Sunday, March 4. Barack Obama, US president and long-suffering partner of insanely jealous and (some would contend) certifiably mad Bibi Netanyahu, aka Mr Israel, finds himself once again at an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference, preparing to reaffirm his love and commitment for his moody, unpredictable partner.
'Shit, what sort of marriage is this?' thought the president - and not for the first time, either. 'I mean, it was only last May* I was here renewing our vows. Now here I am again! Why is he so damn insecure? Honestly, it's not only me, he's driving everyone nuts! As I confided to Sarko at the G20 conference last year: You're fed up with him? I have to deal with him every day!** I just couldn't control myself. He treats me like a doormat. No matter what I do for him, it's just never good enough. And as for gratitude - forget it! Oh well, here we go again':
"[B]ecause of AIPAC's effectiveness in carrying out its mission, you can expect that over the next several days you will hear many fine words from elected officials describing their commitment to the US-Israeli relationship. But as you examine my commitment, you don't just have to count on my words. You can look at my deeds. Because over the last 3 years, as President of the United States, I have kept my commitments to the state of Israel. At every crucial juncture - at every fork in the road - we have been there for Israel. Every single time.
"Four years ago, I stood before you and said that, 'Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable'. That belief has guided my actions as president. The fact is my administration's commitment to Israel has been unprecedented. Our military and intelligence cooperation has never been closer. Our joint exercises and training have never been more robust. Despite a tough budget environment, our security assistance has increased every single year. We are investing in new capabilities. We're providing Israel with more advanced technology - the types of products and systems that only go to our closest friends and allies. And make no mistake: We will do what it takes to preserve Israel's qualitative military edge - because Israel must always have the ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat.
"This isn't just about numbers on a balance sheet. As a senator, I spoke to Israeli troops on the Lebanese border. I visited with families who've known the terror of rocket fire in Sderot. And that's why, as president, I have provided critical funding to deploy the Iron Dome system that has intercepted rockets that might have hit homes and hospitals and schools in that town and in others. Now our assistance is expanding Israel's defensive capabilities, so that more Israelis can live free from the fear of rockets and ballistic missiles. Because no family, no citizen, should live in fear.
"And just as we've been there with our security assistance, we've been there through our diplomacy. When the Goldstone report unfairly singled out Israel for criticism, we challenged it. When Israel was isolated in the aftermath of the flotilla incident, we supported them. When the Durban conference was commemorated, we boycotted it, and we will always reject the notion that Zionism is racism.
"When one-sided resolutions are brought up at the Human Rights Council, we oppose them. When Israeli diplomats feared for their lives in Cairo, we intervened to save them. When there are efforts to boycott or divest from Israel, we will stand against them. And whenever an effort is made to delegitimize the state of Israel, my administration has opposed them. So there should not be a shred of doubt by now - when the chips are down, I have Israel's back."
[*See my 27/5/11 post Obama: Feel the Love; **See my 8/11/11 post That Shitty Little Prime Minister.]
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Shimon Peres' Peace Offensive
Whereas your Iranians, being Iranians, don't just want to wipe Israel off the map, but, if you really want to know, the entire world (if not the universe itself!), your Israelis, which is to say your real people, people with a heart and a soul and a conscience and an eternal yearning for peace, are torn - TORN! - over the matter of whether to save us all from the dreaded Iranians.
I mean take your Israeli president, Shimon Peres, for example. This bloke's even got his own peace centre! And wherever he goes, oil miraculously pours onto troubled waters and doves descend to rest on his shoulders.
No, I'm not making this up. As Uzi of The Times says:
"Mr Obama was due to meet Israeli President Shimon Peres, a leading opponent of a military strike, overnight. Mr Peres, 89, has said privately it would be madness for Israel to go ahead with an attack. Like Mr Netanyahu, Mr Peres believes Iran poses a threat to Israel's survival. But Mr Peres believes it is a problem for the world to solve, not for Israel alone." (Obama urges Israel to hold its fire on Iran until after November poll, Uzi Mahnaimi, The Sunday Times/The Australian, 5/3/12)
Thanks, Uzi.
Yeah, and when this saintly peacenik spoke to AIPAC, Israel's peace-seeking arm in the US, quite by happenstance just before Obama spoke to them on Sunday, his every word was a ringing, heartfelt cry for peace. In fact, being such a nice bloke he even had a few conciliatory words for the Iranians:
"CNN reports that Peres said that while 'peace is our first option... if we are forced to fight, trust me, we shall prevail'. Peres minced no words, declaring Tehran 'an evil, cruel, morally corrupt regime... based on destruction. It is an affront to human dignity'. Of US-Israeli relations, he aid, 'There is no space between us. Our message is clear: Iran will not develop a nuclear weapon'. Further, 'Iran's ambition is to control the Middle East, so it can control a major part of the world's economy', Peres said. 'It must be stopped. And it will be stopped'." (Israel's Peres: Iran 'Will be stopped', Polly Davis, newser.com, 4/3/12)
And, again quite by happenstance, Israel's leading dove met Obama after the AIPAC peace conference for a friendly chat in an effort to prevent him from lashing out at the Iranians:
"It was an excellent meeting with President Obama', Peres said. 'He reinforced the things he said in his speech and went into more details. I left with the feeling that he is determined to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and he is very serious. Obama told me that Israel's security is an American national security interest. I didn't find him to even stutter. He is sharply clear and is not playing politics. I am sure that [Netanyahu] will be received very warmly in the White House tomorrow'." (Netanyau welcomes Obama's statements on Israel's right to self-defense, Barak Ravid, Haaretz, 4/3/12)
Then he phoned his peace offensive partner, Israeli prime minister Netanyahu to say - what else? - shalom.
An amazing bloke, is old Shimon, or, as I prefer to call him 'Shalom'.
Who would have thought that this venerable snow-white dove of doves was the same man as the red-blooded thirty-something back in the fifties who, whilst sowing his wild oats as young men will, ended up fathering his country's very own hush hush nuclear weapons program?
Yep, say what you like, but no country produces peace advocates quite like Israel.
I mean take your Israeli president, Shimon Peres, for example. This bloke's even got his own peace centre! And wherever he goes, oil miraculously pours onto troubled waters and doves descend to rest on his shoulders.
No, I'm not making this up. As Uzi of The Times says:
"Mr Obama was due to meet Israeli President Shimon Peres, a leading opponent of a military strike, overnight. Mr Peres, 89, has said privately it would be madness for Israel to go ahead with an attack. Like Mr Netanyahu, Mr Peres believes Iran poses a threat to Israel's survival. But Mr Peres believes it is a problem for the world to solve, not for Israel alone." (Obama urges Israel to hold its fire on Iran until after November poll, Uzi Mahnaimi, The Sunday Times/The Australian, 5/3/12)
Thanks, Uzi.
Yeah, and when this saintly peacenik spoke to AIPAC, Israel's peace-seeking arm in the US, quite by happenstance just before Obama spoke to them on Sunday, his every word was a ringing, heartfelt cry for peace. In fact, being such a nice bloke he even had a few conciliatory words for the Iranians:
"CNN reports that Peres said that while 'peace is our first option... if we are forced to fight, trust me, we shall prevail'. Peres minced no words, declaring Tehran 'an evil, cruel, morally corrupt regime... based on destruction. It is an affront to human dignity'. Of US-Israeli relations, he aid, 'There is no space between us. Our message is clear: Iran will not develop a nuclear weapon'. Further, 'Iran's ambition is to control the Middle East, so it can control a major part of the world's economy', Peres said. 'It must be stopped. And it will be stopped'." (Israel's Peres: Iran 'Will be stopped', Polly Davis, newser.com, 4/3/12)
And, again quite by happenstance, Israel's leading dove met Obama after the AIPAC peace conference for a friendly chat in an effort to prevent him from lashing out at the Iranians:
"It was an excellent meeting with President Obama', Peres said. 'He reinforced the things he said in his speech and went into more details. I left with the feeling that he is determined to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and he is very serious. Obama told me that Israel's security is an American national security interest. I didn't find him to even stutter. He is sharply clear and is not playing politics. I am sure that [Netanyahu] will be received very warmly in the White House tomorrow'." (Netanyau welcomes Obama's statements on Israel's right to self-defense, Barak Ravid, Haaretz, 4/3/12)
Then he phoned his peace offensive partner, Israeli prime minister Netanyahu to say - what else? - shalom.
An amazing bloke, is old Shimon, or, as I prefer to call him 'Shalom'.
Who would have thought that this venerable snow-white dove of doves was the same man as the red-blooded thirty-something back in the fifties who, whilst sowing his wild oats as young men will, ended up fathering his country's very own hush hush nuclear weapons program?
Yep, say what you like, but no country produces peace advocates quite like Israel.
Monday, March 5, 2012
David Burchell & The Heroes of Benghazi
What an outrage:
"The desecration of dozens of graves at Commonwealth war cemetaries in Libya, in an apparent revenge attack by Islamic extremists, has left surviving Australian veterans of the bloody desert campaign shocked and distressed. Footage has appeared on the internet of militiamen uprooting, smashing and kicking headstones of the war dead, in vandalism the Returned Services League last night branded 'beyond the pale'. The attack last week at the cemeteries in Benghazi - the last resting place for more than 1100 Commonwealth troops, including more than 40 Australians - appears to have been orchestrated in retaliation for the burning of the Koran by US troops in Afghanistan." (Digger graves destroyed by Islamic mob, Mark Dodd, The Australian, 5/3/12)
This dreadful news literally catapulted me back to the deathless prose of one-time Australian columnist David Burchell, who sadly seems, to use his oft-repeated signature simile, to have "vanished like a wraith" from its pages.
You don't forget writing such as this in a hurry:
"Seventy years ago my father, along with 14,000 other Australians of the Ninth Division, was domiciled in the sleepy Libyan coastal town of Tobruk, where all year round the sky shone a fierce blue, the earth glowed red, and the ferocious heat of the day and numbing cold of night seemed drawn from some other planet, where the seasons spin by in a single day... Like others of that stoical and self-effacing generation my father said as little as possible about his experiences in that awful, gutted, fly-blown wreck of a town where so many of his friends and comrades are buried. Scour the photographs of that momentous siege today, though, and you are struck by the seemingly indefatigable optimism and self-confidence of that generation of young Australians, by the awful wreckage of their physical surroundings, in that pretty seaside town turned to rubble - and lastly by the absence of the local population, who seem to have vanished like wraiths." (Libyans failed by Left orientalism, The Australian, 28/2/11)
Burchell went on, by way of lashing Edward Said and his "soulmate" Noam Chomsky, to extol the youth of the Middle East (Palestinians excepted, of course) who were calling as one for "democracy, freedom, [and] women's rights."
"What seems obvious," pontificated our pundit, is that "the young Libyans in the streets of Tobruk, Benghazi and Tripoli... merely want to live... in a 'normal' country, where their persons will be treated with dignity and their views with respect."
In later columns, while arguing for Western intervention on their behalf, he hailed the rebels as the "young heroes of Benghazi" (Rebels live and die by Western ideals, 21/3/11) and asserted confidently that their 'revolution' aimed simply for "the restoration of sanity" (Carping critics betray ideals, 4/4/11).
And then he just vanished like a wraith!
As, it seems, have the "young heroes of Benghazi" - replaced with NATO-jihadis, who've taken time off from torturing perceived enemies, to trash David's Daddy's friends' graves.
David, revered pundit, in whichever etheric dimension you now flit, please, please come back and tell us what happened to the heroic, democratic, freedom-loving youth of Benghazi.
"The desecration of dozens of graves at Commonwealth war cemetaries in Libya, in an apparent revenge attack by Islamic extremists, has left surviving Australian veterans of the bloody desert campaign shocked and distressed. Footage has appeared on the internet of militiamen uprooting, smashing and kicking headstones of the war dead, in vandalism the Returned Services League last night branded 'beyond the pale'. The attack last week at the cemeteries in Benghazi - the last resting place for more than 1100 Commonwealth troops, including more than 40 Australians - appears to have been orchestrated in retaliation for the burning of the Koran by US troops in Afghanistan." (Digger graves destroyed by Islamic mob, Mark Dodd, The Australian, 5/3/12)
This dreadful news literally catapulted me back to the deathless prose of one-time Australian columnist David Burchell, who sadly seems, to use his oft-repeated signature simile, to have "vanished like a wraith" from its pages.
You don't forget writing such as this in a hurry:
"Seventy years ago my father, along with 14,000 other Australians of the Ninth Division, was domiciled in the sleepy Libyan coastal town of Tobruk, where all year round the sky shone a fierce blue, the earth glowed red, and the ferocious heat of the day and numbing cold of night seemed drawn from some other planet, where the seasons spin by in a single day... Like others of that stoical and self-effacing generation my father said as little as possible about his experiences in that awful, gutted, fly-blown wreck of a town where so many of his friends and comrades are buried. Scour the photographs of that momentous siege today, though, and you are struck by the seemingly indefatigable optimism and self-confidence of that generation of young Australians, by the awful wreckage of their physical surroundings, in that pretty seaside town turned to rubble - and lastly by the absence of the local population, who seem to have vanished like wraiths." (Libyans failed by Left orientalism, The Australian, 28/2/11)
Burchell went on, by way of lashing Edward Said and his "soulmate" Noam Chomsky, to extol the youth of the Middle East (Palestinians excepted, of course) who were calling as one for "democracy, freedom, [and] women's rights."
"What seems obvious," pontificated our pundit, is that "the young Libyans in the streets of Tobruk, Benghazi and Tripoli... merely want to live... in a 'normal' country, where their persons will be treated with dignity and their views with respect."
In later columns, while arguing for Western intervention on their behalf, he hailed the rebels as the "young heroes of Benghazi" (Rebels live and die by Western ideals, 21/3/11) and asserted confidently that their 'revolution' aimed simply for "the restoration of sanity" (Carping critics betray ideals, 4/4/11).
And then he just vanished like a wraith!
As, it seems, have the "young heroes of Benghazi" - replaced with NATO-jihadis, who've taken time off from torturing perceived enemies, to trash David's Daddy's friends' graves.
David, revered pundit, in whichever etheric dimension you now flit, please, please come back and tell us what happened to the heroic, democratic, freedom-loving youth of Benghazi.
The Carr Doctrine? What Carr Doctrine?
What did Mark Latham say about Bob Carr in 2004? That he could play a "vital role" in "put[ting the Americans] back in their box. But he won't. When push comes to shove, he's like the rest of the Labor conservatives: scared of Murdoch... scared of the Americans, our great and powerful friends." (See my previous post.)
And so it has come to pass. The Carr Doctrine So Far, the subject of my last 3 posts, is now just a matter of "private views," to be replaced by a new, "official view," with script and to-do list provided by the likes of Hague, Kissinger and Clinton:
"On a raft of contentious foreign policy issues he has blogged about in recent years, Mr Carr sidestepped neatly - saying the views he held as a 'freewheeling private citizen' should be set aside for the 'more precise' views he will now express on behalf of the nation. 'We all have private views. If you are a foreign minister, you have to have one view and that's the official view of the government. The views I now have will be formed by discussions with professional diplomats and my own judgment'. In the past, Mr Carr had criticised America's 'chronic insecurities' over the rise of China and the 'worse' insecurities' of the Chinese about the US, and condemned any permanent US troop presence in Australia. Yesterday he talked up both strategic relationships for Australia: the security treaty with the US was a 'bedrock' that was 'in Australia's serious long-term interest' and which 'confers on Australia much more importance than we would otherwise have in the world'... He spoke with British Foreign Minister William Hague on Friday, and expects to speak with Henry Kissinger and US Secreary of State Hilary Clinton." (Carr winds back personal views, Misha Schubert, Sydney Morning Herald, 4/3/12)
What a phony!
And so it has come to pass. The Carr Doctrine So Far, the subject of my last 3 posts, is now just a matter of "private views," to be replaced by a new, "official view," with script and to-do list provided by the likes of Hague, Kissinger and Clinton:
"On a raft of contentious foreign policy issues he has blogged about in recent years, Mr Carr sidestepped neatly - saying the views he held as a 'freewheeling private citizen' should be set aside for the 'more precise' views he will now express on behalf of the nation. 'We all have private views. If you are a foreign minister, you have to have one view and that's the official view of the government. The views I now have will be formed by discussions with professional diplomats and my own judgment'. In the past, Mr Carr had criticised America's 'chronic insecurities' over the rise of China and the 'worse' insecurities' of the Chinese about the US, and condemned any permanent US troop presence in Australia. Yesterday he talked up both strategic relationships for Australia: the security treaty with the US was a 'bedrock' that was 'in Australia's serious long-term interest' and which 'confers on Australia much more importance than we would otherwise have in the world'... He spoke with British Foreign Minister William Hague on Friday, and expects to speak with Henry Kissinger and US Secreary of State Hilary Clinton." (Carr winds back personal views, Misha Schubert, Sydney Morning Herald, 4/3/12)
What a phony!
Sunday, March 4, 2012
The Carr Doctrine So Far 3
"Ended a long day with a private fundraising dinner at the home of a businessman, Paul Binstead of Pymble. Carr was the star turn, laying into the Americans over Iraq, a scarifying 15-minute critique of their faulty strategy and how it will foster Islamic fundamentalism worldwide. It's a measure of how bad the Americans are going that someone loke Bob, an old Cold War warrior, is up them for the rent. I need him to come out publicly and say these things. The thug Armitage and his underlings are in the Murdoch papers all the time: the born-to-rule mentality of American imperialism, trying to interfere in our sovereign system, trying to help Howard. They see us as a colony, not an ally. Carr is the senior Labor head of government in this country - he could play a vital role, put them back in their box. But he won't. When push comes to shove, he's like the rest of the Labor conservatives: scared of Murdoch, scared of Packer, scared of the Americans, our great and powerful friends. Bob is going to the Australian-American Leadership Dialogue in June, the foreign policy club funded by the US. He won't repeat his comments from tonight publicly, they would throw him out of the club." (Tuesday, 20 April 2004: The Latham Diaries, Mark Latham, 2005, p 281)
So far, Murdoch court reporters love Bob Carr:
"In keeping with the early battles against what he calls the 'comms' in the Labor Party, Carr's position remains hard Right. He will not only be as pro-US as Alexander Downer, he will also be able to match his Washington hosts in Civil War history, as well as the history of the Kennedy administration. On a personal note, I spent a week in Israel with Carr and his wife Helena in 2010: his hawkishness was everywhere on display, including when he told our hosts that were terrorists threatening the citizens of NSW, he would have built a dividing wall here too." (The hard Right man cometh, Imre Salusinszky, The Australian, 3/3/12)
And yet, despite his place in Mark Latham's famous conga line of suckholes and his total ignorance of the history of Palestine/Israel, Carr is described in Salusinszky's report as having a "passion for history" (quoting Michael Egan) and a "knowledge of the issues above anybody else in Australia and far in excess of anybody in public office" (quoting Morris Iemma), and is alleged (by Salusinszky) to have "doubled the IQ of Gillard's caucus."
"Carr was always serious about foreign affairs. He founded Labour Friends of Israel. He was a passionate social democrat, which made him a serious anti-communist all through the Cold War. He gave the NSW Right whatever class and elan it had." (Carr right choice for foreign job, Greg Sheridan, The Australian, 3/3/12)
However, there's a fly in Sheridan's ointment: "Going back through Carr's blog in detail yesterday, I was struck, generally, by its erudition and range, but there were one or two things to disagree with. I think he is a bit too sanguine about the threat posed by a nuclear-armed Iran, and a bit Pollyanna-ish in his interpretation of the Chinese government."
And what's this?:
"Bob Carr has removed an attack on the Dalai Lama from his personal blog where he decribed the spiritual leader as a 'cunning monk'. Australia's next foreign minister, Mr Carr said his views on the Thoughtlines blog were personal ones, but he did not want them to distract from his plum job." (Foreign Minister deletes Dalai Lama attack from blog, Samantha Maiden & Linda Silmalis, Sunday Telegraph, 4/3/12)
And the Carr Doctrine So Far? Well, it's still on Thoughtlines as I type, but will that too be removed or subjected to a judicious nip and tuck, I wonder?
So far, Murdoch court reporters love Bob Carr:
"In keeping with the early battles against what he calls the 'comms' in the Labor Party, Carr's position remains hard Right. He will not only be as pro-US as Alexander Downer, he will also be able to match his Washington hosts in Civil War history, as well as the history of the Kennedy administration. On a personal note, I spent a week in Israel with Carr and his wife Helena in 2010: his hawkishness was everywhere on display, including when he told our hosts that were terrorists threatening the citizens of NSW, he would have built a dividing wall here too." (The hard Right man cometh, Imre Salusinszky, The Australian, 3/3/12)
And yet, despite his place in Mark Latham's famous conga line of suckholes and his total ignorance of the history of Palestine/Israel, Carr is described in Salusinszky's report as having a "passion for history" (quoting Michael Egan) and a "knowledge of the issues above anybody else in Australia and far in excess of anybody in public office" (quoting Morris Iemma), and is alleged (by Salusinszky) to have "doubled the IQ of Gillard's caucus."
"Carr was always serious about foreign affairs. He founded Labour Friends of Israel. He was a passionate social democrat, which made him a serious anti-communist all through the Cold War. He gave the NSW Right whatever class and elan it had." (Carr right choice for foreign job, Greg Sheridan, The Australian, 3/3/12)
However, there's a fly in Sheridan's ointment: "Going back through Carr's blog in detail yesterday, I was struck, generally, by its erudition and range, but there were one or two things to disagree with. I think he is a bit too sanguine about the threat posed by a nuclear-armed Iran, and a bit Pollyanna-ish in his interpretation of the Chinese government."
And what's this?:
"Bob Carr has removed an attack on the Dalai Lama from his personal blog where he decribed the spiritual leader as a 'cunning monk'. Australia's next foreign minister, Mr Carr said his views on the Thoughtlines blog were personal ones, but he did not want them to distract from his plum job." (Foreign Minister deletes Dalai Lama attack from blog, Samantha Maiden & Linda Silmalis, Sunday Telegraph, 4/3/12)
And the Carr Doctrine So Far? Well, it's still on Thoughtlines as I type, but will that too be removed or subjected to a judicious nip and tuck, I wonder?
Saturday, March 3, 2012
The Carr Doctrine So Far 2
Dear Bob,
Congratulations on the prime minister's offer of the foreign ministership you just couldn't refuse.
In light of the Carr Doctrine So Far (See my previous post of the same name), which can perhaps accurately be summed up by the expression, Iranian nukes? Bollocks!, can you please, in the name of sanity and Australian independence, pull all stops out NOW to save this unfortunate Australian man from being caught up in the latest round of USraeli military madness currently sweeping the world?:
"If David Levick was a willing participant in the global conspiracy to nuclearise Iran, he was doing a pretty good job of hiding it yesterday. 'I'm as nervous as shit', the Sydney businessman said when The Australian phoned. 'I'm in a sweat and I feel like I should be going out and getting drunk'. (Sanctions? What sanctions? Aussie accused of exporting goods to Iran, Paul Maley, The Australian, 2/3/12)
"Just 20 minutes earlier, Mr Levick learned he had been indicted by US authorities on 5 counts of selling prohibited goods to Iran in defiance of strict US trade restrictions aimed at thwarting Tehran's nuclear weapons aspirations."
I draw your attention to journalist Maley's failure to insert the word 'alleged' before "nuclear weapons aspirations" in the above sentence. But then, that's The Australian for you, right? Remember your own words: "There is only challengeable evidence they are going to get [the bomb] anyway"? (The US under threat, 18/12/11, bobcarrblog.wordpress.com)
"The small businessman, who for 10 years has made a living selling semi-conductors out of his one-man office in the northern Sydney suburb of Thornleigh, faces the possibility of extradition to the US and a maximum 25-year jail sentence.
"Mr Levick admits to selling material destined for Iran - mainly helicopter parts - but strongly denied he knew he was flouting the law. 'I didn't know there was a thingamajig against them', Mr Levick said, referring to the raft of UN, EU and US sanctions imposed on Tehran.
"A 21-page grand jury indictment... however, argues otherwise. According to the US government, between March 2007 and March 2009 Mr Levick knowingly and wilfully conspired to circumvent the trade ban and defraud the US government. The indictment alleges that Mr Levick used his Sydney company ICM Components to procure banned goods from US suppliers using a Florida-based broker on behalf of his Iranian client. 'Defendants Levick and ICM intentionally concealed the ultimate end end-use and end-users of the Restricted Goods (sic) from manufacturers, distributors, shippers, and freight forwarders', the government alleges. The indictment goes on to accuse Mr Levick of misleading his suppliers, telling them the equipment he sought was for use in 'unmanned helicopters that survey rural Australia' or for 'BHP Billion (sic), a mining company in Australia, for use in either Malaysia or Papua, New Guinea (sic)'.
"It includes an email Mr Levick allegedly sent to an Iranian client in late 2008 saying he had been raided by Australian authorities and US customers. Mr Levick denies any wrongdoing.
"His troubles began in 2007 when he received an email from an Iranian man representing a company called SkyLife Worldwide. The sender of the email, whom Mr Levick declined to name, claimed he had been trying to contact a company in Austria. Austria, Australia. It seemed like an honest mistake, Mr Levick thought. 'A sale's a sale as far as I was concerned', he said.
"Among the items the firm wanted were helicopter rotor blades, brake bearings and helicopter lights, all of which Mr Levick duly procured. But what Mr Levick claims not to have known is that SkyLife was part of an elaborate network of Iranian front companies whose real purpose, according to the US State Department, was to procure parts for Tehran's illicit weapons program."
You'll note again, Bob, that's not alleged "illicit weapons program".
"He said the first hint he had that things were not quite above board was when he was contacted by ASIO in 2007. 'I got a phone call from ASIO saying, 'Come to the office, please', Mr Levick, 50, said. 'I was just about to do my Christmas shopping'. Armed with a warrant, ASIO officers seized Mr Levick's computers and began quizzing him. 'They came out for an interview and said, 'Look, you can't sell all these sort of parts to them'. So I said, 'OK'. Then they asked me all the same questions, who I was supplying them to, where they were going to'. He then halted all pending transfers to Malaysia, which included an emergency flotation kit for a helicopter and miniature gyroscopes, which, among other things, can be used to stabilise target drones, missiles, torpedoes and remotely piloted vehicles. Mr Levick said he never heard from ASIO again.
"However, in a September 2008 email, one apparently sent after the ASIO visit, Mr Levick told his Iranian client of the authority's suspicions.
"He has been charged with conspiracy to defraud the US and breach the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the Arms Export Control Act. The claims against Mr Levick drew silence from the Australian government yesterday. ASIO would not confirm it had raided Mr Levick. Nor would it say whether it had supplied information to US authorities or if that information now formed part of the criminal case against Mr Levick."
Can you please get to the bottom of this, Bob, or is what you just said to Geraldine Doogue on Radio National's Saturday Extra program this morning about your Doctrine So Far - "That's a commentary from a private citizen. I now speak for Australia" - your get out free card?
Congratulations on the prime minister's offer of the foreign ministership you just couldn't refuse.
In light of the Carr Doctrine So Far (See my previous post of the same name), which can perhaps accurately be summed up by the expression, Iranian nukes? Bollocks!, can you please, in the name of sanity and Australian independence, pull all stops out NOW to save this unfortunate Australian man from being caught up in the latest round of USraeli military madness currently sweeping the world?:
"If David Levick was a willing participant in the global conspiracy to nuclearise Iran, he was doing a pretty good job of hiding it yesterday. 'I'm as nervous as shit', the Sydney businessman said when The Australian phoned. 'I'm in a sweat and I feel like I should be going out and getting drunk'. (Sanctions? What sanctions? Aussie accused of exporting goods to Iran, Paul Maley, The Australian, 2/3/12)
"Just 20 minutes earlier, Mr Levick learned he had been indicted by US authorities on 5 counts of selling prohibited goods to Iran in defiance of strict US trade restrictions aimed at thwarting Tehran's nuclear weapons aspirations."
I draw your attention to journalist Maley's failure to insert the word 'alleged' before "nuclear weapons aspirations" in the above sentence. But then, that's The Australian for you, right? Remember your own words: "There is only challengeable evidence they are going to get [the bomb] anyway"? (The US under threat, 18/12/11, bobcarrblog.wordpress.com)
"The small businessman, who for 10 years has made a living selling semi-conductors out of his one-man office in the northern Sydney suburb of Thornleigh, faces the possibility of extradition to the US and a maximum 25-year jail sentence.
"Mr Levick admits to selling material destined for Iran - mainly helicopter parts - but strongly denied he knew he was flouting the law. 'I didn't know there was a thingamajig against them', Mr Levick said, referring to the raft of UN, EU and US sanctions imposed on Tehran.
"A 21-page grand jury indictment... however, argues otherwise. According to the US government, between March 2007 and March 2009 Mr Levick knowingly and wilfully conspired to circumvent the trade ban and defraud the US government. The indictment alleges that Mr Levick used his Sydney company ICM Components to procure banned goods from US suppliers using a Florida-based broker on behalf of his Iranian client. 'Defendants Levick and ICM intentionally concealed the ultimate end end-use and end-users of the Restricted Goods (sic) from manufacturers, distributors, shippers, and freight forwarders', the government alleges. The indictment goes on to accuse Mr Levick of misleading his suppliers, telling them the equipment he sought was for use in 'unmanned helicopters that survey rural Australia' or for 'BHP Billion (sic), a mining company in Australia, for use in either Malaysia or Papua, New Guinea (sic)'.
"It includes an email Mr Levick allegedly sent to an Iranian client in late 2008 saying he had been raided by Australian authorities and US customers. Mr Levick denies any wrongdoing.
"His troubles began in 2007 when he received an email from an Iranian man representing a company called SkyLife Worldwide. The sender of the email, whom Mr Levick declined to name, claimed he had been trying to contact a company in Austria. Austria, Australia. It seemed like an honest mistake, Mr Levick thought. 'A sale's a sale as far as I was concerned', he said.
"Among the items the firm wanted were helicopter rotor blades, brake bearings and helicopter lights, all of which Mr Levick duly procured. But what Mr Levick claims not to have known is that SkyLife was part of an elaborate network of Iranian front companies whose real purpose, according to the US State Department, was to procure parts for Tehran's illicit weapons program."
You'll note again, Bob, that's not alleged "illicit weapons program".
"He said the first hint he had that things were not quite above board was when he was contacted by ASIO in 2007. 'I got a phone call from ASIO saying, 'Come to the office, please', Mr Levick, 50, said. 'I was just about to do my Christmas shopping'. Armed with a warrant, ASIO officers seized Mr Levick's computers and began quizzing him. 'They came out for an interview and said, 'Look, you can't sell all these sort of parts to them'. So I said, 'OK'. Then they asked me all the same questions, who I was supplying them to, where they were going to'. He then halted all pending transfers to Malaysia, which included an emergency flotation kit for a helicopter and miniature gyroscopes, which, among other things, can be used to stabilise target drones, missiles, torpedoes and remotely piloted vehicles. Mr Levick said he never heard from ASIO again.
"However, in a September 2008 email, one apparently sent after the ASIO visit, Mr Levick told his Iranian client of the authority's suspicions.
"He has been charged with conspiracy to defraud the US and breach the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the Arms Export Control Act. The claims against Mr Levick drew silence from the Australian government yesterday. ASIO would not confirm it had raided Mr Levick. Nor would it say whether it had supplied information to US authorities or if that information now formed part of the criminal case against Mr Levick."
Can you please get to the bottom of this, Bob, or is what you just said to Geraldine Doogue on Radio National's Saturday Extra program this morning about your Doctrine So Far - "That's a commentary from a private citizen. I now speak for Australia" - your get out free card?
Friday, March 2, 2012
The Carr Doctrine So Far
Our new foreign minister Bob Carr loves Israel heaps (See my 31/12/10 post But is it acceptable to the Israelis?), but is he with the USraeli program of wiping Iran off the map?
Well, judging by what he's written on the subject so far, no.
However, what with the irresistable power of Israeli pheromones on Lib-Labers, things could easily change, so let's take a look at our new foreign minister's thoughts on the next great USraeli adventure in the Middle East thus far:
In response to the great Republican Presidential Debate of December 2011, Carr posted The US Under Threat (18/12/11) on his blog Thoughtlines with Bob Carr (bobcarrblog.wordpress.com):
"The American strategic position is as fraught as 1946 when it faced Stalin's domination of Europe. Democracy around the world teeters on the brink. The US needs a massive military build-up, 100,000 more troops and a bigger navy. We have found another deadly enemy, another evil dictator 'worse than Hitler'. There should be no space between the US and Bibi's Israel. After the last 2 wars we need another - this time, against Iran, the all-powerful global foe of the US which is ruled by enemies indistinguishable from Al-Quaeda [sic]."
That's Carr summing up the thoughtlines of maddies such as Santorum, Gingrich and Romney. Personally, he's a Ron Paul man:
"Against this certifiable insanity in the candidates' debate only Ron Paul stood out. Another war? A military build-up? Hang on, we're bankrupt! And Iran would not be the only creepy nation to have the bomb. There is only challengeable evidence they are going to get it anyway. Are we going to fight another war against Moslems? [sic] And another after that? It is only Paul who said that a feistier global role for a struggling US is incompatible with saving the country from budget disaster and that the US has got to pull back from Middle Eastern adventures not plunge into more of them... Ron Paul is the authentic expression of the Jeffersonian spirit - no, the Washington spirit."
But there's more. Here's Carr on January 8 this year:
"Foreign policy is what is at stake in this election; Iran above all. Both Israel and Iran have been beating the drums of war and the danger is that talk leads to action. History teaches us that this is the way it starts. Israeli military are advising now is the time to strike although senior figures from Israeli security have warned their government against the military's desire to send the bombers... Remember the [Republican candidates'] litany of this madness. According to this strand of thinking, American [sic] is surrounded by enemies: Russia, China, Iran... and so on. Each, when it takes its place in the spotlight, 'worse than Hitler'. It is 12 minutes to midnight and we are faced with another Munich from a weak Democrat in the White house. After 2 catastrophic wars in 10 years we need a third, to finally remake the Middle East - safe for Israel, reliable with oil, full of governments as pro-American as Saudi. Remember the US ultra-nationalists and neo-conservatives believe the US must always have enemies and, in the words of Norman Podhoretz, 'We need more wars!'... Australia has one role: to talk the Americans back from the brink." (Iran the issue)
OK, so let's sum up Australian foreign minister Bob Carr's position so far:
1) Israel is a warmonger.
2) Attacking Iran is madness.
3) Ahmadinejad is not a reincarnation of Hitler.
4) 2012 is not 1938.
5) (Most interesting this one) Iraq was a war for Israel.
6) Neocons are the pits.
7) Australia's key foreign policy task should be talking the US out of war with Iran.
Right, now let's see where he goes from here.
Well, judging by what he's written on the subject so far, no.
However, what with the irresistable power of Israeli pheromones on Lib-Labers, things could easily change, so let's take a look at our new foreign minister's thoughts on the next great USraeli adventure in the Middle East thus far:
In response to the great Republican Presidential Debate of December 2011, Carr posted The US Under Threat (18/12/11) on his blog Thoughtlines with Bob Carr (bobcarrblog.wordpress.com):
"The American strategic position is as fraught as 1946 when it faced Stalin's domination of Europe. Democracy around the world teeters on the brink. The US needs a massive military build-up, 100,000 more troops and a bigger navy. We have found another deadly enemy, another evil dictator 'worse than Hitler'. There should be no space between the US and Bibi's Israel. After the last 2 wars we need another - this time, against Iran, the all-powerful global foe of the US which is ruled by enemies indistinguishable from Al-Quaeda [sic]."
That's Carr summing up the thoughtlines of maddies such as Santorum, Gingrich and Romney. Personally, he's a Ron Paul man:
"Against this certifiable insanity in the candidates' debate only Ron Paul stood out. Another war? A military build-up? Hang on, we're bankrupt! And Iran would not be the only creepy nation to have the bomb. There is only challengeable evidence they are going to get it anyway. Are we going to fight another war against Moslems? [sic] And another after that? It is only Paul who said that a feistier global role for a struggling US is incompatible with saving the country from budget disaster and that the US has got to pull back from Middle Eastern adventures not plunge into more of them... Ron Paul is the authentic expression of the Jeffersonian spirit - no, the Washington spirit."
But there's more. Here's Carr on January 8 this year:
"Foreign policy is what is at stake in this election; Iran above all. Both Israel and Iran have been beating the drums of war and the danger is that talk leads to action. History teaches us that this is the way it starts. Israeli military are advising now is the time to strike although senior figures from Israeli security have warned their government against the military's desire to send the bombers... Remember the [Republican candidates'] litany of this madness. According to this strand of thinking, American [sic] is surrounded by enemies: Russia, China, Iran... and so on. Each, when it takes its place in the spotlight, 'worse than Hitler'. It is 12 minutes to midnight and we are faced with another Munich from a weak Democrat in the White house. After 2 catastrophic wars in 10 years we need a third, to finally remake the Middle East - safe for Israel, reliable with oil, full of governments as pro-American as Saudi. Remember the US ultra-nationalists and neo-conservatives believe the US must always have enemies and, in the words of Norman Podhoretz, 'We need more wars!'... Australia has one role: to talk the Americans back from the brink." (Iran the issue)
OK, so let's sum up Australian foreign minister Bob Carr's position so far:
1) Israel is a warmonger.
2) Attacking Iran is madness.
3) Ahmadinejad is not a reincarnation of Hitler.
4) 2012 is not 1938.
5) (Most interesting this one) Iraq was a war for Israel.
6) Neocons are the pits.
7) Australia's key foreign policy task should be talking the US out of war with Iran.
Right, now let's see where he goes from here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)