Philip Zelikow Executive Director for the 9/11 Commission on C-SPAN
Philip Zelikow, the Executive Director for the 9/11 Commission, says it's a fact that American polices toward Israel fuels a lot of Arab and Muslim grievances toward the United States but he deceitfully claims "it makes very little difference." Zelikow also admits he made statements that the War on Iraq was really about the threat against Israel but claims it was supposedly taken "out of context."C-SPAN 7/23/2004: WASHINGTON, DC: 18:59 (Caller's question starts at 14:40)
A caller to C-SPAN asks Zelikow about comments Zelikow made at the University of Virginia Law School on Sept. 10, 2002.
Zelikow said: "Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us?" Philip Zelikow explains, "I'll tell you what the real threat [is] and actually has been since 1990 -- it's the threat against Israel. And this is the threat that dares not speak its name because...the American government doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically because it's not a popular sell."
Caller: Mr. Zelikow, you had said that the war in Iraq was for Israel, like James Bamford says in the Pretext for War could you elaborate on that please? You said that it would be a tough sell but that the war on Iraq was for Israel, could you elaborate? We would like to hear it. And what about the dancing Israelis on 9/11, in the Forward, Jewish publication out of New York?
Brian Lamb: Got that earlier. Any comment on what he just said?
Philip Zelikow: Uh, there's uh, um, um. I think the caller is referring to, uh, something bouncing around the Internet about me that has to do with my being pro-Israeli. Um, it takes some things I said or wrote in an earlier occasion out of context and it, it's uh, it would take a long time to discuss it.
Brian Lamb: We checked this morning and, with word search, and found Israel mentioned 26 times in your report, most of those are footnoting, about 7 of them are substantive mentions. Did you sit around as a commission and talk about the impact that our support of Israel might have had on all of this?
Philip Zelikow: Yes, we did talk about that. It uh, we don't really discuss American polices toward Israel in the report. But, um, -- first it's a fact that American policies in the Middle East have consequences and that you have to weigh those consequences. And that American support for the state of Israel has consequences in the Muslim world and fuels a lot of Arab and Muslim grievances toward the United States. That's point one. But, and you have to remember point two, is that, for the hard core, the bin Laden's and their followers, it makes very little difference. These people were trying to kill us when the Middle East peace process was going great, uh, during the period of the Oslo accords in the early 90's.*(not true, see below) When it goes well, when it goes badly, it makes no difference in their plans. Their objections to the United States have to do with who we are in the world and are not significantly affected by the ups or downs of the Middle East peace process.
First note that Zelikow does not deny that he said the war on Iraq was really about Israel's security and not about US security. Zelikow actually acknowledges the fact that he said it but he tries to explain it it away by claiming his words were "out of context." He then avoids telling us what the context supposedly was by claiming that "it would take a long time to discuss it."
Also note that Zelikow admits the "fact that American policies in the Middle East have consequences" and that "American support for the State of Israel has consequences in the Muslim world and fuels a lot of Arab and Muslim grievances toward the United States."
But Zelikow is at his most devious when he denies the significance of US support of Israel with a dismissal of " it makes no difference." Zelikow wants you to think that changing the policy of US support of Israel will make no difference. He is trying to decieve us about polices that threaten our very lives. He is lying, obviously, because he doesn't want the policy of US support of Israel to be changed.
* Zelikow has the audacity to lie to us about the recent history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Zelikow lies about the Oslo accords, he is lying when he says the "Middle East peace process was going great." Zelikow is saying that "these people", the "ones trying to kill us", shouldn't have seen the Oslo accords as a grievance! It was great for the Israelis but it was not great for the Palestinians or anyone that cares about their rights. Zelikow is denying the real grievances, violations of the rights of the Palestinian people during the early 1990's.
For some details about the reality of the Oslo accords and how they were so grotesquely unfair to the Palestinians, buy "Pirates and Emperors, Old and New : International Terrorism in the Real World"
"The essential meaning of the Oslo peace process is well understood by prominent Israeli doves. Just before he joined the Barak government as Minister of Internal Security, historian Shlomo BenAmi observed in an academic study that "in practice, the Oslo agreements were founded on a neocolonialist basis, on a life of dependence of one on the other forever." With these goals, the Clinton-Rabin-Pores agreements were designed to impose on the Palestinians "almost total dependence on Israel," creating "an extended colonial situation," which is expected to be the "permanent basis" for "a situation of dependence." Ben-Ami went on to become the chief negotiator and architect of the Barak proposals." p180 Pirates and Emperors, Old and New : International Terrorism in the Real World Noam Chomsky
Get the book if you want to have a handle on what the US has been doing to the Middle East. Chomsky's book is composed of incredible chapters like "The U.S. Role in the Middle East", "The World after September 11", "U.S./Israel-Palestine" and the revealing chapter called "Thought Control: The Case of the Middle East" which details how influential writers like Thomas Friedman deceive the public about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
On page 169 of Hegemony or Survival, Chomsky points out, "The wording of the Oslo agreements made it clear that they were a mandate for continued Israeli settlement programs, as the Israeli leadership (Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres) took no pains to conceal." (These settlements are illegal according to International Law!) Because of the Israeli insistence on continuing to build the illegal settlements, the man who headed the Palestinian delegation at the Madrid conference, a man "known for his integrity and one of the most respected Palestinian figures, refused to have anything to do with Oslo." Oslo was not "going great" for the Palestinians, regardless of what Zelikow wants you to believe.
But the kicker is, Zelikow admits, "we don't really discuss American polices toward Israel in the report." The 9/11 Commission didn't really discuss American polices toward Israel in their report!?! This is TOTALY OUTRAGEOUS because American polices toward Israel is the prime motive for the 9/11 attack! (also see Motives for 9/11 Terrorist Attacks)
Please don't let Zelikow and others get away with this. I want to run a big campaign to get these facts out to the American people and I need some funds to work with. Please Donate. I would like to print up material to distribute it on a large scale.