Israel will stand by DeLay (George Washington Rolls in his grave)

[see 1996 Israeli policy paper & then a word from an American revolutionary - George Washington]

WASHINGTON - The first public appearance of Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) after being indicted and forced to leave his leadership position was at Wednesday night’s dinner hosted by "Stand for Israel," a group of Israel-supporting evangelical Christians and Jews led by Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein.

"It’s really good to be here among so many old friends and brothers and sisters in the cause for justice and human freedom," DeLay opened, drawing a standing ovation from the crowed. Some shouted, "We love you, Tom."

The ousted majority leader of the House of Representatives is known to be a staunch supporter of Israel and has close ties with right wing groups and the settlers. "Tom DeLay is a true friend of Israel and has always worked for the security and well-being of the state," Israeli ambassador to Washington Danny Ayalon said Thursday. "We will keep up the close ties with him."

Tom DeLay was forced to step down, at least temporarily, from his position as House majority leader after a Texas grand jury indicted him Wednesday on charges related to illegal use of campaign contributions. DeLay has denied any wrongdoing and his lawyers claim that the prosecution was driven, in this case, by political motivation.

As majority leader, Tom DeLay played a lead role in blocking US aid to the Palestinian Authority and conditioning its restoration on reforming the PA and fighting terror. He has supported foreign aid to Israel and backed pro-Israel resolutions on Capitol Hill.

In 2003, DeLay was one of the co-sponsors of House Resolution 294 that expressed support for Israel as it fights terrorism. In his speech from the floor, DeLay said that "Israel’s fight is our fight" and added that the point of the war against terror is not only to defeat terror, but also "to destroy terrorists."

As a born-again Christian, DeLay is close to the pro-Israel Evangelical circles and has said in the past he believes that the land of Israel was given to the people of Israel by god and should not be divided. He opposed the US-led peace plan known as the road map, calling it a "road map to disaster," and has been a critic of the Sharon government’s disengagement plan.

In a 2003 speech at the Zionist Organization of America conference, DeLay said about his latest tour of Israel, "I didn’t see any occupied territories, I only saw Israel."

Israeli officials said Thursday that, even though Tom DeLay was a great supporter of Israel in his leadership position, they do not think Israel’s stand in congress will be affected by his departure, since there is a strong support base for Israel in both parties and in both houses of Congress.

– http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satell...

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm actively participated in the following events:

July 8, 1996 Complete Iraq timeline

The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, an Israeli think tank, publishes a paper titled, “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” [Chicago Sun-Times, 3/6/03; Guardian, 9/3/02; Washington Times, 10/7/03] The paper advises the new, right-wing Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu to make a complete break with the past by adopting a strategy “based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism ....” Much along the lines of an earlier paper by Israeli Oded Yinon, the document urges the Israelis to aggressively seek the downfall of their Arab neighbors-especially Syria and Iraq-by exploiting the inherent tensions within and among the Arab States. [Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, 7/8/96; Carnegie Endowment for Peace, 3/19/03; Guardian, 9/3/02 Sources: A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm]

Other suggestions for Israel include abandoning the Oslo Accords, developing a foreign policy based on a traditional balance of power strategy, reserving its right to invade the West Bank and Gaza Strip as part of a strategy of “self-defense,” abandoning any notion of “land for peace,” reestablishing a policy of preemptive strikes, forging closer ties to the US while taking steps towards self-reliance, and seeking an alternative to Yasser Arafat as leader of the PLO. [Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, 7/8/96; Guardian, 9/3/02 Sources: A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm]

Some of the paper’s authors will later be appointed to influential government and quasi-government positions during the administration of George W. Bush. The lead writer, Richard Perle, will serve on the Defense Policy Board (for the first year and a half he will serve as chairman). Douglas Feith will serve as undersecretary of defense for policy. He will oversee the activities of several controversial offices including the Counter Terrorism Evaluation Group (see Shortly after September 11, 2001) and the Office of Special Plans (see September 2002). David Wurmser will help run the Counter Terrorism Evaluation Group (see Shortly after September 11, 2001) through August 2002 and then will be transferred to the State Department to serve as a senior advisor to Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John R. Bolton (see September 2002).

People and organizations involved: Richard Armitage, Jeffrey T. Bergner, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Robert Loewenberg, Jonathan Torop, Meyrav Wurmser, David Wurmser, Richard V. Allen, Douglas Feith, A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, Benjamin Netanyahu

– http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/...

George Washington’s farewell speech to Americans:

"The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The Nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the Government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The Government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of Nations has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite Nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent Patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practise the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the Public Councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak, towards a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter."

http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/washbye.html