Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 9 Share on Facebook 9 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 20 (38 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   14 comments, 2 series

General News

Lawrence Wilkerson Interview Transcript-- The "Israelization of the USA, CIA lies, and; "It's not a Coup. It's Worse!"

By   Follow Me on Twitter     Message Rob Kall     Permalink
      (Page 5 of 6 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 5   Valuable 5   Supported 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to None 11/12/12

Become a Fan
  (297 fans)
- Advertisement -

Lawrence Wilkerson:  Three hundred  

Rob Kall:    " who wanted to hurt the U.S. ?  

Lawrence Wilkerson:  Yeah.   And could [do it].   And could!   H e said "N ow there ' s fifty thousand."   And then he said " how is that a successful strategy? "  It reminded me of Donald Rumsfeld .   Donald Rumsfeld asked the question , I think it was in 2003, the summer of 2003 as I recall, maybe it was a little bit later then that, maybe it was the winter of 2003, 2004, Rumsfeld sent out one of his " snowflakes ' [memos] , and he asked both the uniformed military and the   civilian staff in the Pentagon, and he said "T ell me how it is , if every time we kill a terrorist, we create ten, that we ' re winning! "  G ood question , Donald!

Rob Kall:    Yeah, well.   Something good out of his mouth anyway .   Well " Shame they didn ' t make a ny decision s based on that!

Lawrence Wilkerson:   Well "  

Rob Kall:    This is the Rob Kall " Bottom-Up ' Radio Show, WNJC 1360 AM,   Sponsored by OpEdNews.com .  I have as my guest, Lawrence Wilkerson , retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson .   He was the former Chief of Staff to U.S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell.   And he ' s now an adjunct Professor of Government at the College of William and Mary.

And we ' ve been talking about N eo c ons, about the CIA, about Iran.   Let ' s talk about Iran . Now, w e went over a couple of things that you have on your agenda now , and one of them is to prevent war with Iran.   So , what are your thoughts about Iran?  

Lawrence Wilkerson:  First, Iran is not an existential threat to anyone.   Israel would come closest in that particular configuration, but I don ' t think as long as Israel has a hundred or more nuclear weapons and airplanes to carry them, I think deterrence works.   So Iran using a nuclear weapon against Israel, to me is preposterous , because Iran ' s leaders know that, were they to do so, Tehran would disappear and maybe lots of other cities in Iran;   n ot only because Israel would retaliate, but probably because we would retaliate too.   So deterrence work s.   It worked during the Cold War, and people who say the "N o, the mad Mullahs in Tehran "'  T hey ' re not mad Mullahs in Tehran, they ' re as rational as anybody else .   They ' re interested in power .   Power, that ' s their objective.   And so deterrence would work.   So i t ' s not an existential threat .   If Ira n were to achieve a nuclear weapon , that is to say the way North Korea did (and notice we aren ' t doing too much about North Korea ), t h en probably what would immediately happen is the Saudis, who would feel, probably of all the people in the Middle East ( even more so than Israel) would feel threatened , would buy ten or twenty or maybe thirty , complete with personnel to take care of them from Pakistan.   And Pakistan would sell them to them.   And so you ' d have an immediate balance of terror as it were, across the Straits of Hormuz.             

- Advertisement -

So deterrence would work, but that ' s not " that ' s an ultimate position.   The interim position, and the position that we ought to be pursuing but I ' m sad to say I don ' t think we are, well not with any vigor anyway, is that Iran has said repeatedly , "Y ou let us enrich to five percent.   That ' s our right under the Non-Proliferation TreatyAnd t hat ' s arguable, but Israel ' s got bombs.   The least we can do is let Iran enrich to 5%  " And we will do everything else that we need to do , with Highly Enriched Uranium [HEU] above 5%, say, that for medical isotope s and things like that, that needs to be enriched to a higher rate, say up to 20%, we will buy that from other countries .   Furthermore, we will allow the IAEA [ International Atomic Energy Agency ] in with very rigorous, beyond NPT and additional protocol, safety standards, and so forth.   Inspection regimes to make sure that we ' re living up to our word.   We ' ll do that, but you ' ve got to give us some sanctions relief.   That ' s our quid pro quo !   That ' s obtainable right now!   Hell, t he Turks and the Brazilians had it a couple of years ago.   The Russians had it a couple three years ago .   So the deal is there to be made.   We just don ' t seem to want to make it.   And what I conclude from that , is that when a President says all options are on the table, including the military option, and then says he wants diplomacy to work but forecloses that diplomacy working, then ultimately we ' re going to res ort to the military option.   Because I don ' t see any other way to go , other than backing down.   That ' s what disturbs me, and that ' s what I ' m working against, to see if I can ' t help prevent our having to go to that military option.  

Rob Kall: M aybe after the election things will change.

Lawrence Wilkerson:    I ' m hoping so.   The deal is there.   I ' ve spent time with Iran ' s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi .   I ' ve spent time with their Ambassador to the United Nations, Mohammad Khazaee.   I even spent some time, some two hours, with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, t he kind of nutty President they have ( who ' s r eally not very powerful any more) i n New York City, during the U.N. General Senate Assembly ' s meetings.   And the deal ' s there.   I mean it ' s there to be made.   It ' s just a question of whether or not a D emocratic President re-elected, feels like he can suffer the ' slings and arrows' of my idiot Republicans, if he proceeds to make a deal.   I would say that if he ' s re-elected he has more opportunity, more power, more mandate, to do that , but he ' s got to get re-elected first .   And I have no idea, although when you parse it carefully, Mitt Romney ' s policy is Obama ' s policy.   So, I have expectations that we wouldn ' t see much change with Mitt Romney.   Now my fear there , is that while Romney m ight feel that way , the Neocon s around him don ' t.   And I ' ve already "

Rob Kall:    That was my next question .   That was my next question!   It ' s very interesting, you ' re saying that Romney and Obama have almost the same policy  o n the face , but Romney ' s advisors are N eo c ons, and I know you ' ve had some pretty strong words   for Bolton. W here do you think that separation is between what Romney states, and where he ' s going to go once he brings in policy advisors and makes appointments?  

Lawrence Wilkerson:   You know you just put your finger on what frighten s me, because I saw how the N eo c ons captured one President, a nd frankly I don ' t see a whole lot more experience in the critical areas that one would need it , in Romney, than I did in George W. Bush.   So when you pit Romney against his Chairman of the Joint Chief s of Staffs, his Secretary of Defense, his Secretary of State, his Director of National Intelligence, his National Security Advisor , and others who may be from that crowd, by the time he gets his Cabinet formed , then I get worried .   I get scared.   I get the feeling that I ' m seeing everything happen over again, only this time with Iran.   

- Advertisement -

Rob Kall: [Noise of disapproval]  What about besides Iran?   What other policies are you concerned about, that Bolton and his other advisors, his N eo c on advisors , will   move Romney to act on?

Lawrence Wilkerson:   Well, one of the m is that Americans don ' t really care about   b elieve me, I ' ve been working on it for five years, some of them don ' t even   as close as Cuba is, they don ' t even know where it is.  It's Cuba!   And , I know that the Romney position, and some of the people on the Romney team, even take this position further, is even to the right of George W. Bush .   A nd we ' re talking about curtailing travel again, we ' re talking about enforcing the Helms -Burton Act to the extent that Cubans who live in the S outhern part of , for example, can ' t even go home to see their mother when she gets sick. W e ' re talking about a real draconian tightening of the embargo of Cuba, or the " blockade ' as the Cubans call it , more appropriately and more accurately.   So that ' s a policy I also oppose " a ridiculous, illogical, stupid policy, that ' s failed now over fifty years and we still pursue it, that I see this administration, if it becomes a Romney administration, even making worse.

I ' m also very, very concerned about the military.   Very concerned !   Romney has said some things that he can ' t possibly fulfill , but he could make a start on them and really make things bad.   And what I ' m talking about is , if you look at his projected military budget, you ' re talking about not only increasing spending beyond the highes t spending years of the Cold War, you ' re talking about doing it by orders of magnitude! I ' ll shall you how high the military budget is right now.   We ' ve had thirteen straight years of increases.   I f you let sequestration take place , and cut about a trillion dollars out of the Pentagon ' s budget over the next ten years, you would still only return spending to 2007 levels, and that ' s in inflation adjusted dollars.   So , that ' s how much we ' ve increased military spend ing.   Our military spending right now is about forty to forty-five percent of the entire world ' s military spending.   We ' ve dwarfed everybody else in the world.   You could combine twenty six of our allies, including Japan and Germany , the United Kingdom, France , and you still wouldn ' t have our defense budget .   You add the Intelligence budget to that, you add the Homeland Security budget to that , you add the Veterans administration budget to that , you add the Nuclear budget to that and the Department of Energy , and you ' ve got over 1.2 trillion dollars in fiscal year 2010 , for example .   T hat ain ' t chump change!   A nd we need to be cutting that budget in order to commit to shape the military   commensurate with the threat in the world, a nd we also need to be paying some of that money to deficit reduction.   And I don ' t see Romney doing that at all.   Now I don ' t think he ' s going to be able to do what he says he ' s going to do.   I think he ' s lying. B ut politicians lie sometimes and sometimes they actually carry out some of their lies .   And in this case if Romney carries th is out, we ' ll have a military so bloated, and so screwed up, and so misconceived, that if anybody does come along down the road like say a China or whatever, we ' re going to have a real problem with it.   So that ' s frightening to me!   I mean I spent thirty one years in the Army .   T hat ' s frightening to me !   

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6

 

Must Read 5   Valuable 5   Supported 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

Rob Kall has spent his adult life as an awakener and empowerer-- first in the field of biofeedback, inventing products, developing software and a music recording label, MuPsych, within the company he founded in 1978-- Futurehealth, and founding, organizing and running 3 conferences: Winter Brain, on Neurofeedback and consciousness, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology (a pioneer in the field of Positive Psychology, first presenting workshops on it in 1985) and Storycon Summit Meeting on the Art Science and Application of Story-- each the first of their kind.  Then, when he found the process of raising people's consciousness and empowering them to take more control of their lives  one person at a time was too slow, he founded Opednews.com-- which has been the top search result on Google for the terms liberal news and progressive opinion for several years. Rob began his Bottom-up Radio show, broadcast on WNJC 1360 AM to Metro Philly, also available on iTunes, covering the transition of our culture, business and world from predominantly Top-down (hierarchical, centralized, authoritarian, patriarchal, big)  to bottom-up (egalitarian, local, interdependent, grassroots, archetypal feminine and small.) Recent long-term projects include a book, Bottom-up-- The Connection Revolution, debillionairizing the planet and the Psychopathy Defense and Optimization Project. 

Rob Kall Wikipedia Page

Over 200 podcasts are archived for downloading here, or can be accessed from iTunes. Rob is also published regularly on the Huffingtonpost.com

Rob is, with Opednews.com the first media winner of the (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

A Conspiracy Conspiracy Theory

Debunking Hillary's Specious Winning the Popular Vote Claim

Terrifying Video: "I Don't Need a Warrant, Ma'am, Under Federal Law"

Hillary's Disingenuous Claim That She's Won 2.5 Million More Votes is Bogus. Here's why

Ray McGovern Discusses Brutal Arrest at Secretary Clinton's Internet Freedom Speech

Cindy Sheehan Bugged in Denver