Israel & intelligence (merged thread)

**Tom Odom** · 10-24-2008

Originally Posted by bourbon

Former Senior CIA Operative Says Spy Agency, State Dept. Are Antisemitic, By Jeff Stein. Congressional Quarterly: Spy Talk, October 23, 2008.

Secretary Rice anti-Israel? Not to sound crass, but its too bad she isn't.

Syria has a proven track record of destroying Salafi Jihadists and provided intelligence that saved American lives in the wake of 9/11. Their cooperation in the reconstruction of Iraq could have easily been secured. So if Secretary Rice were indeed anti-Israel, we would not favoring regime change in Syria and subsequently not be on the side of the same guys responsible for 9/11.

Funny she showed up as a center point of discussion on the AKO intelligence discussion email circuit because of this article:

Hizballah – and by extension, Iran – owns Lebanon

Former CIA Ops Officer on Hizballah
By W. Thomas Smith Jr. Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Among my sources for a recent piece, “Are We Funding the Lebanese Army or Hizballah?” (Human Events, Oct. 20, 2008), was my friend and colleague, Clare M. Lopez, who – when I mentioned to her my concerns regarding Hizballah’s having wormed its way into the legitimate Lebanese Defense apparatus as an official component of the army – said to me, “It’s actually the other way around. The army now appears to be part of Hizballah.”

Lopez – a former operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency who is today a widely sought expert in the interconnected realms of strategic policy, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism – clearly understands the dynamics of Lebanon, its strategic importance in the war on terror, and its increasingly dominant kingdom within the state, Hizballah.

My comments were:

Many words come to mind but they are not suitable for here.

I am glad she is a former CIA Ops Officer.

Anyone who thinks Hizballah is a direct extension of Iran with no end state or agenda of its own does not understand Lebanon.

Best

Tom

and

First I think the article is electioneering hyperbole and I will not go beyond that statement.

Second Lebanon is a microcosm of the Middle East in its ethnic quilt. Agendas fold within agendas and simple just does not apply. Hizballah is a Lebanese--hence Arab--Shia fundamentalist organization that has consistently expanded its social networks in Lebanon even as it expanded its military capacities.

Iran is also complex and its role in Lebanon is not simpy to have a foothold on the Mediterranean. The image of such a geostrategic posture is more valuable than actually trying to maintain such a posture. Certainly Tehran sees benefit in expanding its ties to Hizballah as a challenge to Israel and
the US. But the Iranians are not Arab and that means a lot in just how close those ties can become. To declare that Iran owns Lebanon is simply too simple and certainly too short sighted. Syria tried to own Lebanon and I would hazard a guess that the old school in Syria still want to control Lebanon.

Tom

**Ken White** · 10-24-2008

Originally Posted by Tom Odom

...My comments were:

I am glad she is a former CIA Ops Officer.

Anyone who thinks Hizballah is a direct extension of Iran with no end state or agenda of its own does not understand Lebanon.

True on the latter.

On the first, is it just me or are a lot of those 'former' types crawling out of the woodwork saying strange and wonderful things -- that make little sense...

**Render** · 12-05-2008

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/research/...owitzreply.pdf

Read it again.

Nobody is debating the existence of AIPAC. That's a pathetically transparent strawman argument.

I showed you where the water is, I cannot force you to drink.

Selil: Note the well known and self admitted biases of the websites (counterpunch, antiwar dot com) that others had mentioned previous to my first comment. They both repeatedly publish the works of known Holocaust deniers. The Cockburn family (counterpunch) has three generations of anti-Semitic history only thinly veiled as anti-Zionism. Justin Raimondo (antiwar) is a 9/11 truther who claims that both the US and Israeli governments commited 9/11.

=

It should also be noted that the Kennedy School pulled its name off that paper, in 2006.R

**Ken White** · 12-05-2008

I'll just re quote that for you form the 10th of October, 2008:

"It would be much better if you were to post a comment in your own words to explain why you thought so. Just posting a slew of links that may or may not support a position you appear to espouse is a poor technique and is discouraged here; that kind of stuff belongs on the juvenile political blogs.

It would be appreciated if you'd refrain from the practice in the future."

I'm please to not that you did in this posting provide amplifying comment. However, you also attacked another poster and the rule is attack the comment, not the individual. So you get an infraction.

**Adam L** · 12-05-2008

May I suggest we avoid threads like this in the future? I very much question the credibility of most of these “articles,” as well as the value of the commentary. If you step back for a second, this thread reads like an average political discussion board with, in general, the same people agreeing with each other, and maybe one or two people getting caught in the middle. The starting point is also typical of so many blogs: a “controversial” book, statement or article. There has been no discourse that is sufficiently rigorous in its research or neutral in its approach, and nothing new or enlightening is being offered. Some of the comments reflect, at best, a polarized view and, at worst, personal bias. It is really unbecoming. I really think everyone needs to step back, take a breather, calm down and separate themselves from the issues for consideration.

Adam L