War Without End

Alpha · Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:11 am Post subject:

From: "Jeff Blankfort" <jblankfort@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 19:16:34 -0700
Subject: Village Voice: A Different 'Gut Feeling': Israel Attacking Iran

Should there be an Israeli attack on Iran, which has always been more of a possibility than one launched by the US, the current situation in Iraq will appear like a garden party, albeit a grisly one, in retrospect, with the possibilities of a wide spread Middle East war likely to be the outcome with a major disruption of the regional oil supply and a crisis in the world's economy a by-product. It should be clear that the prospect for such a scenario would not even be on the table were it not for the constant drumbeat over the past two years by the Jewish Zionist lobby in the US and only that lobby, spearheaded by its neocon strike force. Given the power of the lobby over the US Congress as well as the White House, we can expect loud applause from both Houses of Congress as well as the leadership of both political parties as well as from their leading presidential candidates should Israel attack. This will, of course, understandably inflame the already existing anti-American sentiment around the globe and make US institutions as well as its citizens targets for retaliation. What better time than that for the administration, in the spirit of Operations Northwoods, the sinking of the USS Maine, and quite likely, 9-11, to launch a smaller version of 9-11 or series of such events around the country in order to justify the imposition of martial law? I have been skeptical of such a scenario up to now, but as the administrations of both Bush and Olmert have seen the bottom fall out of their popularity ratings and consequently neither have anything to lose, and while the lobby has been behaving as if it is on steroids while the Congress is on valium, this disaster may well await the world.-JB

http://villagevoice.com/blogs/bushbeat/

Daily Voice
The Bush Beat «
by Ward Harkavy |
A Different 'Gut Feeling': Israel Attacking Iran

It always pays to be suspicious when a U.S. official ramps up fear, but Homeland Security czar Michael Chertoff's "gut feeling" remark about an Al Qaeda attack on the U.S. this summer sparks a different suspicion — and a similar sinking feeling: Israel is about to launch a unilateral strike on Iran.
It's not a cinch, but that queasy feeling is building. Seymour Hersh wrote long ago (in his January 2005 "The Coming Wars") about such a Pentagon-induced nightmare. But now that Iraq is a total disaster, the warhawks are stepping up the drumbeat to attack Iran — either by the U.S. or Israel, even arguing that Iran has in effect already declared war on the U.S. by aiding rebels in Iraq.
One of Israel's top officials says he's got the go-ahead from NATO's U.S. and European officials to attack Iran. Chertoff, aware of a longstanding, fierce debate in the White House over attacking Iran, admits a "gut feeling," saying it's about Al Qaeda but probably feeling queasier about what an attack on Iran would do to inflame terrorists. Condoleezza Rice, said to be an opponent of a U.S. attack on Iran, suddenly cancels a visit to Israel. For the warhawks, that keeps her out of harm's way and blunts her attempts to talk with both Muslims and Jews. Israel couldn't very well attack Iran while hosting the U.S. secretary of state.
For all you conspiracy theorists out there — and those of you who pooh-pooh this as simply conspiracy theorizing — here are some of the building blocks of that suspicion:
• July 2: Senator Joe Lieberman (D-Israel/Connectic ut) tells the Hartford Courant that "the fact is that the Iranian government has by its actions declared war on us." Lieberman doesn't speak for the entire U.S. government, obviously, but he does speak for a substantial number of powerful warhawks in and out of the White House. Lieberman adds:
"The United States government has a responsibility to use all instruments at its disposal to stop these terrorist attacks against our soldiers and allies in Iraq, including keeping open the possibility of using military force against the terrorist infrastructure inside Iran."
• July 10: Israel's minister of strategic affairs, Avigdor Lieberman, says Europe and the U.S. have given tacit approval for Israel to unilaterally attack Iran's nuclear plants. From Israel Today:
"If we start military operations against Iran alone, then Europe and the US will support us," Lieberman told [Israeli] Army Radio following a meeting earlier in the week with NATO and European Union officials.

Lieberman said the Western powers acknowledged the severity of the Iranian nuclear threat to the Jewish state, but said that ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq are "going to prevent the leaders of countries in Europe and America from deciding on the use of force to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities," even if diplomacy ultimately fails.

The message Avigdor Lieberman said the NATO and EU officials conveyed to him is that Israel should "prevent the threat herself."
That's not as far-fetched as it sounds. As conservative anti-war talking head Philip Giraldi notes on the same day as Avigdor Lieberman's comments:
It is widely believed that Vice President Dick Cheney and his national security adviser David Wurmser (of 'A Clean Break' fame) have deliberately limited the playing field because they have no desire to engage Iran amicably and are instead fixated on regime change in Tehran as the only acceptable solution to the "Persian problem." Cheney has been ably seconded by fellow hawk Elliot Abrams (another Israel first Zionist Jew) at the National Security Council, who has been working to undercut Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's efforts to avoid a war. Wurmser, meanwhile, has been advising the like-minded at the American Enterprise Institute that Cheney does not believe in negotiations and has promised that the Bush Administration will deal with Iran militarily before its term of office ends.

The Cheney-Wurmser- Abrams axis is opposed to Administration figures like Rice, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and the intelligence agency chiefs, all of whom are reluctant to do a replay of Iraq in Iran. The Iraq Studies Group (ISG) recommended engaging Iran and all other local players including Syria to help stabilize Iraq and the broader Persian Gulf region. It also recommended taking serious steps to resolve the Palestinian- Israeli conflict. As "serious steps" would consist of Washington pressuring Israel, the ISG report has been coolly received by the White House and with intense hostility by certain Congressmen who are closely tied to Israel.
• July 10: Chertoff tells the Chicago Tribune's editorial writers:
I believe we're entering a period this summer of increased risk. We've seen a lot more public statements from Al Qaeda. There are a lot of reasons to speculate about that but one reason that occurs to me is that they're feeling more comfortable and raising expectations. In the last August, and in prior summers, we've had attacks against the West, which suggests that summer seems to be appealing to them. I think we do see increased activity in South Asia, so we do worry about whether they are rebuilding their capabilities. We've struck at them and degraded them, but they rebuild. All these things have given me kind of a gut feeling that we are in a period of increased vulnerability.
• July 12: Rice hastily cancels her trip to Israel and the OPT (Occupied Palestinian Territories, as the U.N. and many others refer to it).
Spokesman Sean McCormack downplays it at his daily briefing for reporters as merely a postponement:
I want to update you on the Secretary's travel schedule. At this point, we are going to postpone the stop — the planned stops in Jerusalem and Ramallah until the end of the month. The Secretary and — Secretary Rice is going to be traveling to the region, as the President announced, in part with Secretary Gates. So she decided that it was appropriate to postpone these two stops and combine it with that trip. So we'll have more information on that trip, the dates, and the stops as we get closer to it, but I would expect that we would leave towards the end of the month and then there would be some joint travel with Secretary Gates at the very beginning of August.
At least some reporters are skeptical. One follows up with this:
Why was it appropriate to postpone those stops if she still plans to travel next week and she's going to be in Africa not that far away? Why not just go ahead and do the important work with the Israeli and the Palestinians?
McCormack's reply doesn't pass the smell test:
Well, if you look at where she is going, there is actually quite a distance from where she still plans to go to travel in the Middle East. And also, given the time in which we find ourselves, there's a lot of discussion going on concerning Iraq, there's certainly a lot of discussion, policy-wise, about the Middle East. And she thought it was appropriate to be back in Washington during this time and plus, from a logistical standpoint, it just made sense.
• July 12: U.S. intelligence chiefs meet at the White House to discuss a report that Al Qaeda is stronger now than at any time since 9/11. >From this morning's Times (U.K.):
Michael Chertoff, the Homeland Security Secretary, has spent days trying to play down comments that his "gut feeling" was that the US faced a heightened risk of attack this summer. . . .

Mr Chertoff emphasised yesterday that "we don’t have any specific information about an imminent or near-term attack on the homeland". However, the Times has been told that US and British intelligence services monitoring al-Qaeda networks have picked up "an increased level of chatter" in recent weeks.
Maybe so, but Chertoff could have been ratcheting up fear so that an attack on Iran would be more palatable to the masses as yet another "front" in the War of Terror. Or perhaps he was just unconsciously channeling the more ominous "chatter" from our own warhawks about an Israeli attack on Iran's nukes. Think about the poisonous cloud of radioactivity and even more terrorists that would produce.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also keep in mind that the 'divide and conquer' plan for the enemies of Israel came from Israeli Oded Yinon as my good friend (Dr. Stephen Sniegoski) wrote about in his 'Israeli Origins of Bush II's War' which is linked near the top of the following URL:

Israeli Origins of Bush II's War:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/04/26/the-israeli-origins-of-bush-ii-s-war.php

PS: Also keep in mind that Patrick Clawson (who is mentioned in the Sy Hersh article which John replied with below) is associated with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy which is an AIPAC spin-off think tank in D.C.

John wrote:

Also read Hersch's nice article here
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh?printable=true

July 13, 2007
Is War With Iran Inevitable?

http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11276

Alpha

The Senate's Blank Check for War on Iran
Written by Chris Floyd
Thursday, 12 July 2007
Empire Burlesque

http://www.chris-floyd.com/Articles/Articles/Down_in_the_Flood%3A_The_Senate%27s_Blank_Check_for_War_on_Iran/

As you may know -- unless you rely on the corporate media for your news, of course -- yesterday the U.S. Senate unanimously declared that Iran was committing acts of war against the United States: a 97-0 vote to give George W. Bush a clear and unmistakable casus belli for attacking Iran whenever Dick Cheney tells him to.

The bipartisan Senate resolution – the brainchild (or rather the bilechild) of Fightin' Joe Lieberman – affirmed as official fact all of the specious, unproven, ever-changing allegations of direct Iranian involvement in attacks on the American forces now occupying Iraq. The Senators appear to have relied heavily on the recent New York Times story by Michael Gordon that stovepiped unchallenged Pentagon spin directly onto the paper's front page. As Firedoglake points out, John McCain cited the heavily criticized story on the Senate floor as he cast his vote.

It goes without saying that all of this is a nightmarish replay of the run-up to the war of aggression against Iraq: The NYT funneling false flag stories from Bush insiders. Warmongers citing the NYT stories as "proof" justifying any and all action to "defend the Homeland." Credulous and craven Democratic politicians swallowing the Bush line hook and sinker.

To be sure, stout-hearted Dem tribunes like Dick Durbin insisted that their support for declaring that Iran is "committing acts of war" against the United States should not be taken as an "authorization of military action." This is shaky-knees mendacity at its finest. Having officially affirmed that Iran is waging war on American forces, how, pray tell, can you then deny the president when he asks (if he asks) for authorization to "defend our troops?" Answer: you can't. And you know it.

This vote is the clearest signal yet that there will be no real opposition to a Bush Administration attack on Iran. This is yet another blank check from these slavish, ignorant goons; Bush can cash it anytime. This is, in fact, the post-surge "Plan B" that's been mooted lately in the Beltway. As you recall, there was much throwing about of brains on the subject of reviving the "Iraq Study Group" plan when the "surge" (or to call it by its right name, the "punitive escalation") inevitably fails. Bush put the kibosh on that this week ("Him not gonna do nothin' that Daddy's friends tell him to do! Him a big boy, him the decider!"), but that doesn't mean there isn't a fall-back position – or rather, a spring-forward position: an attack on Iran, to rally the nation behind the "war leader" and reshuffle the deck in Iraq.

Of course, the United States is already at war with Iran. We are directing covert ops and terrorist attacks inside Iran, with the help of groups that our own government has declared terrorist renegades. We are kidnapping Iranian officials in Iraq and holding them hostage. We have a bristling naval armada on Iran's doorstep, put there for the express purpose of threatening Tehran with military action. The U.S. Congress has overwhelmingly passed measures calling for the overthrow of the Iranian government. And now the U.S. Senate has unanimously declared that Iran is waging war on America, and has given official notice that this will not be tolerated. It is only a very small step to move from this war in all but name to the full monty of an overt military assault.

We've said it before and we'll say it again: there is madness at work here. There is no other word for it. As I noted a few years ago:

Homo sapiens is the only species that dreams of its own total demise. Our brief history of conscious thought is replete with vivid scenarios of the end of life on earth....Religion has produced most of these -- giddy, voluptuous nightmares of universal extinction, usually by fire, at divine order. A favored remnant is always saved in such tales, of course, but only after being transformed into some different, higher order of being. The gross human body -- that bleeding, fouling, endlessly replicating sack of earth -- is gleefully consigned to eternal oblivion.

It seems that some ineradicable nihilism pervades us, like a virus, now dormant, now flaring: something in us that wants to die, to be done with the long, overhanging doom of mortality -- and to take the world with us. Our grandiose visions of the future seem to hide, at their core, a secret, desperate anxiety about the profound meaninglessness of existence -- an anxiety that often disguises itself in elaborate fantasies of the afterlife, in dreams of "dominance" for one's "own kind" (nation, tribe, faith, race, ideology, etc.), or in the eroticizing of death, war and destruction.

Instincts for preservation, sentiments of affection, the drive for pleasure -- from the most basic bodily urges to the most sublime creations and apprehensions of the intellect -- act as counterweights to this dark virus, of course. They provide for most of us, most of the time, enough fragments of meaning -- or at least sufficient distraction -- to get on with things, without too much resort to world-engulfing visions or the extremes of nihilistic anxiety.

On the individual level, the calibration of these competing impulses can be intricate, subtle, ever-shifting, because the individual mind is so complex and all-encompassing, yet also so enclosed, so unlockably private as well: an infinitely supple tool for managing the conflicts and contradictions of reality. But on the broader level -- species, nation, group -- human consciousness is, of necessity, a far more blunt and brutal instrument.

There, our brain-fevers and anxieties rage more virulently, lacking the counterweights of individual feeling and the quick, intimate responsiveness of the private mind. In the group-mind, the fantasies that root in the muddy fear of meaninglessness can emerge full-blown. Thought and discourse are reduced to broad strokes, slogans, codes and incantations, with little correspondence to reality. Awareness of this tendency can mitigate some of its effects; but the group-mind's fundamental falsity and irreality almost invariably infects the thoughts and actions of group leaders -- and eventually many of the group members as well.

Thus we can sometimes say, not entirely metaphorically, that nations "go mad," hurtling themselves toward ruin, embracing self-destruction, lusting for violence and death, sick with nihilism -- although this sickness is always painted in the colors of patriotic fervor or religious zeal, or both…

Now draw these dangerous streams together, and you have a portrait of the blunt and brutal group-mind at work in the leadership of the world's most powerful nation. The folly, fantasy and death-fetish of the Bush Regime -- long evident to anyone who cared to see -- were finally "revealed" in the mainstream media recently by the quasi-official Establishment oracle, Bob Woodward. His latest insider portrait, Plan of Attack, offers -- in the usual, easily-gummed pabulum form -- a few tastes of the bitter truth behind the Regime's mad, ruinous war crime in Iraq.

The corrosive nihilism at the heart of the enterprise ate through the gaudily-painted surface most tellingly in a single anecdote. Woodward asks George W. Bush how he thinks history will regard his adventure in Iraq. Bush, gazing out the window, shrugs and waves the question away. "History, we don't know," he says. "We'll all be dead." No fine, faith-filled talk here about God and Jesus and the immortal soul responsible for its actions throughout all eternity -- the kind of zealous patter Bush favors in public statements. This was just the cold, rotten, meaningless core of his grand vision: "We'll all be dead." So who cares? Après moi, le deluge.

Who would have thought the floodwaters of this death vision would have risen so high again so soon? Yet here they are again, beating against the gates.

UPDATE: Jonathan Schwarz points out that all of the Senate's Democratic candidates for president voted for Lieberman's Iran War amendment: Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, and Joe Biden. Just in case you were expecting a saner foreign policy after the 2008 election.

UPDATE II: Meanwhile, George Milhouse Bush wants to make one thing perfectly clear: even in the highly unlikely (if not totally impossible) event that the Senate grows a rudimentary spine and tries to place the slightest obstacle in the way of a military attack on Iran, the Commander Guy will peremptorily veto it and instigate the mass murder anyway.

Spencer Ackerman at TPM Cafe found this gem of arrogant defiance in "a little-noticed letter from the White House to Carl Levin (D-MI), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee." The main subject of the letter was a similar vow to veto any restrictions on Bush's ability to continue his war crime in Iraq. The passsage concerning Iran might seem redundant now, after the Senate's vote on Lieberman's "Persia delenda est!" measure, which puts a gun in Bush's hand and screams for him to pull the trigger, but the President is obviously taking no chances.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://nomorewarforisrael.blogspot.com

Alpha · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:39 am Post subject:

Sunday, July 15, 2007
Are we Already at War? Have US-enabled Kurds killed 200 Iranian Troops?
http://mparent7777-2.blogspot.com/2007/07/are-we-already-at-war-have-us-enabled.html
---

Juan Cole

I got the below by anonymous email regarding a German news program last month. Am passing it on not because I buy it or its details but because there is at the least an issue in the Kurdish terrorist groups that are operating from US-occupied Iraq against Iraq's neighbors. The US is not able to stop the PKK from operating against an ally, Turkey, so I don't think it could stop the Iranian Kurdish terrorists, PEJAK, from operating against Iran. But it is also probably true that there are elements in the US military, in the intelligence services, and in the Washington power elite that are connected to PEJAK and are either happy about its activities or subtly enabling them.

Since the US Senate has in its wisdom laid the groundwork for a war on Iran on the extremely thin grounds of an unbalanced and gullible NYT story, it is worth pondering the degree to which we are being spun once again by shadowy forces whose salaries we are paying! "Transcript of TV program on German ARD television, "The Monitor, no. 564, June 21, 2007:

Sertan (a PJAK terrorist): "Three months ago, by using radio-controlled mines (IEDs) we killed 13 to 14 Iranian soldiers". Kurdish terrorists hide in the U.S. protected areas of North-Eastern Iraq. From there, they send fighters over the border into Iran and attack Iranians. In the past two years, they have killed over 200 Iranians."

See the transcript of the program in German. . . .

[*Update: A perceptive reader kindly translated the transcript into English at the Comments; I am appending it to the main message below.]*

*** NOTE: You can use Google to translate these German Web Pages into English.

[Then there is this from other press sources]:

Pejak enjoying western support (PressTv, Iran, July 11, 2007):

Head of Pejak (PJAK) terrorist group says he has good relations with the U.S. and German governments and they know everything about the group. Abdul Rahman Haji-Ahmadi who lives in Cologne, Germany told German ARD television network that he directs Pejak from Germany. "Big powers help our military stations and American army generals completely overlook our activities", he added.

Haji-Ahmadi pointed out that some U.S. generals even visit Pejak's military camps and have good ties with Pejak. He noted that the presence of Pejak in Iraq is even useful for the U.S. because "if Pejak does not rule, Islam will rule". Haji-Ahmadi in a similar interview with the Kurdish newspaper Media had acknowledged that some U.S. senators and generals had met with Pejak leaders in Iraq's Qandil region. . .

[Journalist Reese Erlich has also reported on all this for "Democracy Now" and "Mother Jones":]

* Report: U.S. sponsoring Kurdish guerilla attacks inside Iran

* Kurdish & American sources say the U.S. has been supporting guerrilla raids against Iran, channeling the money through organizations in Iraqi Kurdistan."

---

A reader writes:

(ARD report on The Monitor translated as a public service to prevent other family tragedies)

Terrorism: How the Turkish Workers Party attracts recruits under the noses of the BND and Interior Police (Rough and Ready Translation)

Sonia Mikich: Recruiting for the war. How a young man from a nice family was led astray – and to the battle in far way Iran. Incidentally as a consequence , we asked ourselves who practices these terrorist attacks on Iran from the ostensibly peaceful Northern Iraq. There is a secret war there unnoticed by the world and tolerated by the Americans.

The clues led to Germany, to Cologne as Stephan Buchen and John Goetz found out. They met extremists who proselytize young people under the noses of our secret services, completely in the shadows.
Langenfeld North Rhine- Westphalia

The K family has lived here for 34 years. The parents feel happy and safe in Germany. However the major conflicts in the Middle East have intruded into their everyday life. Their son Sertan has been missing for the last eight months.

Photographs from happy times. His mobile [phone] doesn’t answer anymore. He was a student at the higher vocational school in Leverkusen-Opladen. Today Sertan is 21 years old. The parents haven’t heard from their son for 8 months.

We found the son in north eastern Iraq, near the Iranian border, in one of the most dangerous crisis zones in the world. In this mountain zone he is learning the trade of the Guerrilla.

Sertan: We call the weapon Karnas. It is a sniper rifle for assassinations. I was specially trained for assassinations of great generals.

Sertan belongs to an organization called PJAK, the party of a New Life in Kurdistan. Unnoticed by the rest of the world a war is happening here. The young recruits push into Iran and carry out attacks.
Sertan: Especially with explosives, with mines. The mines are prepared …. So that we can detonate them from a distance by radio. They are being developed. We have trained specialists Bomb Experts. Three months ago the friends attacked and killed 13-14 soldiers of the Iranian Army.

Your son a Terrorist. Ready to die for the Kurdish cause? The family learns form us where Sertan is. They are speechless.

Mother (translation) I feel very bad I want my son to come back. I am upset.

Sister of Sertan: He promised mother that he would stay here. He hasn’t kept his promise.

Ideological indoctrination: We observe how Sertan and other recruits are made enthusiastic for the battle. The Commander preaches about the bullets of the guerrilla which will light up the darkness. He demands from the young men and women self-sacrifice, praises the picture of martyrs. Sertan the boy from Langenfeld takes copious notes. This is how he is brought on line so quickly. The high ideals of PJAK can be reached: Overthrow of the Iranian Government, Installation of democracy, and freedom for the Kurds in Iran

The Kurdish guerrillas control a small strip in the north of the US Occupied Iraq. They send fighters across the border from here. They are believed to have killed at least 200 people in the last two years in attacks.

PJAK a pseudonym, as the organization owes allegiance to Abdulla Ocalan the boss of the Kurdish Workers party PKK. It is proscribed in Europe and the US as a terrorist organization.

Food rations is all Sertan gets for his work. His rise to fighter started in NRW. He was recruited there by PKK members he told us. He spent three months in a PKK camp in Belgium. Eventually he landed here with two young Kurds of German nationality.

Sertan: More and more are coming from Germany. From Germany, from Norway, from Sweden we already had two or three new members. But especially from Germany and France

Formal Parade of the recruits in front of the Boss of PJAk

Address of Haji Ahmadi Boss of PJAK:

I am very happy that you are ready for this holy battle says Haji Ahmadi. The Kurds provide an example of what it means to fight to the last man. Haji Ahmadi sees great times coming for his organization. It receives protection from the highest levels. American generals in Iraq look not unfavorably on his activities. They have visited his camp and walked together with respect.

We have positive effects for the Americans. We have the whole mountain chain from Armenia and Azerbaijan under our control. If we weren’t here then the Islamists would take over.

Reporter: You mean to say that essentially you are supported by the Americans.

Haji: 100%

Is that is why the flow of new fighters from Europe works so smoothly?

Haji: Many Kurdish youths and girls are joining the fight from Europe. Many go to Northern Kurdistan and also to turkey

Haji Ahmadi is always temporarily visiting his people in North Iraq. His main residence is Cologne NRW. He has a German passport he says. He makes contact from here with western politicians and intelligence services. Even the BND have visited him.

Haji Ahmadi: He was a young man and said he was from the BND. He asked the same questions you are asking.
Reporter: But that means that the German authorities know what you are doing, who you are and what your objectives are.

Haji: They know exactly what I am doing I have been in Europe for 43 years mostly in Germany ……
BND and Interior Police confirmed that they know PJAK and are watching them. Are young people being recruited for the war against Iran in Germany? We asked Representative Hans Christian Stroeble a member of the parliamentary intelligence oversight committee. He suspects that severe consequences might befall the authorities.

Stroeble: If the suspicion exists of illegal activities and especially such extremely illegal activities as terrorist links to overseas or the recruiting of for a foreign power then the German Justice authorities are obliged to report and investigate the matter and see if enough evidence exists for charges.

So far no sign of action by the Federal authorities. Setan’s family want their son back, but they are afraid that the PKK will do something to their son
Seltan’s father: The PKK told me shouldn’t call the police. Sertan is well. We haven’t called the police because we thought that could put our son’s life in danger.

The German authorities offer no help. To get his son back they have to trust the PKK. So far without result.

Labels: Iran
posted by Juan Cole @ 7/15/2007 07:35:00 AM 9 comments
Posted by CRIMES AND CORRUPTION OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS mparent7777 Marc Parent CCNWON at 2:29 PM
Labels: Iran, Iraq, Kurds, PKK, Turkey, war
2 comments:
Anonymous said...
Israel has been running the Kurds for a few years now. Their Turkish "allies" ( as if I$rael has any true "allies") must feel very foolish.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
NOMOREWARFORISRAEL said...
http://nomorewarforisrael.blogspot.com

Alpha

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/7/15/225002.shtml?s=al&promo_code=3736-1

Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Sunday, July 15, 2007 10:30 p.m. EDT
Bush Will Act on Iran: Paper (for Israel)

Vice President "Cheney has limited capital left, but if he wanted to use all his capital on this one issue, he could still have an impact," Patrick Cronin, director of studies at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, told Britain's Guardian newspaper.
And what issue is he speaking of? An attack on Iran.
President Bush had, as recently as last year, favored and international approach to containing Iran and its nuclear threat - a position espoused by Sec. of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Sec. Robert Gates. Although Rice did tell the Voice of America, when asked if the United States should consider military action in Iran, that President Bush "is never going to take his options off the table." [Editor's Note: Homeland security experts agree: Every home should have an emergency radio. Click Here for our FREE Offer.]
But the Guardian now reports that Bush has lately been listening more to Dick Cheney's point of view, which entails military action.
A well-placed source in Washington told the Guardian: "Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo," adding, "The balance has tilted. There is cause for concern."
The Guardian's source in Washington explained that as of now, Bush and Cheney do not trust potential successors from either political party to deal with Iran decisively.
Any reluctance to strike, however, originates with Israel. "The red line is not in Iran. The red line is in Israel. If Israel is adamant it will attack, the U.S. will have to take decisive action," Cronin adds. "The choices are: tell Israel no, let Israel do the job, or do the job yourself."
Israel’s Minister of Strategic Affairs said last week he had received approval from the U.S. and Europe for an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
"If we start military operations against Iran alone, then Europe and the U.S. will support us,” Avigdor Lieberman said following a meeting with NATO and European Union officials.
The United States says Iran is intent on building a nuclear weapon and is arming insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.
© NewsMax 2007. All rights reserved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://nomorewarforisrael.blogspot.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

VDARE.COM - http://www.vdare.com/roberts/070715_impeach.htm
July 15, 2007
Impeach Bush And Cheney Now
By Paul Craig Roberts
Unless Congress immediately impeaches Bush and Cheney, a year from now the US could be a dictatorial police state at war with Iran.
Bush has put in place all the necessary measures for dictatorship in the form of "executive orders" that are triggered whenever Bush declares a national emergency. Recent statements by Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff, former Republican senator Rick Santorum and others suggest that Americans might expect a series of staged, or false flag, "terrorist" events in the near future.
Many attentive people believe that the reason the Bush administration will not bow to expert advice and public opinion and begin withdrawing US troops from Iraq is that the administration intends to rescue its unpopular position with false flag operations that can be used to expand the war to Iran.
Too much is going wrong for the Bush administration: the failure of its Middle East wars, Republican senators jumping ship, Turkish troops massed on northern Iraq's border poised for an invasion to deal with Kurds, and a majority of Americans favoring the impeachment of Cheney and a near-majority favoring Bush's impeachment. The Bush administration desperately needs dramatic events to scare the American people and the Congress back in line with the militarist- police state that Bush and Cheney have fostered.
William Norman Grigg recently wrote that the GOP is "praying for a terrorist strike" to save the party from electoral wipeout in 2008. Chertoff, Cheney, the neocon nazis, and Mossad would have no qualms about saving the bacon for the Republicans, who have enabled Bush to start two unjustified wars, with Iran waiting in the wings to be attacked in a third war.
The Bush administration has tried unsuccessfully to resurrect the terrorist fear factor by infiltrating some blowhard groups and encouraging them to talk about staging "terrorist" events. The talk, encouraged by federal agents, resulted in "terrorist" arrests hyped by the media, but even the captive media was unable to scare people with such transparent sting operations.
If the Bush administration wants to continue its wars in the Middle East and to entrench the "unitary executive" at home, it will have to conduct some false flag operations that will both frighten and anger the American people and make them accept Bush's declaration of "national emergency" and the return of the draft. Alternatively, the administration could simply allow any real terrorist plot to proceed without hindrance.
A series of staged or permitted attacks would be spun by the captive media as a vindication of the neoconservatives' Islamophobic policy, the intention of which is to destroy all Middle Eastern governments that are not American puppet states. Success would give the US control over oil, but the main purpose is to eliminate any resistance to Israel's complete absorption of Palestine into Greater Israel.
Think about it. If another 9/11-type "security failure" were not in the works, why would Homeland Security czar Chertoff go to the trouble of convincing the Chicago Tribune that Americans have become complacent about terrorist threats and that he has "a gut feeling" that America will soon be hit hard?[Homeland Security chief warns of 'increased risk’ Chertoff bases 'gut feeling' on history, Al Qaeda statements By E.A. Torriero ,July 11, 2007]
Why would Republican warmonger Rick Santorum say on the Hugh Hewitt radio show that "between now and November, a lot of things are going to happen, and I believe that by this time next year, the American public's (sic) going to have a very different view of this war."
Throughout its existence the US government has staged incidents that the government then used in behalf of purposes that it could not otherwise have pursued. According to a number of writers, false flag operations have been routinely used by the Israeli state. During the Czarist era in Russia, the secret police would set off bombs in order to arrest those the secret police regarded as troublesome. Hitler was a dramatic orchestrator of false flag operations. False flag operations are a commonplace tool of governments.
Ask yourself: Would a government that has lied us into two wars and is working to lie us into an attack on Iran shrink from staging "terrorist" attacks in order to remove opposition to its agenda?
Only a diehard minority believes in the honesty and integrity of the Bush-Cheney administration and in the truthfulness of the corporate media.
Hitler, who never achieved majority support in a German election, used the Reichstag fire to fan hysteria and push through the Enabling Act, which made him dictator. Determined tyrants never require majority support in order to overthrow constitutional orders.
The American constitutional system is near to being overthrown. Are coming "terrorist" events of which Chertoff warns and Santorum promises the means for overthrowing our constitutional democracy?
COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeff Blankfort <jblankfort@earthlink.net> wrote:

Re: [IntelligentMinds] The War Propaganda Heats Up:

For some background on NewsMax go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewsMax

Breaking from NewsMax.com

Experts Agree: Major Terror Threat Looms

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/7/15/211155.shtml?s=al&promo_code=3736-1

Paul Williams: Chertoff's 'Gut Feeling' Could Be Nuclear Detonation

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/7/15/230035.shtml?s=al&promo_code=3736-1

Special: Terror 'Chatter' Extremely High, Prepare Your Family

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/7/16/114405.shtml?s=al&promo_code=3736-1

NSC Chief Voices Terror Threat Concern

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/7/15/144859.shtml?s=al&promo_code=3736-1

Paper: Bush Will Strike Iran (for Israel)

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/7/15/225002.shtml?s=al&promo_code=3736-1

Special: 6 Days of Hell: the Coming War With Iran

http://w3.newsmax.com/a/apr07/?s=al&promo_code=3736-1

Important: Homeland Security Has Advised Every Family to Have an
Emergency Radio -- and one not dependent on electric outlet power.
Please check out our free offer for one of the best emergency radios
available -- Go Here Now

Alpha

July 16, 2007
Idiots on the March

by Charley Reese
Idiots in Israel, along with those American idiots in the punditocracy who can't see where they are going because their vision is blocked by Israeli backsides, are trying to pressure our idiots in the White House to commit an act of insanity.

That act of insanity is launching a military attack against Iran because the idiots and their followers believe, despite a total lack of evidence, that Iran is pursuing a nuclear bomb. If you think the Middle East is in turmoil now, just watch what happens if idiocy prevails.

Let's review a few facts. There is no evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon. Of course the Iranians put a lot of their nuclear facilities underground. After all, they saw the Israelis – in clear violation of international law and without any evidence that Iraq was building a bomb – attack and destroy a nuclear reactor in Baghdad without a peep from the U.S.

Given how the Israelis constantly rant against Iran, Iranians would have been fools not to put as much of it as possible underground.

Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel refuses to sign it. Iran allowed international inspectors. Israel never has. Israel has nuclear weapons – and apparently a lot of them. Iran doesn't have any, not one. If you are worried about an Islamic nuke, I remind you that Pakistan already has them. A Hindu nuke? India has them.

So Israel, Pakistan, and India all have nuclear weapons, all refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and all are warmly held allies of the idiots in Washington.

Here's another fact to stack against the clear evidence of insanity on the Potomac. Suppose Iran is lying about peaceful uses and does build a bomb (even the Israelis say it will take until 2009). So what? The world is full of nuclear weapons. My whole life, since the 1950s, has been lived 30 minutes away from nuclear annihilation.

People, especially in the press, tend to get hysterical about nuclear weapons. A nuclear bomb is, after all, a bomb. It has, whatever its size, a limited burst radius. Fallout is a captive of the wind. There have been lots of nuclear detonations on the ground and in the atmosphere, counting the two we dropped on Japan, plus all the nuclear tests conducted by us, the Russians, the French, and whoever else. So far as I know, the people around the world are still producing normal babies, and no giant spiders or ants have appeared over the horizon.

Furthermore, having five or six nuclear weapons does not make you a threat against a country with 200 nukes (Israel), much less the U.S., which has more than 3,000 nukes.

So let these facts settle into your head. Iran says it seeks to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, as it is legally entitled to do under the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. There is no evidence to contradict that. Iran has said repeatedly that it has no desire to acquire a nuclear weapon. It has never – despite the propaganda based on a misquotation – ever threatened Israel or the United States, or, for that matter, anyone else.

So what's afoot? I'll tell you what I think. The neocons in the U.S. and their pet bully, Israel, intend to dominate the Middle East and its oil. That means any country not run by a servile suck-up (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.) must be weakened or destroyed.

We've pretty much destroyed Iraq and Lebanon, so that leaves Syria and Iran. I imagine the neocons plan on Israel taking out Syria while the U.S. carpet-bombs Iran. The neocons are not only idiots, they are evil. They show a complete disdain for peace, a callous disregard for human life, and utter contempt for the rule of law. If that ain't evil, the devil had better retire.

Find this article at:
http://www.antiwar.com/reese/?articleid=11282

Alpha · Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 11:29 am Post subject:

-----Original Message-----

From: Jennifer Packer [mail to:press@theisraelproject.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 9:23 PM

Subject: Urgent correction: Wrong Clinton statement given out

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 19, 2007

Contact:
Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi: 202-857-6644, jenniferm@theisraelproject.org
Jennifer Packer: 202-857-6657, jenniferp@theisraelproject.org
www.theisraelproject.org

The Israel Project regrets that it accidentally gave out the wrong statement for Senator Hillary Clinton, prepared for The Israel Project's press conference on Iran July 19. The correct statement is below. All statements from the press conference today can be found at
www.theisraelproject.org

Senator Hillary Clinton's Statement

Today's event has the important goal of drawing attention to the security threat posed by Iran. Iran poses a threat to our allies and our interests in the region and beyond. The Iranian president has held a conference denying the Holocaust and has issued bellicose statements calling for Israel to be wiped off the map. His statements are even more disturbing and urgent when viewed in the context of the regime's quest to acquire nuclear weapons. This regime also uses its influence and resources in the region to support terrorist elements that attack Israel. Hezbollah's attack on Israel last summer, using Iranian weapons, clearly demonstrates Iran's malevolent influence even beyond its borders.

U.S. policy must be clear, unequivocal and effective. We cannot permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. We also must not let go unanswered its state sponsorship of terrorism. We must not stand silent in the face of the brutal repression of women and minorities. And we must not tolerate threats to the existence of Israel.

That is why we must work together to enforce meaningful, tough economic sanctions on the Iran regime, and why I have joined with Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) to cosponsor legislation that would close the loophole which enables international corporations such as Halliburton to evade these sanctions through foreign subsidiaries. It is essential that the international community and civil society come together to demonstrate our commitment and our determination in the face of the Iranian regime. In doing so, we are promoting the values of peace and freedom in the region and in the world.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Israel Project is an international non-profit organization devoted to educating the press and the public about Israel while promoting security, freedom and peace. The Israel Project provides journalists, leaders and opinion-makers accurate information about Israel. The Israel Project is not related to any government or government agency.
Board of Advisors: Senator Evan Bayh (IN), Senator Saxby Chambliss (GA), Senator Norm Coleman (MN), Senator Ben Nelson (NE), Senator Arlen Specter (PA), Senator Ron Wyden (OR), Congressman Rob Andrews (NJ), Congresswoman Shelley Berkley (NV), Congressman Tom Davis (VA), Congressman Eliot Engel (NY), Congressman Frank Pallone (NJ), Congressman Jon Porter (NV), Congressman Jim Saxton (NJ), Congressman Brad Sherman (CA), Congressman Joe Wilson (SC), Actor and Director Ron Silver

Alpha · Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:06 pm Post subject:

Subject: Re: POLICE STATE-Habeas Corpus: A Defense Against The Dark Arts 7/18/07 Caroline Arnold CommonDreams.org

To: Foppe

Where have you seen such a report, Foppe? It is definitely my concern as well though..

Foppe wrote:

it has been reported that Iraqi troops are prepared for return to the USA, and that concentration camp facilities for 400.000 persons have been completed in the USA
My idea is that these preparations are for combating the USA insurrection that is expected after the USraeli nuclear attack on Iran

spartacus <maximus417@cox.net> wrote:

Subject: Dark Arts

Published on Wednesday, July 18, 2007 by CommonDreams.org
Habeas Corpus: A Defense Against The Dark Arts
by Caroline ArnoldThis week our Air Force announced the deployment of “Reaper” - a remotely-controlled cyber-raptor loaded with hellfire and holocaust designed to deliver death and devastation to any target at any distance, for any reason - or for none - on behalf of … who? what?
This week our Senate is debating the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007, designed to restore habeas corpus rights denied by the Military Commissions Act of 2006 to some 12 million legal residents of the U.S. It will not, we should note, restore the right of habeas corpus to any person accused of being an “enemy combatant, ” nor to anyone detained pending determination of their status.
As I read these stories I kept recalling my son Seth’s accusation, at age four, that I had buttered his toast on the wrong side. Of course I laughed - how can anyone tell the right from the wrong side of a piece of toast, especially before it’s been buttered?
But I also recognized that it represented a child’s exploration of the parameters of the world unfolding around him. Kids must constantly test the real world; they need to find out what consequences follow various words or actions, they need to be aware of cultural assumptions on which their lives may depend; they need to learn right and wrong, and who may be trusted and who should be feared; they need to develop some confidence that the society they live in is rational and lawful, and reasonably predictable. And they need to develop some defenses against whatever “dark arts” are abroad in the world they live in.
All of us today have to come to grips with such things, in a world of unimaginable complexity, fiendish technologies, information overload, managed news and a President and Vice President who actively practice dark arts of fear: lies, secrets, spying, illegal detainment, torture, war.
Too many Americans today are deeply insecure in their understanding of fundamental systems that affect their lives. They aren’t quite sure where their livers are located, or the names of both their Senators; they don’t know whether they should doubt evolution or believe global warming; they’re uncertain about who to trust and who to fear; they’re not altogether convinced that their society is rational and lawful; they’re not quite sure how we should fight terrorism, and they’re hazy about habeas corpus.
But they experience real fear when they read about people being detained without knowing the charges against them. They wonder “What if I got arrested, but didn’t know what for?” “What if my son was detained and I couldn’t find out what he had done or where he was?” Then they wonder further: “How do I know that I won’t be next?” “What should I do or not do to make sure someone doesn’t accuse me and have me arrested?”
We begin to see that the cancellation of habeas corpus was an artful move to make citizens more insecure, more distrustful of one another, and more fearful.
Equally frightening should be the collective impact of the loss of habeas corpus: “If we-the-people cannot know the charges against detainees, how can we know that those in power are acting within the law and on behalf of the common good, and not to enrich or empower themselves, to settle personal grudges or to impose their religious or ideological beliefs on everyone?”
The present abuses of habeas corpus also divide human beings into those deserving of the basic rights and protections of the law, and those who can be excluded. This should terrorize all of us: who can know when he or she may be put out of the human family?
When people don’t know what is going on or why, they feel powerless. When they don’t know who stands beside them and who stands against them, they fear, and that fear overrides not only reason, but also common sense, generosity, forgiveness, our Yankee penchant for fixing things, our human capacity to learn from our mistakes, and the ability to laugh at our absurdities (What else can we do when the head of Homeland Security tells us he has a “gut feeling” that Al Qaeda is buttering our toast on the wrong side?)
The dark arts of Bush & Cheney - including their insubstantial fictions of Saddam’s Weapons of Mass Destruction and the too, too solid hardware and devilishly ingenious software of their grim new “Reaper” - may yet defeat the bright hopes we have for ourselves and our children.
But we cannot give up. First we must tell Congress: If you won’t or can’t impeach Bush & Cheney you must at least restore the universal right to habeas corpus, and reaffirm all the Constitutional rights to due process and speedy and public trials and the protections against cruel and unusual punishment and unreasonable search and seizure. You must give us the means to defend ourselves from the artists of darkness who have taken over our nation, and help us rebuild our confidence that we live in a lawful, rational society in which we, the people, are sovereign, and all of us are members of one human family.
* * *
Postscript: My son, now 42, points out that if you secure a piece of toast with the buttered side against a cat’s belly and drop the cat from some height it will spin indefinitely in midair and never land. That’s because, as the necromancers of White House science would tell us, cats must always land on their feet and toast always lands with the buttered side down.
Caroline Arnold csarnold@neo.rr.com served 12 years on the staff of U.S. Senator John Glenn and is now active in community and environmental affairs in Kent, Ohio.

Alpha · Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 6:18 pm Post subject:

From: "Jeff Blankfort" <jblankfort@earthlink.net>

Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 10:12:50 -0700

Subject: Economist: Sanctioning War with Iran

"THE Iranian regime is basically a messianic apocalyptic cult.” So says Israel 's once and perhaps future prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu. If he is right the world is teetering on the edge of a terrifying crisis.

"It is vital to understand that this third finale is not a nightmare dreamt up by editorial writers. After the false intelligence that led America into Iraq, and the mayhem that followed, it may seem hard to believe that America or Israel are pondering an attack on a much bigger Muslim country. But they are—and they are not mad. This time, after all, there is no question of false intelligence: the world's fears are based on capabilities that Iran itself boasts about openly. Nor would there be another invasion: this would be an attack from the air, aimed at disabling or destroying Iran 's nuclear sites. From a technical point of view, launching such an attack is well within America 's capabilities ( America has lately reinforced its carrier fleet in the Persian Gulf) and perhaps within Israel 's, too."

This is a very frightening editorial, coming from the Economist in the wake of Gordon Brown's ascension to the Prime Ministership. That it is introduced with a quote from Netanyahu--which aptly describes not only Israel's Christian Zionist friends but many in the Israeli hierarchy, both secular and religious, only adds to the epidemic of madness which is bringing us to the brink of another world war which, like the war on Iraq, is being almost exclusively orchestrated by Israel, the American Jewish Zionist lobby, and their equally insane Christian Zionist allies . The question should be is "How Can the US and Israel be stopped?"-JB

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?Story_ ID=9514293

The riddle of Iran
Jul 19th 2007
From The Economist print edition

Iran's leaders think a nuclear weapon could rejuvenate their tired revolution. How can they be stopped?
THE Iranian regime is basically a messianic apocalyptic cult.” So says Israel 's once and perhaps future prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu. If he is right the world is teetering on the edge of a terrifying crisis.
While the world has been distracted by Iraq , Afghanistan and much else, Iran has been moving relentlessly closer to the point where it could build an atomic bomb. It has converted yellowcake into uranium hexafluoride gas. Now it is spinning the gas through thousands of centrifuges it has installed at the underground enrichment plant it built secretly in Natanz, south of Tehran . A common guess is that if it can run 3,000 centrifuges at high speed for a year, it will end up with enough fuel for its first bomb.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN's nuclear watchdog, Iran could have 3,000 centrifuges hooked up by the end of this month. The Iranians say their next aim is to scale up to 54,000 centrifuges. Figuring out how to put the fuel into a usable weapon will also take time—perhaps a year or more. But for would-be bomb-builders, making the fuel is by far the hardest part. The upshot, say Israel and some American experts, is that Iran may have a bomb by the end of 2009. Mohammed ElBaradei, the IAEA's director-general, is more cautious. But even he says that if Iran really wants a bomb it could now build one within three to eight years.

Choose your unhappy ending

What Iran is doing at Natanz is entirely illegal. It has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and says its nuclear aims are peaceful. But having spent decades deceiving nuclear inspectors, it is disbelieved even by its friends. A year ago this month Russia and China therefore joined the rest of the UN Security Council in ordering Iran to stop. It carried on regardless. The Security Council followed up with two resolutions, in December 2006 and March this year, repeating its demands and applying sanctions. The centrifuges spin defiantly on.

So what next? This story could have at least three unhappy endings. In one, Iran ends up with nuclear weapons, bringing new instability and a hair-trigger face-off with nuclear Israel into one of the world's least-safe neighbourhoods. In another, America or Israel take pre-emptive military action and manage to stop it, even though such an attack would almost certainly have very dangerous consequences of its own. In the third ending, Iran is attacked, and enraged, and retaliates—and still ends up with a bomb anyway.

It is vital to understand that this third finale is not a nightmare dreamt up by editorial writers. After the false intelligence that led America into Iraq, and the mayhem that followed, it may seem hard to believe that America or Israel are pondering an attack on a much bigger Muslim country. But they are—and they are not mad. This time, after all, there is no question of false intelligence: the world's fears are based on capabilities that Iran itself boasts about openly. Nor would there be another invasion: this would be an attack from the air, aimed at disabling or destroying Iran 's nuclear sites. From a technical point of view, launching such an attack is well within America 's capabilities ( America has lately reinforced its carrier fleet in the Persian Gulf) and perhaps within Israel 's, too.

Yet such an attack would nonetheless be a huge gamble. Even if it delayed or stopped Iran 's nuclear programme, it would knock new holes in America 's relations with the Muslim world. And if only for the sake of their domestic political survival, Iran 's leaders would almost certainly hit back. Iran could fire hundreds of missiles at Israel , attack American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan , organise terrorist attacks in the West or choke off tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz , the world's oil windpipe. How could any Western leader in his right mind risk initiating such a sequence of events?

The succinct answer of Senator John McCain is that although attacking Iran would be bad, an Iran with nuclear weapons would be worse. He is not alone: most of America 's presidential candidates would consider military force.

Cult or calculator?

If Iran really is no more than the “messianic cult” of Mr Netanyahu's imagination, it would be worth running almost any risk to stop it acquiring nuclear weapons. But as our special report argues, Iran is not that easy to read.

Iran is a self-proclaimed theocracy. Yet it has conducted foreign relations since the revolution of 1979 in a way that seems perfectly rational even if it is not pleasant. Its president, the Holocaust-questioni ng Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is widely reported to have threatened to “wipe Israel off the map”. But in fact he may never have uttered those precise words, and there is both ambiguity and calculation behind the bluster. Look closer and Mr Ahmadinejad is vague about whether he means that Iran should destroy Israel or just that he hopes for Israel 's disappearance. Knowing that a nuclear attack on Israel or America would result in its own prompt annihilation, Iran could probably be deterred, just as other nuclear powers have been. Didn't Nikita Khrushchev promise to “bury” the West?

Since Israel has memories of a real Holocaust, it may not set much store by that “probably”. This newspaper continues to believe that even for Israel containment of a nuclear Iran would be less awful than a risky pre-emptive attack that would probably cause mayhem, strengthen the regime and merely delay the day Iran gets a bomb. Yet the whole world still has a huge interest in preventing that day from coming. Even if Iran never used its bomb, mere possession of it might encourage it to adopt a more aggressive foreign policy than the one it is already pursuing in Iraq , Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. And once Iran went nuclear other countries in the region—such as Saudi Arabia , Egypt and perhaps Turkey —would probably feel compelled to follow suit, thereby entangling the Middle East in a cat's cradle of nuclear tripwires.

Is there a way to avoid all of the unhappy endings by finding a peaceful way to stop Iran going nuclear? The Europeans hoped they had stumbled on such a solution last year, when they at last talked Russia and China into imposing sanctions and George Bush into dangling the prospect of normal relations with Iran once enrichment stopped. But the mild sanctions imposed so far are not working, and now the technological clock in Natanz is outrunning the diplomatic clock at the United Nations. Iran may soon work out how to spin its centrifuges at full speed for long periods; and once it learns how to do that the odds of stopping it from building a bomb will rapidly lengthen. This suggests that a third sanctions resolution, with sharper teeth, needs to be enacted without delay.

Iran is obstinate, paranoid and ambitious. But it is also vulnerable. A young population with no memory of the revolution is desperate for jobs its leaders have failed to provide. Sanctions that cut off equipment for its decrepit oilfields or struck hard at the financial interests of the regime and its protectors in the Revolutionary Guards would have an immediate impact on its own assessment of the cost of its nuclear programme. That on its own is unlikely to change the regime's mind. If at the same time Iran was offered a dignified ladder to climb down—above all a credible promise of an historic reconciliation with the United States —the troubled leadership of a tired revolution might just grab it. But time is short.

Alpha

Can't Find Osama? Attack Iran Instead

The July 17 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) "On the Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland" [.pdf] warns that al-Qaeda has reconstituted itself in the tribal areas of U.S. ally Pakistan, that it has resumed training of cadres intending to carry out "high impact plots" against the United States, and that the terrorist threat for the next three years continues worldwide and is even growing in places like North Africa and Britain. As always there is a bland euphemism to define the emerging situation, in this case that the United States will be experiencing a "heightened threat environment." And to make sure that the conflation of terrorism with Iraq is not lost on the reader, the "central front" in Iraq makes an appearance among the report's "Key Findings."

In a tour-de-force of misinformation disguised as fact, the report states, erroneously, that al-Qaeda in Iraq represents the principal threat for an attack on the U.S. homeland "because it has expressed a desire to attack us here." The "attack us here" theme has been around for several years, and it has lately been reinforced by the White House's incessant linkage of Iraq to al-Qaeda, culminating in a July 10 speech in Cleveland in which President Bush named the terrorist organization 30 times during comments that were ostensibly on the war in Iraq. Anyone who follows terrorism even in a pedestrian fashion might politely suggest that the administration's position on the terrorism problem is nonsense. The main threat to the U.S. comes from the real original unadulterated al-Qaeda in Pakistan. Iraq, though a magnet and training ground for terrorist aspirants, is neither interested in nor capable of exporting its own particular brand of anarchy to America's shores.

Given the prominence of Iraq, the NIE is clearly more a political document than an objective assessment. It goes on to state that the U.S. has been on the offensive against terrorism, that it has "built new institutions" and "developed new tools." It is "constantly evaluating the threat" in hundreds if not thousands of meetings in Washington. Lots of meetings. Lots of reviews. Lots of worker bees working. The irrepressible Karen Hughes at State Department has summoned her Myrmidons, "countering al-Qaeda's violent message," challenging terrorists to cyber duels over the Internet. It's Star Wars all over again. "We remain vigilant." It's all there in the NIE.

But one might be forgiven for thinking, perhaps, that all is not well, that the terrorism problem is somehow worse now than it was in 2001. Such reflection, which would be appropriate for anyone who truly cares about the United States and its people, leads to the inescapable conclusion that the past six years of misdirection and mismanagement have made the world a much more dangerous place. In that light, one might conclude that the NIE is more a chronicle of failure than success, an admission that the White House and Congress have, in fact, been unable to protect the American people. It might also be observed that one doesn't get as much bang for the buck as used to be the case. The expenditure of half a trillion dollars in a "global war on terrorism" (GWOT) that has led to the deployment of hundreds of thousands of soldiers, intelligence officers, and law enforcement personnel against no more than a couple of thousand terrorists concentrated in one of the world's most backward regions has not radically shifted the playing field in America's favor. Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda carried out 9/11. Osama has been hanging around in Pakistan since late 2001, and he is still there, training new terrorists and planning.

And, if something is wrong in the GWOT, as usual no one is to blame, as-finger pointing would reflect badly on the political leadership. Retired Gen. Tommy Franks, the architect of the administration's failure to finish off a cornered Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan's Tora Bora Mountains in December 2001, received his Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2004. He now sits on the boards of the Bank of America and Outback Steakhouse, and it is assumed that he will soon be named president of Oklahoma State University. Ex-CIA Director George Tenet, who claims he warned Condoleezza Rice about an impending terrorist attack but, inexplicably, failed to tell the president, just received a $4 million book advance. Paul Wolfowitz, whose lack of judgment guaranteed that the U.S. occupation of Iraq would not succeed, is now comfortably back at the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute after his failure at the World Bank.

The blundering of the past six years in which America's friends overseas have been turned into enemies by arrogance and bullying, in which Washington's standing among nations has plummeted, has not resulted in any serious change of course. No one is responsible. The neoconservative architects of the Pentagon assault on Iraq that has turned that country into a failed state and a magnet for terrorism have left for greener pastures, but not a one has admitted to error or been publicly admonished. Several, including Vice President Dick Cheney and the National Security Council's Elliot Abrams, are still in positions of power, advocating a new war as part of a larger conflict that will go on indefinitely, everywhere.

And it's always convenient to blame it on the bad guys. Per the NIE, terrorism is not a problem because America's politicians, bureaucrats, and pundits stacked a hundred high in every office lining the Potomac have failed to understand the nature of the threat. It is rather because the terrorists have "evolved" and "adapted," hardly playing fair.

The NIE is not pleasant reading, even though it tries to make the essentially political point that everything possible is being done to protect "the Homeland." What it really is arguing is that everything that is being done should continue to be done, and more. That means more of the bloated bureaucracy of the Department of Homeland Security and the world's mightiest military budget. Another White House tactical response to the very real terrorist threat, which it doesn't want anyone to think about too much, is, predictably, to look for a diversion in the form of someone else to kick. With Iraq and Afghanistan in shambles, there just happen to be a couple of neighbors who can be credibly accused of "interference" with the U.S. military's civilizing mission. In the intelligence business it is sometimes necessary to use "disinformation" to establish a false factual basis or to create a straw man that can be used to divert attention from an unpleasant reality. If it is too hard to catch Osama bin Laden, it might be more convenient to talk about Iran instead. As Syria and Iran have both long been in the crosshair of the neoconservatives because of those countries' antipathy to Israel, it is reassuring to know that they have not been forgotten by the White House. It is possibly no coincidence that there has been a significant increase in the anti-Iran rhetoric emanating from both the Bush administration and Congress over the past few weeks, mostly seeking to establish a casus belli by contending that Iran is masterminding lethal attacks directed against U.S. troops in Iraq and NATO forces in Afghanistan. A tidy little war against Iran would be a useful diversion that would make everyone forget about the NIE and the inability to do anything about Osama bin Laden.

http://antiwar.com/orig/giraldi.php?articleid=11307

Alpha · Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:41 pm Post subject:

Iran says it will never stop nuclear activities (why should it when the rogue state of Israel has reportedly 200-400 nuclear bombs?!):

By Parisa Hafezi and Zahra Hosseinian1 hour, 31 minutes ago

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday Tehran would never yield to international pressure to suspend its nuclear program.
"Iran will never abandon its peaceful (nuclear) work. Our nuclear work is legal and why should we stop it?" Ahmadinejad told state television.
The United States and other Western powers suspect Iran has a secret program to build nuclear weapons. The oil-producing Islamic Republic says its nuclear program is only for generation of electricity for the benefit of its economy.
Two sets of U.N. sanctions have been imposed on Iran for defying Security Council resolutions demanding it suspend all nuclear fuel activity.
Ahmadinejad said any further U.N. resolutions would not prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear technology.
"Let's say they issue resolution number 300 ... what will happen? It should be remembered that Iran is obtaining nuclear technology. They have to eventually accept that," he said.
In an attempt to avert tougher sanctions, Tehran has agreed to increase cooperation with the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, to clarify the scope of its atomic work.
Iran agreed during negotiations with the IAEA on Tuesday to let U.N. inspectors revisit its Arak nuclear reactor site early next week.
WARNING
Tehran has warned Washington, which has led efforts to isolate Iran over its nuclear program, to back off from broader sanctions, saying such measures would harm new diplomatic opportunities.
The United States and Iran agreed at a rare meeting on Tuesday to form a panel to examine ways to reduce violence in Iraq. The two countries have not had diplomatic ties since shortly after Tehran's 1979 Islamic revolution.
European diplomats said last week Western powers had quietly shelved steps to toughen penalties against Iran until September so they could see the outcome of negotiations.
The IAEA inspectors would arrive in Tehran on Thursday, Iran's semi-official Fars news agency reported on Wednesday.
"They will visit Iran's Isfahan Uranium Conversion facility (UCF). It is a routine visit," Fars said.
Ahmadinejad said Iran had "some thousand centrifuges which are spinning every day."
Centrifuges are used to make fuel for power plants but can also be employed to enrich uranium to a higher level to make bomb material.
"(The West) want us to stop right here ... If we were to abide by their demands, we had to negotiate for 10 years to obtain only 20 centrifuges ... but look what we have now," said Ahmadinejad.
Diplomats have said Iran had installed about 2,000 centrifuges by early in June, most enriching uranium and others undergoing test "dry runs" without uranium in them. The 3,000 mark was likely to be reached by the end of July, they said.
Three thousand could produce material for one bomb within a year if run non-stop at supersonic speed.
But analysts say Iran has yet to demonstrate such capability and probably remains a few years away from being able to build a bomb if it wants one.

War Without End

The global war against terror, news about the illegal invasion of Iraq, the corporate puppet presidents, the war criminal Tony Blair, September 11th 2001, the USS Liberty and New World Order crimes against humanity.

War with Iran real risk according to former CIA operative - page 6