For more on the amazing story of the AIPAC "Greater Israel" neo-conservative and neo-Confederate "cheap labor and resource extraction billionaire oil-barons" alliance of convenience, see Michael Lind's "Made in Texas: George W. Bush and the Southern Takeover of American Politics," which details how both "Herrenvolk" apartheid super-clans (Southern neo-Confederates and Greater-Israel Zionists) have formed a political alliance in America to prosecute wars to control land and resources in the MidEast.
-----------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT of Cheney's "war-kill-those who oppose us are guilty of TREASON!" speech to AIPAC at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/03/print/20070312.html
There can be no doubt that AIPAC - the Israel/America Political Action Commitee - has a right to voice their views and help to shape America's foreign & domestic policies.
But there can also be no doubt that those in the press and media who have been opposed to the war, and who have opposed the lies the Bush-Cheney administration used to start that war, have often been FIRED from their jobs, while those who have supported the war find themselves IN THE ASCENDENCY in the America press/media. Examples include ROBERT SCHEER, of the Los Angeles Times, FIRED for contesting the Bush-Cheney excuses for war, and REPLACED by AIPAC pro-war chicken-hawk JONAH GOLDBERG. ROBERT PARRY, as well, was long ago exiled from the American "mainstream" press/media for confronting the lies and cover-ups of the Iran-Contra affair and other "shadow government" military escapades, and especially the radical-right ascendency in the news media, and now reports his world-class journalism from the under-funded ConsortiumNews.com.
In a similar vein, pro-war academics and writers now dominate the American press and media, from PAUL WOLFOWITZ (former Johns Hopkins academic, then, as Deputy Secretary of Defense, the "author" of the invasion of Iraq; now ensconsed out of sight as president of the World Bank) to ARTHUR SULZBERGER (owner and publisher of the New York Times) to WILLIAM SAFIRE (former Nixon speechwriter, and the Times' most virulent and partisan critic of the Clinton administration) to WILLIAM KRISTOL (co-signer of the PNAC manifesto, calling for the US military overthrow of the Iraq regime at the earliest possible moment, now a FOX 'news contributor' and TIME magazine columnist), to CHARLES KRAUTHAMER and HOWARD KURTZ, the Washington Post's most outspoken Democrat-bashing war supporters.
Thus at a glance it is clear that the WASHINGTON POST, NEW YORK TIMES, LOS ANGELES TIMES, FOX 'news,' and TIME magazine are ALL CLEARLY BIASED *FOR* the pro-war agenda.... and, just as coincidentally, all the above 'news' personalities who define those respective media-organizations' war coverage just happen to be charter members of the AIPAC Israel-America lobby.
So it is no surprise to see Dick Cheney running to an AIPAC dinner to solicit the last vestiges of support in America for the administration's criminally negligent if not blatantly corrupt occupation of Iraq. Indeed... did Mr. Cheney even mention to his AIPAC audence that his (former) company HALLIBURTON oil-services corp. IS MOVING ITS HEADQUQUATERS TO... DUBAI..... a nation STILL REKNOWN as a HOTBED OF TERROR-GROUP FUNDING, and to which the Bush administration only recently sold controlling interests in major American ports to? Or that Bush-Cheney administration's allies the SAUDIS have also been reported to be funding terrorist organizations as well??
AP writer MATHEW LEE's article (or at least his editor's editing of his report) is a TEXT-BOOK EXAMPLE of MISINFORMATION... it doesn't identify the location or time of the speech, or that AIPAC has been relentlessly pro-war, and that AIPAC may be instrumental in DEGRADING Democratic Party opposition to the war, despite the greater than 50% opposition in American opinion polls (especially among Democratic voters) to the current administration's conduct of the war. (Through the unspoken SUPPORT for war policies by such AIPAC-friendly 'Democratic" leaders including Joe Lieberman, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Diane Feinstein, and most of the other more senior or influential Democratic Senators, and many Democratic Congressional Representatives as well.
Those who were opposed to the war, and SKEPTICAL of the lame excuses put forth by the Cheney-Bush administration to justify the invasion ("Niger yellowcake uranium!" and "aluminum tubes for centriguges" that were anodized, and therefore useless as uranium centrifuge tubes; and even ARTIST IMPRESSIONS of Iraq's alleged bio-weapons mobile trailers!) WARNED of EXACTLY the DISASTER and CHAOS from Mr. Cheney's invasion, that HE is now complaining about!
<< He [Cheney] predicted "disaster" and "chaos" in the Middle East with either al-Qaida or Iran emerging dominant from a bloody sectarian battle and compromising regional security if U.S. troops withdrew from Iraq before their mission is completed. >>
-------------------------------------------
Cheney challenges 'anti-war' lawmakers
By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer
March 12, 2007
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070312/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq;_ylt=AlY2WKYxy8BqGrWkYpvn_B6s0NUE
WASHINGTON - Anti-war lawmakers in Congress are "undermining" U.S. troops in Iraq by trying to limit President Bush's spending requests for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday.
Hitting out at lawmakers who profess to back the troops but oppose Bush's plans in Iraq, Cheney said proof of their commitment would come as they consider legislation to provide nearly $100 billion for the rest of this year's costs of the wars.
The House plans to begin considering a bill this week that would fully finance the administration's request. Senate action is expected to come later.
"When members of Congress pursue an anti-war strategy that's been called 'slow bleed,' they are not supporting the troops, they are undermining them," Cheney said in a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
"Anyone can say they support the troops and we should take them at their word, but the proof will come when it's time to provide the money," he said.
House Democratic leaders want to add provisions to the war spending measure requiring the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops by the end of August 2008 and possibly by the end of 2007. Some anti-war Democrats prefer limiting the funds so the administration would essentially be forced to remove U.S. forces, a strategy that party leaders have abandoned.
"We expect the House and Senate to meet the needs of our military and the generals leading the troops in battle on time and in full measure," Cheney said.
"When members speak not of victory but of time limits, deadlines and other arbitrary measures, they are telling the enemy simply to watch the clock and wait us out," he said.
Cheney said the House's nonbinding vote against troop increases in Iraq last month was an example of "twisted logic" and "not a proud episode in the history of the United States Congress."
Cheney added, "Very soon, both houses will have to vote on a piece of legislation that is binding, a bill to provide emergency funding to the troops, and I sincerely hope that this time, the discussion this time will be about winning in Iraq."
He predicted "disaster" and "chaos" in the Middle East with either al-Qaida or Iran emerging dominant from a bloody sectarian battle and compromising regional security if U.S. troops withdrew from Iraq before their mission is completed.
Of particular concern, he said, would be a powerful and possibly nuclear-armed Iran, criticizing as inconsistent some lawmakers who are pressing for tougher action on Iran but opposing Bush's Iraq plan.
"It is simply not consistent for anyone to demand aggressive action against the menace posed by the Iranian regime while at the same time acquiescing in a retreat from Iraq that would leave our worst enemies dramatically emboldened and Israel's best friend, the United States, dangerously weakened," Cheney said.
