May 3rd, 2007

Chris Keeley

More on Tenet--and Wolf Blitzer

Here's a nice little summary any of you are welcome to use.  Feel free to make up your own.  So many lies.

The Fish Dies by its Mouth and So Does George Tenet

Larry C Johnson

George Tenet never learned the first law of crisis management--when you are in a hole, quit digging.  Despite a disastrous appearance on 60 Minutes last Sunday, Tenet continues his publicity tour hyping his book and seems oblivious to the reality of Lexis Nexis, Google, and videotape.  The anger and outrage that many of my former CIA colleagues and I feel toward George Tenet is not personal, at least in the sense that we "dont' like him".  On a personal basis Tenet can be gregarious and generous.  He is a good dad and husband and did some good things at CIA.

Our beef with Tenet is simple--he not only repeatedly failed to tell the Congress and the American people the truth he knew about Iraq on several critical issues, but he consciously participated in selling a lie to the American people.  Don't take my word for it, take Tenet's.  Consider the issue of the alleged relationship between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.

Here is what George Tenet said on 60 Minutes last Sunday:

Collapse )
Chris Keeley

Robert Kagan: "Obama the Neocon"

TO: Distinguished Recipients
FM: John Whitbeck

For those who hope for a radical change for the better in America's
approach to the world if a Democratic president (and, in particular, the
"charismatic" Mr. Obama) were to replace George W. Bush, this Washington
Post op-ed offers a depressing -- indeed, terrifying -- reality-check. <>

*Obama the Neocon*

By Robert Kagan
Sunday, April 29, 2007; B07

America must "lead the world in battling immediate evils and promoting
the ultimate good." With those words, Barack Obama
put an end to the idea that the alleged overexuberant idealism and
America-centric hubris of the past six years is about to give way to a
new realism, a more limited and modest view of American interests,
capabilities and responsibilities.

Obama's speech
at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs last week was pure John
Kennedy, without a trace of John Mearsheimer. It had a deliberate New
Frontier feel, including some Kennedy-era references ("we were
Berliners") and even the Cold War-era notion that the United States is
the "leader of the free world." No one speaks of the "free world" these
days, and Obama's insistence that we not "cede our claim of leadership
in world affairs" will sound like an anachronistic conceit to many
Europeans, who even in the 1990s complained about the bullying
"hyperpower." In Moscow and Beijing it will confirm suspicions about
America's inherent hegemonism. But Obama believes the world yearns to
follow us, if only we restore our worthiness to lead. Personally, I like it.

Collapse )

Chris Keeley

Agha and Malley: "The Road from Mecca" (NYRB)

TO: Distinguished Recipients
FM: John Whitbeck
Transmitted below is a hard-headed analysis of the prospects for
movement in the Arab-Israeli conflict by the reality-based duo of
Hussein Agha and Robert Malley. As with many of their prior articles, it
is published in the NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS.
For those of you who may lack the time to read this article (which
prints out to 9 pages), the conclusion is that there is no realistic
hope for any positive movement: "The time may yet come. Meanwhile, the
wait, and the waste, go on."
Notable for its absence among the alternatives considered by Agha and
Malley is the potential initiative most likely to stimulate movement --
a shift in the declared goal of the Palestinian liberation movement from
a Palestinian mini-state on scraps of the national homeland to a single
democratic state in all of Israel/Palestine with equal rights for all
who live there ... or at least clear public indications that such a
shift would be likely in the absence of positive movement.

The New York Review of Books <>

*Volume 54, Number 8 · May 10, 2007

*The Road from Mecca*

*By Hussein Agha <> and Robert Malley


The idea that negotiations conducted bilaterally between Israelis and
Palestinians somehow can produce a final agreement is dead. The world,
slowly, is coming to this realization. Its fate was sealed in part
because neither side has the ability, on its own, to close the gaps
between the positions they have taken. The two parties also lack any
sense of trust, but that, too, is not an overriding explanation. If
bilateral negotiations have become a fast track to a dead end it is
because today neither the Palestinian nor the Israeli political system
possesses the requisite degree of coherence and cohesion.

On the Palestinian side, the national movement is undergoing its most
fundamental, far-reaching, and destabilizing transformation since Yasser
Arafat took it over and molded it in his image over four decades ago.
The transformation is more complex than a mere question of succession.
It is the metamorphosis that comes with the passing of a man who
gradually had become the movement and on whom all serious political
deliberation depended. Arafat achieved what, before him, was the stuff
of unachievable dreams and, after him, has become the object of wistful
nostalgia: the identification of man and nation; the transcendence of
party politics; and the expression of a tacit, unspoken consensus.

Collapse )