Why bombing Iran won't work

And some things that just might ...

clipped from www.niacouncil.org "You can't bomb knowledge," said Robert Litwak, Director of the Division of International Security Studies at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars [...] [B]ombing ... Iran's nuclear sites will not deter future technological developments [...] US military action ... would only trigger major responses worldwide, ... a worsening of the fragile state of Iraq and "a rally around the flag effect in Iran." Washington will need to recognize that "what is politically serious in Washington is politically insignificant in Tehran." What the US has previously viewed as a big step toward normalization, such as allowing the importation of pistachios and carpets, has little weight in Iran [...] Pres. Obama and other political figures have not recognized the need to use sensitive language when dealing with Iran. Iran has expressed its disdain for phrases such as "carrots and sticks," that the US has repeatedly used [...] [T]his mistranslates to say that the US plans to deal with Iran as a donkey, either reward it with carrots or beat it into submission. "This will backfire on us," ... stated Robin Wright, journalist, author and public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center.

Mennonite Uni's in exchange with Iran

Brilliant!

clipped from www.payvand.com AKRON, Pa. – A delegation from six U.S. and Canadian Mennonite universities visited Iran from Oct. 4 to 10 to explore opportunities for academic collaboration with Iranian universities. Iranian university officials expressed particular interest in academic exchanges related to peace, justice, conflict and religion, according to several members of the delegation. Sommer said she hopes that such exchanges can contribute to peace between Iran and the U.S. despite high tensions between governments. She noted that many Iranians fear a military attack by the U.S. or its allies, and many Americans would be afraid to travel to Iran. "There's nothing scary about going there," she said. The delegation's visit is part of MCC's ongoing work to build relationships between people in Iran and the West. Iranian educators are particularly interested in fostering future interactions between Iranian and North American students. Part of the rationale is to combat harmful stereotypes between Iran and the West

Russians: US, Israel to use Georgia for Iran attack

Russia claims intelligence reveals the USA and Israel are exchanging massive military aid for the right to use airfields to bomb Iran.

TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- Russia's envoy to NATO said that the US plans to use airfields in Georgia for a war on Iran.

Ambassador Dmitry Rogozin said Russian intelligence had obtained information indicating that Washington had launched "active military preparations on Georgia's territory" for an air strike on Iran.

"The reason why Washington values (Georgian President Mikheil) Saakashvili's regime so highly" is that he has given permission to the Pentagon to use its airfields, he said.

Other reports suggested that the Georgian airfields could also be used by Israel for an attack on Iran.

Israel had supplied Georgia with sophisticated Hermes 450 UAV spy drones, multiple rocket launchers and other military equipment that Georgia, as well as modernized Georgia's Soviet-made tanks that were used in the attack against South Ossetia.

Israeli instructors had also helped train Georgia troops.

clipped from www.payvand.com	US Plans to Use Georgia for Attacking Iran: Russia's NATO envoy

H. CON. RES. 362 -Calling For The Naval Blockade of Iran

H.Con.Res. 362, new resolution introduced on May 22, 2008 by Representatives Gary Ackerman (D-NY) and Mike Pence (R-IN), is raising controversy in Washington and across the country. There is a particular clause that some many fear is tantamount to declaring that the President should pursue a naval blockade against Iran, which would be an act of war.

The bill was introduced just prior to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Annual Policy Meeting and urging co-sponsorship is one of AIPAC's central legislative asks. They are currently circulating a letter in support of H.Con.Res. 362 and the Senate companion, S.Res. 580.

According to the House leadership, this resolution is going to "pass like a hot knife through butter" before the end of June on what is called suspension -- meaning no amendments can be introduced during the 20-minute maximum debate. It also means it is assumed the bill will pass by a 2/3 majority and is noncontroversial. As of June 18, the bill already has 169 co-sponsors. If and when the bill is voted on suspension, there will be a roll call vote and AIPAC will use how members voted on the resolution in the lead up to the elections.

When Representative Dennis Kucinich introduced articles of impeachment against Vice-President Cheney, and then against President Bush, one of his key accusations was that the Bush Administration has tried to lead the United States into war with Iran. So you might have thought that Members of Congress who signed on to the impeachment crusade shared Rep. Kucinich’s critique of U.S. saber-rattling towards Iran.

If you thought that, you might want to think again. The evidence is, shall we say, mixed. Representative Robert Wexler, who has made support of impeachment a signature issue, has signed on to a House resolution promoted by AIPAC that appears to endorse a naval blockade of Iran. A naval blockade would, of course, be an act of war. If not sanctioned by the UN Security Council - and there is no reason to believe that it would be - it would be a war crime. The resolution makes no mention of seeking Security Council approval.

As well as AIPAC the American Jewish Committee is working to get this resolution passed but they do not mention the part that would enable a Naval Blockade, they call it an urgent effort—economic, political, and diplomatic—to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

If it were just that it would not have this key part buried in the penultimate paragraph of the resolution -

(3) demands that the President initiate an international effort to immediately and dramatically increase the economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on Iran to verifiably suspend its nuclear enrichment activities by, inter alia, prohibiting the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products; imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran; and prohibiting the international movement of all Iranian officials not involved in negotiating the suspension of Iran's nuclear program; and

Just Foreign Policy have a form to write to your representative (if a citizen of the American Empire) and wake them up to this and ask them not to support the resolution. Click Here.

The Biggest Mistake of the 21st Century

From Der Spiegel........

Israeli Ministers Mull Plans for Military Strike against Iran

The Israeli government no longer believes that sanctions can prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons. A broad consensus in favor of a military strike against Tehran's nuclear facilities -- without the Americans, if necessary -- is beginning to take shape.

[...]

The one question over which Israel's various political groups disagree is the timing of an attack. The doves argue that diplomatic efforts by the United Nations should be allowed to continue until Iran is on the verge of completing the bomb. That way, Israel could at least argue convincingly that all non-military options had been exhausted.

The hawks, on the other hand, believe time is running out. They stress that there is now a "favorable window of opportunity" that will close with the US presidential election in November, and that Israel can only depend on American support for as long as current US President George W. Bush is still in charge in Washington. They are convinced that the country cannot truly depend on any of the candidates to succeed Bush in office. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic candidate, has already said that he favors direct negotiations with Tehran. And even if Republican John McCain wins the race, politicians in Jerusalem do not expect him to be ordering an attack as his first official act -- despite his performance, at a campaign appearance last year, of the Beach Boys' song "Barbara Ann" with the lyrics: "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran."

[...]

And no one knows better than Israeli leadership itself just how much power lies in the mere belief that a country has nuclear weapons. After all, Israel itself has used this as a deterrent for the past 40 years. It is believed that an estimated 100 to 200 nuclear warheads have been produced at the Dimona reactor in the Negev Desert. Israeli historian Benny Morris, who is not normally considered a hardliner, recently suggested using the weapons: "If the issue is whether Israel or Iran should perish, then Iran should perish."

I find this to be an extremely unstable situation, and would urge everyone to click on the link, and read the entire story.

Ahmadinejad's hold on power "slipping badly"

More pragmatic speaker elected; likely to look for agreement with the West:

clipped from www.time.com Are Ahmadinejad's Days Numbered? Ali Larijani projected a presidential bearing as he accepted his election as speaker of Iran's parliament on Wednesday — a vote that boded ill for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Larijani, a high-profile arch-rival of the President, addressed global themes in his address to the opening session of the Majlis While Iran's insistence on its right to enrich uranium unites all major factions in the country, Larijani represents a more pragmatic approach to handling the issue, aimed at finding agreement with the West and avoiding confrontation. makes two things clear: President Ahmadinejad's hold on power is slipping badly, and next year's Iranian presidential election race is now wide open Prominent politicians and clerical figures have begun distancing themselves from Ahmadinejad and rallying around Larijani Ahmadinejad has alienated many in his own conservative camp with an arrogant personal style and erratic economic and foreign policies

US Declares War on Iran

Washington is now making the most ruthless use of its dollar hegemony against Iran. It just declared war on the entirety of Iran's banking system and will blackmail China, Europe, Japan, et al. to cut off Iran financially.

(1) the March 20 advisory [of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a unit within the US Treasury Department] represents a US declaration of war by sanctions on Iran and a sanctions threat to the international banking community, (2) the US has various unilateral financial sanctions measures at its command in the form of executive orders and Patriot Act Section 311 and (3) the BDA-North Korea sanctions were, at least in retrospect, a test run for Iran.

If the US succeeds, an international quarantine on Iran's banks would disrupt Iran's financial linkages with the world by blocking its ability to process cross-border payments for goods and services exported and imported. Without those linkages Iran is unlikely to be able to engage in global trade and commerce. As 30% of Iran's GDP in 2005 was imports of goods and services and 20% was non-oil exports (World Bank and other data), a large chunk of Iran's economy would shrivel up. The repercussions will be painful and extend well beyond lost business and profits. For example, treating curable illnesses will become difficult. According to an Iranian health ministry official, Iran produces 95% of its own medicines but most pharmaceutical-related raw materials are imported. (John McGlynn, "The March 20, 2008 US Declaration of War on Iran," MRZine, 24 March 2008)

Make no mistake: this economic war is a strategy pursued by both Democrats and Republicans, realists and adventurists alike: Daniel Dombey, "Senators Urge Formal Sanctions," Financial Times, 6 March 2008.

The dollar hegemony is declining (cf. Jeffrey Frankel, "The Euro Could Surpass the Dollar within Ten Years," Vox, 18 March 2008; Wolfgang Münchau, "This Crisis Could Bring the Euro Centre-stage," Financial Times, 23 March 2008), but will it decline fast enough for the Iranians?

The ruling clerics of Iran are able leaders who have run their country with a surer hand than leftists would have, but this presents them with the greatest challenge since Saddam Hussein, backed by the West, invaded Iran -- perhaps even a greater challenge, since at least the richest third of Iranians are not made of the same stuff as those who made the revolution and defended Iran's sovereignty in the eight-year-long war.

Fallon Out

The fallout from the article is blamed (see previous post), he showed himself to be a bloodthirsty racist imperial warrior but not onboard enough with Bush policy on Iran. Whether this means merely the usual distaste for loyalty or has more significance in respect to an attack on Iran is debatable.

The top U.S. military commander for the Middle East resigned Tuesday amid speculation about a rift over U.S. policy in Iran. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that Adm. William J. Fallon had asked for permission to retire and that Gates agreed. Gates said the decision, effective March 31, was entirely Fallon’s and that Gates believed it was “the right thing to do.”

‘Laptop Of Death’ Came From Mossad?

And not PC World where most horrible Windows based atrocities emanate from, ahem, some excerpts (and check out the Shah's family happy to help out in the 'intelligence')-

(IPS) - The George W. Bush administration has long pushed the "laptop documents" -- 1,000 pages of technical documents supposedly from a stolen Iranian laptop -- as hard evidence of Iranian intentions to build a nuclear weapon. Now charges based on those documents pose the only remaining obstacles to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) declaring that Iran has resolved all unanswered questions about its nuclear programme.

But those documents have long been regarded with great suspicion by U.S. and foreign analysts. German officials have identified the source of the laptop documents in November 2004 as the Mujahideen e Khalq (MEK), which along with its political arm, the National Council of Resistance in Iran (NCRI), is listed by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organisation.

There are some indications, moreover, that the MEK obtained the documents not from an Iranian source but from Israel's Mossad.

Despite the fact that it was listed as a terrorist organisation, the MEK was a favourite of neoconservatives in the Pentagon, who were proposing in 2003-2004 to use it as part of a policy to destabilise Iran. The United States is known to have used intelligence from the MEK on Iranian military questions for years. It was considered a credible source of intelligence on the Iranian nuclear programme after 2002, mainly because of its identification of the facility in Natanz as a nuclear site.

The German source said he did not know whether the documents were authentic or not. However, CIA analysts, and European and IAEA officials who were given access to the laptop documents in 2005 were very sceptical about their authenticity.

Scott Ritter, the former U.S. military intelligence officer who was chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998, noted in an interview that the CIA has the capability test the authenticity of laptop documents through forensic tests that would reveal when different versions of different documents were created. The fact that the agency could not rule out the possibility of fabrication, according to Ritter, indicates that it had either chosen not to do such tests or that the tests had revealed fraud.

In her February 2006 report on the laptop documents, the Post's Linzer said CIA analysts had originally speculated that a "third country, such as Israel, had fabricated the evidence". They eventually "discounted that theory", she wrote, without explaining why.

Since 2002, new information has emerged indicating that the MEK did not obtain the 2002 data on Natanz itself but received it from the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad. Yossi Melman and Meier Javadanfar, who co-authored a book on the Iranian nuclear programme last year, write that they were told by "very senior Israeli Intelligence officials" in late 2006 that Israeli intelligence had known about Natanz for a full year before the Iranian group's press conference. They explained that they had chosen not to reveal it to the public "because of safety concerns for the sources that provided the information".

Shahriar Ahy, an adviser to monarchist leader Reza Pahlavi, told journalist Connie Bruck that the detailed information on Natanz had not come from MEK but from "a friendly government, and it had come to more than one opposition group, not only the mujahideen."

Navy's version of Iran speedboat story unravels

But networks don't correct inflammatory early versions
clipped from www.commondreams.org

WASHINGTON - Despite the official and media portrayal of the incident in the Strait of Hormuz early Monday morning as a serious threat to U.S. ships from Iranian speedboats that nearly resulted in a “battle at sea”, new information over the past three days suggests that the incident did not involve such a threat and that no U.S. commander was on the verge of firing at the Iranian boats....[New information] includes the revelation that U.S. officials spliced the audio recording of an alleged Iranian threat onto to a videotape of the incident....Further undermining the U.S. version of the incident is a video released by Iran Thursday showing an Iranian naval officer on a small boat hailing one of three ships. ...Furthermore, as the New York Times noted Thursday, the recording carries no ambient noise, such as the sounds of a motor, the sea or wind, which should have been audible if the broadcast had been made from one of the five small Iranian boats....

The Tonkin Commemorative Geography Quiz

Ok people, now pay attention this won't be too difficult.

Q1. Now who knows where the strait of Hormuz is?

A: Anyone.... it's the narrow bit of water between Iran and the United Arab Emirates with a hint of Oman (see map)

Q2. How far away is this area of water from- a: Iran. b: the USA?

A: It is zero miles from Iran as it laps on the sandy shores of Persia, it is approximately 8,684 miles (as the crow flies) from the USA.

Q3. So which country's naval forces are simply mooching around off their own coast defending their nation from attack (with occasional hilarious -and very irresponsible, ahem- pranks such as this) and which are thousands of miles from home belligerently occupying the area?

Hint: Come on, it really isn't that hard, just go over the figures- 0 or 8,684 miles. Here let's make it easy we'll round down the large (extra hint) number to 8,000. So is 8,000 bigger...or smaller than 0?

A: Yes 8,000 is bigger than 0! It's the USA who are occupying an area thousands of miles from home. Well done!

Now I understand that might have been difficult because of the media reflecting elite Imperial opinion-

US Navy warships over the weekend came "very close" to shooting at an Iranian Revolutionary Guard vessels, which American officials say provoked US ships in international waters, according to CNN. "US officials are confirming to CNN that five Iranian Revolutionary guard boats, in their words, 'harassed and provoked' three US Navy warships sailing in the Strait of Hormuz," reports CNN's Barbara Starr. "One of those Iranian boats came within 200 yards of a Navy warship."

But that's what we have to do, unlearn the established nationalistic biases and see the world from eyes not tattooed in red, white and blue. (nb. this answer also applies to 'which side of the line were the British sailors on?' which was asked & debated by retards everywhere last year. They were thousands of miles over their line, m'kay?).

Confused? You Might Be

ISRAELI security officials are to brief President George W Bush on their latest intelligence about Iran’s nuclear programme - and how it could be destroyed - when he begins a tour of the Middle East in Jerusalem this week.

Ehud Barak, the defence minister, is said to want to convince him that an Israeli military strike against uranium enrichment facilities in Iran would be feasible if diplomatic efforts failed to halt nuclear operations. A range of military options has been prepared.

Hey! I've just realised a major software flaw in all media word processing applications. They print 'Iran' when the user types 'Israel', see there is no Mearsheimer & Walt-ian Israel lobby it's the software! When journalists are reporting on Israeli aggression the article comes out as 'Iranian aggression'. It also makes understanding the news a lot easier, we all know Israel has an active nuclear weapons program but because of the glitch we all got worked up about the 'Iranian nuclear weapons program'.

There is also an intermittent fault when sometimes 'America' is printed as 'Iran'- When the media write about Iranian influence they mean 'American influence' which makes so much more sense:- American influence in the middle east is suspected of backing dictators, puppet leaders and client regimes exporting oil to a technologically inefficient swamp of carbon horror! I'm going to have to do some thorough testing but I suspect there may be other bugs affecting media perception:-

Capitalist greed euphemistically hidden as the subprime crisis, will destroy our entire economy.
Actually prints out as- 'Britney Spears'

The invasion was specifically designed to funnel public money into private hands while impoverishing future generations, government programs for the needy can now be cut under the guise of balancing the budget WHILE at the same time spreading imperial influence in key oil producing areas which enables greater profits for transnational corporations while destroying the people of the country unfortunate enough to play host to these sociopathic power hungry ruling class parasites.
Actually prints as- 'Election '08'

Raped, flailing, sizzling burning limbs coated with pain as babies incinerate in the melted eyes of their mothers.
Prints as- 'winning hearts & minds' also sometimes- 'peace talks'

We are going to reintroduce slavery.
Prints as- 'competitiveness'

Tranquilliser
Prints as- 'entertainment' sometimes- 'beer'

Have a look around yourself and see if you notice any, it's a game the whole family can play!

Oh Do Shut Up

Iran needs to "confess" to running a past nuclear weapons program or its claims of cooperating with a U.N. investigation of its past clandestine activities will be a sham, the chief U.S. envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency said Friday. In Washington, meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Tehran must do even more to end present U.N. sanctions and avoid new ones — halt uranium enrichment and related activities that could make the ingredients for a bomb.

Fantastically illogical, astronomically arrogant and just plain batshit warmongeringly insane. But y'know persistent & dedicated and they wrote 'bomb' result! So they have that going for them. Empires don't expand themselves people.

American Jews Oppose Military Action against Iran

This just in: American Jews are opposed to any military attack on Iran, by a large margin, according to the American Jewish Committee's 2007 Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion (6-25 November 2007).

7. Would you support or oppose the United States taking military action against Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons?
Support	35
Oppose	57
Not Sure	8

The rest of the survey is just as good.

No, this doesn't surprise us: the fact obscured by both the Israel lobby and some of its most foolish critics is that, after all these years, Jewish Americans still largely lean to the Left, thinking more like oppressed Blacks than privileged whites, and adjusted for income differences (lower incomes tend to correlate with more progressive opinions on foreign policy as well as economics), Jewish Americans are probably the most progressive group in the USA; and that neo-conservatives are a tiny minority at odds with a great majority of Jewish Americans they claim to represent (Glenn Greenwald, "New Poll Reveals How Unrepresentative Neocon Jewish Groups Are," Salon.com, 12 December 2007). Now, isn't it great to have what we know confirmed by the American Jewish Committee again?

Update

"Two-Thirds of Israelis Oppose Attack on Iran: Poll" (Agence France Presse, 6 December 2007). Take that, neo-cons!

In the face of the threat of an attack on Iran, support the people of Iran!

via Renegade Eye

Renegade Eye Note: This was written by Alan Woods : However, it would appear that the prospects of an air strike against Iran have receded - at least for the present. This does not suit Ahmadinejad at all. His support is rapidly eroding inside Iran, and his only hope was to keep beating the drum about the danger of US aggression in order to divert the masses' attention away from their most pressing problems and thus save his regime. He has made a public statement to the effect that the new revelations expose Bush as a liar (which they do) and completely justify the policies of his regime (which they do not).

This will make it easier for the development of a widespread movement of opposition by the Iranian workers and students, which has already begun and is destined to transform the whole political life of the region in the coming period. The Iranian Revolution will cut across the stagnant and unbreathable atmosphere of reaction that hangs over the region. It will cast off the yoke of religious fundamentalism and resolutely take the road of socialism and workers' power. I think Allen's words compliment Maryam's.

In the face of the threat of an attack on Iran, support the people of Iran!
Maryam Namazie

The threat of a US attack and the devastating consequences of economic sanctions are looming over the people of Iran. US's war with the Islamic Republic is not the war of the people. People of Iran and their interests are not represented in this conflict. They want neither the Islamic Republic, nor a military attack, nor economic sanctions. For years, they have been fighting the Islamic Republic and the unbearable conditions that this ultra-reactionary regime has imposed on society.

Iran is a society where people sing the Internationale anthem in their protest gatherings and chant "One earth, one humanity" and "One race, the human race". It is a society where the slogan "Freedom, equality, human identity" has adorned the banner of its struggles. A society where the International Day of the Child is celebrated in large gatherings in scores of cities, and where its manifesto in defence of the rights of homeless children and child workers declares: "for children to be free, this inverted world must be changed". It is a society where prisoners on death row, from deep inside the jails, call on the people of the world to fight for the universal abolition of the death penalty. Iranian people in their numerous demonstrations have repeatedly stated that they want neither war, nor a nuclear programme, nor the Islamic Republic.

People of the world!

To end the threat of a military attack on Iran, support the struggle of the people of Iran! The overthrow of the Islamic Republic by the will and power of the people is the only human and civilised way to end the threat of war and the deadly race that Islamic terrorism and US militarism and state terrorism are waging in Iran, the Middle East and globally. The Islamic Republic does not represent the people of Iran. This regime is their enemy, not their representative! This is a regime that has been able to survive only by executing tens of thousands of people and carrying out the most ghastly medieval tortures and punishments such as stoning to death, flogging and amputating. The Islamic Republic must be rejected and isolated internationally. The world must treat this regime of sexual Apartheid like it treated the racist Apartheid regime in South Africa. Demand that the world's states and international bodies not to recognise the Islamic Republic as the government of Iran. Demand that they cut off their diplomatic ties with this medieval regime.

In the fight against the US government's warlike, inhuman and brutal policies, the Iranian people are on your side; they are asking you to be on their side in the fight against the Islamic Republic! To defeat the American government's and its allies' bullying and militarism, to defeat the reactionary and terrorist political Islamic movement and to overthrow the Islamic Republic, support the struggle of the people of Iran.

Hamid Taqvaee
Secretary of WPI Central Committee
30 November 2007
Maryam Namazie

NIE LIE

"Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005," says the unclassified summary of the secret report.Rand Beers, who resigned from Bush's National Security Council just before the Iraq war, said the report should derail any appetite for war on the administration's part, and should reinvigorate regional diplomacy. "The new NIE throws cold water on the efforts of those urging military confrontation with Iran," he said.

The spooks say Iran halted its nuclear weapon program in 2003, incidentally the year it proposed unconditional talks with the US and which the White house rejected point blank. They want war, ok, the Bush administration in the United States of America want war with Iran. So with this latest piece of reality impinging on their war pimping they spin it thusly- as they continue to enrich uranium (which they need for nuclear power) that means they actually are pursuing weapons. Lying war mongering bastard says-

U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, said the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains "a serious problem." The estimate suggests Bush "has the right strategy: intensified international pressure along with a willingness to negotiate a solution that serves Iranian interests, while ensuring the world will never have to face a nuclear armed Iran," Hadley said. He was less interested in what the 2005 assessment missed than what it got right: that Iran had a covert nuclear program.

So even the entire intelligence community of the empire is saying for fuck's sake do not attack Iran, it poses no threat and the consequences of attacking to America would be disastrous. This is the NIE Cheney delayed for a year to force it to include as much anti Iranian propaganda as possible-

• intelligence analysts have had to review and rewrite their findings three times, because of pressure from the White House.


• The White House has now apparently decided to release the unsatisfactory draft NIE, but without making its key findings public.


• Frank J. Gaffney, a protégé of neoconservative heavyweight Richard Perle, complained that Negroponte was “absurdly declaring the Iranian regime to be years away from having nuclear weapons”.


• an unsubtle signal to the intelligence community that the White House was determined to obtain a more alarmist conclusion on the Iranian nuclear programme.

So even with that, look at what it concludes- they stopped 4 years ago. The cabal in charge are the same mental patients who deliberately exaggerated the threat from the Soviets in the cold war, they lied us into the Iraq invasion, at exactly which fucking point do we stop them?

PS. As Hass a commenter at my blog added-

From IranAffairs.com:

Iran NIE report - Are you lying now, or were you lying then? If the 2005 NIE report was wrong, why should the 2007 NIE report be any more credible? If Iran really had a nuclear weapons program until 2003 as the new NIE says, then why has the IAEA found no evidence of it? WHy should we believe that Iran EVER had a nuclear weapons program at all?

Seven Bad Assumptions We Make About Iran

clipped from www.alternet.org The Bush Administration's policy (insistence on zero enrichment of uranium, regime change and isolation of Iran) and the policy of the radicals around President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (unlimited civilian nuclear capability, selective inspections and replacing the United States as the region's dominant power) have set the two countries on a collision course. Yet the mere retirement of George W. Bush's neocons or Ahmadinejad's radicals may not be sufficient to avoid the disaster of war. The ill-informed foreign policy debate on Iran contributes to a paradigm of enmity between the United States and Iran, which limits the foreign policy options of future U.S. administrations to various forms of confrontation while excluding more constructive approaches. A successful policy on Iran must begin by reassessing some basic assumptions:

Continuation:

1. Iran is ripe for regime change.
Not true. [...]
2. Iran is irrational and cannot be deterred.
Not true. [...]
3. Iran is inherently anti-American.
Not quite. [...]
4. Enrichment equals a nuclear bomb.
Not necessarily. [...]
5. Iran seeks Israel's destruction.
False. [...]
6. The pressure on Iran is working.
Questionable. [...]
7. Stability in the Middle East can be achieved only through Iran's isolation.
Quite the contrary. [...]

Iran poses a complicated challenge to America, but not an irresolvable one. Despite the tremendous distrust between the two countries, history shows that negotiations can work. In 2001 Tehran and Washington worked closely together to defeat the Taliban and install a new government in Afghanistan. Without Iranian help, the new Constitution of Afghanistan would not have been achieved, according to U.S. diplomats involved in the effort.

[Posted on Clipmarks by Rasmus, who has many excellent clips there. You might also enjoy some of mine there: masbury's clipmarks. It's a great place to stash brief clips, and see those of others. - Monte]

US Warplanes Violate Iranian Airspace

Tabnak reports that US warplanes from Iraq violated Iran's airspace around Khorramshahr nine times in the 24-hour period from 6 AM on Monday:
"تجاوز هواپيماي آمريکا به خرمشهر در 24ساعت" (13 November 2007). That is unprecedented since the beginning of the occupation of Iraq, as Tabnak notes. An ominous sign.

Empire Building Lubricant

Ten Percent in the muthaluvvin' house! Thanks to Naj's kind invitation it is I- RickB with my first post to this fine group blog/meta blog whose goal I feel is nothing less than world peace and the end of Empire Americana! Easy, I thought it might be something challenging, what am I going to do next week with all my spare time? Oh ok, I'll cure AIDS & cancer. Yeah supertalented and overwhelmingly humble too, like the aristocratic fool said- Bring it on!

Now, as well as all the other uses Iran is being put to by the US government (scapegoat, bogeyman, military budget enlarger) it is also being put to work by American imperialists as both a lubricant and aphrodisiac to expand US influence into Europe.

(Reuters) The United States intends to proceed with a radar and missile shield in central Europe despite Russian objections, a senior U.S. official said on Monday. "We are continuing negotiations with those countries (Poland and the Czech Republic)," Daniel Fried, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State, told a news conference in Baku.

"We hope to succeed, and if we succeed, we will proceed with the development of a radar system for the Czech Republic and missiles for Poland," he added. The plan for a radar in the Czech Republic and interceptor missiles in Poland to avert potential missile strikes from Iran has angered Russia, which says the defense shield would threaten its security.

The logic is impeccable, no wait the other thing- absurd. Exactly why and indeed how would Iran be attacking Poland or the Czech Republic is something probably only spiritualists and groundhogs could divine. But apparently the Whitehouse are down to any old nonsense coupled to base xenophobia to sell their incredibly expensive, non-functional empire enlarging boondogle. Without Iran they would be left to hint that maybe aliens might be about to attack and without the missile shield nothing would stand between brain sucking slimy green xenomorphs and our poor innocent children.

There is a very detailed and completely hilarious article on the farcical world of the US missile shield/military industrial gravy train by Jack Hitt in a recent Rolling Stone(I am not kidding when I say the ex-guitarist from the Doobie Brothers plays a key role in missile defence & the previously mentioned alien invasion... is seen as a risk, but they'd need more money to fight it), you can read it here, and a quick taste-

Missile defense exists in a world of its own. It has a special budget process that exempts it from most congressional oversight, and it is pioneering a new acquisitions process that redefines the very nature of what constitutes a "threat." The system has a separate definition to denote what it means for a weapon to "work" and even what it means to "know" something to be true.

Most of the time, the Patriot missed its mark. And in 2003, at the start of the Iraq War, Patriots killed two British soldiers and an American pilot, Lt. Nathan White. It turns out that even the Patriot -- the only part of missile defense that has actually been battle-tested -- suffers from basic problems, sometimes mistaking our own planes for enemy missiles.

To justify the deployment of untested technologies, officials at the Missile Defense Agency changed the fundamental epistemology of weapons procurement. In bureaucratic-speak, they ceased following a "knowledge-based" system and relied instead upon what they called a "capability-based" standard. In simple terms, it's the difference between knowing that something works because you've tested it, and believing that something works because all the parts, when put together, should be capable of working. It's the difference between test-driving a car before mass-producing it, and building one from a schematic but deciding not to turn the key for the first time until there's an emergency. It's the difference between the old carpenter's advice of "measure twice, cut once," and the new, Rumsfeldian directive: "Cut already."

How to treat Islamophobia

Responding to Islamophobia: A Pro-Active Strategy Phyllis Bennis | October 24, 2007 Editor: Erik Leaver
Foreign Policy In Focus

It is clearly no coincidence that the areas that are the ultimate targets of the so-called "war on terror," countries where Islam is preeminent as majority populations and often the basis for governance, are the same countries and regions where strategic resources--most notably oil and natural gas--are concentrated. It is also no coincidence that both the 2002 and 2006 versions of the Pentagon's "Quadriennial Review" demonized Muslims, Islamic countries and Islam, in various guises, as grave threats to U.S. security. read more ...