AIPAC Ordered Bush To Attack Iran

By Gordon Duff
In a unique interview with an official at the highest policy levels of the Pentagon, White House and, eventually, CIA, we are offered a unique "behind the curtains" look at areas of policy making during the period between 1999 and 2007. Extensive notes have been taken of meetings with President Bush and all his top policy advisors. This is only a teaser.

A highly placed source within the White House and CIA confirmed, in an interview, that the invasion of Iran was sheduled for 2006 but planned in 1999. We have heard some of this before but not with so many pieces and, I am told, more to come. In an interview with a Bush administration policy official:

Q. What is the first thing that comes to mind when you think of your work at the White House? You have read my articles, what do you think of my take on things?

A. You are closer than anyone else in understanding how things worked, the only person willing to simply put it out there. You also come at things like the Pentagon people I have worked with, the ones who stood against Bush, Cheney and the AIPAC gang at the NSC (National Security Council.) I can also see that you don't have background material that you need. Some of it you have wrong, particularly the motives for Iraq. It was always Iran, Iraq was simply a door.

"The Iraq invasion was a 'done deal' in 1999, but not as you thought to steal oil and bilk billions, that was all gravy. Iraq, the entire Bush presidency, had one purpose, to remove Iran from the picture."

Q. You talk about journalists. What has your experience been?

A. I have good friends at the New York Times, Time Magazine, the Washington Post and others. They know all of this. They aren't fooled. They could write anything but it would never hit print.

Q. Back to the 2000 election. The first impediment was, I am told, removing John McCain from the picture. Was this the case?

A. "He was enemy # 1, stubborn, unpredictable and already tarnished by the Keating 5 scandal, with all his faults, he didn't have the serous skeletons in his closet that would fit the bill. McCain couldn't be blackmailed like Bush, thus McCain is a risk. Unless you can be controlled, blackmailed or bought or both, you will go nowhere in Washington.

McCain is a womanizer, the real thing. For a war hero, with McCain's charm that's nothing, he would never fall into the kind of trap Clinton did. Rove was assigned the job of getting rid of McCain. We all saw what was done in South Carolina. It was a masterful job."

Q. When you talk about McCain not being vulnerable, he certainly was in South Carolina, a few rumors and smears and he was gone. You say Bush is more vulnerable?

A. "A window into a lot of this can be found in the Rosen-AIPAC lawsuit. Bush has serious issues, let's just leave it at that.

As for Rosen, he just wasn't an AIPAC lobbyist, he sat inside the National Security Council until 2005 as the Rand Corporation's Director of Foreign Policy. When the press talks about an AIPAC employee and spying, he didn't join AIPAC until later, after his arrest.

The FBI investigation and his indictement for spying covered a time when he was at the center of the Bush administration, a key policy formulator at the highest levels of government. Rosen, indicted in 2004 for spying for Israel, was responsible for formulating American policy in the Middle East and largely responsible for the fate of the Palestinian people, a bit of a conflict of interest for an Israeli lobbyist and accused spy."

Q. Rosen has made some accusations, says AIPAC spies all the time and that they do nothing but watch pornography there. You worked with this guy, what do you know?

A. "Rosen has dirt on absolutely everyone. His divorce depositions are fascinating reading. They are sealed now but there are copies out there. I know that reporters at Time Magazine have them, others too. The FBI has tons, they were after Rosen for years. As for AIPAC, Rosen told me of their spy operations many times, but nobody needed telling, they were more than obvious to all of us.

Q. You talk about Rosen and his "black book," that he has dirt on "everyone." The news stories mentioned only porn. That doesn't sound so serious. Dirt, not just porn, what kind of dirt?

A. "Mostly sex stuff, gay bondage, clubs, expense money being spent on sex, liasons in public restrooms, that kind of thing. Many of the key people around the president are involved and there is FBI surveillance, massive amounts of it, photographs, videos, and one or more undercover informants recorded conversations with top National Security Council members. Spying, nuclear secrets passed to Israel, this was common place.

I witnessed, with two others, the top Bush counter-terrorism official, actally primary advisor to Bush on counter-terrorism, who had served Clinton and others, pass nuclear weapons plans to an Israeli agent, like it was nothing."

Q. Did the FBI know about this?

A. "For years, FBI agents, I have a list of names, worked to stop this. Then I learned that the Department of Justice killed the prosecution, Rosen's lasted into the Obama administration before it was dropped. Witnesses were threatened with prosecution and the guilty, the spies, were allowed to keep doing what they are doing. This is what Rosen knows and what he is talking about when he says AIPAC was involved in spying. It isn't just that AIPAC is said to receive information it is that it came from top administration officials."

Q. Let's get back to the sex thing. How high up does it go?

A. "One famous joke around the NSC, there was a photo of someone kissing Laura Bush on the cheek and shaking hands with President Bush. The same person had, not that long before, using those same lips and hands in a men's restroom."

Q. What do you know about 9/11?

A. "9/11 was planned as early as 1999 or before, to be executed as soon as the Bush team was in place. One meeting in April 2001, a meeting outlining the invasion of Iraq, may have been the green light.' Chalibi was in place early on, from day number one. I remember telling them he was a known crook, totally disreputable and that things in Iraq would fall apart immediately. Nobody in the National Security Council ever spoke about what they would do once Saddam was overthrown. Nobody really seemed to care.

Of course, none of those people have real experience with military issues or, in fact, much of anything else."

Q. How was the Iran invasion supposed to work?

A. "This is where so many have it wrong. In fact, there was never serous discussion about terrorism or Al Qaeda or bin Laden. These things weren't even a sideshow. The only talk about any of it was how it could be used to justify going into Iraq and then attacking Iran.

Q. The intel on Iraq, we all know it was wrong. When was that learned?

A. "The administration didn't believe false intelligence, it created it, order it in place before the election to be ready for, well I guess, 9/11. Silencing Plame and Joe Wilson, those were the same people who planned the creation of the phony intelligence. There was never a discussion of a serious terrorist threat against the United States. These guys would have fallen off their chairs laughing themselves to death. It was all a joke to them, 9/11, the Iraq invasion, all of it."

Q. Back to Iran, how was the invasion to start?

A. "Everything was going to happen in Bahrain. Plans were to attack Americans, blow up clubs, restaurants. There were plans to stage a "Tonkin Gulf' type attack and blame it on Iranian torpedo boats. Guys in the military were aware of this and there was strong opposition. Marine Colonel Joe Molofsky was the real hero here. He did more to scramble administration plans than anyone else, Molofky and General Mattis. These were really straight shooters, how I learned to trust the Marine Corps.

The government there, their security services, I believe they were deeply involved. It would have been good to see something about this in Wikileaks."

Q. You said that war had to start by 2006. Was there a timetable?

A. "Absolutely. General Petraeus was sent to Iraq to quiet things down, not to win a war or create a lasting peace, nothing like that. His job was to shut things down so an operation against Iran could be staged from Iraq."

Q. But that never got off the ground…

A. "No kidding, and Bush was enranged. It was the only reason he was put in office in the first place, as long as Iran survived, he was a failure, no matter what happened to the US."

Q. Didn't they know that war with Iran would have driven oil to $300 a barrel and collapsed the American economy?

A. "There were never briefings on that like there were never briefings on stabilizing Iraq. Nobody cared, nobody noticed and it was never discussed. It was really all about Iran and orders came in and people did what they were told like good little soldiers."

Q. Orders? From where?

A. "All of it, all foreign policy issues, were out of AIPAC, they ran everything in the Bush adminsitration. That was the whole point of it. We never were told why we had to destroy Iran only that it had to be done. Nobody ever asked why. Nobody ever believed Iran had a credible nuclear program and, eventually, we were all very certain they never would. There was never an issue about Iran being a threat or not. There was never an issue of motive of any kind. These were orders, plain and simple, the administration that will come into office in 2001 will be tasked with destroying Iran, tasked by AIPAC who will control all key position in the administration."

Q. Was there talk about Lebanon and the threat of Hizbollah?

A. "There really weren't talks at all, only planning on how to follow policy, never on what policy should be or what was right or wrong. There was never a discussion about the United States, what was good for America or bad for America. People were generally oblivious to there being an America."
http://sabbah.biz/

Tariq Shadid – Wikileaks leaks toxic acid in every direction, except to Israel

Let us ponder for a second about the meaning of 'leaking'. When something is leaking, it is usually understood that some fluid substance that is supposed to be flowing in a certain direction, is escaping from its designed route because of a defect in the structure that was built to guide it. Usually, if you have a leaking pipe in your water system, your main problem is that you are unable to control the flow of it, and water goes into directions where you don't want it to be going.

However, the definition of 'Wikileaking' seems to be following entirely different laws of nature. Indeed, the information is flowing away from the secret pipelines it was originally guided into. However, the strange thing about 'Wikileaking' is that Israel, a country widely known for its secret dealings and cunning intelligence service, is managing to keep dry feet in spite of the massive political flooding allegedly caused by Wikileaks' founding father, Julian Assange.

The lack of control that is so typical of other forms of 'leaking', certainly does not seem to apply to 'Wikileaking' – instead it looks like it is under perfect control, and carefully guided in such a way that it only serves the interests of one state, namely that of Israel.

Assange takes a leak, the world jumps up

Barely a country in the world that is actively involved in Middle East and other international affairs, either by choice or by geographical location, has been spared by Assange's latest opening of his Pandora's box of revelations. It is hard to visit a news source these days, without the word 'Wikileaks' jumping into your view at least once, and revealing some scandalous backdoor deal, secret agreement or embarrassing hidden relationship between governments who on the surface seem to be diametrically opposed to each other in the political spectrum.

Since the list of countries that have faced these embarrassments includes Obama's United States, many anti-imperialist activists around the world have been anxiously awaiting the latest leaks, and are now engaging in discussions about the implications of many of these so-called astounding revelations. Julian Assange is being hailed worldwide by people who are critical of their governments as the activist who was able to embarrass governments, helped only by a small group of independent supporters. His star is rising rapidly, and although sounds of cynicism can be heard here and there, the overwhelming noise resounding in progressive circles is one of loud cheers for this long-awaited 'champion of the ordinary man'.

What many seem to fail to be noticing however, is that although the list of countries that were painfully embarrassed by the publication of their secret cables, memo's and meetings, includes the Palestinian Authority, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, Egypt and the United States – where Obama is suffering from serious problems from a 'Tea Party' he was not invited to – one of the main actors in the dirty political game of Middle East animosities and alliances is remaining completely unharmed: Israel.

Much ado about old news

What are Wikileaks telling us? That Saudi Arabia poured oil on the flames against Iran? We already knew that. That Abbas' administration as well as the Egyptian government were very well informed about Israel's genocidal military assault on Gaza in the winter of 2009? There is nothing new about that either. The list goes on and on, and the main victims of embarrassment are leaders of Arab governments. But what is so new about that? Doesn't almost every Arab in the world who reads newspapers, watches Al Jazeera and has a certain degree of understanding of Middle East politics, already know about the extent and scope of secret relations in the region? Even many people living outside of the Arab world are largely aware of this.

Oana Lungescu, spokeswoman for NATO, called Wikileaks' revelations about the presence of American nuclear missiles in Europe – mainly the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany – 'dangerous' on November 29. Why exactly would something be dangerous, if it is a commonly known fact that has now only been confirmed yet again? Didn't earlier revelations have no effect, so why would these new ones do that? Does the fact that Obama, Sarkozy, and the Chinese leadership all have condemned Wikileaks and its founder, make any significant difference?

The answer to these questions is: yes, these revelations are indeed causing unpleasant domestic situations all around the world, and creating electoral problems and other political embarrassments for governments everywhere – except in one place, namely Israel.

No worries: Assange will tell you who to trust

Julian Assange, 'master revealer' of international conspiracies, apparently also is highly irritated by people questioning the events of 9/11. In an interview in the Belfast Telegraph on July 19, 2010, he was asked about the 9/11 attack, and answered: "I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud."

Apparently Julian 'Robin Hood' Assange finds the story of pilots who fly an airplane full of people straight into a humongous skyscraper full of unsuspecting citizens, just because some hysterical hijacker is holding a box-cutter against their jugular veins, perfectly believable. He apparently also believes that when you fly an airplane into the top floors of one of the world's largest buildings, in a horizontal direction, the building will not only spontaneously collapse all the way down to its basement in a vertical direction, but will indeed be transformed into a powdery dust, not leaving behind even one piece of debris that is larger than a ballpoint pen – except of course the completely undamaged passport of one of the alleged hijackers, that was miraculously found among the ruins of the World Trade Center.

Unless you, dear reader, also believe in fairy tales, this should certainly make you wonder. So much for your credibility, mr Assange.

Cui Bono?

In politics there is a golden rule for understanding what may be the driving force behind unexpected mysterious events. This rule is known as 'Cui Bono', which is Latin for: 'who benefits?'

Browse through all the news sources available on the latest Wikileaks revelation, and try to find even only one revelation that actually damages Israel, even though so many of the revealed documents are directly or indirectly connected to Middle East politics, and to a large extent to Israeli affairs. Did you find any document among them that either creates difficulties for the government of the zionist entity, or even slightly embarrasses it? Think about it well, you will find that the answer is a very simple "No".

Does it not strike you as interesting or remarkable, that many of the revelations about Middle East affairs are of direct benefit to Israel? If it hasn't, read them again, and give it some thought.

Cui bono? Israel. Therefore, who is the prime suspect behind the phenomenon 'Julian Assange'? You tell me, or just prove me wrong by showing me one Wikileaks document that would make Binjamin Netanyahu and his rogue companions scratch their heads, or even become only slightly uncomfortable. My suspicion grows stronger every day, and is not deterred by Interpol's announcement on December 1 that Julian Assange is wanted for an alleged sexual harassment case in Sweden. It is obvious that he is a man who has angered many people of power, regardless of whether he is actually guilty in that harassment case or not. The problem however is that none of these people of power are Israeli, and that says a lot. You never bite the hand that feeds you, do you, Julian?
http://palestinethinktank.com/2010/12/01/tariq-shadid-wikileaks-leaks-toxic-acid-in-every-direction-except-to-israel/

An Al Quds day letter to Tony Blair. From Lauren Booth, in Iran

Gilad Atzmon: I guess that Tony Blair’s sister in law, Lauren Booth, could easily use the phone and tell Tony what she thinks of him, his politics and his new memoir. However, being a peace activist she decided also to share it with the rest of us.Dear Tony,

Congratulations on your political memoir becoming an instant bestseller. I’m in Iran and have the only copy in the country. I can tell you, its so fiercely fought over, it’s worth its weight in WMD’s. Note to Random House; have ‘A Journey’ translated into Farsi and Arabic asap, it’ll fly off the shelves in this part of the world.

Tony, yesterday I went the Al Quds day protest in Tehran. You may have heard of it? It’s the rally where Iranians gather to protest against Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine, including the Holy city of Jerusalem.

I’m being sarcastic by asking if you’ve heard of Al Quds day, because I know you have. It is after all your very worst nightmare right? It must be horrifying with the ‘world view,’ you express in your memoirs to watch scenes on the BBC news showing the precise meeting point of politics and Islam.

Personally I’ve never understood this fear of ‘political Islam’ it seems to me that religious people should always be educated on world events rather than kept in ignorance like say, Mid West Christian Zionists in the US who can’t even find their home city on a map of their state.

Anyway, yesterday, I stood in the midst of more than one million Iranian Muslims all chanting in unison ‘Marg Bar Isre-hell!’ and ‘Marg Bar Am-ri-ca!’ You know what that means Tony I’m sure ; ‘Down with Israel, down with America’. The men, women and children around me withstood a day of no water and no food (it’s called Ramadan, Tony, it’s a fast). Coping with hunger and thirst in the hundred degrees heat, as if it were nothing. They can withstand deprivation in the Muslim world, and think it a proud thing to suffer in order to express their fury at the continued slaughter of Palestinians. To protest the theft of what little remains of Palestinian land by settlers. To protest the blockade of Gaza causing immense suffering to millions.

Now, the Christian Zionists in the US and the Jewish Zionists in Israel would have you believe that I was am in danger in Iran, especially on a day like Al Quds. Well here again Tony, you’ve been fed and have consumed in its entirety, a massive lie. The lie that says that when Muslims march they march against infidels (like me I suppose) in some kind of Middle Eastern homage to the ancient crusades.

Yet the crusade Tony is yours, not ‘theirs.’

Today I spoke with many women on the Tehran protest. One mother who wept, not out of hatred for ‘the West’ but out of empathy for the mothers of Rafah, Khan Younis, Nablus and Jenin. Do you recognise these place names Tony, as Middle East peace envoy you really should. Israel has massacred children in all of these cities in recent years. Didn’t you know?

Anyway the women I met were gentle, frustrated by the refusal of the international community to stop the arrests of Palestinian children, to stop the routine bombing of the tunnels (the main access still for food and essential items in the Gaza strip). We embraced in the streets of Tehran like sisters. Not in Islam Tony, but in the fight against your brand of extremism and prejudice.

And today when the streets of London reverberate with cries of ‘Allahuakbar!’ and ‘Down Down Israel.’ Christians and Jews will join the thunderous cries of ‘Down Down Israel, marching against the ‘political’ Muslims you say you fear so much, That you would have me fear too if you could.

Having spent a good deal of time in Palestine in recent years, certainly more than you and your the ‘peace envoy’ supposedly. It repulsed me to read your blatant swallowing of the Israeli narrative regarding Palestine and its people.

The ‘conflict’ between Palestine and Israel is according to you all about religion and has nothing at all to do with the ethnic cleansing of the Arab population, nor the degredation of those who remain by their Israeli occupiers. You say that Arabs have and always will see ‘Jews’ as enemies. For God’s sake Tony do your history. And if you’re going to run a ‘Faith Foundation’ then better gen up on Islam 101 don’t you think? Did your pals in Tel Aviv forget to tell you how many thousands of Jews lived in Historic Palestine in harmony with their Arab neighbours before 1948? Do you really not know that even today tens of thousand of Jews reside contentedly in Iran?

I’ve sat with dozens and dozens of Muslim families, those whose children have been burned by Israeli/US phosphorous bombs. Those who are still suffering hunger due to the Israel siege of Gaza. Those who have lived through the early days of sanctions against Iran when they needed food vouchers just to live. And every single Muslim in these suffering families has the same message ; ‘We don’t hate anyone for their race or their religion. We cannot hate Jews they are in our holy book it is against the teachings of the Koran.’ But Tony let me ask you this. Why should any people Muslim or otherwise have NO right to justice and NO right to challenge an evil being done to them and their children? or to those who share a set of common beliefs? Do you have no understanding of what it is like to live in Gaza? Under siege, attacked with chemical weapons, your children’s schools razed to the ground by Israeli missiles, your hospitals shelled, your electricity limited, your water undrinkable?

Or do understand the ‘idea’ of the hardships suffered by millions in the Middle East as a direct result of your support for Israel and just think they deserve it?

In your book you say you knew full well how many Beirut homes were flattened, how many civilians died in Lebanon in 2006. Yet you dismiss Lebanese rage about Israeli land theft of ‘Shebas Farm’ as being an irrelevance, about a ‘tiny’ amount of land. You cannot see it as part of an attack on Lebanese life as a whole, by it’s heavily armed aggressive neighbour. You see it as: ‘Israel is attacked. Israel strikes back.’ As if Israel lives in placid peace, being kindly to all around it in between these massacres.

As other world leaders came out to demand Israel immediately cease its 2006 bombing raids on Lebanese cities, you stayed silent.

‘If I had condemned Israel’ you say ‘I would have been more than dishonest. It would have undermined my world view.’

Your world view that Muslims are mad, bad, dangerous to know. A contagion to be contained. Your final chapter is a must read here in the Middle East Tony, congratulations! For it lays out the ‘them’ and ‘us’ agenda of your friends in Washington and Tel Aviv and in David Milliband, the ambassador of Zionism that he is.

In the final chapter you say; ‘we need a religious counter attack’ against Islam. And by ‘Islam’ you mean the Al Quds rallies, the Palestinian intifada (based on an anti Apartheid struggle Tony, NOT religious bigotry), against every Arab who fails to raise a flag as the F16s rain on their homes and refugee camps and breaks out singing ‘Imagine all the people…’

When you say ‘extremism’ must be ‘controlled and beaten’ you mean the message of solidarity shared by Non Muslims alike on the streets of London and across the world today, joining the Al Quds day protests.

‘Not only extremism must be defeated’ you say but ‘the narrative that has to be assailed.’

Iran is indeed the place where Islamic tradition meets political action.

But I’m not afraid here Tony. The people are kind, friendly, full of good humour.

They are also highly aware of the history of this region, the wrongs perpetrated by Israel against Palestine and the political machinations of the US and the UK governments.

And as your book remains highly sought after here in Tehran. It’s that and not Islam, that you and your Israeli chums should be afraid of because it reveals you in all your ignorant glory.

Lauren Booth
Broadcaster and Journalist

http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2010/09/an-al-quds-day-letter-to-tony-blair-from-lauren-booth-in-iran/

Dr. Lawrence Davidson: Iran, Israel and the Holocaust

Unfortunately, even if you believe that Israel is a necessary retreat for threatened Jewry, the use of the Holocaust as a justification for Israel and its policies is a grave strategic mistake. For by underpinning its continued existence on preventing a second Holocaust, the defenders of Israel invite some of their adversaries to call into doubt the first Holocaust”

On August 5, 2010 Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, citing a Fars (Iran) news service story, reported that a non-governmental organization in Iran had “launched a Website with cartoons on the Holocaust aimed at undermining the historic dimensions of the mass murder of Jews.” Israelis and Zionists reacted angrily to this announcement. Spokesmen at Yad Vashem, Israel’s national Holocaust museum stated that the website was “yet the latest salvo emanating from Iran that denies the facts of the Holocaust and attempts to influence those who are ignorant of history.” The Haaretz report also noted, somewhat resentfully, that “since the 1979 Islamic revolution , Iran has not acknowledged Israel as a sovereign state and even refrained from using the name Israel, instead referring to the Jewish state as the Zionist regime.”

This is obviously a hot button issue and so I will begin my examination of this report by stating that the Holocaust is a proven factual event and the number of six million Jewish victims killed is roughly accurate. Histories based on detailed research on this subject include the early classic study by Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, first published in 1961 and followed later by his Sources of Holocaust Research (2001). Other recent works include David Engel’s The Holocaust: The Third Reich and the Jews (1999) and S. Hochstadt, Sources of the Holocaust– Documents in History (2004). There are many other works as well.

Iran’s academics are no fools. Many of them have been trained in Western universities, but even those who have been trained elsewhere or locally are well read, multilingual, and every bit as intelligent as scholars you will find in the West. Thus, my feeling is that most Iranian historians and others familiar with the research on the Holocaust know the truth of the matter. Indeed, when I was in Iran in 2005 I did not find any academics raising questions about the reality and extent of the Holocaust. However, five years later we are witness to regular attacks coming from Iran on the traditional interpretation of the Holocaust. So what is going on here? Is it just that the present Iranian leaders are a bunch of anti-Semites as the Zionists would have us believe? Or is there something else behind this questioning of a seminal tragedy?

Understanding the Holocaust As a Western Event

For the West, the most disastrous event of the last century was the Holocaust. Yet, as horrible as the Holocaust was, it also was mainly a Western affair. With some justification one might argue that the lessons to be learned from the Holocaust are universal, but that does not negate the fact that Westerners did this to themselves. Thus, there is no reason why the West’s tragedy has to be the tragedy of all other peoples. This is an important fact and it helps explain why, if one goes to the Arab world today and asks people what is the greatest disaster of the 20th century, you are not going to get the Holocaust as the most common answer. Rather, from a good number of Arabs the answer will be the Nakba– the massive dispossession of the Palestinian people by Zionist invaders. Unfortunately, since 1948 an added complication has crept into this equation. Because of the attitude taken by the leaders of Israel and their Zionist supporters, the two disasters, the Holocaust and the Nakba, have become inextricably intertwined.

Despite the fact that modern Zionism predates the Holocaust by half a century, that disaster has been consistently used by the Zionists to justify the need for the Israeli state. Therefore, the notion that Israel stands as a defense against a new Holocaust is present in much of the propaganda that makes the West’s Zionist lobbies so powerful. In this storyline, the Palestinians who resist Israeli aggression are simply reduced to latter day Nazis. This claim was most recently made explicit by Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, in his September 25, 2009 speech before the United Nations General Assembly. In that speech Netanyahu compared Hamas to the Nazis and the firing of Qassam rockets with the London Blitz during World War II. As a corollary to this stance, any criticism of Israeli behavior is said to weaken the defenses against a new genocide of the Jews and is therefore, ipso facto, an expression of anti-Semitism.

Unfortunately, even if you believe that Israel is a necessary retreat for threatened Jewry, the use of the Holocaust as a justification for Israel and its policies is a grave strategic mistake. For by underpinning its continued existence on preventing a second Holocaust, the defenders of Israel invite some of their adversaries to call into doubt the first Holocaust. As we have seen, these opponents, now led by Ahmadinejad of Iran, assert that the Zionists have, at best, exaggerated the victimhood of the Jews during World War II, or that they might be just making it all up to justify stealing Palestine. Thus, the website that has caused all the uproar is, according to Haaretz, “dedicated to those [Palestinians] who have been killed under the pretext of the Holocaust.” In short, if you can establish doubt about your enemy’s core argument you have struck that enemy a serious blow.

Who is the Target Audience?

In this effort it is unlikely that the Iranian president or those behind the recent website are simply poking their fingers into the proverbial Western eye. The populations to whom they are really talking do not live in the West. They live in the non-Western world and more specifically the Muslim lands. Most of this audience have no more knowledge of modern European history than their Western counterparts have of Arab or Muslim history. Except, of course, that educated non-Westerners can readily identify the West with the history of modern imperialism. For many of them that is local history–the kind that stays in the collective memory for generations. So while the average citizen of the Muslim lands probably knows little about the reality of the Holocaust, they are likely to know a lot about Israel as a surviving symbol of their immediate ancestors imperialist experience. Under the circumstances, convincing them that the Holocaust is a Western ploy to justify an imperialist crime is not such a difficult task. And, that is just what Iran’s anti-Holocaust rhetoric is all about.

An End Result

Before righteous indignation sets in over this deception, keep in mind that the Zionist movement has just as easily convinced most Israeli and Zionist Jews of the correctness of Nakba denial. That is, that the Nakba never really happened and that the history of the founding of Israel was nothing other than the heroic struggle of a people to survive.

The website in question seems to have been discontinued, perhaps because it was unauthorized by the government. But its brief existence should teach us a lesson. The West as well as the East is indeed full of “those who are ignorant of history.” This does not mean, however, that they have no sense of any history at all. Rather, it means that the history they believe in is often contrived and distorted. This points the way to the lesson to be learned– what motivates us, and this includes our leaders, is not what is true, but rather what we think is true. Sometimes the two might be close enough that when we act we do so in a relatively effective way. But more often than not the two exist at some distance from each other, and it is then that we often walk off a cliff.

I am not sure how one can correct this situation. But it is an enormous problem in a world were there are no longer any sanctuaries. Where, for us Americans, the oceans no longer protect us.
http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2010/08/iran-israel-and-the-holocaust%e2%80%93an-analysis/

Obama and Iran

http://latuff2.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d2p1qb2

The Biggest Threat to Peace in Middle East

By Dr. Elias Akleh

A build up of heightened tension in the Middle East is escalating in the last few weeks. American and Israeli postures towards Lebanon, Syria, and Iran have become more threatening. Listening to speeches of political leaders one hears talks only about war not peace. Iranians and Israelis are continuously training hard for a possible showdown. Both sides are conducting extensive war games every month. This led Syrians to claim that Israel is preparing for a soon-to-come another war. The Jordanians also are warning that current stalemate of the peace process is an indication of a war breaking this summer. The Russian President and his army chief hinted, few months ago, that the US and Israel were planning for an attack on Iran.

Indeed Iran is, as it has been for last few years, the target of most of the threats and accusation of supporting terrorism. Escalating incitement against Iran the American Defense Department sent Last month (April) to Congress a report on Iran's military claiming Iran could develop intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the US by 2015.

Ignoring the fact that N. Korea, India, Pakistan, and Israel are proven to have nuclear weapons while Iran does not, the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton chose in her speech, to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference at the UN, to focus on Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions putting the whole world at risk as she put it. According to Clinton Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons, rather than Israel's more than 200 nuclear bombs, is destabilizing the Middle East. She called on world's nations to rally around US efforts to hold Iran, not other nuclear countries, to account.

Accusation that Usama Bin Laden is living comfortably in Iran had received a boost after the broadcast of a documentary called "Feathered Cocaine". This echoed the June 2003 claims of the Italian newspaper Corre de la Sierra that Bin Laden was in Iran according to some intelligence report, and according to Richard Miniter's book "Shadow War". This accusation was countered by Ahmadinejad in ABC News interview with George Stephanopoulos stating that, since Bin Laden was a previous partner of Mr. Bush, he is living comfortably in Washington DC not in Tehran. It was also widely reported that one of Bin Laden's wives was living in Tehran with six of his children and eleven grandchildren.

A recent Associated Press exclusive, May 13th, written by Adam Goldman and Matt Apuzzo, reported that according to CIA monitoring program RIGOR Saad, the son of Usama Bin laden and many Al-Qaeda leaders and operative had taken refuge into Iran after 911. This exclusive disqualifies itself stating that "But generally, the U.S. has only limited information about them.", and "Details are murky".

The American military capitalized on such rumors when the commander of US forces in the Middle East, general Petraeus, told Congress that Tehran is working with Al-Qaeda facilitating links between its senior leaders and affiliate groups.

Syria, in turn, was not spared from American and Israeli warnings and threats. Syria was accused of violating 2006 UN Resolution 1701 prohibiting the transfer of weapons to Lebanese Hezbollah. Just before the US Congress approves sending Robert Stephen Ford as American ambassador to Syria as a sign of improving relationships, the Israeli President, Shimon Peres, accused Syria of smuggling Scud missiles to Hezbollah. Peres' accusation prompted the Congress to suspend sending Ford to Damascus.

Major General Alberto Asarta Cuevas of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon was quoted by Lebanese daily An-Nahar as saying: "We have no evidence of any Scud missiles in UNIFIL's area of operations." The US, also, could not confirm any Scud missiles shipped to Lebanon. Scud missiles are large and are difficult to hide.

Although not mentioning Scud missiles in specific Israeli officials such as the head of the Israeli military intelligence research department, Brigadier General Yossi Baidatz, claimed that: "Weapons are transferred to Hezbollah on a regular basis and this transfer is organized by the Syrian and Iranian regimes." Syria was accused of transferring sophisticated weapons, such as M600 rockets, to Hezbollah. Israel's Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, accused Syria of importing weapons of mass destruction from North Korea to ship them to Hezbollah and Hamas.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak directly warned both Syria and Lebanon: "We make it clear once again that we see the government of Lebanon, and behind it the government of Syria, responsible for what happens now in Lebanon, And the government of Lebanon will be the one to be held accountable if it deteriorates."

The Americans parroted the Israeli claims. Hillary Clinton warned Syria of grave consequences of delivering weapons to Hezbollah and Hamas warning that such an act "could mean war or peace for the region … Hezbollah's acquisition of new weapons, especially long-range missiles, would threaten Israel's security and destabilize the region."

Robert Gates, the American Defense Secretary, had also accused both Iran and Syria of arming Hezbollah with sophisticated weaponry. Finally, citing what the White House alleged Syria's "extraordinary threat" to US security and foreign policy, Barack Obama decided to renew economic sanctions against Syria for another year. Obama said that Syria's "continuing support of terrorist organizations and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and missile programs, continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the US".

Israel's fear was heightened by the visit of Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, to Syria, the first visit to Damascus by Russian ruler since 1917, to sign an arm trade agreement by which Russia would supply Syria with Mig-29 fighters, truck-mounted Pantzir short range surface to air missiles, and anti-aircraft artillery system. Building a Syrian nuclear power plant with Russian help was also discussed by the two leaders.

Turkey's improved relationships with Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, and its sympathy towards Palestinians worry the US and Israel the most. Since Davos incident in January 2009 between Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Israel's president Shimon Peres, Turkey seems to adopt the Palestinian cause. Turkey had sent humanitarian aid to besieged Gaza within "Viva Palestina" and "Break the Siege" campaigns, and is also sending three humanitarian ships to Gaza within the "Freedom Flotilla" campaign.

Turkey and Syria had dramatically improved their political, economic, socio-cultural, and military relationships. The two countries conducted, last April 2009, a three-day military exercise along their borders and signed a technical military cooperation agreement to strengthen collaboration between their defense industries.

Turkey had improved relationship with Iran, where trade between the two countries is expected to increase to $30 billion. Turkey had opposed economical sanctions against Iran, had repeatedly played down the alleged threat of Iran's nuclear program, and defended Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy. This month, May 2010, Turkey and Brazil convinced Iran to accept nuclear fuel swap on Turkish soil.

Turkey seems determined to protect its good relationships with Syria and Iran to a point of deploying anti-aircraft batteries along the Syrian border in the Iskenderun district to repel any US or Israeli aerial attack against Iran or Syria, according to Turkish daily Hurriyet. In a phone call with Al-Manar TV, Mustafa Ozcan, a Turkish political analyst, confirmed this fact.

A Middle Eastern geopolitical alliance between Turkey, Iran, and Syria and Lebanon seems to take shape. This alliance seems to provide a counterbalance for Israel's military superiority in the region, and a deterrent to any further Israeli terrorist attack against Gaza, Lebanon, or Syria. Israelis are afraid that they may not be able to win a war as convincingly and with impunity as they used to do, especially after their failures in 2006 Lebanese war and 2008 Gaza onslaught.

Israel's whining about Iran's and Syria's weapons is meant to portray the Israelis as the poor victims, and to justify any Israeli aggression against its neighbors. It is meant also to draw in the US for its rescue, as usual. Israel wants a joint American/Israel attack against Iran/Syria/Hezbollah axis before their alliance become any stronger. American involvement is the wild card, as it always has been, that will maintain Israel's superiority in the region.

While supplying Israel with weapons allegedly for self defense the US denies this right to Palestinians, Lebanese, and Syrians. Coming to Israel's rescue, again, the US described Iran as the greatest threat to America, to its allies, to the Middle East, and to world peace by claiming that Iran is the region's greatest proliferator of weapons and supporter to terrorist groups.

Obama cited the possibility of nuclear Iran supplying nuclear material to some terrorist groups to be used against the US and its allies. The documented facts proved that the US is the only nuclear country that had secretly supplied nuclear material to terrorist Israel to build its nuclear bombs.

In his article "America's Loose Nukes in Israel", Grant Smith, director of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy, explains how large quantities of America's highly enriched uranium and plutonium was smuggles to Israel via the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC), part of Apollo Steel Company plant in Pennsylvania. A 1965 audit by Atomic Energy Commission discovered the shortage of 220 pounds of enriched uranium, and in September 1968 587 more pounds of enriched uranium went missing immediately after the visit of 4 Israelis, including Mossad agent Rafi Eitan. Also refer to the 1978 declassified report "Nuclear Diversion in the U.S.? 13 Years of Contradiction and Confusion" regarding the investigation between 1957 and 1967 of the loss of highly enriched uranium in NUMEC.

Whistleblower former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds testified that Richard Perle, Doughlas Feith, and Marc Grossman, high ranking officials in G.W. Bush administration, were passing sensitive data and nuclear technology to Israel's military industrial complex.

Based on 30 declassified government documents from the National Security Archive in April 2006 Avner Cohen and William Burr published the article "Israel Crosses the Threshold" in the May-June 2006 issue of the "Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists" indicating that the Nixon's administration decided to accept and to live with Israel's ambiguity of its nuclear weapons program, knowing very well that Israel had already built nuclear bombs.

At the Global Summit on Nuclear Security, last April, the US tried to rally nations against Iran's nuclear program, and supported the call for Middle East nuclear-free zone. Yet the US supported Israel's claim that it would consider signing the NPT and supporting such a nuclear-free zone only if there is a comprehensive Middle East peace.

The US, with 5,113 self-declared nuclear bombs and free of any IAEA monitoring process, is trying to use the NPT to monopolize nuclear technology and deny it to other countries. After signing the START Treaty on April 8th President Obama called for $80 billion in nuclear funding to modernize the US nuclear weapons complex to meet the need to "rebuild and sustain America's aging nuclear stockpile". This means making the bombs smarter, smaller in size, and more powerful. This $80 billion came on top of more than the additional $100 billion for nuclear deliver systems like submarines. The US has no intention of reducing its nukes, but to improve them.

War clouds are looming over the Middle Easter. Israeli military officials keep threatening to attack Iran claiming they can use military force to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Israel is primed to attack Iran boosted Deputy Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon. Iran is taking these threats seriously and is preparing for war through war games; two of them this month. Iran's strongest warning to Israel came Wednesday May 19 from Iranian Chief of Staff, Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei, stating that if Israel attacked Iran it would be destroyed within a week. Sunday May 23 Israel is conducting its most intensive and comprehensive war games called "Turning Point-4" lasting five days and including 68 cities and towns. Could this be preparation for another war this summer?

During its short 62 years history Israel had fought 8 wars against its Arab neighbors. It had developed nuclear weapons and did not sign the NPT. It had used chemical and nuclear (DU) weapons against civilians. It violated many UN resolutions. It committed war crimes and many massacres against civilians. It had refused all Arab peaceful gestures and keeps threatening to attack its neighbors. It occupation and destruction of religious sites, especially Islamic, might provoke religious war in the region. Israel is the biggest threat to peace in the Middle East.

http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2010/05/24/the-biggest-threat-to-peace-in-middle-east/

Cartoon of the day

By Carlos Latuff
http://palestinethinktank.com/2010/05/07/cartoon-of-the-day-161/

Cartoon of the day

By Carlos Latuff

http://palestinethinktank.com/2010/04/30/cartoon-of-the-day-160/

Iran demands US troop withdrawal

Ahmadinejad proposed forming a body that would provide a balance to the UN's nuclear watchdog.


The Iranian president has called on the US to withdraw its troops from the Gulf region and Afghanistan.

"The region has no need for alien troops and they should return home and let the regional states take care of their own affairs," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a speech marking the country's annual Army Day on Sunday.

"They must leave the region and this is not a request but an order, and the will of the regional nations," he said.

He said the deployment of US and Nato troops in Iraq and Afghanistan under the pretext of fighting terrorism had not only failed, but also increased insecurity in both countries.

Israel will 'collapse'

The president also said that Israel, the "main instigator of conflict" in the Middle East, was on its way to collapse and that regional powers wanted it uprooted.
"This is the will of the regional nations that after 60 odd years, the root of this corrupt microbe and the main reason for insecurity in the region be pulled out," Ahmadinejad said.

He said that except the "Zionist regime (Israel)," Iran considered all other countries as "friend and brother" with whom the Islamic state wanted peaceful co-existence.

On the day that Iran was exhibiting its latest military hardware, Ahmadinejad vowed that the country would use all its military potential in case of any armed aggression.

Ahmadinejad's comments came a day after he called for the formation of a new international body to oversee nuclear disarmament during a two-day summit on civilian nuclear energy in Tehran.

Nuclear summit

The summit, which is continuing on Sunday, is seen as a counterpoint to a major conference in Washington earlier this week, in which Barack Obama, the US president, outlined his nuclear strategy.

Iran criticised the 47-nation nuclear security summit on the grounds that the US holds one of the world's largest stocks of nuclear weapons.

Iran was not invited to the conference as the US fears its nuclear programme could be a cover for the production of atomic weapons.

Tehran says it is entitled to continue work on its controversial uranium enrichment programme. It strongly denies it is seeking nuclear weapons, saying its atomic programme is for meeting civilian energy needs.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/04/201041854124873989.html

Prevent Holocaust BOMB IRAN

By Carlos Latuff

Iran: When "Barack" decides to head a Barrack

WRITTEN BY Kourosh Ziabari
"The continued presence of all options on the table"; this is the disappointing message which a Nobel Peace Prize laureate dispatches internationally. In his latest interview with CBS News, American President Barack Obama refused to rule out the possibility of a military strike against Iran by harking back to the famous catchphrase of former U.S. President George W. Bush who once devised, regarding Iran's nuclear program, the popular sentence of "all options are on the table".
Putting the quality and quantity of these options aside, the very "table" on which the options should be placed is as well a matter of controversy. Who is in the position to decide the destiny of Iran's nuclear program? Which table is the U.S. President referring to? What's wrong with Iran's nuclear program in lieu of which a 70-million nation should go on with crippling sanctions, continued threats of military strike, isolation and economic embargo? What's the definite answer to the simple question that "why should the U.S., France and Israel possess nuclear weapons"? Which one is more offensive and
violent? Iran's nuclear program which has been demonstrated again and again that it does not have anything to do with military purposes, or the adventurous, aggressive trajectory Washington and its European allies have begun to go across?
Robert Parry, an award-winning American investigative journalist austerely answers the questions we have in mind. In an April 2 article in Consortium News, he notes: "if two countries with powerful nuclear arsenals were openly musing about attacking a third country over mere suspicions that it might want to join the nuclear club, we'd tend to
sympathize with the non-nuclear underdog as the victim of bullying and possible aggression."
As Robert Parry notes, the "bomb bomb Iran Parlor Game" has much to do with the regular psychological operations the U.S. government ruthlessly directs against its victims and it has been seen several times during the post-World War II era that the U.S. government has resorted to the most brutal methods of black propaganda to demonize
and demoralize its opponents.
In order to thwart Iran's efforts to achieve the zeniths of high technology and prevent the country from becoming an influential player in the Persian Gulf region and beyond, Washington has mobilized a large number of conservative think-tanks and pundits to direct psychological warfare against Iran multilaterally. Although the New York Times by itself suffices to wage a spotless and perfect psy-op by running misleading and untruthful articles which get circulated, syndicated and believed globally, numerous websites, blogs and community portals have also been activated to function as the podium of White House so as to disseminate illusive and deceptive stories regularly and misrepresent what's happening in Iran.
Over the past three decades and especially following the eruption of nuclear dispute with Iran, U.S. has been carrying out media operations to incite anti-Iranian sentiments vigorously. Some recent efforts include the establishment of websites such as "United Against Nuclear Iran" and the production of Hollywood-sponsored movies "300" and "The
Wrestler".
The American psychological warfare, however, is not limited to mainstream media outlets, NY Times and Fox News-like stuff, campaign websites and TV shows. A number of bloggers also have been mobilized to take part in the cyber maneuver against Iran. It means that the wave of American psychological operation against Iran has become so
extensive and far-reaching that even involves bloggers and independent commentators who run e-zines and online publications.
Above all, carrying out psychological operations is one of the most sensitive and delicate responsibilities of the U.S. Army, CIA's Special Activities Division (SAD) and National Clandestine Service (NCS). SAD is in charge of providing the U.S. President with "special"
options where diplomacy and military action is likely to fail. U.S. President has the authority to order the commencement of a new clandestine operation whenever necessary. Covert and intangible intervention in foreign elections is one of the main tasks of SAD. It also carries out missions to undermine or even overthrow a regime which does not comply with the interests of the U.S. administration. SAD has a long history of carrying out inconceivable and paralyzing missions of psychological propaganda against different countries including Bolivia, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Nicaragua, El Salvador,
Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran. In Iran, where people still remember the bitter memory of U.S.-backed coup d'etat of 1953 which brought down the democratic government of Dr. Mosaddeq and inaugurated the tyranny of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, SAD has accomplished numerous operations, several of which have been revealed by the investigative journalists.
In July 2008, for example, the renowned American journalist Seymour Hersh published an article in the New Yorker and revealed that the Bush administration had taken practical steps, including the authorization of a Presidential Finding to legitimize the illegal entry of paramilitary troops into Iran, through the borders of Iraq, so as to help overthrow the government of Iran. Based on the documents he had obtained, Hersh wrote: "Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran. [...] These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership."
Hersh cited the federal law of America which brands a Presidential Finding as highly classified and only available to the Democratic and Republican leaders in the House and the Senate and the ranking members of their respective intelligence committees. This greatly highlighted the significance of his discovery of the documents. "The Finding was
focused on undermining Iran's nuclear ambitions and trying to undermine the government through regime change, working with opposition groups and passing money” Hersh quoted an informed, anonymous source as saying.
SAD has also carried out globally significant actions such as preventing the Italian Communist Party (PCI) from winning the parliamentary elections in 1948 and 1960s, overthrowing the government of Guatemala in 1954 and staging the 1957 coup d'etat of Indonesia which removed from power the popular, democratically-elected President
Ahmad Sukarno and led to a terrible massacre in which almost 1 million people lost their lives.
Anyway, history seems to be repeated once again. The White House and its numerous teams, departments, groups, unions and forces of psychological operation, under the decree of someone who right after winning a Nobel Prize of "Peace" began to drum for a war of bloodshed in the Middle East, are gathering together to launch a new scenario of
war game and violence; however, they've simply forgotten an undeniable reality: Iran is a different country; different from all of the countries throughout the world.
Dear President Obama; we know that whoever rises to presidency in your country should be first an expert of psychological warfare and a dexterous pamphleteer; you've done your job successfully by teaching us that you have the potentiality to be a duplicate of Mr. George W. Bush. Now you've satisfied your Zionist supervisors excellently. The only thing which you should know is that you had better take the options off the table and save more space consequently!
http://palestinethinktank.com/2010/04/14/iran-when-barack-decides-to-head-a-barrack/

Margaret Kimberley – Obama's Lies about Iran

The Peace Prize winner in the White House continues to beat the drums of war with Iran, in perfect synch with the corporate media orchestra. “The New York Times was made privy to what has been called a ‘parlor game,’ of ‘Imagining an Israeli Strike on Iran’” – apparently in the spirit of the old motivational slogan, “If you can conceive it, you can achieve it.”

"It is Obama who will instigate a conflict that the much-hated Bush would not."

Threats both subtle and not so subtle were constantly made against Iran during the presidency of George W. Bush. Beginning with the infamous “Axis of Evil” speech, a campaign of threats began and a bevy of lies were told claiming that Iran threatened Americans’ very lives.

Iran’s nuclear power capability is used to keep us frightened beyond all reason. That nation’s domestic turmoil wrought by last year’s disputed presidential election has also been used as proof that Iran is a terrorist state, or a “state sponsor of terror” or whatever new terms can be invented to make Americans believe that war is a necessity.

The Obama administration has once again taken up where the Bush administration left off, but in a far more clever way. In September 2009, with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy by his side, Obama announced that the Iranians had a nuclear enrichment facility in the city of Qum. Brown and Sarkozy played their roles perfectly, exclaiming in equally hysterical tones that Iran is up to something nefarious and must be stopped. What the press didn’t reveal was that the Iranians themselves, not the United States government, announced the facility’s existence just a few days earlier.
“The ties between corporate media and the highest levels of government have never been clearer.”

The corporate media have joined in on the side of our government, guaranteeing access for their reporters and Pulitzer prizes in their future. The New York Times was made privy to what has been called a “parlor game,” of “Imagining an Israeli Strike on Iran ” The ties between corporate media and the highest levels of government have never been clearer. This game, this plan for the death of thousands of human beings, is clearly on the drawing board for the Obama administration and the New York Times and its ilk will be among the biggest cheer leaders.

The drum beat of lies continue on a daily basis. Shahram Amiri is an Iranian nuclear scientist who disappeared while on pilgrimage to Mecca in June 2009. Iran accused the United States of abducting him, a claim which was vehemently denied for months but which was very recently confirmed as being true. Now the CIA admits that Amiri is in United States custody and claim that he defected willingly. The degree of willingness which resulted in his presence in the United States should be accepted with the same grain of salt as any other claims about his country. So far it appears that Iran tells the truth and our own government tells lies.

The latest administration claim is that the members of the United Nations Security Council are united in applying more sanctions against Iran. China has so far been reluctant to bend to America’s will. Now the Obama administration claims to have Chinese support in applying even more sanctions against Iran. Like the claims of non-involvement in the “defection” of Amiri, these claims may yet prove to be specious. Even if true, the degree of arm-twisting from Obama must be considerable if the Chinese reverse course.

China has so far been reluctant to bend to America’s will.

Nearly ten years ago the Bush administration went through the same awful game, with Iraq as its target. Now the Peace Prize administration is engaging in the same tactics. Iran is blamed for everything except bad weather. Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, blames Iran for “providing some assistance to insurgents in Afghanistan.” Iran has nukes, helps insurgents and wants to steal your first-born child, too.

Barack Obama appears to be more intent on making good on threats against Iran than George W. Bush ever was. Bush did not make the same efforts of applying pressure on European governments and on the Security Council to back additional sanctions, the first precursor to war. He didn’t invite New York Times reporters to take part in war game simulations. No, it is Obama who will instigate a conflict that the much-hated Bush would not.

When it happens, when Barack Obama appears on television speaking in the most serious tones about why Iranians have to die, what will we say? What will black Americans, formerly in the vanguard of every antiwar movement, say about the slaughter? What will all progressives say about an awful crime against humanity?

We can only hope that the United States and Israel have under estimated the Iranians ability to defend themselves. If they or anyone else on this earth, is expecting an outcry from the American people or its media, they will be sorely disappointed.
http://palestinethinktank.com/2010/04/08/margaret-kimberley-obamas-lies-about-iran/

Iran & Yemen are next on the list!

Hitler invaded countries under no pretext. He just wanted war.

NATO and the West are invading countries under the pretext that they are fighting terror when they are the biggest greedy terrorists on the planet. Oil, gas, and other natural resources are what they’re after, why don’t they just put on a mask and say, “Hands up!”, like they did in Iraq.

Now Iran and Hitler invaded countries under no pretext. He just wanted war.

NATO and the West are invading countries under the pretext that they are fighting terror when they are the biggest greedy terrorists on the planet. Oil, gas, and other natural resources are what they’re after, why don’t they just put on a mask and say, “Hands up!”, like they did in Iraq.

Now Iran and Yemen are next on their list.

But they won’t pick on Russia because it’s too strong for them and they are up to their eyes in China because it’s pulling the West out of the economic recession with its economic power, regardless of the fact that China has committed more “human rights abuses” than Iraq, Iran and Sudan!!!

Brit from the United Kingdom are next on their list.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/articles/41/Iran-&-Yemen-are-next-on-the-list!-.html

But they won’t pick on Russia because it’s too strong for them and they are up to their eyes in China because it’s pulling the West out of the economic recession with its economic power, regardless of the fact that China has committed more “human rights abuses” than Iraq, Iran and Sudan!!!

Brit from the United Kingdom