Komisja Kissingera zbada, czy służby specjalne ...

[Gość: Mietek]

Zdumiewające! Może Saddam by tak poprowadził inspektorów w Iraku?

[galaxy2099]

To zdumiewajace Mietus jak wielkim autorytetem jest dla ciebie
wujek Saddam.


Gość portalu: Mietek napisał:

> Zdumiewające! Może Saddam by tak poprowadził inspektorów w
Iraku?

[Gość: informacja]

Many of his critics have said that Mr. Kissinger's approach to
foreign affairs excessively emphasizes the importance of
geopolitics and advancing national interests at the expense of
moral issues.
Mr. Isaacson said he believes Mr. Kissinger hated his book
so long because he did not always portray the former secretary
of state as the text of the Nobel Peace Prize did. The author
showed him as secretive, ambitious, ruthless toward his enemies
and associates, manipulative, autocratic, and given to temper
tantrums and rages.
But Mr. Isaacson's book was mild compared to a two-part
series about Mr. Kissinger that ran in Harper's magazine in
February and March 2001. The series, written by British
journalist Christopher Hitchens, held that Mr. Kissinger should
be viewed as a war criminal.
Mr. Hitchens accused Mr. Kissinger of being responsible for
numerous "crimes," such as prolonging and expanding the war in
Southeast Asia; human rights abuses in Chile in the early 1970s;
the 1971 Pakistani-led massacre in Bangladesh; and the car-
bombing in Washington that killed a Chilean foreign minister and
his aide in 1976.
(washingtontimes.com)

[Gość: Tysprowda]

Albo Szaron komisje ktora ma zbadac Szabre i Szatile, lub Eichman czy Holocaust
sie zdarzyl naprawde, lub Iwanow czy w Czeczenii wszytko idzie OK, lub Osama
bin Laden, kto zaatakowal 911.
Wesoly jest ten swiat. Wyniki badan komisji Kissingera juz sa znane, tak jak
kto zabil Kennedy'ego.

[Gość: kleks]

Brawo kolego!!

Gość portalu: Tysprowda napisał(a):

> Albo Szaron komisje ktora ma zbadac Szabre i Szatile, lub
Eichman czy Holocaust
>
> sie zdarzyl naprawde, lub Iwanow czy w Czeczenii wszytko idzie
OK, lub Osama
> bin Laden, kto zaatakowal 911.
> Wesoly jest ten swiat. Wyniki badan komisji Kissingera juz sa
znane, tak jak
> kto zabil Kennedy'ego.

[Gość: U]

Hodowcom drobiu proponuje uzywanie do pilnowania kurnikow
tchorzy.Smierdza tak samo i maja ten sam charakter.

[Gość: Tysprowda]

A ja proponuje aby jednak kurnika pilnowal lis. Tak jak Poindexter zbieranych
informacji o Tobie.

[bimi]

Gość portalu: Mietek napisał(a):

> Zdumiewające! Może Saddam by tak poprowadził inspektorów w Iraku?

Wtedy przynajmniej inspektorzy patrzyli by mu na ręce... :)

[Gość: msz]

Zdaje sie znow ktos wezmie szmal, za "wyjasnienie" czegos tam.

Gość portalu: Mietek napisał(a):

> Zdumiewające! Może Saddam by tak poprowadził inspektorów w Iraku?

[Gość: -]

Dr Schwazenegger is ba-a-ack!

[Gość: Tysprowda]

He's Ba-a-ack!
By MAUREEN DOWD


WASHINGTON — It's an inspired choice. Bold, counterintuitive, edgy, outside the
box.

Who better to investigate an unwarranted attack on America than the man who
used to instigate America's unwarranted attacks?

Who better to ferret out government duplicity and manipulation than the man who
engineered secret wars, secret bombings, secret wiretaps and secret coups, and
still ended up as a Pillar of the Establishment and Nobel Peace Prize winner?

It was Dick Cheney's brainstorm, naturally. Only someone as pathologically
opaque as the vice president could appreciate the sublime translucency of Henry
Kissinger. And only someone intent on recreating the glory days of the Ford and
Nixon White Houses could have hungered to add the 79-year-old Dr. Strange—— I
mean, Dr. Kissinger to the Bush team.

There will be naysayers who quibble that the president's choice to lead the
9/11 commission is not so much a realist as an opportunist, not so much
Metternich as Machiavelli.

They will look askance at Mr. Kissinger's résumé: keeping the Vietnam War going
for years after he realized it might be unwinnable; encouraging the illegal
bombing of Cambodia; backing Chile's murderous Pinochet; playing Iago to
President Richard Nixon, telling him he'd be "a weakling" if he did not
prosecute newspapers running the Pentagon Papers; wiretapping journalists and
his own colleagues to track down leaks on the Cambodia bombing.

If you look for the words "Kissinger" and "secret" in the same sentence in
Nexis, the search cannot be completed; there are too many results. When he was
dating Jill St. John and Liv Ullmann and preaching that power is an
aphrodisiac, he even coyly called himself "a secret swinger."

In Walter Isaacson's biography, "Kissinger," the same words
cascade: "deceitful," "disingenuous," "paranoid," "insecure," "temper
tantrum," "flatterer," "two-faced" and "secretive." The über-diplomat has even
been criticized for dissembling in his own memoirs. But secretiveness is not a
disqualification for jobs in this White House. Quite the contrary: only the
clandestine and the conspiratorial need apply.

Mr. Bush, after all, worked very hard to suppress any investigation of 9/11. He
had to cave to the victims' families, who were hellbent to hear what the
president learned in his August 2001 briefing about Al Qaeda plans, and what
wires were crossed at the C.I.A., F.B.I. and I.N.S.

Now Mr. Bush can let the commission proceed, secure in the knowledge that Mr.
Kissinger has never shed light on a single dark corner, or failed to flatter a
boss, in his entire celebrated career. (He was one of Mr. Bush's patient tutors
in foreign policy during the campaign.)

If you want to get to the bottom of something, you don't appoint Henry
Kissinger. If you want to keep others from getting to the bottom of something,
you appoint Henry Kissinger.

Mr. Bush learned about the diplomat's black belt in the black arts long ago,
when he made a patsy of Bush père. As the ambassador to the U.N. in 1971, Bush
41 was accused of aggressively making the case for Taiwan and against Beijing,
even as Mr. Kissinger, the national security adviser, was secretly traveling to
Beijing and undercutting Taiwan.

Afterward, Mr. Kissinger told George H. W. Bush he was "disappointed" that
Beijing had gotten Taiwan's seat in the U.N. "Given the fact that we were
saying one thing in New York and doing another in Washington," Mr. Bush drily
observed, "that outcome was inevitable."

Fortunately, Bush Jr. was not held back by the revulsion that many in his
generation have for Mr. Kissinger's power-drunk promotion of bloody American
adventures abroad. As the former fraternity president told GQ magazine, he
stayed a retro 50's guy through the roiling 60's: "I don't remember any kind of
heaviness ruining my time at Yale."

Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney are in tune with Mr. Kissinger's principles: that the
greatest enemy of U.S. policy is the U.S. media, that American diplomacy may be
happily indifferent to American public opinion, that the great unwashed masses
of our democracy are just a big old drag on the elites who know what's best,
and that corporate pals are a help, not a hindrance, in government work.

For this administration, outside the box is inside the box.

[Gość: ©]

http://www.jewishpost.com/jp0710/jpn0710m.htm


Can Dr. Kissinger Save the Middle East from War?

by Gad Nahshon


In 1993 at the ceremony of the Oslo agreement, Dr. Henry Kissinger asked a
senior PLO leader if he was satisfied. The leader said that still he wants to
return to Jaffa. His home, his dream and the dream of his children is to go
home: "It is in Jaffa," he explained to Dr. Kissinger, who shares with us this
story in his new illuminating excellent book Does America Need a Foreign
Policy Toward a Diplomacy for the 21st Century (Simon and Schuster, New York
2001).

This book is a must for anyone who wants to understand the present and the
future of the American foreign policy. It is an analytical survey of the
present set of relations between the U.S. and the major regional countries.
Dr. Kissinger wrote one more classical book on foreign policy and he teaches
America about the future of these relations. He peppered his discussions with
many insights and also points out that the American public is ignorant as to
the dimension of foreign policies. He complains that the media (T.V.) treats
foreign policy as one more aspect of entertainment!

It is important to reassess foreign policy in this century because "...the
United States is enjoying a pre-eminence unrivaled by even the greatest
empires of the past. From weaponry to entrepreneurship, from science to
technology..." writes Kissinger "...America exercises an unparalleled
ascendancy around the globe."

Kissinger has a qualm that the American leaders of this century will make the
wrong decisions in the New Age, the post-cold war era, in the world of
globalization and in the age of information. Therefore, in this new book, Dr.
Kissinger of Harvard, ex-foreign minister, and 1973 Nobel Prize Winner,
suggests new ideas in order to shape a positive realistic American foreign
policy and when Dr. Kissinger talks, America should listen! Today, the Middle
East is a region on the bring of a total war. The posture of the Israeli-Arab
conflict is on the verge of an explosion. The P.L.O. has pushed the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict into a 'war of attrition.' The P.L.O. is moving on a
course of building anti-confidence measures. It is managing an open policy
toward the destruction of Israel, the 'Zionist entity.' It is managing an open
international psychological war and even demographic war against Israel. (Any
survey of terrorist P.L.O.'s acts demonstrates, clearly, the fact that the
murderers target children and women. Do you remember the massacre of children
in a school at Maalot?)

Dr. Henry Kissinger is an expert on the Middle East affairs. Often Jews and
Israelis were very critical of his behavior. Some recall the fact that in the
Yom Kippur War, Dr. Kissinger did not rush to help Israel and it was President
Nixon who rushed to the rescue of Israel.

But it is important to see how he is assessing the crisis and how he suggests
his new ideas which might prevent a total war in the Middle East. I would like
to point out the fact that Kissinger views the issues of the settlements
(obstacles to peace) as marginal. Kissinger explains:

The P.L.O. views Israel as an 'intrusion'
Today the war turned out to be a Muslim war
Israel suffers because it did not dismantle the first Intifada (Dec. 1987)
The P.L.O. views Israel as a weak divided state. The Israeli defeatism
manifested itself in the evacuation from South Lebanon, a sign of weakness in
the eyes of the P.L.O. Israel radiates weakness. Its policies radiate
weakness. The P.L.O. believes that "Israel was psychologically on the run..."
concluded Kissinger. The Arabs, he explains, view Israel as a strong military
entity but that "...it was coming apart politically..."
Kissinger surveys, in his book, the history of war between Israel and the
Arabs and the role of the various peace agreements. (He was among the
contributors to the cool peace between Saadat and Begin in 1979). How has he
assessed the failure of President Clinton and ex-prime minister Ehud Barak at
Camp David? (No. 2) Kissinger knows that Arafat is a liar who never really
honored the Oslo agreement but Clinton-Barak of a 'deadline' was a
mistake! "Kissi" does not like deadlines in foreign policy. Clinton and Arafat
knew that a future president will have to deal with any potential agreement.
It was the wrong time for any negotiations. But the biggest mistake was done
by Barak, who suddenly erupted with "...the flood of concessions..." Barak
viewed them as a fuel for the talks. No one in history has suggested so many
concessions. He even was willing to cross 'taboos' such as the Palestinian's
refugees return.
So what happened in Camp David II? Arafat left the meeting because he viewed
Barak's daring policy as a radiation of weakness! As to Clinton, Kissinger
argues the American eagerness to achieve agreement helped Arafat to perform
his love for blackmail and extortion. Therefore, the U.S. became a marginal
player, a player who came to the table without a clear cut conception.

Can we save the Middle East from a total war? Dr. Kissinger outlined the
following minimal ideas to be followed. They might thwart a total war, an
explosion:

A. interim agreements
B. never use deadlines
C. Israel should announce its support for the establishment of a Palestine
State
D. to reduce the contact between Jews and Palestinians, the issues should be
about territory and borders. More power to Arabs in Jerusalem to reduce the
settlements.
E. we should involve European countries and the U.S. in the peace process. The
U.S. needs the support of moderate countries such as Jordan. Also, the
agreement about the P.L.O. state will deal with the Jordanian interests
F. as to the future of the relations between Israel and the U.S.: the core of
the relation is the American military support of Israel. America cannot be
impartial. Israel cannot find an alternative to the military support. If the
U.S. shrinks this support, the Arabs will go to war. Weak Israel will push the
U.S. to send troops there. Then terrorists will attack them: "An Israel no
longer able to defend itself will sooner or later be submerged in the tide of
its neighbor's hostility," remarked Kissinger. Peace in the Middle East is an
American responsibility as is its guarantee of Israel's security.
In this book he also discusses the fact that the U.S. does not view Iran as a
problem. But Iran causes problems by supporting the Hizbullah Muslim terror.
He suggested more support for Turkey and he argues that the U.S. should not
allow Sadam Hussein to mock its policies in the region.

In this book, Kissinger discusses the reality of other regions. The following
are some of his insights:

A. U.S. should lead the world for democracy but not as imperialistic power: co-
operation and not enforcement
B. in Europe there is a new tendency for more integration. It is a challenge
to the America hegemony. But the U.S. is not looking for hegemony: NATO should
not turn out to be a mini-U.N. NATO should accept Russia as a member. To those
who want to challenge American economic power, Kissinger suggests: TAFTA or
Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Area. Also, Latin America should support NAFTA
(today, only Mexico and Canada);
C. Asia is a very important region: Japan is important to America. As to
China: the regime is looking for peace and economic success and the Chinese
army is not offensive in their nature. China does not look to export communism
and honors the regimes of its neighbors. Kissinger believes that new countries
might join the super power club: India in Asia, Brazil in Latin America.
There is one problem: Many of these countries are not true democracies in the
Wilsonian tradition. Dr. Kissinger argues that the U.S. must so

O Mamo! /nt

[bimi]