Posts Tagged ‘Tehran’
Tuesday, March 16th, 2010
»
^
Mar 16 08:23
Tags:
The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws.
Mar 16 08:21
Tags:
The Obama administration’s fierce denunciation of Israel last week has ignited a firestorm in Congress and among powerful pro-Israel interest groups who say the criticism of America’s top Mideast ally was misplaced.
Webmaster’s Commentary:
Insert sounds of groveling here.
»
^
Mar 16 08:20
Tags:
It is claimed that leaked documents show the US Army felt sufficiently threatened by security breaches on Wikileaks that it considered ways it might wreck the site.
A 2008 report by the Army Counterintelligence Center, classified Secret, calls for a mole hunt and prosecutions to undermine potential sources’ trust in Wikileaks.
Mar 16 08:18
Tags:
After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate’s health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.
Webmaster’s Commentary:
Who really needs a Congress anyway, right madam Fuhrer?
Mar 16 08:07
Tags:
Newly discovered footage of a terrorist attack perpetrated by an Israel Defense Forces soldier in the Arab town of Shfaram five years ago indicates that authorities were aware of plans to commit the attack, a lawyer representing Israeli Arabs suspected of taking part in the subsequent lynching of the gunman said Sunday.
Mar 16 08:06
Tags:
Maryland’s two largest counties outlined spending cuts Monday that would reach from children’s health clinics to nursing homes, slice tens of millions of dollars in education spending and furlough thousands of public employees.
Webmaster’s Commentary:
Never enough tax money for the taxpayers, but always aenough for more bombs to drop on Iran!
Mar 16 08:04
Tags:
Webmaster’s Commentary:
The bankers created a system to suck all of the money out of the society and put it into their pockets. But nobody planned what to do if they succeeded!
»
^
Mar 16 08:01
Tags:
Shameful Zionist propaganda lobby group The Simon Wiesenthal Center has issued a report which smears people who question government as racists and terrorists, labeling conspiracy theories “hate” in the latest crusade against free speech on the Internet.
…
In reality, the only peddlers of “hate” are the Simon Wiesenthal Center itself. Their latest report is yet another salvo in the long-standing agenda to silence what they characterize as “conspiracy theories,” but what in fact constitute legitimate criticism of the abuses committed by Israel against Palestinians.
»
^
Mar 16 08:01
Tags:
Iran has dismissed a recent report by an American paper which claimed Tehran was seeking nuclear weapons in the late 1980s.
Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast described the report as a “propaganda ploy that shows Washington’s ultimate frustration.”
Mar 16 07:55
By: Saladin
Tags:
The President convinces his democratic party that without a victory on health care HIS presidency is in jeopardy -as if it is his personal possession. His legacy will be lost. The president thus shows the most contempt for the American people by claiming that his personal position of power and his legacy are more important than the wishes or the best interests of the American people. That is the type of contempt that is demonstrated by kings, dictators and tyrants.
Mar 16 07:51
By: Ethan Allen and…
Tags:
Great man, Lysander Spooner.
Mar 16 07:49
By: boulderdash
Tags:
I happen to mention this debacle with The Pope because it fits in with a few other alarming events that aren’t on the hilltops with ten foot horns but which are going to be making a lot of noise sooner or later. One of these is the capture of someone reputed to be the Taliban’s #2 guy. Apparently the Afghan government is very angry about this because this Talibani had a promise of safe passage and was engaged in strategic talks; please forgive my linking to a Zionist manufactured news site. It’s what I could find handy and sometimes they tell the truth just to keep the borderline mentalities guessing.
»
Mar 16 07:46
By: Ethan Allen and…
Tags:
What do you say we put a wall topped with razor wire around the district of criminals and send in Snake Pliskin!
»
Mar 16 07:46
Tags:
Terrorism, or the glorification of it, is not the solution to anything….it will only prolong the struggle for a permanent Just Peace. We must find ways and means to get to that goal. Both sides must unite against terrorism!
»
^
Mar 16 07:44
Tags:
A year ago. Israeli Border Police shattered the skull of Tristan Anderson with a high-velocity tear gas canister as he stood unarmed following a weekly demonstration against Israel’s Separation Wall in the West Bank village of Nilin. Since then, his family, friends, and supporters around the world continue the struggle to hold Israel accountable.
Anderson, a now-39-year-old resident of Oakland, California, still lies in the Tel Hashomer hospital outside Tel Aviv, where he was taken after the March 13, 2009, shooting. Although his mother Nancy Anderson recently reported some welcome signs of progress in his recovery, he remains in critical condition, with severe permanent brain damage and an uncertain prognosis.
»
^
Mar 16 07:43
Tags:
The Israeli military finally constructed the watchtower in Ush Ghrab in the middle of our town of Beit Sahour today. An ugly reminder to us of the apartheid military power and an eye-sore too. News also indicates that the army decided to declare areas of Bilin and Nilin as closed military zones on Friday so that they try to prevent the weekly demonstrations.
WHAT REALLY HAPPENED | The History The US Government HOPES You Never Learn!
Tags: Afghanistan, america, army, ATTACK, Bill H. R, commentary, criticism, Dick Act, Dictatorship, Ethan Allen, Gun Control, Gun Control Laws, Health Care Bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Iran, Israel, Israel Defense Forces, israel interest, israeli arabs, Mar, Maryland, mole hunt, Montgomery, Nancy Pelosi, Prince George, report, Shfaram, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Tags, Tehran, U.S., US, Washington, Webmaster, wikileaks Posted in headlines | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Monday, March 15th, 2010
Ray McGovern
CounterPunch
Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:01 EDT
© Unknown
Participants at an otherwise informative discussion on "Iran at a Crossroads" at the Senate on Wednesday seemed at pains to barricade the doors against the proverbial elephant being admitted into the room – in this case, Israel.
This, despite the fact that the agenda virtually dictated that the elephant be allowed in. The cavernous hearing room also could have accommodated it – however awkward and untidy the atmosphere might have become.
Otherwise, as was entirely predictable, the discussion would be lacking a crucial element. Which is exactly what happened. Which is exactly what always happens.
The tongue-tied impediment displayed by some of the presenters can be chalked up mostly to the all-too-familiar timidity on Capitol Hill to countenance candid discussion of any issue on which Israel can be revealed to be a fly in the ointment.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Michigan, obtained use of the hearing room for the organizers of the discussion, the thoroughly professional National Iranian American Council headed by Professor Trita Parsi. This is to Levin’s credit, in my view.
At the same time, Sen. Levin holds the all-time-high record for PAC contributions from groups affiliated with the self-described "America’s Pro-Israel Lobby" – the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). I’m guessing that Levin’s office may have asked that some caution be exercised, so that it would be difficult for Fox News to misrepresent the proceedings as "Israel bashing."
Setting the Stage
In any case, a truly distinguished panel launched a discussion on "The U.S. and Iran: Back to Confrontation?" which Professor Parsi moderated. The panelists began by setting a fact- and reality-based context, which in turn raised hopes of a no-holds-barred discussion. Their observations included, or implied, the following:
The status of the U.S. as the "world’s sole remaining superpower" may have "turned a corner." In many key respects, China, India, Russia and Brazil now represent a rival "superpower" strong enough to thwart American policy objectives.
The consequences of nuclear weapons proliferation in the general area of the Persian Gulf would be so truly ominous that "everything imaginable" should be done to head it off.
The main "positive" of robust sanctions against a country like Iran is simply that those who impose them can feel good. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to target sanctions on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps without hurting the Iranian people at large.
The experience of the past several years demonstrates that the U.S. and Iran share – and can act on – a range of common interests (in Afghanistan, for example). Neither country would profit from hostilities involving Iran.
Iran is nowhere near a nuclear weapon, so there is time to reconsider what guarantees could be offered to Tehran to dissuade it from pursuing a nuclear weapons option.
No member of Congress has set foot in Iran since 1979.
No Discussion of Implications
With these observations on the table, it was as if the doors to the hearing room were clanked shut and bolted, lest the Israeli elephant be allowed to intrude. And this, despite a palpable yearning in the audience for the panelists to address uncomfortable questions like:
If there are no intrinsic factors dictating implacable hostility between Iran and the U.S., how does one account for its persistence? What promotes, what feeds it?
There was, of course, the sad history of 1953 when the CIA and British intelligence engineered the overthrow of Iran’s first democratically elected government, and the outrage of Iran’s holding 52 American hostages for 444 days at the end of Jimmy Carter’s presidency.
But aside from those incidents, could the mutual hostility today have anything to do with Israel and its ability to enlist the U.S. behind Israeli strategic objectives?
Do the Iranian leaders see as contrived the oft-expressed concern that Iran might eventually obtain a nuclear weapon, when American officials do nothing about Israel’s actual nuclear weapons, or for that matter, those of Pakistan and India?
Is the real objective of Israel and, by extension, the U.S. the same as it was with respect to Iraq seven years ago – that is, "regime change"? (How I dislike using the euphemism in vogue for what we used to call overthrowing governments!)
Even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton let drop last month that, even if Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon, this does not "directly" threaten the United States.
Is it true, as one of the panelists asserted, that "No one believes that the Green (opposition) movement in Iran is supported by outside forces; that rather it is clearly an entirely indigenous, spontaneous movement?"
Into the memory hole went past news reports about the Bush administration earmarking $400 million to support covert operations designed to frustrate Iran’s nuclear program and to destabilize its political system. Also unmentionable were troubling reports that the United States has helped "good" terrorist organizations, like Jundullah, to strike violent blows against Iran’s regime.
Is it a given, as one afternoon panelist suggested, that "Everyone knows that the Israelis would not use their considerable nuclear arsenal except in self-defense"? It seems that when Israel is mentioned in these affairs, commentary must be only in the most positive light; there can be no suggestion that Israel might use, say, bunker-busting tactical nukes to destroy hardened Iranian targets.
Does the Israeli government honestly perceive an "existential threat" in Iran’s possible acquisition of a few nuclear weapons against the 200-300 devices already in Israel’s arsenal? If so, is Israel prepared to "defend itself" by attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities, using the preventive-war justification which has long been a staple of Israeli policy, and was adopted kit and caboodle by Bush and Cheney?
Are the Israelis counting on U.S. logistical support for such a preventive attack – intelligence and operational planning support of the kind that enabled its surgical strike on the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak in 1981? Are they expecting the kind of political support the United States provided in the wake of Israel’s September 2007 attack on a suspect nuclear-related facility being built in Syria?
Why is it that former Ambassador Robert Hunter, now an adviser to RAND and himself a passionate opponent of nuclear proliferation, can endorse the idea of a "nuclear-free Middle East," and then with a wan smile simply throw up his hands lamenting that that’s never going to happen. Why must this proposal be banned from the category of "everything imaginable," simply because "everyone is sure" that Israel would never go along?
If Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu feels he can thumb his nose at the U.S. President (and Vice President) on the signal issue of Israeli settlements, is there reason to believe that Netanyahu is inclined to take into account repeated "please pleas" from the likes of Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen, who has warned the Israelis publicly that an attack on Iran would be a "big, big, big problem for all of us?"
Was this week’s chutzpah-laden Israeli announcement of new settlement construction in East Jerusalem – in the midst of a visit by Vice President Joe Biden – a case of what one might call "practice mouse trapping," to test whether the Obama administration really has the toughness to push back in a meaningful way?
Ambassador Hunter was accompanied on the afternoon panel by prolific writer, Professor Juan Cole of the University of Michigan, and Robert Malley, who served in senior positions at President Bill Clinton’s National Security Council and is now Program Director for Middle East and North Africa at the International Crisis Group in Washington, D.C.
All three have a wealth of experience on the Middle East and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and this gave rise to eventually dashed expectations of a more candid discussion of several related issues as they impinge on Iranian interests.
There are, of course, limits to what can be covered in an hour and a quarter. Still, there did seem to be distinct reluctance to include Israel in any discussion of the political obstacles preventing sensible accommodation between Tehran and Washington.
No doubt the main obstacle can be traced to the timeworn "passionate attachment" of U.S. leaders to Israel’s perceived interests, and the tendency to view them as identical to those of the United States. This politically and emotionally sensitive issue needs to be addressed openly and without fear – in the interest of Israeli, as well as Iranian and American citizens.
If Not Now, When?
Granted, volunteering to sponsor such a discussion would be seen as the kiss of death for the vast majority of lawmakers. But can it be that there is no group, no think tank with courage enough to arrange such a forum? For it truly needs to be done, and quickly, somewhere – whether permitted in a Senate office building, or not.
Without free discussion and greater understanding, there is virtually no prospect of lessened tensions. Rather, the volatile situation seems likely to get still worse, and could even include an Israeli provocation and/or a preventive strike on Iran.
Here Admiral Mullen is right; such actions would constitute a "big, big, big problem for all of us."
Ray McGovern was an Army officer and CIA analyst for almost 30 year. He now serves on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. He is a contributor to Imperial Crusades: Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair (Verso). He can be reached at: rrmcgovern@aol.com
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/204763-Taboo-Thwarts-Candor-on-Israel-Iran
Tags: account, Afghanistan, Ambassador Hunter, Ambassador Robert Hunter, American Israel Public Affairs Committee, ATTACK, brazil, Carl Levin, Chairman Mike Mullen, china, Clinton, Counterpunch, country, East Jerusalem, Everything, fox news, Hostility, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Israel Public Affairs Committee, Jimmy Carter, Middle East, pac contributions, Pakistan, policy, President Bill Clint, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Professor Juan Cole, Proliferation, Public Affairs Committee, Quot, RAND, Ray Mcgovern, Robert Malley, Russia, Secretary of State Hillary, Sen. Carl Levin, support, Syria, Tehran, the Persian Gulf, trita parsi, U.S., U.S. President, United States, Vice President Joe Biden, weapon Posted in Global governance, Israel, The soon to be former USA, nation, nato, war, war criminals, world | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Monday, March 8th, 2010
Tags: Afghanistan, america, anthony j hall, blow whistle, Bogota, Camp OUT, china, civil, Colombia, contractor fraud, David Swanson, DC, Deborah Hastings, George W Bush, Hamid Golpira, Iran, Iraq, los alamos national laboratory, March, Megan Cornish, Mike Whitney, National, Norman Finkelstein, nuclear, Obama, Peace, Philadelphia, Prof. Anthony J, Prof. James Petras, Prof. Marc W, Quot, Single Payer Health Care, Somalia, Suzy T. Kane, Tehran, Tom Burghardt, treason in america, US, valley forge convention center, video, waffen ss, war, war in somalia, Washington, William Fisher, Women Posted in headlines | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Saturday, March 6th, 2010
By Philip Giraldi
View all 20 articles by Philip Giraldi
Published 03/06/10
The Scottish poet Robert Burns wrote "Oh what a gift a gift to gie us, to see ourselves as others see us." Burns could not have possibly predicted a hubris ridden twenty-first century America not much given to introspection, but there were certainly enough examples of over mighty kings and princes in his own time for him to draw upon. Burns’ enduring wisdom about people and their ways is particularly relevant in our own time–something that might give pause to all Americans as Washington’s political class blunderingly continues to seek to remake the world in its own image. A bit of Burnsian self-criticism might also help the many pundits who inhabit the media talk shows, bombarding the American public with their wisdom explaining why things are the way they are and why we citizens should be satisfied that a state of continual warfare in pursuit of a dubious new world order, is the best we can hope for.
It is particularly interesting to follow the pieces written by the many opinion shapers in the print media. Many were cheerleaders for Iraq, became doubters when the war went sour, climbed on the bandwagon of the surge, and now are accomplices in Washington’s attempt to subdue Afghanistan. The most subtle of the pundits are those like Tom Friedman and David Brooks of the New York Times who appear to be reasonable but are nevertheless agents of the consensus politics crafted by the Washington elite from both parties, hardly ever advocating what might actually be good for the American people. David Ignatius of the Washington Post is another example and particularly appealing as he exudes calmness and "let us reason together" in his articles and op-eds, unlike his more strident opinion page colleague Charles Krauthammer. Ignatius is, nevertheless, no disinterested observer. He is a classic Washington "insider," an embedded media source with the US commands in Iraq and Afghanistan and his unique access to information is the prize he gets for saying the right things. One of his more recent offerings, "Buying the Vote: Iran is backing candidates — In Iraq" (Feb 25), is a replay of the enemy is Iran theme that has proven popular in the mainstream media, so popular indeed that a large majority of Americans now think incorrectly that Iran already has a nuclear weapon and have concluded that it is a threat that has to be dealt with by force of arms.
Ignatius should pay attention to Robert Burns. He does not even conceal that his information comes from the US Commander in Iraq General Ray Odierno. Odierno/Ignatius make the following four points to illustrate Iranian hostility: First, "Iran provides money, campaign materials, and political training to various individuals and political parties in Iraq." Second, "Iran interferes in Iraq’s political process, urging alliances that not all Iraqi politicians favor, in an effort to consolidate power among parties supported by Iran." Third, "Iran supports de-Baathification efforts engineered by Ahmed Chalabi for the purpose of eliminated potential obstacles to Iranian influence." And fourth, "According to all source intelligence, Ahmed Chalabi visited Iran at least three times since last year."
The Baath Party was the ruling political grouping under Saddam Hussein and, because it was part of the dictatorial regime, what role it should play at the present time is hotly debated in Iraq. The Baaths were predominantly Sunni Muslims. Ahmed Chalabi, is a leading Shi’ite politician who has lately been blamed for efforts to limit the Sunni influence, acting in collusion with the rulers in Iran, who are also Shi’ites.
The situation is extremely confusing, but even Ignatius concedes that in spite of their best efforts Iranians are not particularly popular in Iraq and being linked to them is in all likelihood a vote loser rather than a gainer. Ignatius and Odierno might also note that if you substitute the United States for Iran in all the charges they are leveling against the Mullahs you will find that everything applies pretty much equally well. The US Embassy is heavily engaged in the elections both supporting and promoting candidates that are deemed to be pro-American–it was behind the initial and catastrophic de-Baathification program of the Coalition Provisional Authority in 2003-4–and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Vice President Joe Biden have visited Iraq numerous times to tell Iraqi leaders what to do. It is particularly ironic that Ahmed Chalabi, who was the darling of the Pentagon neocons, has gone from hero to villain. Ignatius once enjoyed easy access to Chalabi through his neocon friends. Now Odierno and Ignatius regard Chalabi as a dupe of Tehran whereas in reality Chalabi is what he has always been–a promoter of himself and his personal political interests.
So the wheel turns. The United States decides it must interfere in the Middle East for reasons of its own security based on phony allegations about weapons of mass destruction. It smashes Iraq, destroys its government, and produces a vacuum which powerful neighbor Iran seeks to fill insofar as possible. What exactly did Washington expect to happen–Switzerland on the Tigris? Iran has a great deal to lose if a hostile government were to emerge in Baghdad. After all, it lives in the neighborhood and shares an 875 mile border with a country that has often been viewed as an enemy. Iraq’s war of aggression against Iran, producing over a million Iranian casualties between 1980 and 1988, is a recent memory. Iran is also surrounded by a sea of hostile predominantly Sunni Muslim states backed by American firepower, meaning that it is impelled to protect itself by establishing friendly and even client relationships with other Shia groups in the region. The United States has much less at stake. It only wants Iraqi elections to bring a certain measure of stability so plans to withdraw US forces can proceed, enabling a focus on the new big war in neighboring Afghanistan. Even there it is hedging its bets with Odierno stating recently that Washington would be prepared to stay in Iraq if the political situation does not stabilize, whatever that means. Ultimately it makes little difference to the US who is on top in Iraq as long as they sell their oil on the international market and are not openly hostile or permitting the country to be used as a base for groups like al-Qaeda.
David Ignatius is by no means unique. The mainstream media is full of self-described experts who need tension and war to bolster their own self-esteem so that they will continue to appear as well-informed and well-paid interpreters of today’s world. They artfully package threats against the US national interest in such a way as to make it seem as if a war against dark forces can and should go on and on forever, eventually involving Washington in every corner of the globe. Until the money and manpower run out. Ironically, none of the hawks are actually willing to put their own lives on the line to support the policies they so passionately embrace. None have any actual experience of warfare beyond riding around in a Pentagon protected bubble with a platoon of infantrymen to guard them. Run through the list of media neocons and pro-war journalists if you will. You will not find one who has done military service yet all are constantly in full chickenhawk battle array, boasting about how much they love America’s armed forces. Their quest for military glory is in truth hostile to everything the American Republic has ever stood for, dedicated to creating a narrative that will ultimately lead to more wars against every Muslim country left standing, shedding other Americans’ blood and eviscerating the US economy until there is nothing more to give.
Copyright © 2010 Campaign for Liberty
Also by Philip Giraldi:
The War on Terror Is Anti-Conservative 02/26/10
National Insecurity 01/29/10
Yemen and the War of the Worlds 01/07/10
Obama’s New Years Resolutions 01/01/10
Changing the Narrative for War 12/29/09
View all 20 articles by Philip Giraldi
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=666
Tags: access, Afghanistan, Ahmed Chalabi, america, Charles Krauthammer, Clinton, consensus politics, David Brooks, David Ignatius, disinterested observer, General Ray Odierno, gift, Ignatius, information, Iran, Iraq, Joe Biden, Odierno, Opinion, Philip Giraldi, poet robert burns, Quot, Robert Burns, Saddam Hussein, scottish poet, Secretary of State Hillary, Source, Tehran, Time, Tom Friedman, United States, US, Vice, Vote, Washington, washington elite, Wisdom, world Posted in The soon to be former USA, activism, mainstream media, nation, the former republic that was America, war, world | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010
Feedthemoon
Tue, 02 Mar 2010 13:20 EST
Aaanan Gissin, Israel’s infamous Media advisor to Benjamin Netan-yahoo, looked the press-pack square in the eye, and jabbed a podgy finger of warning:
‘Be in no doubt’, he said, ‘Tehran has the weapon, they have it! -And as we speak, I am in no doubt, they are watching us with those big binoculars.’
Many assembled press-men, followed his nervous glance toward the window, myself included.
‘Oh yes, they watch us all the time,’ he continued. ‘They watch us as we drive our children to school, they watch our politicians as they draw up defensive plans to strike Iran, they could even, God forbid, watch us in our private moments.’
During the course of his paranoid diatribe, Gissin seemed to be becoming more and more agitated. Eventually he broke:
‘For God’s sake, will someone please close those curtains!’ he screamed.
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/203952-Iran-Develops-Powerful-Super-Binoculars-To-Spy-On-Israel-
.
Tags: Aaanan, advisor, Benjamin Netan-yahoo, binoculars, curtains, Diatribe, doubt, EST, Feedthemoon, Gissin, glance, God, Iran, Israel, Mar, media, Netan-yahoo, No Doubt, Politicians, private moments, Sake, Tehran, Tue Posted in Humor | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
|
|
