| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:29 pm Post subject: |
| US intel links Iran with nuke bomb bid
By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press WriterThu Feb 14, 10:21 AM ET
The U.S. has recently shared new intelligence with the International Atomic Energy Agency on key aspects of Iran's nuclear program that Washington says shows Tehran was directly engaged in trying to make a bomb, diplomats said Thursday.
One of the diplomats said Washington also gave the IAEA permission to confront Iran with at least some of the evidence in an attempt to pry details out of the Islamic republic, as part of the U.N. nuclear watchdog's attempts to investigate Iran's suspicious nuclear past.
The diplomats suggested that such moves by the U.S. administration would be a reflection of Washington's' drive to pressure Iran into acknowledging that it had focused part of its nuclear efforts toward developing a weapons program.
The U.S. is leading the push for a third set of U.N. sanctions against Iran. Tehran insists its program is intended only to produce energy and has refused U.N. demands that it suspend its uranium enrichment program — technology that can produce both fuel for nuclear reactors and the fissile material for a bomb.
A recent U.S. intelligence assessment that Iran had a clandestine weapons program but stopped working on it four years ago has hurt Washington's attempts to have the U.N. Security Council impose a third set of sanctions.
While the Americans have previously declassified and then forwarded intelligence to the IAEA to help its investigations, they do so on a selective basis.
Following Israel's bombing of a Syrian site late last year, and media reports citing unidentified U.S. officials as saying the target was a nuclear installation, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei turned in vain to the U.S. in asking for details on what was struck, said a diplomat who — like others — spoke on condition of anonymity in exchange for divulging confidential information.
Over the past two years, the U.S. already has shared material on a laptop computer reportedly smuggled out of Iran. In 2005, U.S. intelligence assessed that information as indicating that Tehran had been working on details of nuclear weapons, including missile trajectories and ideal altitudes for exploding warheads.
After declassification, U.S. intelligence also was forwarded on two other issues: the "Green Salt Project" — a plan the U.S. alleges links diverse components of a nuclear weapons program, including uranium enrichment, high explosives testing and a missile re-entry vehicle — and material in Iran's possession showing how to mold uranium metal into warhead form.
Two of the diplomats said the material forwarded to the IAEA over the past two weeks expanded on the previous information from the Americans, but had no additional details.
Iran is already under two sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment, which it started developing during nearly two decades of covert nuclear activity built on illicit purchases and revealed only five years ago.
Since then, IAEA experts have uncovered activities, experiments, and blueprints and materials that point to possible efforts by Iran to create nuclear weapons, even though Tehran insists its nuclear project is peaceful and aimed only at creating a large-scale enrichment facility to make reactor fuel.
Its leaders consistently dismiss allegations that they are interested in enrichment for its other use — creating fissile material suitable for arming warheads.
Instead of heeding Security Council demands to freeze enrichment, Iran has expanded its program. On Wednesday, diplomats told the AP that Iran's new generation of advanced centrifuges have begun processing | |  | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:33 pm Post subject: |
| Lieberman Takes on Iran
Europe has been moving toward a similar accommodational approach to Iran, a nation that has been developing weapons of mass destruction. Though there is little doubt that Iran, unless stopped, will acquire nuclear weapons, NATO is unwilling to aggressively tackle the threat.
Iran already has the ballistic missile capability to strike Europe. And its leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has called Israel a “disgraceful blot” that should be “wiped off the map,” adding menacingly that the Jewish state is “heading toward annihilation.”
Sen. Lieberman told the conference that Iran must be reckoned with "before it is too late." He pleaded with European and U.N. member states to use their economic leverage over Iran to stop its nuclear weapons plans.
"The dangers of a nuclear Iran cannot be denied, diminished, or dismissed. There is no room for complacency, and no excuse for inaction, about this threat," he warned.
Lieberman also clarified press reports suggesting that the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate found that Iran’s nuclear program was not a serious threat.
"The NIE itself expresses only 'moderate' confidence that Iran has not already done so,” Lieberman said, referring to Iran’s program to develop nuclear weapons. “And other respected national intelligence services believe that Iran already has restarted its nuclear weaponization program."
Concerted action today could prevent a worse solution, he suggested.
"Military action to destroy or deter Iran's nuclear arsenal is not an option we seek, but it is also not an option that we can eliminate," he said.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And its leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has called Israel a 'disgraceful blot' that should be 'wiped off the map' adding menacingly that the Jewish state is heading toward annihilation'
General (Ret) Jim David (who is mentioned on the cover of former Republican Congressman Paul Findley's 'They Dare to Speak Out' book about the power/influence of the pro-Israel lobby - AIPAC and similar - on the US political system and media) replied with the following:
I am sure you are aware that the phrase "wiped off the map" was never used or said by Ahmadinejad and only interpreted as such by the Jews and other zionists to build their case against Iran in order to give the United States justification to attack Iran and so that the American people do not question U.S. decision. Israel's main objective is to be the sole possessor of nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Ahmadinejad said that Israel will eventually fall just as the Soviet Union fell after the cold war. He never said that Israel should be wiped off the map (although it would probably be the best thing to ever happen for world peace.)
I worry that McCain will select Lieberman as his running mate. Lieberman just announced yesterday that he will attend the GOP Convention and will be one of the main speakers if asked to do so. We all know that Lieberman has been a big supporter for McCain and the biggest supporter of AIPAC.
Jim
Last edited by Alpha on Sat Feb 16, 2008 9:20 pm; edited 1 time in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:46 am Post subject: |
| The following provides yet another example of why Ron Paul's message needs to be heard by as many Americans as possible before fifth columnist Israel firsters cheerlead for yet another war for Israel in the Middle East with even more Americans to die/get horribly maimed in the process as courageous American Jew Jack Bernstein warned US about in the 1980s (before the Mossad murdered him) in his 'Life of an American Jew in Racist/Marxist Israel' which can be found via a yahoo search as well:
Bush Won't Let Facts Stand in the Way of Regime Change in Iran
By James Harris
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/76699/
Listen to this interview (via the URL above):
James Harris: This is Truthdig. James Harris sitting down with Scott Ritter, former chief weapons inspector in Iraq. And today we're talking about the latest report from the National Intelligence Estimate. The report says that Iran is not, as of mid-July, in the nuclear weapons business. Scott Ritter -- I think, wisely -- told me to look at this report with caution and that this means nothing to the White House, that they [members of the Bush team] are about regime change. Please explain.
Scott Ritter: Well, I think it's important to assess patterns of behavior. When we take a look at the Bush administration and how it has sought to implement its policies of regional transformation in the Middle East, inclusive, these policies include the notion of regime change, removing unpopular regimes, regimes that the United States unilaterally declares incompatible with its vision, removing them from power. This includes Saddam Hussein and the theocracy in Tehran. They have demonstrated a tendency to exaggerate threats in the form of weapons of mass destruction to exploit the ignorance of the American public and the fear that is derived from this ignorance. They did so with Iraq. They made a case for war based upon weapons of mass destruction that they fail to back up with anything other than rhetoric. I can say, as a former weapons inspector who ran the intelligence programs from '91 to '98, that we had fundamentally disarmed Iraq, so for the president to say that there's this new weapons capability, he would have to demonstrate some new information, and he failed to do so. And that's why I said, unless he provides this new data, that there isn't the WMD threat that he said. The same thing can be said about Iran.
Harris: Why should we be cautious about what President Bush is telling us right now?
Ritter: Here's a president who has said Iran is a threat, a threat in the form of a nuclear weapons program. But for some time now I have been saying, "Where's the beef, Mr. President? ... "
Harris: Hmm.
Ritter: " ... I hear the rhetoric, but your pattern of behavior leads me to believe that you might be exaggerating the threat, fabricating the threat, misrepresenting data to achieve your policy objective of regime change, trying to exploit the ignorance of the American public and the fear derived from this ignorance." Now we have a National Intelligence Estimate that is released that says, "Time out. There hasn't been a nuclear weapons program in Iran since 2003." Now I need to make a point here: I continue to say that there's never been a nuclear weapons program in Iran. And the National Intelligence Estimate doesn't provide any evidence to sustain its assertion that there was a nuclear program. But be that as it may, they're saying that the concept of Iran today pursuing nuclear weapons is a fallacy. There's no data to promote this. Now, if we lived in world where government functioned the way it's supposed to when it comes to policy -- that is, you get your intelligence, you look at it, you examine it, you assess it, and you say, "OK, how do we now interact with the target, the nation, in this case, Iran?" -- that's normal. That's cause-and-effect relationship.
Harris: Sure.
Ritter: But what we have is, the administration has already made up its mind about what it wants to do with Iran and had been fabricating a case based upon a nuclear weapons program that the U.S. intelligence community now says doesn't exist today. Do you think there will be a change in policy? And the answer, of course, is no, because they've got the cart before the horse. They put the policy out in front. Inconveniently, the intelligence community didn't back them on the nuclear weapons issue.
Harris: But you say Iran's status as a terrorist organization also plays into this. How so?
Ritter: Not only does the Bush administration continue to say that Iran is a terrorist state, that it supports terrorists who were directly or indirectly involved in the events of Sept. 11, 2001. The United States Senate has passed a resolution that says the same thing and certifies the Iranian Revolutionary Guard command is a terrorist organization. So anybody who thinks for a second this National Intelligence Estimate somehow retards the ability of the Bush administration to engage in military action against Iran, you're sadly mistaken. The Bush administration's policy has been made. This estimate was not used to make that policy, and as you yourself have reflected, the president's not going to let this estimate get in the way of his continuing to articulate Iran as a threat.
Harris: Well, Scott, if you're right, that's a high crime. That's wanton disregard for American wishes, disregard for any of the national intelligence agencies that supposedly cover our back.
Ritter: It's wanton disregard for everything we stand for as a nation. We elect representatives to government to do our bidding. We expect them to operate within a framework of due process set forth by the rule of law. We might call this the Constitution or laws derived from the Constitution. We speak of checks and balances where we have three separate but equal branches of government, and when it comes to foreign policy and national security policy, really, two. The judiciary takes a step aside and it becomes the executive and the legislative branch. And there's a system, a bureaucratic system there -- the State Department, the CIA, the Defense Department -- that is supposed to weigh in on these issues. And like I said, you want to gather the facts, examine the reality, and then make the policy. What we have here is an administration that, ideologically, has committed itself to certain policy actions divorced from what we'll call reality, early on in the Bush administration.
Harris: Hmm.
Ritter: We heard people speak of a new reality, that the Bush administration can make its own reality. I'm not joking. Paul O'Neill, former secretary of the Treasury, who sat in Cabinet meetings where this was said. And so we now take a look at a situation where the president and his administration are continuing to march forward on a policy direction, regardless of what the data says. Am I jaded? No. I'm alarmed, as much as you are, but I think it's imperative that we address this responsibly by first realistically acknowledging what's occurring. There's too many pundits out there today who are raising the flag of victory, saying, "Aha! Because of this NIE, this National Intelligence Estimate, war's off the table. We don't have to worry about it. The Bush plan has been undermined." It most certainly hasn't, because the Bush administration has never shown a tendency to respect the normal system of government. This estimate won't have an impact at all.
Harris: Is it likely that George Bush will look at this report, throw it in the garbage and continue on, business as usual? The business, in this case: engage hostilely with Iran.
Ritter: The answer is yes. He is engaging hostilely with Iran. Remember: I've been saying for some time now that the Bush administration is taking the nuclear issue off the front burner. The CIA's estimate follows on the heels of a finding by the International Atomic Energy Agency back in September that said the same thing: There's no evidence of a nuclear weapons program. And this was one of their final analyses. They've been saying this for some time. The Bush administration has been, for many months now, having a hard time selling Iran's nuclear threat as a causa bella. This is why they've shifted to terror and terrorism. The Bush administration is going to use the gift it was given by the U.S. Senate, this target list of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard command to serve as the cornerstone of its target list when it comes to launching a limited military operation against Iran that'll probably take place some time in the spring. This is the plan, and the NIE -- I don't think -- has changed this one iota. Now, it could. Let's say Congress woke up all of a sudden. Let's say Congress said, "Oh my goodness, this president's been pulling our chain, been lying to us, hyping this thing up. There's no threat," and Congress intervenes in a way that it's refused to do so to date, then maybe, maybe this war could be stopped. But if Congress continues to turn a blind eye or worse, as in the case of the Senate resolution, to facilitate Bush's hyping of Iran as a threat, I think war is inevitable.
Harris: They've been asleep for five years now. Why would they wake up now? Why ...
Ritter: [Unintelligible.]
Harris: Yeah. Hillary Clinton voted "yes." She's a U.S. senator, she's running for president, and she said, "Yes, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is indeed a terrorist organization." Does this further the idea that "the Democrats and the Republicans -- you know what? -- they're all in bed together"?
Ritter: It furthers the notion that front-runners are all in it together. The bottom line is, Hillary is getting money from the same sources that fund Giuliani. And if you take a look at their foreign policies, they're pretty much one and the same. They're very aggressive foreign policies. They're based upon the premise of a unitary executive, that the president has the right to pre-emptively launch military strikes against threats that emerge, and maybe do so in a manner which negates Congress. There's no difference between Hillary and George W. Bush or Rudy Giuliani when it comes to issues of this sort. There's other Democrats out there who of course take a more nuanced, I would say responsible, point of view. Bill Richardson, governor of New Mexico, an outstanding candidate. But he's not getting money from the same sources that are underwriting Hillary and Giuliani and others.
Harris: Scott, tell me what you think our president should be all about these days.
Ritter: The president should govern in accordance with the Constitution. What we have here is a situation that has existed for some time now where successive presidential administrations, frustrated by the inadequacies of democracy, so to speak -- .
Harris: [Laughs.]
Ritter: It's an ugly process. It takes time. It's not convenient. And presidents want to wield their executive authority. And so, especially in time of war, they've created this concept -- and it's totally at odds with the Constitution -- of the unitary executive where the president has unilateral powers in times of war. Somebody like Ron Paul, I think, somebody who knows the Constitution, takes a look at this notion of unitary executive authority and says, "Humbug. That's ridiculous." And I agree with him. I think it's imperative that whoever becomes president understands that there are constitutional restrictions on what the president can and can't do. I also think it's imperative that Congress start reading the Constitution and flexing its constitutional muscles. That there is a role for Congress to play. It's called oversight. And that Congress can retard irresponsible policy, that the president doesn't get a blank check when it comes to foreign policy and national security policy. But, as you mentioned, we don't have a Congress that seems to be enlightened in this fashion, and outside of a Ron Paul we don't have too many people who have announced themselves as candidates for the president who will publicly commit to reversing this trend towards a unitary executive.
Harris: Before we move on, what are you optimistic about as we close the year and some of us being to make resolutions? Having told us before, there are no weapons of mass destruction, having been vociferous about the fact that the Bush administration is not doing their job, what keeps you optimistic in all of this? How do you not become jaded? How do you not become disillusioned?
Ritter: I'm a student of history. I allow myself to go back and examine the history of the United States, and I recognize that throughout our history our nation has been faced with serious problems, and yet we overcame these problems. It wasn't pretty, and it didn't happen overnight, but I'm a firm believer in the resiliency of the American people and our system of government because it's founded in the Constitution. And as long as we respect that Constitution and abide by that Constitution, I'm comfortable with the fact that we will recover. It's not going to happen overnight. It won't happen in the next decade. This invasion of Iraq has set in motion events that are going to take decades to cure. And so I'm not optimistic about 2008, 2009, 2010; I'm optimistic about 2020, that America will heal itself. But we're not going to heal ourselves without a fight. That doesn't mean that I can just sit back and throw my feet up and say, "I'll just wait until the time passes." No. We'll heal ourselves because we will wake up collectively. Congress will reawaken. The presidency will be brought in line with the Constitution, but not without a fight. And so 2008 is going to be a fight, 2009 is going to be a fight. We have to fight, because if we don't, then I have no confidence whatsoever in America healing itself.
Harris: Tell me a little about your dig. You're leading a dig on Truthdig, Truthdig.com. And it's called "Calling Out Idiot America." Can you share with us some of what you're saying? Your thesis, if you will?
Ritter: That was the first piece I wrote. I was approached by Mr. Scheer [Robert Scheer, Truthdig editor] and Ms. Kaufman [Zuade Kaufman, Truthdig publisher] to write for Truthdig. I thought probably the best thing to do is to set the tone of how I was going to approach this, which wasn't going to be a kinder, gentler dig; it was going to be an in-your-face dig, but not one that was irresponsible. I chose, right off the bat, the issue of Iraq. I say we have a responsibility to the soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who are over there and a responsibility to our government to be engaged on Iraq. But, sadly, most Americans were ill equipped. I was driving down -- I had just talked to the publishers and the editors of Truthdig and I was driving down from L.A. to San Diego, formulating this concept of -- how do I explain Shia, Kurds and Sunni to people? And I was listening to the radio and the Green Day song came on, "Calling Out to Idiot America." I said, "That's a great title. That's pretty much what I'm trying to do." With all due respect to the American people, we're 300 million people, technologically advanced, but we're probably the most ignorant people in the world ...
Harris: How do you mean? How do you mean?
Ritter: ... so I have no qualms about calling Americans idiots when it comes to issues like Iraq, Iran and other areas around the world that somehow in our nationalistic ... we thump ourselves on the chest and say we have a right to intervene, but when you ask people to talk about the reality of that country, we know nothing about it, so we're basically sticking our nose in an area that we're ignorant of.
Harris: Mm-hmm. How do we cure that? Because I think that's the main reason we can't make change. At least that's one speculation: that we are thousands of miles away from where the action is going down. We're disconnected. We're over here living our lives, we're doing our own thing and there's a war going on. Maybe that's why we aren't up in arms collectively.
Ritter: It's a huge part of the problem, the complacency of a society that has been dumbed down by the narcotic of consumerism. If you just think about it, we wrapped ourselves in this cocoon of comfort and so long as the powers that be keep us waddling down a relative path of prosperity, we don't want to rock the boat. But the fact is, we must empower ourselves with knowledge and information. That's why I'm grateful to Truthdig for giving me a chance to write, because I view it as an outstanding forum for informing people and for having people empowered with knowledge and information so that we make informed decisions. We go back. We talk about our system of government. It doesn't work if we, the people, are divorced. And if you accept, as I do, that the Constitution of the United States is the foundation of our government, that preamble says that we, the people of the United States of America, we shouldn't take that lightly. The Supreme Court has said, because of that preamble, the Constitution belongs to us; we are the defenders of the Constitution. And so it's imperative that we, the people, get empowered and we empower ourselves through the acquisition of knowledge and information and then assert ourselves onto a system of government. But it's going to require people to stand up and shake off this apathy, as I said, the narcotic of consumerism brings the bear. I love Christmas. I help my Jewish friends celebrate Hanukkah. I think there's nothing wrong with this time period, but we also need to reflect on how far we've shifted away from a holiday that celebrates human beings coming together and instead become involved in a holiday that's about conspicuous spending.
Harris: Yeah.
Ritter: We need to recognize that there's an enemy out there. And if we look in the mirror long enough, we'll realize that the enemy is us.
Harris: I think you make a good point. Some of my busy friends would say, "You know what? What time do I have to make a difference? Is there anything the average Joe can do to help affect change? Besides writing the senator and writing the congressman, what else can you do?
Ritter: The first thing is to recognize that there's a need. That's step one. You have to say, "There is a need for change." The next thing, after that, is to allocate time. I keep hearing people say, "I don't have time." Last night was Monday Night Football. Heckuva game, by the way. I sat in a bar with my friends. These are good guys; they're not stupid. But they keep telling me over and over again, "That foreign policy stuff is too complicated, man. How do you expect us to get our fingers wrapped around it? You've been living this for your life, but we don't do this. We have jobs and everything." And I said, "That's fair enough." But then we're watching the game, and they start criticizing play calls. They say, "You know, if they'd given the ball to the fullback on this play, statistically speaking on second down through the guard and tackle off the right side, he's going to gain 3.5 yards." I said, "How do you know that?" They go, "Oh, we studied the stats." I'll tell you what: If you've got enough time to study sports stats so that you know this kind of information, you can make that kind of analysis, you've got enough time to study American foreign policy and have an informed opinion about places where Americans are dying.
Harris: You would agree, then, that the more informed, and the more masses, the more people that are informed, the better off we are. We benefit from that, don't we?
Ritter: It's the only way we can be. It's not one of these things that we would say is an "elective." We don't get to opt out of this one. If you call yourself an American citizen, you have to be informed. It's a responsibility of citizenship. It's not something you can opt into or opt out of. If you opt out of it, turn in your passport and leave my country. If you want to be a citizen in America, you've got to opt in and say: "Hey! I'm here. I count. I'm relevant, and I'm going to be informed."
Harris: I think it is the job of every American to know something about foreign policy and something about government and be able to talk intelligently about these subjects, because that only means a better public. So I agree with you there. But we are preaching that Americans need to participate, yet the chief American is not participating. He's not doing the things that we're preaching Americans should do. So then, how, at this time, can we mount an effort to overcome the backward thinking that's coming out of the White House?
Ritter: One of the reasons why the executive headed down the path towards unilateral executive power is that they got frustrated with the slow pace of democracy. I think the first thing we have to recognize is that the American people can't allow themselves to be frustrated by the slow process of democracy. The other thing they have to recognize is that the rule of law means nothing unless the law is enforced. And we have a president who is showing a wanton disregard for the rule of law. There are constitutional remedies for executives who behave in this manner. It's called impeachment. And I'm a big fan of the American public letting Congress know that impeachment is on the table. It's Congress' job, not to impeach, per se, but to investigate. And we have clear examples in the case of Iraq of the potential of wrongdoing that Congress has yet to investigate in a satisfactory manner. And now we're taking a look at Iran. If we speak of holding the president to account for his actions, how about starting to hold Congress accountable for their failure to act in accordance with the will of the people? And what I'm talking about is a Nancy Pelosi and a Harry Reed, these "great" Democrats. And I say "great" in quotations because I don't think they're great at all. These Democrats who were elected to office by the will of the people and who have said that they are going to do nothing to tie the hands of this president when it comes to issues such as Iran and Iraq. And the last thing they're going to do is defend the Constitution by holding the president accountable for his failure to abide by the Constitution. It's time we started holding these people accountable as well.
Harris: Certainly refreshing to hear that you still maintain optimism and that you still have belief.
Ritter: I have belief in the American people. The government, as long as it's reflective of the will of the people within the framework of the Constitution, I'll continuously eye it in a suspicious fashion. But the government we have in play today? No, I don't have any faith in it. It needs to be changed, and this is our collective responsibility to elect people to office who will do our bidding in accordance with the Constitution and who will be held accountable to us. Too many times we vote, but then that's it. We don't do the second half of the representative democracy equation, which is to hold them to account.
Harris: Yeah. If we keep calling the people, maybe they will answer one day. I believe they have to answer.
Ritter: I agree.
Harris: Scott Ritter, the former chief weapons inspector in Iraq, is also the author of "Iraq Confidential" and the first man I heard say there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Scott Ritter, thank you for joining us today on Truthdig.
Ritter: Thank you for having me.
Harris: All right then. For Scott Ritter, this is James Harris, and this is Truthdig.
James Harris is a radio producer and filmmaker based in San Francisco.
© 2008 Truthdig All rights reserved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B-2s being fitted for Bunker Buster Bomb - delivery to Iran:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2007/07/26/war-with-iran-real-risk-according-to-former-cia-operative-page-7.php
Last edited by Alpha on Sat Feb 16, 2008 11:44 pm; edited 5 times in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:14 am Post subject: Ron Paul Censored on Youtube |
| Even Michael Scheuer (who used to head up the Bin Laden unit for the CIA) basically endorsed Ron Paul in the following youtube video (of course the fifth columnist Israel first crowd doesn't like Ron Paul!):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAehMPVFFE0
Michael Scheuer (former head of CIA Bin Laden unit) was on Bill Maher. He said:
" Israel is not worth an American life or an American dollar." and
"Our unqualified support of Israel has brought the US a great deal of pain and increasingly dead Americans, fighting wars that are not ours to fight." and
" America is fighting a war that does not exist -- our politicians have lied to us-it is not about hating freedom, womens' rights etc.---it is about our policies in the Middle East ."
Ron Paul Censored on Youtube:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/the-americas/2008/02/16/ron-paul-my-guy-page-151.php | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 12:05 am Post subject: |
| Email exchange with Donald Jones who is a retired consultant to the CIA, Janes and others:
You are not considering the Israel factor for the coming war with Iran.. Israel could get it started by initiating the attack on Iran's nuclear facility at Bushehr before it becomes operational soon knowing that Iran would more than likely retaliate and that the US would be there to 'defend' Israel as Bush and the AIPAC hacked Congress have already made known. In addition, Israel could even go back into Lebanon in accordance with the rest of the 'A Clean Break' agenda to engage Hezbollah drawing Syria and Iran into it as well in the process.. The recent assassination of the Hezbollah operative in Syria might even have been in accordance with such:
"Dying for a Second Round." Israel Said to Plan Attack on Lebanon:
http://www.counterpunch.org/nairn02202008.html
http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/156988
Ashkenazi warns Israel may face conflict in near future:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3509269,00.html
look at how 50,000 Hezbollah operatives are supposedly gathering at the Israel/Lebanon border according to the following article:
50,000 Hezbollah men said deployed along border with Israel:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/954644.html
Just saw the following post on the WWE message board in the UK:
Lebanon will not be Israeli-Americanized
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2008/02/17/nasrallah-lebanon-will-not-be-isralized-or-americanized.php
Army intervenes in Beirut clashes
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7249094.stm
Read about the 'A Clean Break' (as discussed by Bamford on pages 261-269/321 of his 'A Pretext for War' book by scrolling down to such at the following URL):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/02/11/a-clean-break-from-james-bamford-s-a-pretext-for-war.php
Take a look what is in the Israeli military mindset via the following article:
http://www.ilanpappe.org/Articles/What%20Does%20Israel%20Want.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: War with both Lebanon and Syria -- with the hope of getting Iran involved (see top of http://neoconzionistthreat.blogspot.com as well)
Hezbollah and the 'Unknown Knowns'
http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?at_code=433564
President Bush's second term in office will expire in one year. For the president who has unconditionally rubber-stamped Israeli policies, one year is not enough to set long-term goals, but it's enough to ignite chaos.
The assassination of a high-profile person like Mugniyah was not merely an opportunity to boast over a classic Mossad operation. It was a major ingredient in a larger scheme, the end result of which may be war with both Lebanon and Syria -- with the hope of getting Iran involved.
Posted Feb 24, 2008 05:10 PM PST
Category: MIDDLE EAST
The big question which Israeli policy makers and its military strategists need to be asking is, relative to how Russia would respond to an attack on Iran, do they really feel that potentially lucky, even with US involvement?
Russian officials have stated consistently that any attack on Iran will be perceived as an attack against Russia.
And what sane person or government really wants to go to war with Russia?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I am willing to bet that the assassination was carried out by the Mossad (with perhaps the assistance of some paid off Syrians) to provoke this kind of possible reaction which would be right in accordance with the rest of the 'A Clean Break':
VIDEO: A Clean Break and A Pretext for War, read James Bamford (Ron Paul mentioned):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNN9cMvnHdc
http://neoconzionistthreat.blogspot.com/2008/02/clean-break.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last update - 00:18 23/02/2008
Nasrallah: We're readying for war with Israel within months
By Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondent
Tags: Israel, Hezbollah
Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said Friday that operatives within Lebanon are preparing for a new war with Israel in coming months.
Nasrallah, who made a speech in honor of the "Islamic Resistance Week," maintained that activists from his organization are ready for battle against the Israel Defense Forces and will fight the IDF soldiers "in every wadi" in ways they haven't fought in the past.
The leader of the Lebanon-based guerilla group spoke at a rally in front of thousands who came to honor Imad Mughniyah, Hezbollah's deputy secretary general, who was killed in a car bombing in Damascus on February 12. Nasrallah also spoke about the 1992 targeted killing of his predecessor, Abbas Moussawi.
Advertisement
"No one can protect the entire Israeli home front from our missiles," he said. "If they think of entering the south, to any valley, any hill, I swear you [Israelis] will carry your tanks and soldiers and your entire army will collapse under the feet of Imad Mughniyah," Nasrallah said
"I swear to you Haj Imad, your blood will not go to waste," Nasrallah said.
"We will defend ourselves the way we choose, at the time we choose, in the place we choose... With our will and bravery we will defend ourselves and our blood," he proclaimed.
At time of his death, Mughniyah was the commander of Hezbollah's guerrilla army. He had been on the United States' most wanted list and was hunted by Israeli intelligence for two decades for his role in a string of kidnappings, hijackings and attacks against Western and Israeli targets that killed hundreds in the 1980s and early 1990s. Though many accused Israel of the assassination, Israel denies any involvement.
"Destroying Israel is an inevitable outcome, a historic law, a divine doctrine," Nasrallah said. "When Israel won't have an army it won't survive, and that's what I said about Mughniyah's blood leading to the elimination of Israel."
He maintained that Hezbollah is waging an "open war" with Israel, emphasizing that "the war is open since 1948, before I was born."
Nasrallah said that Syria is responsible for investigating Mughniyah's assasination, and updating the Shiite organization with its findings.
He maintained that the investigation strengthened his view that Israel stood behind the assassination, praising Mughniyah's involvement in the kidnapping of Israeli businessman Elhanan Tennenbaum and forcing Israel to leave Lebanon in the year 2000.
Israel flights taking extra precautions due to Hezbollah hijacking threats
Israel is requiring that passengers on all incoming flights be confined to their seats in the half-hour before landing as part of heightened precautions against hijacking, aviation security sources said on Friday.
They said the Transport Ministry order, issued to local and foreign airlines on Wednesday, cited threats by Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas to avenge the February 12 assassination of their operations chief by waging "open war" against Israel.
"Our new policy is that planes lock their flight-deck doors and activate the 'please fasten seat belts' signs when 290 kilometers away from Israel," one Israeli security source said.
"It's a precaution against hijackers storming the cockpit in the final approach, given the current terrorist threat level," the source said, adding that previously it was up to the airlines to decide when to ask passengers to remain seated.
The Transport Ministry had no immediate comment.
The new Israeli aviation security standards may remain in force even if Hezbollah's threats of reprisals are not being borne out and the recent alert level is lowered, sources said.
Israel last year began requiring that all pilots who fly to its airports use the Security Code System (SCS), a local invention designed to ensure any plane commandeered for an al Qaida-style ramming attack is spotted and intercepted in time.
On most flights, which approach Israel from the west, pilots equipped with the SCS must enter a personalized, technologically secured code when 290 kilometers out, so that air traffic controllers in Tel Aviv know the cockpit is in the right hands.
Aviation experts have suggested that hijackers could wait for SCS compliance to have been established before striking. Keeping passengers seated until landing would help diminish such a threat, an Israeli security source said.
"The new regulations are definitely linked to our introduction of the SCS," the source said.
Since the al Qaida attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States has instituted mandatory pre-landing seating regulations for flights to some of its airports. There are also U.S. rules against incoming passengers congregating in plane aisles.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 5:50 PM
Subject: Israel: Bracing for an Attack and Hezbollah's New Leader
Strategic Forecasting, Inc.
---------------------------
ISRAEL: BRACING FOR AN ATTACK AND HEZBOLLAH'S NEW LEADER
Summary
Hezbollah has named a replacement for its slain leader, Imad Mughniyah,
Stratfor has learned. The new commander, Hajj Talal Hamiyye, was
Mughniyah's deputy and has experience with Hezbollah's Latin American
operations. Word of the new leader comes as Israel reportedly has
tightened aviation security out of fear of a possible Hezbollah
hijacking in retaliation for the Mughniyah killing. Hezbollah's response
is more likely to come farther afield, however.
Analysis
Hezbollah has appointed Hajj Talal Hamiyye to replace slain top
commander Imad Mughniyah, Stratfor has learned. Separately, Israel has
tightened aviation security. Hamiyye reportedly has been involved in
Hezbollah operations in Latin America and was deputy to Mughniyah, who
was assassinated Feb. 12 in Damascus, Syria.
Israel is bracing itself for a retaliatory strike by Hezbollah following
the Mughniyah killing, with speculation spreading about the size,
location and style of the impending attack. Israel's Ynet news has
reported that fears of a Hezbollah hijacking have prompted the Israeli
Transportation Ministry to order all airlines serving Israel to tighten
their security measures by instructing pilots to seal the cockpits and
prevent passengers from leaving their seats 30 minutes prior to landing.
El Al Israel Airlines has the most stringent security program in the
industry, making foreign carriers flying in and out of Tel Aviv more
likely targets for hijacking. The 30-minute rule indicates that Israel
might be more concerned about a 9/11- type scenario than an actual
hijacking aimed at taking hostages.
Hezbollah is no stranger to airline hijackings, as the June 1985
hijacking of TWA Flight 847 from Athens to Rome -- among others --
demonstrated. That said, the cost of such a hijacking could be too high
for Hezbollah and its foreign sponsors at this point. Hijacking for
hostages is an overt action that would virtually guarantee retaliation,
even if Hezbollah were to act under another name, such as the ever-so
nebulous Organization of the Oppressed on Earth, which has been credited
with the 1985 hijacking.
Israel has made significant strides in reorganizing and preparing its
military since the 2006 summer conflict with Hezbollah, and neither the
Hezbollah leadership nor its backers in Tehran and Damascus can be
assured that such a public operation would not end up giving Israel the
justification to retaliate with full force. Syria is trying to hide its
embarrassment over the June 2006 Israeli airstrike and the Mughniyah
assassination, and it is not looking for a fight with the Israelis that
it cannot win. Hezbollah knows the next military confrontation with
Israel will not be like the last one, and it cannot afford to have its
infrastructure uprooted in Lebanon by Israeli forces. Meanwhile, the
Iranians are involved in extremely complex negotiations with the United
States over Iraq, and they probably are not willing to rock the boat too
much in the region for fear of sinking a potential deal.
Instead of an airline hijacking, Stratfor believes Hezbollah will
retaliate in a more covert and innovative fashion by using its overseas
networks, as it did in the 1994 attacks against Jewish targets in Buenos
Aires, Argentina, and London. And with Mughniyah's successor having
worked in the organization's Latin America operations, the potential for
such an operation to take place in Latin America -- where Hezbollah has
an extensive intelligence network -- seems greater.
Copyright 2008 Strategic Forecasting, Inc.
From: "Donald Jones"
Subject: RE: Bush Won't Let Facts Stand in the Way of Regime Change in Iran
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 19:18:44 -0500
Bunker busters are fine if you hit the bunker. If you don’t they are irrelevant. They just make big holes and fill up with water. Nobody knows where the nuclear facilities are because nobody knows how the tunnels run deep under ground. What the CIA/NRO is seeing is what the Iranians want them to see. If the USAF attacks it will do so all by itself. If the Iranians attack the US army and the USAF does not respond adequately the army is going to be beyond pissed off. I think 300 top generals and Powell are meeting at the Army-Navy Country Club in Arlington and talking things over. I suspect Bush has worn out his welcome with the generals thanks to Wolfowitz and Perle. I think an Iranian attack in Iraq right now would wipe out the 160,000 soldiers we have there and the USAF wouldn’t do a thing to stop it. The Iranians have supersonic anti-ship missiles and could sink our carrier and cruiser forces in minutes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 6:56 PM
To: Donald Jones
Subject: RE: Bush Won't Let Facts Stand in the Way of Regime Change in Iran
Donald Jones wrote:
Colin Powell said we are not going to war with anyone. He is speaking for the generals. If Bush pushes it, he could get a military coup. He is pushing for a military catastrophe that the military won’t tolerate. He likes to blame the generals for disasters that he gets them into. They don’t like that. The generals detest Bush’s LZNP pals like Wolfowitz and Perle.
Don,
I have heard similar from a very valued contact/friend in D.C. in that Gates and Fallon will more than likely resign if the attack on Iran order were to be given. Keep in mind though that even Colin Powell has conveyed (for Washington Post editor Karen DeYoung's bio book about him) that the 'JINSA crowd' was/is in control of the Pentagon (via JINSA/PNAC/AEI associated Dick Cheney of course - see http://tinyurl.com/2b6p5k ) and the Air Force would more than likely carry out any order to strike Iran when it comes down from Cheney via Bush.
I was at 'meet and greet' with Senator Gravel in Los Angeles recently as he also mentioned that the Air Force (see http://tinyurl.com/2a6md6 ) is eager to carry out the mission (especially after the B-2s are finished having their bomb brackets modified in Palmdale to enable them to carry the new 30,000 pound bunker busters which are obviously intended for the Iranian nuclear facilities as they could easily be launched from Diego Garcia where their facilities are already being upgraded - see the following URL):
B-2s being fitted for Bunker Buster Bomb - delivery to Iran :
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2007/07/26/war-with-iran-real-risk-according-to-former-cia-operative-page-7.php
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 4:48 AM
Subject: Bush Won't Let Facts Stand in the Way of Regime Change in Iran
Bush Won't Let Facts Stand in the Way of Regime Change in Iran
http://tinyurl.com/yqqkoq
Donald Jones wrote:
If the USAF hits Iran, Iran will hit the US army in Iraq with 50,000 commandos plus 60,000 Iraqi Shiites. The army knows that and does not like it. The army is not going to invade Iran. The USAF can’t locate the nuclear targets. Iran has some very deadly weapons thanks to Russia. It can deploy 6,000,000 troops. The US couldn’t deploy more than 250,000 and that would take six months to do it. So, no wars with Iran. The next war may be between Powell, the generals, and the LZNP goons led by Bush.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 6:25 PM
Subject: RE: Bush Won't Let Facts Stand in the Way of Regime Change in Iran
Secret U.S. Air Force team planning Iranian strike (for Israel), led by Jews:
http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/3717
Exactly right, Don... Look at what General (Ret) Jim David has to say via the following URL (he is a very valued friend who is mentioned on the cover of Paul Findley's 'They Dare to Speak Out' book which is shown in the margin of http://tinyurl.com/26jf4d ):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2008/02/14/war-with-iran-real-risk-according-to-former-cia-operative-page-61.php
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Donald Jones
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 4:30 PM
Subject: RE: Bush Won't Let Facts Stand in the Way of Regime Change in Iran
Iran is not a terrorist nation to the Muslims. It is a terrorist nation to Israel and Bush. Terrorists to Israel are freedom fighters for Arabs. There are two points of view here. People need to keep their terminology straight. The term terrorist was coined by the Israelis to demonize the Palestinians. The Israelis were the ones who introduced terror into the Middle East, not the Palestinians.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush Won't Let Facts Stand in the Way of Regime Change in Iran
By James Harris
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/76699/
Last edited by Alpha on Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:17 pm; edited 10 times in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 12:54 am Post subject: |
| Iran-backed groups using secret arms stores: U.S. (Reuters)
By Mohammed AbbasSun Feb 17, 1:40 PM ET
The U.S. military said on Sunday it had evidence Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias in Iraq were increasingly using secret weapons stores to attack U.S. and Iraqi forces.
The accusation comes days after Tehran postponed talks with the United States on improving security in Iraq for "technical reasons," a move that prompted rebukes from U.S. officials.
"In just the past week, Iraqi and coalition forces captured 212 weapons caches across Iraq, two of those inside Baghdad, (which have) growing links to Iranian-backed special groups," military spokesman Real Admiral Gregory Smith told reporters.
The military uses the term "special groups" to describe rogue elements in the Mehdi Army militia of Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. It says these militants get weapons, funding and training from neighboring Iran.
Smith was speaking at a news conference in which he lauded recent security gains in Iraq, adding that on some days attacks had dropped to below 40 a day, the lowest level since 2004.
Highlighting the fragility of the gains, a female suicide bomber killed at least three people in central Baghdad, police said. The U.S. military said only the bomber was killed.
Two U.S. soldiers were also killed by insurgents in Diyala province northeast of Baghdad, the military said.
Washington, at loggerheads with Shi'ite Iran over its nuclear plans, accuses Tehran of destabilizing Iraq by arming Shi'ite groups. Iran denies the accusations and blames the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 for the violence.
Smith said there was no evidence of increased arms shipments to Iraq from Iran, but added that Iranian-backed groups were increasingly using secret stores of weapons to launch attacks.
"What we're seeing is an increase in the use of weapons by Iranian-backed special groups," he said, adding the number of weapons caches found in January was the largest in a year.
BITTER ENEMIES
The U.S.-Iranian security talks are one of the few forums in which officials from the two bitter foes have direct contact. Diplomatic ties have been frozen for almost three decades.
Iran's Foreign Ministry said technical reasons were behind the delay in talks between Iranian and U.S. officials in Baghdad, but did not elaborate. Tehran on Thursday postponed what would have been a fourth round of discussions.
David Satterfield, the U.S. State Department's Iraq coordinator, said on Friday Iran was "intent on continuing to promote violence within Iraq."
Violence has fallen 60 percent across Iraq since 30,000 additional U.S. troops became fully deployed in June.
Vital to better security has been a decision by Sunni Arab tribal leaders to turn against Sunni Islamist al Qaeda, and form groups to drive them out.
The U.S.-backed groups, called concerned local citizens (CLCs) by the military, have 80,000 men across Iraq. They man checkpoints and provide intelligence on militant hideouts.
But cracks have appeared in ties with U.S. and Iraqi forces.
One CLC group said it was suspending its activities after three members were killed in an incident near the town of Jurf al-Sukr, south of Baghdad on Friday.
The unit blamed U.S. soldiers for the deaths. The U.S. military said attack helicopters had responded with rockets after security forces came under small-arms fire.
Smith said any incidents were investigated.
"Coalition forces are working with CLCs to bring about security. They are certainly not targeting CLCs," he said.
In the southern city of Basra, a CBS News journalist continued to be held by kidnappers after being captured a week ago. Efforts to free the Briton, who has not been named, were being held up over talks about how he should be released, negotiators said.
(Additional reporting by Michael Holden; editing by Andrew Roche) | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 8:48 am Post subject: |
| After reading the following take a look at the 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda as discussed by respected American intelligence author/writer James Bamford via the link near the top of http://NEOCONZIONISTTHREAT.BLOGSPOT.COM :
U.S. sends warship off Lebanon coast (Reuters)
By Sue Pleming and Andrew Gray
Thu Feb 28, 6:52 PM ET
Signaling impatience with Syria, the United States has sent its USS Cole warship off the coast of Lebanon in a show of support amid Beirut's political crisis, U.S. officials said on Thursday.
Officials said the Bush administration was concerned about political deadlock in Lebanon, which Washington blames on Syrian meddling, and the move underlined that worry.
"The presence is important. It isn't meant to send any stronger signals than that but in fact it does signal that we're engaged, we're going to be in the vicinity," said Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Mullen said the decision was not aimed only at Syria but at the region as whole.
"That's a very, very important part of the world and stability there as well as in the broader Middle East is an important outcome for us," he told reporters at the Pentagon.
A U.S. defense official said the Cole, a destroyer, left Malta on Tuesday heading toward Lebanon, adding it would not be within visible range of Lebanon but "well over the horizon."
A couple of U.S. Navy refueling ships were also in the area, the official said.
Lebanon's Western-backed governing coalition and its Syrian and Iranian backed opposition have failed to reach a deal to end the country's political conflict.
"The United States believes a show of support is important for regional stability," said a senior Bush administration official, who spoke on condition he was not identified.
"We are very concerned about the situation in Lebanon. It has dragged on very long."
The Cole was attacked off the coast of Yemen in October 2000 by al Qaeda militants. Seventeen U.S. sailors were killed.
Mullen said a group of ships will operate in the eastern Mediterranean "for a while."
The Lebanese government had no immediate comment.
But Hezbollah ally and Christian opposition leader Michel Aoun said the United States sent the Cole to display its deterrence capability and he was not worried about the action.
OTHER SHIP EN ROUTE
Two U.S. defense officials said the Cole could be replaced by the USS Nassau, an amphibious assault ship on a course for the Mediterranean. Such ships can transport U.S. Marines but there are no Marines on the Nassau, one official said.
A third defense official noted the Nassau was accompanied by other vessels as part of an expeditionary strike group and suggested some of them may be more likely to relieve the Cole.
The presidential election in Lebanon was postponed again this week to March 11 from February 26, the 15th such delay, after rival leaders failed to reach a deal.
The deadlock has threatened to degenerate into sectarian violence and continues to poison inter-Arab relations in the run-up to an Arab League summit in Syria next month.
"The Arab League is engaged but it has not been successful. In those set of circumstances we think a show of support for regional stability and regional solutions is important," said the senior Bush administration official.
Saudi Arabia, a close U.S. ally which supports the pro-Western coalition, has also voiced concern over events in Lebanon and discussed the issue with President George W. Bush last month during his visit to Saudi Arabia.
Bush ordered the move earlier this week as a sign of concern over Lebanon and consulted U.S. allies such as France and Britain about it as well as those in the Middle East.
Bush administration officials declined to say whether the decision was taken partly because of Saudi pressure.
"The president is concerned about the situation in Lebanon and discusses the issue regularly with his national security team," said National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe.
The United States has increased pressure on Syria in recent weeks, targeting more individuals with sanctions.
The U.S. Treasury froze assets of four Syrians on Thursday, saying they facilitated the flow of money, weapons and terrorists through Syria to al Qaeda in Iraq.
(Editing by Cynthia Osterman)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hezbollah reject US ships off Lebanon (Associated Press)
40 minutes ago
Hezbollah on Friday rejected the deployment of U.S. warships off Lebanon, calling it a threat to the country that will not affect the militant group.
"We are facing an American threat against Lebanon," Hezbollah legislator Hassan Fadlallah said. "It is clear this threat and intimidation will not affect us."
Officials in Washington said Thursday that the U.S. Navy was sending at least three ships, including at least one amphibious assault ship, to the eastern Mediterranean Sea in a show of strength during a period of tensions with Syria and political uncertainty in Lebanon.
Hezbollah is leading the opposition seeking to topple the U.S.-backed government in Beirut.
The group fought Israel in the 2006 war and is believed linked to Muslim militants who attacked U.S. forces and diplomats in Lebanon in 1983-84 during the Lebanese civil war, killing about 270.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last update - 09:33 19/02/2008
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/955583.html
Lebanon tensions grow amid specter of renewed Israel-Hezbollah fighting
By Yoav Stern, Yuval Azoulay and Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondents and News Agencies
Tags: imad mughniyah, lebanon
Tensions are growing in Lebanon over the possibility of renewed fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in the wake fo the assassination of terrorist mastermind Imad Mughniyah in Damascus last week.
Bracing itself for the likelihood of Hezbollah retaliation, Israel on Monday deployed Patriot air defense missiles near Haifa.
Rhetoric between rival factions in Lebanon has reached a new peak with Druze leader Walid Jumblat accusing Hezbollah in an editorial to be published Tuesday in his party's journal, Al Anba, of serving Syrian interests at Lebanon's expense in its war against Israel. "Lebanon continues to be the arena where wars break out according to their [Hezbollah's] calculations, interests and circumstances, as if the occupied Syrian territory [Golan Heights] is not suitable for such campaign."
Advertisement
The recent statements by Hezbollah's secretary-general, Hassan Nasrallah, that the Second Lebanon War is not over yet and that there is an "open war" with Israel, have stirred angry responses from Lebanese figures opposed to the radical Shi'ite group.
Prime Minister Fuad Siniora responded to Nasrallah's statements by saying that Lebanon is not interested in war. In an interview in London to two Lebanese television stations, Siniora attacked Hezbollah and Nasrallah for accusing him and other members of the March 14 group (named after the demonstrations that swept the country in the wake of prime minister Rafik Hariri's assassination in 2005) - which opposes Syrian domination of Lebanon - of collaborating with Israel.
"Lebanon wants good relations with all the world, except with Israel ... all Lebanese are opposed to Israel. We need to stop classifying people and charging them with being agents," he said.
In parallel, pro-Hezbollah spokesmen have intensified their fiery rhetoric against Israel with calls for its destruction. After Nasrallah declared at Mughniyah's funeral in Beirut last week that "Israel will cease to exist," Ibrahim al-Amin, the editor of the pro-Hezbollah daily Al Ahbar, wrote Monday in an editorial that, "The confrontation that began under the title 'destruction of Israel' requires different tools from those [used] in the liberation of territory."
Amin wrote that conventions to date are no longer relevant and that the blow to be delivered by Hezbollah will surprise Israel. "They will have to await a response where they are expecting it and where they are not," he wrote.
The vitriol was also echoed in Iran, where the head of the Revolutionary Guards said Monday that Israel would soon be destroyed by the "hands of Hezbollah," which is a surrogate of the Iranian regime, Fars News Agency reported.
Guards Commander-in-Chief Mohammad Ali Jafari made the comment in a letter to Nasrallah, offering condolences after the killing of Mughniyah. "In the near future, we will witness the destruction of the cancerous germ of Israel by the powerful and competent hands of the Hezbollah combatants," Jafari was quoted as saying.
"Undoubtedly the martyrdom of this sincere fighter [Imad Mughniyah] will strengthen the determination of all revolutionary and combatant Muslims, particularly his co-combatants in confrontation with the Zionist regime," Jafari added.
Also Monday, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said that even after 60 years, Israel still has neither legitimacy nor any role in the Middle East, the ISNA news agency reported. "The West has tried to impose a fabricated regime on the Middle East but even after 60 years, the Zionist regime [Israel] has neither gained any legitimacy nor played any role in this region," Mottaki was quoted as saying.
Calling United States policies in the Middle East a failure, Mottaki predicted the collapse of Israel. "The era of imposing policies on other states by military threats is over. The nations in the region will no longer surrender to any threats," Mottaki said.
Meanwhile, Israel's deployment of a battery of Patriot air defense missiles near the northern port city of Haifa is part of precautions against a possible attack by Hezbollah, Israeli security officials said Monday. The officials said the battery was put on standby Sunday for the first time since the 2006 Second Lebanon War.
Another military source said Monday that it is also possible that the deployment is part of routine exercises carried out by the air defense units.
The air defense missiles are part of a series of steps Israel has taken since Mughniyah's assassination in Damascus, with a focus on bolstering defenses in northern Israel as well as increasing the security of Israeli missions abroad. A travel advisory was also issued last week to Israelis traveling abroad. Israel's security services are concerned that Hezbollah may try to kidnap Israeli civilians abroad.
Over the weekend, the Israel Defense Forces moved reinforcements close to the border with Lebanon in the North, including elite units. Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Israel is prepared on all fronts for an attack.
The deployment of the air defense missiles is part of preparations to intercept explosives-laden, pilotless drones Hezbollah may use in an attempt to strike targets in Israel.
Following the Mughniyah assassination, Hezbollah vowed to hit Jewish targets outside Israel in retaliation. Israel has denied any involvement in the killing.
Home Front Command also carried out checks of air warning stations in the North and briefed municipal authorities and local council heads on preparedness and procedures. The command is in the process of running a large-scale exercise, unrelated to the current emergency, which will also include testing a broadcasting station dedicated exclusively to home-front applications. During emergencies the station would broadcast warnings and information to civilians as well as brief them on how to deal with specific situations. The broadcasts would interrupt regular television and radio programs in the country.
Last edited by Alpha on Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:38 am; edited 2 times in total | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:10 am Post subject: |
| Please pass this on to others:
"A hidden crisis is under way. Many government insiders are aware of serious plans for war with Iran, but Congress and the public remain largely in the dark."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIUSMLOmtQ8
Ellsberg Explains Reality of US Foreign Policy to Kristol p1
Daniel Ellsberg spent three years in the U.S. Marine Corps, serving as rifle platoon leader, operations officer, and rifle company commander.
He worked as a strategic analyst at the RAND Corporation and consultant to the Defense Department and the White House.
"His recent essay, "The Next War", featured in the October 2006 issue of Harpers magazine, urges government officials to reveal truths about government secrecy and nuclear planning—with documents—to avert a possible attack on Iran." | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
