From Progressive Trail...
An Open Letter to Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens)
Dear Yusuf Islam,
First, allow me to begin with an apology for the actions of the Bush administration and the Ministry of Homeland Security for so shamelessly exploiting you last week. As you are undoubtedly aware, the Bush administration rarely does anything without ulterior motive, or for political gain, although it can be fairly stated this is the generally accepted modus operandi of many governments, not simply the Bush administration. As it now appears, the Bush administration denied you entry into the United States for two reasons: as a public relations ploy in an effort to seize control of airline passenger lists (more or less under the control of airlines) and also portray a famous Muslim and peace activist as a terrorist in support of Hamas. In regard to the first, the Bush administration, under a recommendation put forth by the September 11 commission, wants to centralize airline passenger lists in an all-encompassing database and thus deny more people permission to travel based on political and religious affiliation. In short, they want to restrict the travel of their political opponents. Second, the Bush administration has, since the events of September 11, consistently strived to portray Muslims as a threat to the national security of the United States, not simply fundamentalist Muslims but all Muslims without exception. Obviously, this is part of a larger strategy devised by key administration officials and so-called neoconservative policy advisors who believe the national security of the United States is inextricably bound with that of Israel, in particular the government of Ariel Sharon and the extreme right-wing Likud Party. I believe, based on policy papers and pronouncements issued by neoconservative think-tanks (the American Enterprise Institute, the Project for a New American Century, and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, to name but three), the neoconservatives, in league with the reactionary Likud Party in Israel, are interested in not only diminishing the influence of Arab and Muslim governments in the Middle East, but also desire to “reshape” their culture and society (through overt and covert warfare) for the sake of a so-called Greater Israel, that is to say an expansionist Israel. One document in particular ("A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm"), authored in 1996 by influential American neoconservatives and the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies in Washington and Jerusalem for then in-coming Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, proposes the destruction of the Oslo Accords, annexation of the West Bank and Gaza, and the overthrow of governments in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Several Bush administration officials and policy advisors, including Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, and John Bolton, co-authored this document and now direct foreign policy initiatives for the United States. Recently John Bolton, as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, has called for overthrowing the Islamic government of Iran, as spelled out in the “Clean Break” document. As well, Bolton, with an all-star neoconservative cast from the Project for a New American Century, signed a letter sent to Clinton in 1998 calling for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. As we now know, literally within hours of the September 11 attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon, Bush Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was calling for an invasion of Iraq, even though there was absolutely no evidence that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with the attacks. Not surprisingly, Rumsfeld had signed the PNAC letter addressed to Clinton. Obviously, the Bush neoconservatives are well on their way to realizing Israel’s policy objectives. As further evidence that Sharon and the Likud Party are working overtime to dictate U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was implicated in a spy scandal a few weeks ago (specifically, attempting to influence the Bush administration’s policy toward Iran). It is a well-documented fact that AIPAC wields enormous power over not only the executive branch of the U.S. government, but Congress as well. “The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is a lobbying group that used to support whatever government was in power in Israel, and used to give money even-handedly inside the US. My perception is that during the past decade AIPAC has increasingly tilted to the Likud in Israel, and to the political Right in the United States,” notes Juan Cole, a history professor at the University of Michigan. “[AIPAC] and a few allies have succeeded in imposing complete censorship on both houses of Congress. No senator or congress member dares make a speech on the floor of his or her institution critical of Israeli policy … [and if a Congress person does speak out] that person is targeted for unelection in the next congressional campaign, with big money directed by AIPAC and/or its analogues into the coffers of the senator or congressman’s opponent. Over and over again, AIPAC has shaped the US congress in this way, so successfully that no one even dares speak out any more.” As an American citizen, I am, to say the least, concerned about this undue and apparently ironclad influence a small, self-described “cabal” of neoconservatives, pro-Israel lobbying groups, and others in unison with a far right-wing Israeli government have over not only my country’s foreign policy but domestic policy as well, as evidenced by your recent experience. Extremist neoconservatives, well entrenched in the White House and Pentagon, demand “total war,” as the influential neoconservative Michael Ledeen describes it, against Islam. Not only will Ledeen’s “total war” be waged in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere in the Middle East, but here, in America, as well. Muslims in America, as I am sure you are well aware, are under intense scrutiny and increasingly fall victim to draconian law enforcement and surveillance measures, racial profiling, and even calls for mass expulsion and internment (the latter argued by author Michelle Malkin and others). Naturally, during a second Bush administration, “total war” against Islam will not only intensify but is likely to reach catastrophic proportions if the violence and chaos in Iraq spreads elsewhere in the Middle East, as promised. In fact, I believe this violence and chaos is part of the neoconservative plan to disrupt and weaken Islamic societies. Some naively believe if John Kerry is elected president in November he will change U.S. foreign policy. However, considering Kerry’s unswerving and publicly announced support for Israel and the Sharon regime, this is unlikely. In short, it appears America is set on an unalterable course of generational conflict (a modern version of the Crusades) directed against not only Muslims in the Middle East, but eventually around the world (as of 2003, the total number of Muslims in the world stood at nearly 1.5 billion). So, what can be done? Unfortunately, not much. However, Europeans and other people around the world can effectively express their outrage and disapproval of America’s policies in much the same way many of them express their outrage and disapproval of Israel and its treatment of the Palestinians: through economic boycott. As it now appears, the only way to stop the neoconservative drive toward total war is to shut down the economic system that drives the war machine here in the United States. Refuse to buy American products. In fact, refuse to market your products in the United States. Of course, as a musician, your livelihood depends on selling products in America, a huge and lucrative market. However, I cannot realistically think of another way to shut down the economic machine that fuels the drive toward total war and, ultimately, global destruction as more and more nations, in response to American military aggression, arm themselves with nuclear weapons. As an example of nuclear brinkmanship, consider the truly scary situation emerging in Iran and North Korea. Sooner or later, somebody, somewhere, will defensively respond with nukes to the neoconservative master plan of perpetual war. I fear it is only a matter of time. In the meantime, we can work to shut down the system through economic boycott and a refusal to participate in our own demise. Of course, this may be naïve, but I cannot think of a reasonable alternative.
Sincerely, Kurt Nimmo
Dear Yusuf Islam,
First, allow me to begin with an apology for the actions of the Bush administration and the Ministry of Homeland Security for so shamelessly exploiting you last week. As you are undoubtedly aware, the Bush administration rarely does anything without ulterior motive, or for political gain, although it can be fairly stated this is the generally accepted modus operandi of many governments, not simply the Bush administration. As it now appears, the Bush administration denied you entry into the United States for two reasons: as a public relations ploy in an effort to seize control of airline passenger lists (more or less under the control of airlines) and also portray a famous Muslim and peace activist as a terrorist in support of Hamas. In regard to the first, the Bush administration, under a recommendation put forth by the September 11 commission, wants to centralize airline passenger lists in an all-encompassing database and thus deny more people permission to travel based on political and religious affiliation. In short, they want to restrict the travel of their political opponents. Second, the Bush administration has, since the events of September 11, consistently strived to portray Muslims as a threat to the national security of the United States, not simply fundamentalist Muslims but all Muslims without exception. Obviously, this is part of a larger strategy devised by key administration officials and so-called neoconservative policy advisors who believe the national security of the United States is inextricably bound with that of Israel, in particular the government of Ariel Sharon and the extreme right-wing Likud Party. I believe, based on policy papers and pronouncements issued by neoconservative think-tanks (the American Enterprise Institute, the Project for a New American Century, and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, to name but three), the neoconservatives, in league with the reactionary Likud Party in Israel, are interested in not only diminishing the influence of Arab and Muslim governments in the Middle East, but also desire to “reshape” their culture and society (through overt and covert warfare) for the sake of a so-called Greater Israel, that is to say an expansionist Israel. One document in particular ("A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm"), authored in 1996 by influential American neoconservatives and the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies in Washington and Jerusalem for then in-coming Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, proposes the destruction of the Oslo Accords, annexation of the West Bank and Gaza, and the overthrow of governments in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Several Bush administration officials and policy advisors, including Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, and John Bolton, co-authored this document and now direct foreign policy initiatives for the United States. Recently John Bolton, as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, has called for overthrowing the Islamic government of Iran, as spelled out in the “Clean Break” document. As well, Bolton, with an all-star neoconservative cast from the Project for a New American Century, signed a letter sent to Clinton in 1998 calling for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. As we now know, literally within hours of the September 11 attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon, Bush Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was calling for an invasion of Iraq, even though there was absolutely no evidence that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with the attacks. Not surprisingly, Rumsfeld had signed the PNAC letter addressed to Clinton. Obviously, the Bush neoconservatives are well on their way to realizing Israel’s policy objectives. As further evidence that Sharon and the Likud Party are working overtime to dictate U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was implicated in a spy scandal a few weeks ago (specifically, attempting to influence the Bush administration’s policy toward Iran). It is a well-documented fact that AIPAC wields enormous power over not only the executive branch of the U.S. government, but Congress as well. “The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is a lobbying group that used to support whatever government was in power in Israel, and used to give money even-handedly inside the US. My perception is that during the past decade AIPAC has increasingly tilted to the Likud in Israel, and to the political Right in the United States,” notes Juan Cole, a history professor at the University of Michigan. “[AIPAC] and a few allies have succeeded in imposing complete censorship on both houses of Congress. No senator or congress member dares make a speech on the floor of his or her institution critical of Israeli policy … [and if a Congress person does speak out] that person is targeted for unelection in the next congressional campaign, with big money directed by AIPAC and/or its analogues into the coffers of the senator or congressman’s opponent. Over and over again, AIPAC has shaped the US congress in this way, so successfully that no one even dares speak out any more.” As an American citizen, I am, to say the least, concerned about this undue and apparently ironclad influence a small, self-described “cabal” of neoconservatives, pro-Israel lobbying groups, and others in unison with a far right-wing Israeli government have over not only my country’s foreign policy but domestic policy as well, as evidenced by your recent experience. Extremist neoconservatives, well entrenched in the White House and Pentagon, demand “total war,” as the influential neoconservative Michael Ledeen describes it, against Islam. Not only will Ledeen’s “total war” be waged in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere in the Middle East, but here, in America, as well. Muslims in America, as I am sure you are well aware, are under intense scrutiny and increasingly fall victim to draconian law enforcement and surveillance measures, racial profiling, and even calls for mass expulsion and internment (the latter argued by author Michelle Malkin and others). Naturally, during a second Bush administration, “total war” against Islam will not only intensify but is likely to reach catastrophic proportions if the violence and chaos in Iraq spreads elsewhere in the Middle East, as promised. In fact, I believe this violence and chaos is part of the neoconservative plan to disrupt and weaken Islamic societies. Some naively believe if John Kerry is elected president in November he will change U.S. foreign policy. However, considering Kerry’s unswerving and publicly announced support for Israel and the Sharon regime, this is unlikely. In short, it appears America is set on an unalterable course of generational conflict (a modern version of the Crusades) directed against not only Muslims in the Middle East, but eventually around the world (as of 2003, the total number of Muslims in the world stood at nearly 1.5 billion). So, what can be done? Unfortunately, not much. However, Europeans and other people around the world can effectively express their outrage and disapproval of America’s policies in much the same way many of them express their outrage and disapproval of Israel and its treatment of the Palestinians: through economic boycott. As it now appears, the only way to stop the neoconservative drive toward total war is to shut down the economic system that drives the war machine here in the United States. Refuse to buy American products. In fact, refuse to market your products in the United States. Of course, as a musician, your livelihood depends on selling products in America, a huge and lucrative market. However, I cannot realistically think of another way to shut down the economic machine that fuels the drive toward total war and, ultimately, global destruction as more and more nations, in response to American military aggression, arm themselves with nuclear weapons. As an example of nuclear brinkmanship, consider the truly scary situation emerging in Iran and North Korea. Sooner or later, somebody, somewhere, will defensively respond with nukes to the neoconservative master plan of perpetual war. I fear it is only a matter of time. In the meantime, we can work to shut down the system through economic boycott and a refusal to participate in our own demise. Of course, this may be naïve, but I cannot think of a reasonable alternative.
Sincerely, Kurt Nimmo
posted by BLONDIE at 9:01 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home