Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi fired for exposing warmongers and ethnic cleansers
By Jonas E. Alexis
Alexander Solzhenitsyn: “And thus, overcoming our temerity, let each man choose: will he remain a witting servant of lies, or has the time come for him to stand straight as an honest man, worthy of the respect of his children and contemporaries?”
Philip Giraldi is no ordinary man. He graduated from the University of Chicago and has a Ph.D. in European History from the University of London. He was a CIA officer for eighteen years. He has appeared on Good Morning America, 60 Minutes, MSNBC, Fox News Channel, National Public Radio, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the British Broadcasting Corporation, etc.
Giraldi has been putting the Neocon war machine on a frying pan over the past decade or so, and they certainly don’t like him. He once exposed Jewish Neocon Michael Ledeen for forging fake evidence pretentiously showing that Saddam Hussein was buying uranium from Niger. Giraldi said:
“These people did it probably for a couple of reasons, but one of the reasons was that these people were involved, through the neoconservatives, with the Iraqi National Congress and Chalabi and had a financial interest in cranking up the pressure against Saddam Hussein and potentially going to war with him.”
Ledeen was one of the most vocal representatives for the idea of bombing Iran. He is also known for his book The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots’ Quest for Destruction. Ledeen is a former scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Neoconservative think tank where he worked with “Prince of Darkness” Richard Perle, and for over twenty-five years was actively involved in “the Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs (JINSA), an activist group that promotes a strategic alliance between the United States and Israel.”
Central to Ledeen’s thesis in The Iranian Time Bomb is that Iran is responsible for September 11th. Not only that, Iran has always sought “to destroy or dominate” the United States! Moreover, for Ledeen, Iran is “the mother of modern terrorism.”
Ledeen believes the best way to destroy “the mother of modern terrorism” is through war. In fact, Ledeen has been a proponent of the idea that peace can come through violent war. “I don’t know of a case in history where peace has been accomplished in any way other than one side winning a war [and] imposing terms on the other side.”
Ledeen also maintains that Iran was the chief mine of terrorism, proven, says Ledeen, by court documents (even though he never tells where to find the court documents or what they actually said); in the same article, Ledeen even implied that the quicker the U.S. invaded Iran, the better.
By invading Iran, Ledeen argued, the U.S. would eventually bring down “the mullahcracy, for they will keep killing our people and our friends.” It is not surprising that Ledeen has been described as “one of the most dishonest and ludicrous jokes on the political scene.”
As the United States moved toward war against Iraq, Ledeen claimed that countries that did not fully support the United States were allying themselves with terrorism. “The Franco-German strategy was based on using Arab and Islamic extremism and terrorism as the weapon of choice, and the United Nations as the straitjacket for blocking a decisive response from the United States,” he wrote, claiming that both France and Germany should be treated as “strategic enemies.”
Not only that, Ledeen further stated that both France and Germany had “struck a deal with radical Islam and with radical Arabs.” Although Ledeen admits that the theory “sounds fanciful, to be sure,” he was clear that if it happens to be correct,
“we will have to pursue the war against terror far beyond the boundaries of the Middle East, into the heart of Western Europe. And there, as in the Middle East, our greatest weapons are political: the demonstrated desire for freedom of the peoples of the countries that oppose us.”
In response to this, Jonah Goldberg proposed the “Leeden doctrine,” which simply is that “every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.”
Once again we are back to perpetual wars, not only in the Middle East, but wherever the Jewish Neocons like Ledeen want them. As Ledeen himself declared, the level of casualties in the Iraq War are “secondary. It may sound like an odd thing to say. But all the great scholars who have studied American character have come to the conclusion that we are a warlike people and that we love war.” This is not the first time Ledeen had turned to blatant fabrication in order to promote an ideology. As we have already seen, he was one of the people who promoted the falsehood that Saddam Hussein had bought uranium in Niger.
Ledeen later denied any involvement in the matter. Neoconservatives such as Mark R. Levin have stood up for Ledeen, saying things like the “Left’s narrative” has produced a libelous accusation against Ledeen when he had nothing to do with the forgery.
In short, it is pretty well confirmed that people like Ledeen love perpetual wars in the Middle East. In fact, Neoconservatism, which is a Jewish ideological movement, has been proposing perpetual wars in the Middle East since its progenitors took over US foreign policy.
So, when Philip Giraldi argued that “America’s Jews Are Driving America’s Wars,” he was right on target. Giraldi is not saying that every single Jew in America is “driving America’s wars.” If a person happens to say that Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941, he is not saying that every single Japanese is responsible for the Pearl Harbor disaster. Giraldi specifically said after the article was published:
“Some individual American Jews and organizations with close ties to Israel, whom I named and identified, are greatly disproportionately represented in the government, media, foundations, think tanks and lobbying that is part and parcel of the deliberations that lead to formulation of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Inevitably, those policies are skewed to represent Israeli interests and do serious damage to genuine American equities in the region.
“This tilt should not necessarily surprise anyone who has been paying attention and was noted by Nathan Glazer, among others, as long ago as 1976.
“The end result of Israel centric policymaking in Washington is to produce negotiators like Dennis Ross, who consistently supported Israeli positions in peace talks, so much so that he was referred to as “Israel’s lawyer.” It also can result in wars, which is of particular concern given the current level of hostility being generated by these same individuals and organizations relating to Iran.
“This group of Israel advocates is as responsible as any other body in the United States for the deaths of thousands of Americans and literally millions of mostly Muslim foreigners in unnecessary wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. It has also turned the U.S. into an active accomplice in the brutal suppression of the Palestinians.
“That they have never expressed any remorse or regret and the fact that the deaths and suffering don’t seem to matter to them are clear indictments of the sheer inhumanity of the positions they embrace.
“The claims that America’s Middle Eastern wars have been fought for Israel are not an anti-Semitic delusion. Some observers, including former high government official Philip Zelikow, believe that Iraq was attacked by the U.S. in 2003 to protect Israel. On April 3rd, just as the war was starting, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz headlined ‘The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history…’
“My suggestion for countering the overrepresentation of a special interest in policy formulation was to avoid putting Jewish government officials in that position by, insofar as possible, not giving them assignments relating to policy in the Middle East.”
Giraldi’s assessment is confirmed by numerous scholarly studies. But guess what? The American Conservative has recently fired Giraldi for saying uncomfortable but true things. Giraldi writes:
“The Editor of The American Conservative (TAC) magazine and website, where I have been a regular and highly rated contributor for nearly 15 years, called me and abruptly announced that even though my article had appeared on another site, it had been deemed unacceptable and TAC would have to sever its relationship with me. I called him a coward and he replied that he was not.
“I do not know exactly who on the TAC board decided to go after me. Several board members who are good friends apparently were not even informed about what was going on when firing me was under consideration.
“I do not know whether someone coming from outside the board applied pressure in any way, but there is certainly a long history of friends of Israel being able to remove individuals who have offended against the established narrative, recently exemplified by the hounding of now-ex-Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel who had the temerity to state that ‘the Jewish lobby intimidates lots of people’ in Washington. As Gilad Atzmon has observed one of the most notable features of Jewish power is the ability to stifle any discussion of Jewish power by gentiles…
“Three days later, another shoe dropped. I was supposed to speak at a panel discussion critical of Saudi Arabia on October 2nd. The organizer, the Frontiers of Freedom foundation, emailed me to say my services would no longer be required because ‘the conference will not be a success if we get sidetracked into debating, discussing, or defending the substance of your writings on.’ Last Saturday morning, Facebook blocked access to my article for a time because it ‘contained a banned word.’”
When Mark Dankof told me that Giraldi was fired from TAC, I was a little shocked. It shows that TAC doesn’t want to deal with the fundamental issues that are dragging America into a hellish existence in the twenty-first century. Dankof wrote a letter to TAC saying:
“I’m a longtime Buchanan conservative. I read of your dismissal of Dr. Philip Giraldi for his on-target articles of the last two weeks.
“I’m never buying another copy of your magazine. I’m sure I won’t be missed, but a clone of National Review, Bill Kristol’s The Weekly Standard, or Commentary Magazine is no longer worthy of my time.”
I too wrote a letter to The Editor, which read in part:
“It has come to my attention that TAC has recently dismissed Philip Giraldi. This is a sad moment in our history and the culture wars because Giraldi has been on the front line fighting against the diabolical forces that have come to dominate US foreign policy.
“Some of my colleagues have said that they will no longer support TAC. I don’t blame them. I find myself in a similar position. Hasn’t Giraldi’s assessment been documented over and over by scholars of various stripes?”
Dankof and I do not expect to get a response from TAC, but we wanted to let them know that they are a bunch of cowards. Alexander Solzhenitsyn would have disgraced them as well. Solzhenitsyn said:
“And thus, overcoming our temerity, let each man choose: will he remain a witting servant of lies, or has the time come for him to stand straight as an honest man, worthy of the respect of his children and contemporaries?”
 Jim Lobe, “Veteran Neo-Con Advisor Moves to Iran,” Asia Times, June 26, 2003.
 Michael A. Ledeen, The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots’ Quest for Destruction (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2007), 19.
 Michael Leeden, “Faster, Please,” National Review, April 1, 2002.
 Lobe, “Veteran Neo-Con Advisor Moves to Iran,” Asia Times.
 Michael Ledeen, “Iran Connects the Dots: The Mullahs and the Global War on Terror,” National Review, June 9, 2006.
 Glenn Greenwald, “Stephanopolous and Ledeen: Together in the Most Accountability-free Profession,” Salon, November 4, 2009
 Lobe, “Veteran Neo-Con Advisor Moves to Iran,” Asia Times.
 Michael Ledeen, “A Theory,” National Review, March 10, 2003.
 Jonah Goldberg, “Baghdad Delenda Est, Part II: Get On With It,” National Review, April 23, 2002.
 “Iraq: What Lies Ahead,” American Enterprise Institute, March 25, 2003.
 Joshua Micah Marshall, Laura Rosen, and Paul Grastris, “Iran-Contra II?,” Washington Monthly, September 2004.
 Philip Giraldi, “Forging the Case for War,” American Conservative, November 21, 2005.
 Andrew C. McCarthy and Mark R. Levin, “Rolling Smear: James Bamford Writes a Fiction about our Michael Ledeen,” National Review, July 28, 2006.
 For scholarly studies on this, see Murray Friedman, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and Public Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005); Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004); John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M Walt, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007).
Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Solzhenitsyn Reader (Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, 2006), 558.
This entry was posted on 10/04/2017, 9:34 and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.