The Passionate Attachment

America's entanglement with Israel

Pro-Israeli think-tanker calls for escalation of ‘war on terror’ against Iran over ‘sloppy’ terror op

leave a comment »

In his testimony to the Committee on Homeland Security’s Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence and the Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Management joint hearing on “Iranian Terror Operations on American Soil,” Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former Middle East specialist in the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, cited his authority on the subject to explain away the ludicrous Hollywood B-movie nature of the alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador:

I might make a slight digression and just say all intelligence services aren’t as good as you think they are. And the Iranians are no exception. They make a lot of mistakes. So it’s important to remember that as when you think about the Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Quds Force too is that these services largely reflect their domestic ethics.

Now, the way the IRGC works, the Pasdaran and the Revolutionary Guard Corps works inside of Iran is usually one of brute force and coercion. They are not a subtle organization. The ethos that you see inside the country is the same ethos that you see outside of the country. They do not have one body of very sophisticated folks who are the Persian version of James Bond working outside of the country, and then just the brutes — the thugs — inside. It’s the brutes and the thugs in both places.

So do not, for a moment, buy the argument from those who said it cannot be because this is too sloppy. This is the nature of the game. This is how it is done.

Gerecht, currently a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, went on to advocate an escalation of the “war on terror” against a supposedly emboldened Iran:

If they think they can get away with it, they will push forward, and they did get away with it.

Now, even though it is very invidious to say this, there is I think it’s crystal clear that they have the conception that now, today, in Washington, D.C., they could have a terrorist operation that could hit the two people that they detest most — the Americans and the Saudis. And they could get away with it.

Now, the only way that I would argue that you are going to stop that type of mentality and attitude is that you have to convince them that you will escalate. You don’t want to run away from that word, you want to run towards it. You do not want to say that we don’t want to have another front in the war and [sic] terror. Say you are more than willing to have another front on the war and [sic] terror.

In a July 19 report on the funding of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Eli Clifton observed:

Most of the major donors are active philanthropists to “pro-Israel” causes both in the U.S. and internationally. With the disclosure of its donor rolls, it becomes increasingly apparent that FDD’s advocacy of U.S. military intervention in the Middle East, its hawkish stance against Iran, and its defense of right-wing Israeli policy is consistent with its donors’ interests in “pro-Israel” advocacy.


Written by Maidhc Ó Cathail

October 31, 2011 at 10:16 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: