Home Page

From the Vol.1 No.2 issue of Electronic Intelligence Weekly
USA News Digest

LaRouche Campaign To Issue 250,000 Copies of Updated 'Goetterdaemmerung in Palestine' Leaflet

'Dr. Strangelove Alive in Washington'; Reactions to Nuclear Posture Review

While many people presumed that the March 10 Los Angeles Times leak of the list of countries targetted in the U.S. NPR (see article in Indepth) was aimed at exposing and stopping the change of U.S. nuclear warfighting doctrine, Lyndon LaRouche took the opposite view, in discussions about the NPR on March 11.

LaRouche charged that the contents of the new doctrine had been leaked by the proponents of the "Clash of Civilizations" doctrine associated with Samuel Huntington, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Bernard Lewis, and Henry Kissinger. These lunatics, LaRouche said, are playing a "nuclear chicken-game" with the rest of the world, attempting to scare nations, including America's European NATO allies, into capitulating to the drive to provoke a new world war, beginning in the Middle East. Coupled with the U.S. toleration of the Israeli military's mass killings of Palestinians in seven refugee camps, and with George W. Bush and Richard Cheney's war whoops against Iraq in Washington and London, the Administration defense of the NPR document targetting of Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Libya, has led to comments such as "the lunatics have taken over Washington." Opposition is reported below, though there has been virtual silence from the U.S. Congress.

*Under the headline, "America as Nuclear Rogue," the lead editorial of the March 12 New York Times argues, "If another country were planning to develop a new nuclear weapon and contemplating pre-emptive strikes against a list of non-nuclear powers, Washington would rightly label that nation a dangerous rogue state. Yet such is the course recommended to President Bush by a new Pentagon planning paper that became public last weekend....

"Where the Pentagon review goes badly wrong, is in lowering the threshold for using nuclear weapons and in undermining the effectiveness of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

"The treaty, long America's main tool for discouraging non-nuclear countries from developing nuclear weapons, is backed by promises that as long as signatories stay non-nuclear and avoid combat alongside a nuclear ally, they will not be attacked with nuclear weapons. If the Pentagon proposals become American policy, that promise would be withdrawn, and countries could conclude that they have no motive to stay non-nuclear. In fact, they may well decide they need nuclear weapons to avoid nuclear attack...."

*The uproar in the press on March 12 featured wildly differing interpretations of the Pentagon's new Nuclear Posture Review.

The Washington Post, for example, offered views totally at variance with those of the New York Times. The Post's Walter Pincus wrote that this is really nothing new—that the current NPR follows the pattern of Presidential Decision Directive 60 signed by President Clinton five years ago. PDD-60 reduced the targetting of Russia, added targets in China, and added contingency planning for "rogue nations" such as Iran, Iraq, and North Korea. "Nothing has changed," one official was quoted as saying.

*The British and Russians also reacted strongly to the NPR leak. British Labour Party MP Alice Mahon said, "The lunatics have taken over the White House. This report must be ringing alarms throughout NATO."

British Liberal Democrat spokesman Menzies Campbell said, "America seems to be moving from nuclear deterrence to nuclear war fighting. It would drive a coach and horses through NATO'S doctrine of nuclear strikes as a last resort."

Said Russian General Leonid Ivashov: "The heart of U.S. political doctrine is to push powerful Russia off the political scene." Vyacheslav Nikonov, of the Politika think tank, said the U.S. plans sent a "very negative signal" which would be "received in an appropriate fashion by Russia's leadership."

Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, former Iranian President and currently head of Iran's Expediency Council, said: "The U.S. believes that by threatening countries they'll withdraw their demands. Their policy is one of intimidation."

Congress Opposition to 'Clash of Civilizations' Too Weak To Stop Brzezinski Lunatics

Various U.S. Senators have begun to raise some questions about the Bush Administration's "axis of evil" policy, at thinktank meetings, and in the Washington media.

The strongest opposition to confrontation is on the matter of Iran. At a meeting of the American Islamic Council on March 14, Senators Joseph Biden (D-Del), Robert Torricelli (D-NJ), and Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) all proposed that the Administration pursue a track of dialogue and negotiation with Iran, on the basis of mutual interest.

At the same event, which was held at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and devoted to the question of whether confrontation between the U.S. and Iran was necessary, however, there was also heavy emphasis on the opposite point of view. Robert Gallucci, of Georgetown University, formerly President Clinton's envoy to North Korea, and Zalmay Khalilzad, of the National Security Council, presented to terrified Iranian emigres, diplomats and thinktankers, the coup faction's view of Iran as a leading aggressive enemy of the United States.

More striking, was the fact that Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and John Kerry (D-Mass) went public and told March 13 issue of The Hill paper, that they were against rushing into war on Iraq. While not expressing opposition to "regime change," they commented on the obstacles, such as lack of support from allies and other Arab states, and the need for consultation with Congress. Reed contrasted Afghanistan with the situation in Iraq and said, correctly, that Iraq would be a lot more difficult.

Without a firm understanding of the insane imperial purpose of the plans for war against the "axis of evil," however, it is not likely that these Senators would resist the rush of war hysteria, and disinformation, which is bound to accompany the countdown to expanded war.

Israeli Spy Scandal Prompts Justice, Defense Departments To Ban on Foreign Nationals Running IT Programs

In a move that reflects considerable concern about Israeli espionage operations against the U.S. government, both the Defense Department and the Justice Department have issued new regulations prohibiting foreign nationals from involvement in the development and maintenance of information technology systems at the two giant Federal bureaucracies. Pete Nelson, the Pentagon deputy director for personnel security, told World Tribune.com that "some foreign nationals—those in the most sensitive positions—may not be permitted to remain in those positions.... [W]e need to ensure all people with access to sensitive IT systems are cleared and properly vetted for the material to which they have access."

The new DOD regulations, to be implemented within the next 60-90 days, will involve non-classified as well as classified projects as well. The Justice Department regulation, issued March 3, places similar restrictions on foreign nationals involved in IT, and a follow-on Justice memo spelled out a timetable. So much for the claims (see below) by the Washington Post claims that the reports of U.S. concerns over Israeli spies are merely "urban legend."

The Justice Department decision comes in the wake of extensive U.S. media coverage of the resurfacing in France (see Europe Digest) of the story of the Israeli spy scandal, first broken by EIR this past December. The recent European stories were based either on the French online newsletter Intelligence Online, or on coverage in Le Monde. Several nasty papers, including the Washington Post, tried to spike the story by quoting a government source who dismissed the charges of Israeli spying as "an urban legend." A Washington-based journalist commented on the Post story that the woman whom Mintz quoted as the authoritative official debunking the spy story was a "deputy assistant telephone answerer," with no knowledge of the matter.

Meanwhile, an official of the intelligence division of the DEA confirmed, in a phone discussion with EIR March 13, that the DEA is conducting an investigation into Israeli spying on DEA facilities around the United States. He said the probe began sometime prior to June 2001. "They were clearly casing our offices," he said.

OMB Shoots Down Supplementary Aid for Israel

Sources in the Administration and Congress said March 13 that the Bush Administration is blocking a request by Israel for additional financial aid. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had asked for $800 million on an earlier visit to Washington, for the "fight against terrorism," and money promised by President Clinton after Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon. Recently, the State Department whittled that down to $200 million, although reportedly some millions had already been given to Israel from anti-terorism monies.

According to sources, the White House Office of Management and Budget nixed the $200-million request, because it raised concerns over the major Israeli offensive against the Palestinians; because the U.S. already gives $3 billion in aid to Israel; and because there is a "strain" on the U.S. budget stemming from the war.

'Free-Trade' Warhawks in U.S. Hit Bush on Tariff

The March 11 issue of the Washington Times featured an article by Bruce Bartlett, Senior Fellow of the National Center for Policy Analysis (one of the Mont Pelerin Society's front groups), blasting President Bush's decision to impose 30% tariffs on imported steel. The Bartlett rant, titled "On a Slippery Tariff Slope," declared that "George W. Bush has made the greatest mistake of his Presidency by imposing additional tariffs on steel imports," and insisted that Bush had caved in to unions and industry—a precursor to more such concessions to protectionism. A cartoon depicts Bush driving a steam roller labelled "steel tariffs," squashing people flat in the street, while a fat man labelled "unions" sits smiling next to the driver.

The Moonie-owned Washington Times, pro-Republican Party by profile, does not usually attack President Bush.

The National Center for Policy Analysis's premier upcoming event will be to host former Israeli Prime Minister (and rabid warhawk) Benjamin Netanyahu in Dallas, Texas April 11.

States Will Restrict Medicaid Drug Coverage for Poor, Disabled

As budget squeezes get worse and worse around the country, states are looking to balance their budgets by restricting Medicaid drug coverage for the poor and disabled—making it impossible for the poorest patients to get their medications. States are also requiring that the poor pay higher co-pays for their medications, meaning that many will have to do without, risking their lives and health.

As a direct consequence, many drug store chains nationally are indicating they will drop Medicaid patients if the states cut fees to pharmacists.

From around the country:

*Idaho decided that Medicaid patients can't have more than four prescriptions at once without special approval (elderly patients and chronically ill patients often need over a dozen medications at a time).

*Nebraska is eliminating so-called "unnecessary and wasteful drugs."

*North Carolina is eliminating 30 medications that are deemed too expensive.

*West Virginia will let Medicaid patients have only approved (cheaper) medications on their lists—despite doctors' orders.

*Mississippi, which calls Medicaid "a cancer on the state budget," will only allow patients to be on seven medications at once, and is increasing the amount Medcaid patients must pay to get them.

Headless Democratic Party Prepares To Lose Midterm Elections

According to reports in the March 12 Washington Post and Washington Times, a recent memo by Democratic strategists James Carville, Stanley Greenberg, and Robert Shrum, says that the party has not given the voters a "clear direction," and that "Democrats are not gaining.... Democrats have not made gains on the economy or as the party willing to take on the powerful special interests." They suggest that timid, unfocussed leadership is to blame. "The case does not make itself. Democrats have to make it. Democrats cannot run or win from a crouch. The opportunity is to stand up, speak out, define the Democratic purpose in large terms...."

Tipper Gore May Run for Tennessee Senate Seat

The Tennessean.com and the Washington Post (in an article titled "Tipper Gore Weighs Senate Race") report that the wife of the former Vice President is considering a run for the Tennessee Senate seat now held by Republican Senator Fred Thompson, who has said he will not seek re-election. Al Gore, of course, was Senator from Tennessee from 1985 to 1993, and in the 2000 Presidential election, he lost his home state to George W. Bush.

Al Gore says he has not decided whether to run for President in 2004, but he has founded a political action committee to raise money for other Democratic candidates.

Bill Farmer, chairman of the Tennessee Democratic Party, said: "Mrs. Gore has always been an outstanding campaigner and would be an asset [would more than fill—ed] to any office she seeks [chances to occupy—ed]."

Meanwhile, there are two websites dedicated to drafting Gore in 2004, one of which is entitled, "Re-elect Al Gore [to what?—ed]."

All rights reserved © 2002 EIRNS