| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:14 am Post subject: US blacklists Iranian commander, Syrian-based TV station |
| US blacklists Iranian commander, Syrian-based TV station (afp.com)
Wed Jan 9, 11:58 PM ET
The US Treasury said Wednesday it had blacklisted a high-ranking Iranian Revolutionary Guards officer and a Syrian-based television station for allegedly "fueling" insurgent activity in Iraq.
The Treasury said it had slapped financial sanctions on Ahmed Foruzandeh, who it said was a brigadier general in Iran's Revolutionary Guard Qods Force, as well as Syrian-based Al-Zawra television.
US officials accused Foruzandeh of helping foment attacks in Iraq against Iraqi government officials and American troops.
Al-Zawra was said to have broadcast messages through patriotic songs to the Islamic Army of Iraq group, which Washington labels a Sunni terrorist group. The US claims Al-Zawra has also received financing from Al-Qaeda.
The Treasury's actions also targeted three Iraqi men identified as Abu Mustafa Al-Sheibani, Ismail Hafiz Al Lami and Mish'an Al-Jaburi.
The government agency said, however, that the Iranian brigadier general and the three Iraqis all had numerous aliases.
The US sanctions against the top-ranking Iranian military officer come amid increased tensions between the United States and Iran in recent days.
US President George W. Bush, currently on a trip to the Middle East, warned Iran of "serious consequences" if it attacked US warships, following an encounter between US and Iranian vessels in the Strait of Hormuz over the weekend.
"Iran and Syria are fueling violence and destruction in Iraq. Iran trains, funds, and provides weapons to violent Shia extremist groups, while Syria provides safe-haven to Sunni insurgents and financiers," said Stuart Levey, the Treasury's under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence.
Levy urged US allies to support the sanctions, which freeze the assets of targeted individuals under US jurisdiction, as well as barring US citizens from conducting financial deals with those affected.
The Treasury said Foruzandeh has backed "terrorist operations" against US and Iraqi forces in Iraq, which borders Iran, and claimed he was responsible for managing assassinations of Iraqi citizens.
US officials believe the Iranian officer has housed his operations in the former US embassy compound in Tehran.
They claimed Foruzandeh had set up training courses in Iran for Iraqi militias, including lessons on guerrilla warfare and improvised explosive devices (IEDs), which have been responsible for the deaths of US troops deployed in Iraq.
Al-Zawra television is owned and controlled by one of the Iraqis cited on the updated blacklist, Mish'an Al-Jaburi, according to the Treasury.
Washington said the television station broadcasts "graphic" videos of insurgent attacks against US troops based in Iraq, as well as urging Iraqis to fight US forces.
US officials believe Mish'an Al-Jaburi is based in Syria, which also borders Iraq, and that the other two Iraqis cited are living in Iran.
The Treasury said Abu Mustafa Al-Sheibani and Ismail Hafiz Al Lami led different groups seeking to harm US forces, Iraqi officials and citizens.
The Treasury has ratcheted up its financial sanctions against various Iranians and the Iranian government, including large banks, in the past year as relations between the two countries have hardened.
Tehran has vigorously denied backing violence in Iraq.
Washington has also been seeking to win broader United Nations sanctions against Iran over its disputed nuclear program.
US officials say Iran is developing nuclear weapons, but Tehran says its nuclear program is for civilian purposes. | |  | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 6:23 pm Post subject: |
| Need confirm how credible the following is (saw it linked at www.whatreallyhappened.com)?:
We'll nuke Iran - Bush promises Israel
http://presscue.com/node/38692
Thu, 01/10/2008 - 16:08 - Wire Services
US President George W. Bush promised Israel's opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu that the United States will join the Jewish state in a nuclear strike against Iran, Israel Radio reported today.
Former Prime Minister Netanyahu, opposition Likud party's hardline chairman who opposes the US-backed Annapolis peace process, reiterated to President Bush his stance, that a pre-emptive nuclear strike against Iran's nuclear installations was the only way to stop the Islamic nation's nuclear weapons ambitions.
"I told him my position and Bush agreed," Netanyahu told Israel Radio.
During their 45-minute meeting at King David hotel in Jerusalem Netanyahu also told Bush that "Jerusalem belongs to the Jewish people and will remain under Israeli sovereignty for eternity."
President Bush issued a stark warning to Iran over Strait of Hormuz incident, saying that "all options are on the table to protect our assets."
“There will be serious consequences if they attack our ships, pure and simple,” Bush said during the joint news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in Jerusalem. “And my advice to them is, don't do it.”
Bush criticized those who interpret the National Intelligence Estimate, which found that Iran gave up its nuclear weapons program in 2003, as a sign that Iran was no longer a threat.
"Let me remind you what the NIE actually said," Bush stold reporters. "It said that as far as the intelligence community could tell, at one time the Iranians had a military -- covert military program that was suspended in 2003 because of international pressure. My attitude is that a non-transparent country, a country which has yet to disclose what it was up to, can easily restart a program."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
UN Ispector Scott Ritter on Iran
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XQan1qo8T4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XctgkYj5aVk
AIPAC Pushing US to attack Iran (for Israel) - see the Scott Ritter youtubes posted in the comments section of the following URL:
http://neoconzionistthreat.blogspot.com/2007/10/re-aipac-is-pushing-us-to-war-with-iran.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forwarded:
Subject: H.R. 393: The National Service Act of 2007
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:34:54 -0800
SEE THIS!!! PLEASE CALL your Senators & Congress SAY NO TO THIS BILL!!
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
Hi ......My name is Jane. I am a member of Ron Paul meetup in Clermont, Florida. There is legislation that was just introduced on January 10th that you may or may not be aware of. It was introduced by Rep. Charles Rangel ( D-NY ). It is H.R. 393: The National Service Act of 2007. In short it is being set up to induct into military service every man & woman 18 yrs. to 42 yrs. in case of war. We all know what war they are trying to perpetrate on us now....Iran. ( and they are not taking no for an answer ).
Please have everyone there get behind an effort to bombard Chas. Rangel with emails, phone calls...letters, whatever it takes to let him know this is not acceptable to the American people and NEW YORK'S. Bush will invoke NSPD 51 and it will be all over. I am a fellow New Yorker. I lived my whole life ( 57 yrs.) in East Islip, L.I. I just moved here 7 years ago....but my heart & soul will always be on Long Island. My email address is
Sincerely, Jane
PS: Additional on NSPD-51 which is mentioned above:
http://tinyurl.com/2ebrrz
Additional about the military draft:
http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/907
Draft Test or “Don’t ask, don’t tell?”
by Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich (source: CASMII)
Saturday, December 23, 2006
It came to light today that the Pentagon is planning to test the military-draft machinery. To ease the apprehensive parents of 18 year-olds, they were being reassured that this will not happen until 2009, by which time everyone hopes the US will have disengaged from Iraq. But what is one more lie? As Secretary for Veterans Affairs Jim Nicholson said: "society would benefit" if we were to bring back the draft. There are for course, justifications for this.
Foremost, President Bush cannot find soldiers who are willing to die for his crusade. American soldiers with a few exceptions are about principles. While they are willing to defend their soil, they are not willing to go to the four corners of the world to fight the neo-conservative agenda and die in order to fulfill the agenda of the Project for the New American Century. They have woken up to the ugly truth. As such, there is a shortage of enlisted men to fight the next war – Iran. Battleships heading towards Iran, resolution sent to the United Nations Security Council, this White House is short of soldiers willing to die a futile death.
But even instituting the draft will have its complications. The United States Armed Forces prohibits homosexuals or bisexuals from serving in the armed forces. Unlike the previous policy, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” does not allow the military to ask enlistees if they are gay, but similar to its predecessor, it does stipulate that service members who disclose that they are homosexual are subject to dismissal. The official justification for the current policy is the unit cohesion rationale, which states that military performance would decline if known gay and lesbian soldiers were permitted to serve in uniform.
In 2004, George W. Bush was re-elected to the White House based on a cultural divide and not partisanship. The divide was based on homosexuality and abortion. Undeniably, George W. Bush is the cause of almost approximately 700,000 deaths in Iraq alone by illegally invading that country. This gives a new meaning to pro-life. Instituting the draft, or merely testing the draft-machinery, will no doubt create a whole generation of homosexuals in this country; even if it is to avoid the armed forces. Better (pretend to) sleep with a man/woman than to take the life of one. I reckon.
Doubtless, this man will not have the army to attack Iran. But he does possess the madness to attack all the same. The methods at his disposable are horrendous at best. We all contribute to the making of history – some achieve infamy by expunging the rest of us. The 655,000 Iraqis are nameless. I pray that Iranians do not become nameless casualties of history. It is while we have a name and a voice, here or elsewhere, that we can save those about to become a number.
Last edited by Alpha on Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:33 pm; edited 5 times in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 3:17 pm Post subject: Fw: Open Letter to George W. Bush (GULF NEWS EDITORIAL) |
| Fw: Open Letter to George W. Bush (GULF NEWS EDITORIAL)
TO: Distinguished Recipients
FM: John Whitbeck
Transmitted below is an editorial in the form of an open letter to President George W. Bush which was published at the top of the front page of the GULF NEWS (Dubai), the leading English-language newspaper in the United Arab Emirates, shortly before Mr. Bush's arrival in the UAE.
The United Arab Emirates is a "moderate" Arab state. The GULF NEWS is a moderate, mainstream newspaper in the UAE. The views expressed in this editorial open letter reflect the commonly held views of moderate, mainstream people in this relatively pro-American part of the Arab world.
WAKE UP, AMERICA! The "more of the same" (or even worse!) being promised by ALL the presidential candidates (other than the "marginal" Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul) is simply not good enough.
Gulf News
Editorial
Letter to George W. Bush
Gulf News
Published: January 11, 2008
http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/08/01/11/10180995.html
Dear Mr. President;
On the occasion of your first official trip to this vital region, it is only appropriate to raise a few points which might also be raised by the leaders you meet. Unfortunately, you landed here with prejudice and pre-formed opinions. By describing Israel, moments after you arrived, as "the land of freedom" and "justice", you have shown total ignorance of the political situation in the Middle East and the issue you claim to want to solve in the remaining 12 months of your presidency. Israel, Mr. President, continues to defy every UN resolution, exercise unprecedented oppression on the occupied Palestinian people and persecute its Muslim and Christian population. We realise that containing Iran, selling more weapons and securing cheap oil supplies are the main issues on your mind as you tour the region. But you need to look beyond the neocon rhetoric and speak directly to the people who have been unjustly thrown out of their land, victimised by your "strong ally" Israel. As for other matters, such as the promise of democracy and human rights, which you are expected to raise in your official talks in the region, we really don't take them seriously. Your dreadful record on both gives you no moral right to lecture others.
Lest you forget. Invasion of Iraq. Thousands of dead. Looting the National Museum. Disbanding the Iraqi army. Donald Rumsfeld. Shock and Awe. Jay Garner. Paul Bremer. Inciting sectarianism. Abu Ghraib. Thousands of detainees without charges. Torture. Oil. Ghost WMDs. The Niger connection. Halliburton. Blackwater. Deadly security contractors. Mercenaries. Fallujah. Haditha massacre. Blind support of Israel. Instigating the suffering of Gaza. Ignoring the expansion of illegal colonies. Defying United Nations resolutions. Securing "a Jewish State". Allowing Israelis to extend the destruction of Lebanon in the 2oo6 war. Providing Israel with new Bunker Buster bombs to attack Lebanese towns. The War on Terror. "The Crusade". Clash of civilisations. Where is Osama Bin Laden? Afghanistan. Bagram massacre. Bombing media offices. Guantanamo Bay. Kangaroo courts. Indefinite detention. Presidential orders to ignore Geneva Conventions. "Unlawful enemy combatants". Illegal National Security Agency wiretapping. Fingerprinting visitors. Black prisons. Kidnapping foreign citizens on foreign lands. Khalid Al Masri. Abu Omar. Maher Arar. Central Intelligence Agency. "Aggressive interrogation techniques". Destroying the torture tapes. Iran tension. Isolating Syria. Embracing Syrian opposition Iraq style. The Chavez coup. Denial of global warming. Rejecting Kyoto Protocol. Marginalisation of the United Nations. John Bolton. Paul Wolfowitz and the World Bank. Carl Rove. Alberto Gonzales. Firing attorneys. Nepotism. False democracy promises. Dick Cheney, Dick Cheney and Dick Cheney.
Mr President;
The list goes on. You might not be able to recall some of it. But the people around you, Cheney and Condoleezza Rice especially, would. And they realise that on the subject of human rights, your administration has had the worst record of all, surpassing most Third World countries. The tension and the misery in parts of this region can very well testify to this.
Mr President;
In a famous speech in 2003 you announced an "historic" shift in US foreign policy. You pledged to support democracy and liberty while declaring "victory" in Iraq. More than four years later, Iraq is in chaos. It has virtually disintegrated and "the surge" did little to stop the killing or ease the sectarian tension. At the same time, you gave up on your freedom-for-all prophecy. We are all back to the old ways of doing business - arms and oil. The agenda of your current tour is evident.
Mr President;
This is your first official trip to a land you long claimed has a very special place in your heart. The land of the Prophets. However, you started out wrong. By maintaining your support of an Israeli "Jewish State", you are flouting your own ideals upon which your great country was founded more than two centuries ago. So much for the promise of democracy. What you advocate in fact is the creation of states on religious and racial lines, thereby justifying the atrocious actions of terrorists who hate and seek to eliminate the followers of other religions: The same terrorists you like to blame for every ill on earth and every failure of yours.
Mr President;
It has been reported that you are here to "lecture" us on democracy and human rights. But with a record like yours, you will not be very convincing. The people you are addressing have greater respect for human rights and dignity.
You also said that your current tour aims to realise the long neglected peace in the Middle East. Regional peace, Mr President, will not be achieved by escalating tension and threatening to change regimes. And most importantly, it will not be achieved by supporting Israel, which continues to defy international law, occupy Arab lands, oppress the Palestinians and rebuff peace initiatives.
Mr President;
We hope you have enjoyed the trip so far. The scenery is great. The food is exotic. As for the more "serious" things, it is unlikely you will make any difference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
US Support of Israel's brutal oppression of the Palestinian people PRIMARY MOTIVATION for tragic attacks on the World Trade Center in 1993 and on 9/11:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/08/05/the-gorilla-in-the-room-is-us-support-for-israel.php
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CIA reveals: We said in 1974 that Israel had nuclear weapons
http://haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtStEngPE.jhtml?itemNo=943729&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&title='CIA%20reveals:%20We%20said%20in%201974%20that%20Israel%20had%20nuclear%20weapons%20'&dyn_server=172.20.5.5#top
Last edited by Alpha on Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:54 pm; edited 4 times in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 3:30 pm Post subject: Jewish Neocons want war with Iran at whatever cost |
| US offered to scare Iran: report
Article from: Agence France-Presse
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,,21519759-663,00.html
From correspondents in London
April 07, 2007 01:42pm
US offered aggressive air patrols over Iranian bases
Britain knocked back offer, asked for calm approach
THE US offered to mount aggressive air patrols over Iranian bases during the country's stand-off with Britain, UK media reported today.
Citing unnamed diplomatic sources, The Guardian newspaper said Pentagon officials offered a series of military options that Britain rejected.
Britain reportedly told the US to keep out of the affair and instead tone down armed forces activity in the Gulf region.
One of the options involved combat aircraft patrolling over Iranian bases to show how serious the incident was, the newspaper said in a front page story.
On March 20, three days before the 15 British marines were seized at gunpoint in the Gulf, a second US aircraft carrier group arrived in the region.
At Britain's request, the two carrier groups, totalling 40 ships plus aircraft, changed their exercises to make them appear less confrontational, the newspaper said.
Britain also asked the US to ensure it kept the rhetoric low-key, The Guardian said.
It reported a consensus was emerging among British, Iraqi and Iranian officials that Iran had not planned to seize the sailors.
"My best guess is that this was a local incident which became an international incident," a British source told the newspaper.
"If this had been between Iranian and American soldiers, it could have been the beginning of an accidental war," said a senior Iranian source.
The source claimed British forces had illegally entered Iranian waters three times in three months before the capture, which was decided upon by a regional commander.
Last edited by Alpha on Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:25 pm; edited 1 time in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 4:13 pm Post subject: Bush says US, allies must confront Iran |
| Bush says US, allies must confront Iran
By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Writer1 hour, 24 minutes ago
President Bush said Sunday that Iran is threatening the security of the world, and that the United States and Arab allies must join together to confront the danger "before it's too late."
Bush said Iran funds terrorist extremists, undermines stability in Lebanon, sends arms to the hardline Taliban regime, intimidates its neighbors with alarming rhetoric and defies the United Nations by refusing to be open about its nuclear program.
"Iran is the world's leading state sponsor of terror," Bush said in a speech about democracy that he delivered about midway through his eight-day Mideast trip, which began with a renewed push for an Israeli-Palestinian peace pact — an accord he said whose "time has come."
Chiding U.S. allies who have withheld civil liberties, Bush said governments will never build trust by harassing or imprisoning candidates and protesters. But his rebuke was general, and he did not single out any U.S. partner in the region for oppressive practices.
"You cannot expect people to believe in the promise of a better future when they are jailed for peacefully petitioning their government," Bush said. "And you cannot stand up a modern, confident nation when you do not allow people to voice their legitimate criticisms."
Bush's speech, reprising the call for democracy in the Middle East that he made in his second inaugural address, was delivered in one of the few countries in the region — the Emirates — where democracy has not been a vital issue. In other countries in the region, especially Egypt, the fight between democracy activists and autocratic governments has been much more pointed and controversial.
The president lauded some democratic reforms among Arab nations. He urged the Arab leaders to show support for the fragile Iraqi government, open their societies and provide backing, and possible funding, to help make an Israeli-Palestinian agreement stick.
"Leaders on both sides still have many tough decisions ahead, and they will need to back these decisions with real commitments," Bush said, "but the time has come for a holy land where Palestinians and Israelis live together in peace."
He called on the Palestinians to reject extremists, although he did not specifically mention the Islamic radical group Hamas, which has gained control of the Gaza Strip.
"The dignity and sovereignty that is your right is within your reach," Bush said in a direct appeal to the Palestinians.
On Iran, Bush is privately trying to allay the concerns of Persian Gulf allies nervous about Iran's military might and spreading influence. Gulf allies are jittery after the Jan. 6 confrontation between U.S. and Iranian naval vessels off their shores, but seek assurance that Bush doesn't want war. Any attack on Iran could bring retaliation against military bases on Arab soil or choke the lucrative oil trade through the Strait of Hormuz.
"Iran's actions threaten the security of nations everywhere," Bush said, calling on the Iranian government to make itself more accountable to its citizens. "So the United States is strengthening our long-standing security commitments with our friends in the Gulf, and rallying friends around the world to confront this danger before it is too late."
Earlier Sunday in Bahrain, U.S. Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, commander of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, which patrols the Gulf, told Bush that he took it "deadly seriously" when an Iranian fleet of high-speed boats charged at and threatened to blow up a three-ship U.S. Navy convoy passing near Iranian waters. The Iranian naval forces vanished as the American ship commanders were preparing to open fire.
Bush spoke with Cosgriff after he had a breakfast of pancakes and bacon with troops of the U.S. 5th Fleet based in Bahrain.
"The media may be free to second-guess the military decision, but his (Bush's) captains are not and they take it very seriously," White House press secretary Perino told reporters aboard Air Force One en route to the United Arab Emirates. "They have deliberate and measured ways to engage other traffic there in the Strait of Hormuz, which they did. But all the military people remember what happened in the past, such as the USS. Cole ... The vice admiral said they take it deadly seriously."
Seventeen sailors were killed in a terrorist attack on the USS Cole in Yemen in October 2000.
Bush spoke at the Emirates Palace, at an opulent, gold-trimmed hotel where a suite goes for $2,450 a night. Built at a cost of $3 billion, the hotel is a kilometer long from end to end and has a 1.3 kilometer white sand beach — every grain of it imported from Algeria, according to Steven Pike, a spokesman at the U.S. Embassy here.
Half the audience was dressed in western attire and the other half in Arabic clothes — white robes and headdresses for men and black abayas, many with jeweled edges, for women.
In renewing his "Freedom Agenda" — Bush's grand ambition to seed democracy around the globe — the president declared: "We know from experience that democracy is the only system of government that yields lasting peace and stability."
Yet he was speaking about democracy in a deeply undemocratic country, the Emirates, where an elite of royal rulers makes virtually all the decisions. Large numbers of foreign resident workers have few legal or human rights, including no right to citizenship and no right to protest working conditions.
Some human rights groups have accused the Emirates of tolerating virtual indentured servitude, where workers from poor countries like Sri Lanka are forced to work to pay off debts to employers, and have their passports seized so they can't leave.
Shortly after landing during a steady rain on the southeastern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, Bush met at a ceremonial palace with Sheik Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, who was appointed president of the United Arab Emirates in 2004 following the death of his father, Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan. The UAE president presented Bush with a ceremonial sash that looked like a thick golden necklace about two feet long. A portrait of the late president hung on the wall behind them.
After the speech, Bush ventured to a sprawling horse farm for a traditional desert dinner, outside of a tent set up in the sand. Large carpets with colorful red and white pillows were set up for the meal. Before eating, Bush was shown several prized falcons, and even took a turn holding one. When the bird moved suddenly, Bush jumped back a bit, but quickly recovered. "You're making him nervous," Bush told the assembled media. "He never had a press conference before."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush insists Iran biggest terror sponsor
By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent 5 minutes ago
President Bush gently nudged authoritarian Arab allies Sunday to satisfy frustrated desires for democracy in the Mideast and saved his harshest criticism for Iran, branding it "the world's leading state-sponsor of terror."
Speaking in this Persian Gulf country, about 150 miles from the shores of Iran, Bush said Tehran threatens nations everywhere and that the United States was "rallying friends around the world to confront this danger before it is too late."
The warning about Iran was much tougher than Bush's admonition about spreading democracy in the Middle East, which had been billed as the central theme of his speech.
In a region of autocratic rulers, Bush did not single out any country for criticism. He spoke about democracy in a deeply undemocratic country, the United Arab Emirates, where an elite of royal rulers makes virtually all the decisions. Large numbers of foreign resident workers have few legal or human rights, including no right to protest working conditions.
"To the people of the Middle East: We hear your cries for justice," Bush said. "We share your desire for a free and prosperous future. And as you struggle to find your voice and make your way in this world, the United States will stand with you."
Usually averse to sightseeing, Bush rode out into the sand dunes to the desert encampment of Abu Dhabi's crown prince, Sheik Mohammed Bin Zayed Al Nahyan. He let Bush hold one of his prize falcons. Later, Bush returned to his suite in the opulent Emirates Palace Hotel, constructed at a cost of more than $3 billion and reputed to be the most expensive hotel ever built.
The next stop scheduled on Bush's eight-day Mideast journey was Saudi Arabia. Its ruler, King Abdullah, has tried to push some reforms on education and women's rights, and there have been limited municipal council elections. But he has been cautious and limited in his efforts, apparently hampered by others in the royal family worried that fast changes could upset the country's conservative clerics and citizens.
In Egypt, the last country Bush planned to visit, the democracy effort has stalled badly. The opposition candidate, Ayman Nour, who ran against longtime President Hosni Mubarak in the first multiparty elections, remains jailed on what many critics view as trumped-up criminal fraud charges.
Apparently referring to Egypt, Bush said, "Unfortunately, amid some steps forward in this region we've also seen some setbacks. You cannot build trust when you hold an election where opposition candidates find themselves harassed or in prison."
Bush cast the broader campaign for democracy in terms of the battle against terrorism, saying there was a desire for freedom from terrorism, oppression and injustice. "We see this desire in the ordinary people across the Middle East, who are sick of violence, who are sick of corruption, sick of empty promises — and who choose a free future whenever they are given a chance."
Bush praised some democratic reforms in Arab countries. He urged leaders to show support for the fragile Iraqi government, open their societies and provide backing, and possible money, to help make an Israeli-Palestinian agreement stick.
"Leaders on both sides still have many tough decisions ahead, and they will need to back these decisions with real commitments," Bush said. "But the time has come for a holy land where Palestinians and Israelis live together in peace."
Bush's blistering words about Iran appeared intended to reassure Arab allies about U.S. readiness to confront Tehran. There have been doubts about Washington's intentions because of a new U.S. intelligence report that said Iran had stopped pursuing nuclear weapons in 2003.
Bush appeared to put the danger posed by Iran on par with that from al-Qaida, which the U.S. national intelligence director, Mike McConnell has said is America's greatest threat.
"One cause of instability is the extremists supported and embodied by the regime that sits in Tehran," Bush said. "Iran is today the world's leading state sponsor of terror.
Bush said Iran funds militant groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad and sends arms to the Taliban in Afghanistan and Shiite extremists in Iraq. "The other major cause of instability is the extremists embodied by al-Qaida and its affiliates," he said.
His words brought a stern response from Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, to end what he called U.S. meddling.
"Mr. Bush has tried unsuccessfully to undermine our relations with the countries of the region. We believe his mission has totally failed. We have making strides in building ties with the region, politically, economically and even in security," Mottaki told the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera television. "It is much better if the Americans had stopped intervening in the region's affair."
Also Sunday, the U.S. focused new attention on the Jan. 6 confrontation between American and Iranian naval vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.
U.S. Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, commander of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, which patrols the Gulf, briefed Bush on the incident before the president left Bahrain on Sunday morning.
Cosgriff told Bush that he took it "deadly seriously" when an Iranian fleet of high-speed boats charged at and threatened to blow up a three-ship U.S. Navy convoy passing near Iranian waters. The Iranian naval forces vanished as the American ship commanders were preparing to open fire.
White House press secretary Dana Perino said that "all the military people remember what happened in the past, such as the USS Cole." Seventeen American sailors were killed in a terrorist attack on the USS Cole in Yemen in October 2000.
___
Associated Press writer Sally Buzbee in Cairo, Egypt, contributed to this report.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush Disowns U.S. Intel, Tells Israelis Iran NIE ‘Doesn’t Reflect My Own Views’
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/13/bush-israelis-nie/
After the recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran was released, Israel publicly challenged the U.S. intelligence consensus that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program. “In our opinion,” Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said, Iran “has apparently continued that program.”
Just days after the NIE was released, Bush quickly announced he would make the first visit to Israel of his presidency to mend differences over Iran.
In private meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert this week, Newsweek reports that President Bush disowned the U.S. intelligence community’s judgments:
But in private conversations with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert last week, the president all but disowned the document, said a senior administration official who accompanied Bush on his six-nation trip to the Mideast. “He told the Israelis that he can’t control what the intelligence community says, but that [the NIE’s] conclusions don’t reflect his own views” about Iran’s nuclear-weapons program, said the official, who would discuss intelligence matters only on the condition of anonymity.
Bush had reportedly briefed Olmert about the Iran NIE days before it was publicly released in late November. The New Yorker’s Seymour Hersh said, “The Israelis were very upset about the report. They think we’re naive, they don’t think we get it right. And so they have a different point of view.”
But after his private meetings with Bush this week, Olmert — asked whether he felt reassured — replied, “I am very happy.”
UPDATE: Speaking in the United Arab Emirates, Bush said the United States and Arab allies must join together to confront the danger of Iran “before it’s too late.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read Kevin MacDonald's 'Thinking about Neoconservatism' article (which is linked near the top of the following URL) to see how 'democracy' has been used as a mask to cover the war for Israel agenda in the Middle East:
Thinking about Neoconservatism:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/04/06/neoconservatism-as-a-jewish-movement.php
Last edited by Alpha on Sun Jan 13, 2008 8:09 pm; edited 4 times in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 4:41 pm Post subject: Bush Fails Again |
| January 12, 2008
Bush Fails Again
by Charley Reese
To understand the failure of the president's trip to the Middle East, which is foreordained and doesn't have to be completed in order to fail, take note of two words that the president will not utter: "occupied territories."
Let's review the situation from the standpoint of international law. The West Bank, Gaza, the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and a smidgen of Lebanon the Israelis still occupy are officially designated as occupied territories. They were seized in war. Jerusalem is officially an international city, so designated by the United Nations partition resolution that created the state of Israel. The Israelis, of course, long ago declared the resolution null and void.
As occupied territories, they fall under the Geneva Conventions. An occupying power is not allowed to take land or to build settlements in occupied territory. It is not allowed to destroy homes, to uproot olive groves, to deport people, and to wall the area off – all of which the Israelis have done and are continuing to do.
This brings us to the equation of negotiations. It is impossible for the Palestinians, whose land is occupied and whose lives are totally controlled by the most powerful military state in the Middle East, to make any concessions. To make a concession, you have to have something. They have nothing. They have no power. They don't control their land, their borders, their access to the sea or the air, the water or even their movements within the territories. Thanks to the American vetoes, they don't even have any recourse in the U.N.
The only party, then, that can make concessions is Israel, and Israel is not making any concessions, since it far prefers land to peace with an enemy that is virtually powerless.
Therefore, if the U.S. refuses to pressure Israel, there will be no peace. President Bush's trip is nothing more than a public-relations ploy to simulate an interest in peace. Bush is, however, unwilling to say or do anything that might actually result in Israeli concessions and therefore in peace. In fact, the main purpose of Bush's visit is to harangue the Arabs about the alleged dangers of Iran. He refuses to talk to the elected representatives of the Palestinians, who are Hamas members.
I see no change in Bush's thinking, if you can call it that, at all, but I do notice that he looks depressed. The last two public appearances I've watched on television show an unhappy man. The old cockiness and the silly smiles seem to have vanished. It could be that slowly the news is trickling into his brain that his administration has been a flop.
In the meantime, the Palestinians continue to suffer, the world continues to ignore their suffering, and the kettle that is the Middle East continues to simmer. It is never wise for either an individual or a country to believe that because it is powerful today it will always be powerful. The Middle East is an open-air museum of the ruins of past conquerors.
It's quite a sad situation for everyone concerned. If I were an Israeli, I'd be concerned about forcing another generation of Palestinians to live in poverty and bitterness. I'd be concerned that another generation of Israeli children is going to have to grow up in a militarized state in the midst of a larger population that hates them. As an American, I'm concerned that cowardly politicians are putting Americans at risk out of fear of a domestic lobby.
Find this article at:
http://www.antiwar.com/reese/?articleid=12196
Last edited by Alpha on Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:59 pm; edited 2 times in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 4:45 pm Post subject: US-Iran stand-off not mere propaganda |
| US-Iran stand-off not mere propaganda
Last Updated: Friday, 11 January 2008, 10:56 GMT
By Paul Reynolds
The admission by the US Navy that Iranian speedboats might not have been
the source of an apparent threat to attack American ships in the Gulf is
a significant move that raises new fears about the chances of unintended
clashes in the region.
It has worrying similarities with the incident in 1988 when, in the same
Strait of Hormuz, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian
airliner, having failed to monitor the radio traffic properly.
The crew of the Vincennes became wrongly convinced that the airliner, an
Airbus with 290 people on board, all of whom died, was an Iranian
fighter jet.
The Iranian government said that the destruction of the plane was done
in full knowledge of what it was.
The US government later suggested that one factor at play on the
Vincennes was a condition called "scenario fulfillment" in which
military personnel are under such pressure that they expect and then
execute a particular scenario, as if in an exercise.
Whether the same expectation was at play in this latest incident is not
clear.
What is clear is that there are grave doubts about who uttered the
warning picked up by the US ships. A deep voice was heard to say: "I am
coming at you. You will explode after a few minutes."
The video released by the US implied that the warning was part of a
series of transmissions to the ships from the Iranian craft.
It turns out that the warning was added onto the video. It was a radio
recording made separately.
Experts say it could have come from another ship in the area or from a
radio transmitter on shore. The channel used by the Iranian vessels to
make their inquiries is an open one.
The Iranians later issued their own video, in which one of their
sailors, in a much higher and quite different voice from the one which
issued the "warning", asks the US ships who they are and what course
they are on.
He gets a dusty reply that the US vessels are in international waters.
The Iranian video does not show their boats buzzing close (200m or so)
to the Americans.
The US said that in any case the Iranian speedboats acted aggressively.
Iran's version is that this was a routine check by its sailors. ==
Official Version of Naval Incident Starts to Unravel
By Gareth Porter, January 10, 2008, Inter Press Service
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40747
WASHINGTON, Jan 10 (IPS) - Despite the official and media portrayal of
the incident in the Strait of Hormuz early Monday morning as a serious
threat to U.S. ships from Iranian speedboats that nearly resulted in a
"battle at sea", new information over the past three days suggests that
the incident did not involve such a threat and that no U.S. commander
was on the verge of firing at the Iranian boats.
The new information that appears to contradict the original version of
the incident includes the revelation that U.S. officials spliced the
audio recording of an alleged Iranian threat onto to a videotape of the
incident. That suggests that the threatening message may not have come
in immediately after the initial warning to Iranian boats from a U.S.
warship, as appears to do on the video.
Also unraveling the story is testimony from a former U.S. naval officer
that non-official chatter is common on the channel used to communicate
with the Iranian boats and testimony from the commander of the U.S. 5th
fleet that the commanding officers of the U.S. warships involved in the
incident never felt the need to warn the Iranians of a possible use of
force against them.
Further undermining the U.S. version of the incident is a video released
by Iran Thursday showing an Iranian naval officer on a small boat
hailing one of three ships.
The Iranian commander is heard to say, "Coalition warship 73, this is
Iranian navy patrol boat." He then requests the "side numbers" of the
U.S. warships. A voice with a U.S. accent replies, "This is coalition
warship 73. I am operating in international waters."
The dramatic version of the incident reported by U.S. news media
throughout Tuesday and Wednesday suggested that Iranian speedboats,
apparently belonging to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard navy, had made
moves to attack three U.S. warships entering the Strait and that the
U.S. commander had been on the verge of firing at them when they broke off.
Typical of the network coverage was a story by ABC's Jonathan Karl
quoting a Pentagon official as saying the Iranian boats "were a
heartbeat from being blown up".
Bush administration officials seized on the incident to advance the
portrayal of Iran as a threat and to strike a more threatening stance
toward Iran. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley declared Wednesday
that the incident "almost involved an exchange of fire between our
forces and Iranian forces". President George W. Bush declared during his
Mideast trip Wednesday that there would be "serious consequences" if
Iran attacked U.S. ships and repeated his assertion that Iran is "a
threat to world peace".
Central to the depiction of the incident as involving a threat to U.S.
warships is a mysterious pair of messages that the sailor who heard them
onboard immediately interpreted as saying, "I am coming at you...", and
"You will explode after a few minutes." But the voice in the audio
clearly said "I am coming to you," and the second message was much less
clear.
Furthermore, as the New York Times noted Thursday, the recording carries
no ambient noise, such as the sounds of a motor, the sea or wind, which
should have been audible if the broadcast had been made from one of the
five small Iranian boats.
A veteran U.S. naval officer who had served as a surface warfare officer
aboard a U.S. Navy destroyer in the Gulf sent a message to the New York
Times on-line column "The Lede", Wednesday pointing out that in the
Persian Gulf, the "bridge- to-bridge" radio channel used to communicate
between ships "is like a bad CB radio" with many people using it for
"hurling racial slurs" and "threats". The former officer wrote that his
"first thought" was that the message "might not have even come from one
of the Iranian craft".
Pentagon officials admitted to the Times that they could not rule out
that the broadcast might have come from another source
The five Iran boats involved were hardly in a position to harm the three
U.S. warships. Although Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman described the
Iranian boats as "highly maneuverable patrol craft" that were "visibly
armed," he failed to note that these are tiny boats carrying only a two-
or three-man crew and that they are normally armed only with machine
guns that could do only surface damage to a U.S. ship.
The only boat that was close enough to be visible to the U.S. ships was
unarmed, as an enlarged photo of the boat from the navy video clearly shows.
The U.S. warships were not concerned about the possibility that the
Iranian boats were armed with heavier weapons capable of doing serious
damage. Asked by a reporter whether any of the vessels had anti-ship
missiles or torpedoes, Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, Commander of the 5th
Fleet, answered that none of them had either of those two weapons....
Last edited by Alpha on Sun Jan 13, 2008 4:52 pm; edited 1 time in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 4:51 pm Post subject: Navy officials say threat raised tension |
| Navy officials say threat raised tension
By MARTIN BENEDYK, Associated Press Writer2 hours, 48 minutes ago
A threatening radio message to U.S. warships may have been a coincidence but was taken seriously because it came at the same time Iranian vessels swarmed the American fleet, the commander of one of the American ships said Sunday.
Cmdr. Jeffery James, of the destroyer USS Hopper, and Capt. David Adler, of the cruiser USS Port Royal, would not say how close the Navy was to firing at the Iranian ships on Jan. 6 near Iranian waters in the Strait of Hormuz. But the Iranians knew what they were doing when they charged the three U.S. vessels in the Persian Gulf, they said.
"This was not a loose bunch of guys," James said. "During this entire time, we were going through our pre-planned responses trying to warn them off before we had to take any lethal action. And fortunately for everyone involved, they turned outbound before we needed to open fire," James said.
The two commanding officers gave a press conference Sunday at the Bahrain headquarters of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, which patrols the Gulf. Tensions between Iran and the U.S. have escalated since the incident, which occurred right before President Bush's arrival in the region.
The U.S. released video and audio showing small Iranian boats swarming around American warships in the waters. In an audio recording, a man threatens in accented English, "I am coming to you. ... You will explode after ... minutes."
Navy officials have not determined the source of the threatening radio call but believe it was related to the actions of the Iranian boats.
"Whether it was coincidental or not, it occurred at exactly the same time that these boats were around us, and they were placing objects in the water so the threat appeared to be building," James said.
Iran has denied that its boats threatened the U.S. vessels, saying the incident was a normal occurrence, and accused Washington of fabricating video and audio it released. Iran's government has released its own video, which appeared to be shot from a small boat bobbing at least 100 yards from the American warships.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini reiterated Sunday that the incident was not unusual and would not affect Iran's policies in the region. He accused the Bush administration of trying to stir up tensions in the Gulf.
"Some political factions in the U.S. are pursuing adventurism to help Bush to spread Iran-phobia in the region," Hosseini said at a weekly press conference. "U.S. officials should apologize to Iran, regional countries and the American people."
___
Nasser Karimi in Tehran, Iran contributed to this report.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another Iranian Act of Aggression :
http://www.antiwar.com/prather/?articleid=12198 | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:01 pm Post subject: Tehran: U.S. spreading 'Iran-phobia' |
| Tehran: U.S. spreading 'Iran-phobia'
U.S. told to apologize for 'pursuing adventurism' over naval confrontation
The Associated Press
updated 3:06 a.m. PT, Sun., Jan. 13, 2008
TEHRAN, Iran - Iran charged Sunday that the United States was trying to spread anti-Iranian sentiment in the Mideast by accusing Iranian boats of threatening U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf.
The U.S. has said an Iranian fleet of high-speed boats zoomed dangerously close to a three-ship U.S. Navy convoy passing near Iranian waters on Jan. 6 in the Strait of Hormuz. The Iranian boats veered away as the American ship commanders were preparing to open fire.
Iran has insisted its boats never threatened the U.S. ships and that the incident was a normal occurrence in the Gulf waters.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini reiterated Sunday that the incident was not unusual and would not affect Iran's policies in the region. He accused the Bush administration of trying to stir up tensions in the Gulf.
"Some political factions in the U.S. are pursuing adventurism to help Bush to spread Iran-phobia in the region," Hosseini said at a weekly press conference. "U.S. officials should apologize to Iran, regional countries and the American people."
Earlier Sunday in Bahrain, U.S. Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, commander of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, which patrols the Gulf, told Bush, who was in Bahrain as part of a Mideast tour, that he took the incident "deadly seriously."
On Friday, the Navy also said one of its ships had fired warning shots at a small Iranian boat in the Strait of Hormuz in December during one of two serious encounters with such craft that month.
But Hosseini on Sunday said: "This was not confirmed by any of the relevant authorities."
© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22632161/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iran agrees to answer nuclear questions
By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer1 hour, 7 minutes ago
Iran's leaders agreed to answer all remaining questions about their country's past nuclear activities within four weeks in talks with the U.N.'s chief nuclear inspector, his spokeswoman said Sunday.
The spokeswoman also said International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei received new information on Iran's "new generation of centrifuges" — a priority as the agency tries to establish how far advanced Iran is in developing the technology, which could be used in a weapons program.
The four-week deadline is meant to wrap up an IAEA probe of past Iranian nuclear programs. A diplomat familiar with the talks said that investigation now was focused on the most delicate aspects of Iran's past atomic work, including programs linked to U.S. suspicions the country conducted experiments linked to nuclear arms.
The probe was originally slated to be completed in December, and the United States and its allies have been chafing at the delay, say diplomats accredited to the IAEA. But they are unlikely to object publicly if the extension allows ElBaradei to reveal details of such secret programs.
In Abu Dhabi on Sunday, President Bush said Iran "defies the United Nations and destabilizes the region by refusing to be open and transparent about its nuclear programs and ambitions."
ElBaradei on Sunday ended a two-day visit to Tehran that included unprecedented meetings with both Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, and President Mahmoud Amhmadinejad.
The diplomat said ElBaradei pressed his case for the need for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment, a key U.N. Security Council demand.
Separately, however, a senior diplomat expressed doubt ElBaradei was able to persuade the Iranians to freeze enrichment and noted Western efforts for additional U.N. sanctions against the Islamic republic would continue unless that condition was met. Both spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly on the issue.
The statement from ElBaradei's spokeswoman, Melissa Fleming, said the Tehran talks included "confidence building measures called for by the Security Council."
The Security Council has demanded Iran suspend enrichment — which can create both nuclear fuel and the fissile core of warheads — as a "confidence building measure." It has additionally urged the government to restore broader inspection rights for the IAEA.
Alluding to the IAEA probe of Tehran's past nuclear activities launched last year, Fleming also said that the talks resulted in agreement that the "work plan should be completed in the next four weeks."
Under the plan, Iran committed itself to answering all lingering questions about its past nuclear activities — including those it has evaded since 2003, when nearly 20 years of clandestine atomic work on the part of Tehran were revealed.
Shortly before ElBaradei's trip, diplomats told the AP that Tehran had ended years of stonewalling and begun providing some information on topics including whether it ever had a military nuclear program and the state of its enrichment technology.
"Iran also provided information on its research and development activities on a new generation of centrifuges," said Fleming's statement.
While IAEA experts have access to Iran's declared enrichment program using outmoded P-1 centrifuges, it has been kept in the dark about the existence of the state of the art P-2 machine.
Iranian officials confirmed the existence of a P-2 research program only last year. As late as November, diplomats told the AP that agency had recently been denied access to a workshop testing and developing the P-2. Large-scale use of P-2s would allow Iran to accelerate its enrichment program, which the government insists is only to create the capability to generate electricity. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:11 am Post subject: Bush to seek Saudi help in maintaining U.S. pressure on Iran |
| Bush to seek Saudi help in maintaining U.S. pressure on Iran
Bush to reaffirm strong ties with Saudi Arabia (Reuters)
By Tabassum Zakaria1 hour, 13 minutes ago
President George W. Bush heads to Saudi Arabia on Monday to encourage active support for Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking by the Arab powerbroker and seek help in maintaining American pressure on Iran.
Bush will spend two nights in the Islamic kingdom, having already visited Kuwait, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. He will go to Egypt before heading back to Washington on Wednesday.
His main message for Gulf Arab allies has been to support peace efforts and isolate Iran to contain its growing influence in the region, which is crucial to world crude oil supplies.
While Gulf Arabs want to curb their large Shi'ite neighbor, they also want to avoid another war on their doorstep.
Analysts say there are growing signs that America's Arab allies prefer to engage Iran, as Saudi Arabia did with its invitation to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the haj. He was the first Iranian president to receive an official invitation to the annual Muslim pilgrimage.
The Bush administration said it had heard a different account of that invitation.
"We are told that Ahmadinejad, as he has done from time to time, invited himself," a senior administration official said.
"So if someone asks to come, the Saudis' view is, it's very difficult for them as the custodian of the two holy mosques, which is the whole point of the haj, for them to say no."
Bush has been sounding a warning about Iran as a threat in the region throughout this trip to the Middle East. In a speech in Abu Dhabi on Sunday he declared Iran a threat to world security and "the world's leading state sponsor of terror."
Before heading to the Gulf trade and tourism hub of Dubai, which has declared a national holiday due to the road closures imposed for his visit, Bush toured an exhibit on MASDAR, a planned renewable energy project in Abu Dhabi.
"I hope my visit shines a spotlight on the Middle East, the opportunities to work constructively with our friends," he said.
ARMS AND PEACE
Bush has also been asking Arab allies to diplomatically and financially support Palestinian leaders involved in peace talks, and to expand relations with Israel.
Saudi Arabia attended a U.S.-sponsored summit in Annapolis, last year aimed at restarting Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts.
But Saudi Arabia has no diplomatic ties with Israel and says "normalization" will only happen with a final peace deal that returns all Arab land occupied by Israel in the 1967 war.
The Bush administration is expected to notify Congress this week about part of an arms package for Saudi Arabia.
"It's a big package that we have offered to the Saudis. It actually gets sort of negotiated between us and the Saudis in pieces, and those pieces then get notified to the Congress," the official said. One element of the arms package will be notified to Congress on Monday, he said.
The administration last year proposed supplying Gulf Arab states with some $20 billion in new weapons, including Joint Direct Attack Munition bomb kits for the Saudis.
The plan had angered Israel's backers in Washington but Israeli security sources said on Sunday the United States would provide the Jewish state better "smart bombs" than those it plans to sell Saudi Arabia under the regional defense plan.
It was unclear what may be discussed on the subject of oil prices when Bush meets King Abdullah, or whether that issue would be left mainly to U.S. Energy Secretary Sam Bodman when he visits Saudi Arabia later this month.
Oil prices near $100 per barrel have nearly doubled since Bush, a former oil man, walked arm in arm with King Abdullah, then the crown prince, at his Texas ranch in April 2005.
Washington rarely makes public criticism of Saudi Arabia over its political and human rights record, but Bush spoke out against a court verdict condemning a gang rape victim to 200 lashes. King Abdullah pardoned the woman who was accused of being with an unrelated man when she was snatched by seven attackers.
(Editing by Charles Dick) | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
