> ----------
>
> Israeli intelligence misled Bush on Iran
>
> By Paul Michaud
>
> Dawn /Pakistan 02 February 2002
> http://www.dawn.com/2002/02/02/int12.htm
>
> PARIS: Sources in the French Secret Services say they have an explanation
> why President George W. Bush decided at the last minute to add Iran to his
> "axis of evil," which originally was to include only Iraq.
>
> North Korea was apparently added "for good measure," say the sources, for
> Bush does not apparently want to give the impression that his crusade is
> waged exclusively against Islam or the Middle East.
>
> As for Iran, the French sources say that Israel, on the eve of the
> forthcoming visit to Washington of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, has
> provided intelligence to Bush according to which, firstly, Osama bin Laden
> is presently very much alive and well, and that he is being kept "under
the
> heavy protection" of Iranian security forces in northwestern Iran, not far
> from its border with Iraq.
>
> The other "revelation" made by the Israelis to President Bush and his
> entourage would indicate that the other major figure on America's "wanted"
> list, Mulla Omar, has also made his way to Iran, and that he was
> exfiltrated to the northwestern part of the country, from Afghanistan,
> where he was until now in hiding.
>
> The operation, according to the intelligence provided to Washington by the
> Israelis, say the French sources, took place on Tuesday (Jan 29). Bush
made
> his announcement of the US decision to undertake its new anti-terrorist
> campaign against Iran, Iraq and North Korea the following day, Wednesday,
> Jan 30.
>
> Both men, according to intelligence provided by the Israelis to
Washington,
> and to certain of their contacts in France, were spirited to Iran by the
> special security forces of Ayatollah Khamenai, the spiritual guide of the
> Iranian revolution, a man who happens to be a bete noire to President
Bush,
> just as he had been to his father, the elder George Bush.
>
> It is certainly to Israel's advantage that Iran become the target of a US
> anti-terrorism campaign, as not only does Iran support the Hezbollah, but
> also the country does possess nuclear devices, also the missiles capable
of
> carrying the devices to Israel or, for that matter, any other country in
> the region.
>
> What flusters French strategists about the US decision to place Iran in
its
> line of fire is that relations between Iran and the West, the United
States
> and France included, had become warmer in recent months, indeed that
Tehran
> had been one of the first countries in the world to condemn the Sept 11
> attack on the World Trade Center. More recently, Washington had gone so
far
> as to congratulate Iran on its "constructive role" in the creation of a
new
> Afghan state, notably during preparatory meetings held in Bonn on
> reconstruction of Afghanistan.
>
> And, if Iran seemed so ready to involve itself in the pacification of
> Afghanistan, it was for a number of pressing reasons, among them the
return
> to Afghanistan of the 2.5 million Afghan refugees present on its soil.
>
> The cost of maintaining the refugees on its territory was proving
> incredibly onerous to Iran, say French sources privy with the matter,
> specially as the West, which encouraged the action, never came through
with
> much of the financial and technical support that had been promised.
>
> Another reason why Iran had welcomed an end to the Afghan conflict and the
> arrival in power of a credible government was the possibility of at last
> putting an end to a war which, over 20 years, had cost it the lives of
some
> 4,000 militarymen, also the expense of the construction and maintenance of
> special fortifications along its joint border with Afghanistan.
>
> As the French sources put it, Iran has had absolutely no interest in
> continuing any of the terrorist activities cited by Bush in his "evil
axis"
> speech of Wednesday.
>
> Indeed, they say, Iran has made a number of decisions going back to last
> year which it hoped would be read positively by Washington in hopes that
> the two countries could turn a leaf on a relationship that turned sour in
> 1979 with the return to Iran of Ayatollah Khomeini, who had until then
been
> in exile in France, and above all the kidnapping the following year of
> diplomats at the US embassy in Tehran - an event that not only brought
> about the defeat, in 1980, of president Jimmy Carter, but also the arrival
> in power the following January of president Ronald Reagan and his new vice
> president, George Bush senior.
>
> ----------
>
> Uri Avnery 2.2.02
>
> Break the Head
>
> Many years ago I got interested in a field of military activity called
> Psychological Warfare, in which all the armies in the world invest
> considerable resources.
>
> Psychological warfare is the opposite of propaganda. Propaganda tries to
> convince the other side that we are right. Psychological warfare does not
try
> to convince anybody, it is an instrument of war like the air-force or the
> armored corps. Its aim is to break the enemy and compel him to submit to
our
> will. If propaganda is honey, psychological warfare is prussic acid.
>
> To achieve this aim, this field uses psychological means in order to break
the
> enemy apart and sow suspicion and distrust between its parts. The main
> objective is to destroy the person leading the enemy, i.e. break the head:
to
> undermine the trust in him and to get his fighters, followers and the
world at
> large to hate him.
>
> How does one do this? The manuals describe the methods:
> The leader of the enemy is corrupt. He sends his fighters to their death
while
> he himself enjoys life. He steals the people's money and hides it in
foreign
> bank accounts. His henchmen are a gang of thieves, who lead a life of
> luxury in hotels around the world, while the ordinary people go hungry.
The leader is a
> contemptible, loathsome, brutal, effeminate, tyrannical, ridiculous
figure.
> These stories are repeated thousands of time, they are planted in
"neutral"
> foreign media, so that they come back from "objective" sources.
>
> Does this sound familiar?
>
> Of course. For several years, already, almost all Israeli media and
spokesmen
> are engaged in demonizing one person: Yasser Arafat. All the classic
tricks of
> psychological warfare, as well as some authentic Israeli inventions, are
used
> to achieve this central aim. Not against the Palestinian people, not even
> against the Palestinian leadership, but against Arafat personally.
>
> The conductors of this campaign do not care a damn whether Arafat is nice
or
> mean, handsome or ugly, a peace-lover or a war-monger, super-honest or a
> highway robber. Quite possibly, Sharon himself admires him in secret. (In
1976
> he asked me to arrange a meeting with him, in order to propose that Arafat
> become the president of a Palestinian state east of the Jordan river.)
That
> did not prevent him last week from declaring that he regrets that he did
not
> succeed in killing him in Beirut.
>
> Arafat is targeted for one sole reason: he is the head of the Palestinian
> people fighting against the occupation. Breaking the head means breaking
the
> whole structure of the Palestinian fight. In the course of war, especially
a
> war of liberation, trust in the leader is essential for steadfast
resistance
> against overwhelming forces. Without it, the movement will splinter into
> thousand pieces. No amount of missiles can compete with that.
>
> In the Israeli and international arenas, this campaign has achieved
> considerable success. The story about the corrupt Arafat, heading a
"corrupt
> authority" and surrounded by a gang of thieves has been spread throughout
the
> world with relentless effort, until the very words "Palestinian
Authority",
> "Arafat" and "corrupt" have become synonymous. These days, the success can
be
> measured: If Atafat had been imprisoned in Ramallah ten years ago, there
would
> have been riotous demonstrations in all European capitals, with the
> pictures of Arafat being carried side by side with those of Che Gevara and
Mandela.
> Whereare they now?
>
> In Israel itself the success is even greater. The hatred of Arafat unites
all
> parts of the public, from the extreme right to the established left.
Research
> shows that out of 300 articles published by "leftists" about the
Palestinian
> problem, 284 contained abusive remarks about Arafat. Like Christians
crossing
> themselves when entering a church, an Israeli "leftist" has to say
something
> like "I am for peace with the Palestinians, but I cannot stand the corrupt
> Arafat", or "I am against the occupation, but Arafat's corrupt gang has to
be
> removed", as a sop to public opinion. The people who write this are not
aware,
> of course, that they are serving the psychological warfare campaign aimed
at
> breaking the Palestinian people at the decisive point.
>
> One can view Arafat positively or negatively. He can be criticized from
many
> directions. He is not a romantic figure like Che Gevara (who died in a
stupid
> campaign) or Nelson Mandela (whose task was incomparably easier than
> Arafat's), neither is he a television star. He is only the leader of the
Palestinian
> people, elected by an immense majority in democratic elections (under the
> supervision of Jimmy Carter).
>
> The corruption in the Palestinian Authority is no
> worse than in Egypt or Jordan, and there is less there than in the United
> States (the Enron affair), France (the Elf-Aquitaine affairs), Germany
(the
> Kohl affair) or Israel (Shass). In the middle of a life-or-death national
> liberation fight, the treatment of this disease can certainly be
postponed.
>
> The Palestinians themselves understand this well. In this arena - the main
> target of Israeli psychological warfare ? the campaign, it now turns out,
has
> completely failed. Sharon believed that by shutting Arafat up in Ramallah
he
> would expose him to ridicule and show that he is not "relevant" anymore,
in
> order to install a gang of collaborators in his place. The very opposite
has
> happened, of course: from Sheikh Yassin of the fundamentalist Hamas to the
> left-wing Popular Front, the Palestinian people has closed ranks behind
Arafat
> at this moment of supreme danger to their very existence. Even the
rumbling of
> criticism from some Palestinian intellectuals ? who where also unwittingly
> exploited by Israeli psychological warfare ? has fallen silent.
>
> These methods were used against Churchill, as well as against Castro. To
no
> avail. They will, probably, not succeed against Arafat either.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> southnews-unsubscribe at egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/