|
|
Guitar Discussions -> IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool?
There are 14 messages in this thread.
You are currently looking at messages 1 to 10.
|
IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - White Man Fight - 6-:24 -0-09-20
|
|
http://mundiclub.blogspot.com/2006/01/jews-stirring-up-world-war-three-zog_=
30.html
www.iamthewitness.com
The jews-only state in palestine is mobilizing its supporters in
america (and in europe) to push the bush administration into yet
another proxy zionist war =96 this time against iran. In america, the
political pressure for a war against iran is coming overwhelmingly
from one sector of american society: the jewish sayanim network of
mossad collaborators, the jews in the jewish dominated american media,
the jewish lobby, the jewish-owned congress, and the israelis who have
infiltrated the bush administration. The proposed war against iran is
the most blatant example of a war concocted, planned, and marketed, by
jews around the world solely for the benefit of the jews-only state in
palestine. It is not the american oil industry which is leading the
charge for such a war, "Except for the Israeli lobby in the US and its
grass root Jewish American supporters and allies among the Presidents
of the Major Jewish organizations there are no other organized lobbies
pressuring for or against this war. The ritualistic denunciations of
"Big Oil" whenever there is a Middle East conflict involving the US is
in this instance a totally bogus issue, lacking any substance. All the
evidence is to the contrary =96 big oil is opposed to any conflicts,
which will upset their first major entry into Middle Eastern oil
fields since they were nationalized in the 1970=92s." (James Petras
=91Israel's War with Iran=92 http://www.uruknet.info/?p=3Dm19081&l=3Di&size=
=3D1&hd=3D0
December 28, 2005). It is not the american military which wants such a
war. "Rumsfeld, under tremendous pressure from practically all of the
top professional military officials, fears that an Israeli war will
further accelerate US military losses. The pro-Israel lobby would like
to replace the ultra-militarist Rumsfeld with the ultra-militarist
Senator Joseph Lieberman, an unconditional Israel First
Zealot." (James Petras =91Israel's War with Iran=92
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=3Dm19081&l=3Di&size=3D1&hd=3D0 December 28, 2005=
).
It is not american economists wishing to promote american economic
interests around the world. It is the israelis living in america =96
parasites who have colonized the american political system. Their sole
concern is to promote policies which benefit the jews-only state in
palestine no matter how damaging this might be to america=92s economic
and national interests.
The Commentators who believe the Jewish Lobby is Primarily Responsible
for Stirring up a War against Iran.
Eric Margolis.
"The growing clamour over Iran's nuclear intentions, with rumblings
about air strikes against Iran's reactors in the fall, may prove to be
a part of just such a manufactured crisis. Remember, these latest
fevered claims about Iran come from the same "reliable intelligence
sources" and neo-conservative hawks who insisted Iraq had a vast
arsenal of weapons of mass destruction that threatened the U.S., with
intimate links to al-Qaida." (Eric Margolis =91Those who deceived
America into attacking Iraq may be at it again=92
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Toronto/Eric_Margolis/2004/07/25/5=
56378.html
July 25, 2004).
Martin Sieff.
"The pattern of preparation for this is all too familiar from the
buildup to war with Iraq. First, the war drums are sounded by the same
old "experts"; then they are amplified by alarmist columnists. Once
you see Krauthammer or Ledeen opining, as they have over the past two
months, that Iran's nuclear capability poses the gravest possible
threat to Civilization as We Know It, and that The World Cannot Afford
to Wait and Negotiate, then you can guarantee - conveniently close to
the election to panic voters into supporting the president - that
Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld will pick up the chorus. Ledeen has already
written at least two columns on the subject. Krauthammer, prophet of
the Iraq war, has made quite clear his determination to unleash a new
one. In his July 23 Post column he wrote: "The long awaited revolution
[in Iran] is not happening. Which makes the question of preemptive
attack all the more urgent ... If nothing is done, a fanatical
terrorist regime openly dedicated to the destruction of the 'Great
Satan' will have both nuclear weapons and the terrorists and missiles
to deliver them. All that stands between us and that is either
revolution or preemptive strike."" (Martin Sieff =91Today Iraq, Tomorrow
Iran=92 http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/feature/2004/08/11/iran/ Aug.
11, 2004).
James Petras.
"Israel=92s political and military leadership have repeatedly and openly
declared their preparation to militarily attack Iran in the immediate
future. Their influential supporters in the US have made Israel=92s war
policy the number one priority in their efforts to secure Presidential
and Congressional backing. The arguments put forth by the Israeli
government and echoed by their followers in the US regarding Iran=92s
nuclear threat are without substance or fact and have aroused
opposition and misgivings throughout the world, among European
governments, international agencies, among most US military leaders
and the public, the world oil industry and even among sectors of the
Bush Administration. An Israeli air and commando attack on Iran will
have catastrophic military consequences for US forces and severe loss
of human life in Iraq, most likely ignite political and military
violence against pro-US Arab-Muslim regimes, such as Saudi Arabia and
Egypt, perhaps leading to their overthrow. Without a doubt Israeli war
preparations are the greatest immediate threat to world peace and
political stability." (James Petras =91Israel's War with Iran=92
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=3Dm19081&l=3Di&size=3D1&hd=3D0 December 28, 2005=
).
William S. Lind.
"In Washington, the same brilliant crowd who said invading Iraq would
be a cakewalk is still in power. While a few prominent neocons have
left the limelight, others remain highly influential behind the
scenes. For them, the question is not whether to attack Iran (and
Syria), but when. Their answer will be the same as Israel's." (William
S. Lind =91The Next Act=92 http://www.antiwar.com/lind/?articleid=3D8486
February 2, 2006).
Jeffrey Blankfort.
"Why is the neocons/American Jewish establishment the only sector in
US society pushing for a confrontation with Iran? And why with Iraq
before that?" (Jeffrey Blankfort =91War within Range? Another Neocon
beats the drums for war and says it will happen in 10 weeks=92
jblankfort@earthlink.net c.January 7th 2006); "And right at this
moment, the only segment of the American society that is pushing the
US administration to confront Iran, happens to be the Jewish
establishment or the lobby, whose main focus for months =96 groups like
AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, but also other
Jewish organizations - has been to prevent Iran from getting nuclear
weapons." (Jeffrey Blankfort quoted in R=E9seau Voltaire =91The Chomsky/
Blankfort Polemic=92 http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/editorials/signs_T=
heChomskyBlankfortPolemic.php
February 20, 2006); "The neo-cons who are almost exclusively Jewish
and the Israel lobby got the US into the war in Iraq. The father of
the President, the first George Bush was against it, the oil companies
were against it. And despite the fact that the war is going so badly,
they did not have to pay a political price because only a few isolated
columnists, and but a few from the left, and none representing the
anti-war movement in this country, wrote articles about that. So now,
the same forces are now pushing for a US confrontation with
Iran ..." (Jeffrey Blankfort quoted in R=E9seau Voltaire =91The Chomsky/
Blankfort Polemic=92 http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/editorials/signs_T=
heChomskyBlankfortPolemic.php
February 20, 2006).
Edward S. Herman.
"The (american jewish) lobby and its representatives in the Bush
administration were eager supporters of the attack on Iraq, and they
are now fighting energetically for war against Iran- in fact the lobby
is the only sector of society calling for a confrontation with Iran
and it is already engaged in a major campaign on Bush and Congress to
get the United States to take action." (Edward S. Herman =91Western
Approval for Long-Term Israeli Ethnic Cleansing=92 Z Magazine March
2006).
Antony Loewenstein.
"Sadly, Israel and many of its supporters are at the forefront of
demonising Iran and advocating military action. Not unlike Iraq, Iran
is a perceived threat to the Jewish state and must therefore be
obliterated. Israeli generals and politicians know Iran is not a
serious threat but they never underestimate the political need to
create a regional bogeyman to rally an ever-fearful Israeli
population." (Antony Loewenstein =91An Aussie Perspective: Spinning Us
to War with Iran=92 http://www.counterpunch.org/loewenstein03012006.html
March 1, 2006).
Justin Raimondo.
"Remember how important the nuclear issue was for getting us into the
Iraqi quagmire: this time around, the same crew is pushing the same
button." (Justin Raimondo =91Another War for Israel: The amen corner
howls for war with Iran=92 http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=3D8663
March 6, 2006).
Jews in America stirring up a War against Iran.
Jewish attempts to whip america into a war against iran have a long
history. There have been a succession of anti-iran propaganda
campaigns launched by america=92s ruling jewish establishment. There is
virtually no opposition to such a war amongst america=92s jewish
community.
1990s.
The jews-only state in palestine, the jewish sayanim network of mossad
collaborators in america, the jewish dominated media in america, the
jewish lobby in america, the jewish-owned politicians in congress, and
the israelis in the clinton administration, started their political
attack on iran in the early 1990s. In 1991, almost immediately after
saddam hussein had been ejected from kuwait, and much of his army
decimated, jews in america began highlighting the threats allegedly
posed to the jews-only state by its other major adversary.
The jewish lobby in america eventually forced the clinton
administration into passing punitive economic measures against iran.
"Pushing the US into a confrontation with Iran, via economic sanctions
and military attack has been a top priority for Israel and its
supporters in the US for more than a decade." (Jewish Times/Jewish
Telegraph Agency, Dec. 6, 2005); "In 1995, former President Bill
Clinton, in a speech to the World Jewish Congress, announced that he
would not permit Conoco to make a petroleum deal with Iran. Clinton
betrayed the interests of the American people." (Paul Sheldon Foote
=91James Petras=92 "Israel=92s War with Iran"=92 pfoote@fullerton.edu Decem=
ber
30, 2005).
1996: A Clean Break.
In 1996, two so-called american politicians decided to write a foreign
policy paper for a foreign power, the jews-only state =96 a paper which
suggested ways in which that foreign power might increase its
independence from the country these politicians were living in and
supposed to be serving. Let=92s put aside the possibility that this
might be treasonous. What is important here is that this paper
advocated a jews-only state attack on iran. "In 1996, Richard Perle
and Douglas Feith, two neo-conservatives later to play an important
role in formulation of Bush administration's Pentagon policy in the
Middle East, authored a paper for then newly elected Israeli prime
minister Benjamin Netanyahu. That advisory paper, "A Clean Break: A
New Strategy for Securing the Realm", called on Netanyahu to make a
"clean break from the peace process". Perle and Feith also called on
Netanyahu to strengthen Israel's defenses against Syria and Iraq, and
to go after Iran as the prop of Syria." (F William Engdahl =91Why Iran's
oil bourse can't break the buck=92 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East=
/HC10Ak01.html
March 10th 2006).
1997: The Project for the New American Century.
It was not possible to publish =91A Clean Break=92 in america and hope the
american government would be persuaded to implement the foreign
policies of the jews-only state. So, instead, in 1997, an israeli
writer living in america, rewrote the paper from an american
perspective in which all the policies that were beneficial to the jews-
only state were miraculously transformed, by sheer loquacity, into
policies that were beneficial for the united states of america.
Although americans might be persuaded to think these policies were
policies which boosted american interests they were really policies
which served the interests only of the jews-only state and were, in
reality, contrary to american interests. The new pamphlet the =91Project
for the New American Century=92 proposed the use of american military
power to attack iran =96 supposedly for the benefit of the united states
but, in actuality, for the benefit only of the jews-only state. "That
strategy (the plans for the attack on Iran) was worked out long ago in
documents like the Project for the New American Century .." (Mike
Whitney =91Edging Towards Disaster with Iran=92 http://www.opednews.com
October 9th 2005). This zionist manifesto, signed by the leading
jewish neocons, was an updated version of the Protocols of the Elders
of Zion. "Fukuyama, after all, was the most prominent intellectual who
signed the 1997 "Project for the New American Century," the founding
manifesto of neoconservatism drawn up by William Kristol, editor of
The Weekly Standard, the house journal of the neoconservative
movement. The Project for the New American Century aimed to cement for
all time America's triumph in the Cold War, by increasing defense
spending, challenging regimes that were hostile to U.S. interests and
promoting freedom and democracy around the world. Its goal was "an
international order friendly to our security, prosperity and values."
The war on Iraq, spuriously justified by the supposed threat posed by
Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, was the test run of this theory.
It was touted as a panacea for every ill of the Middle East. The road
to Jerusalem, the neocons argued, led through Baghdad. And after Iraq,
why not Syria, Iran and anyone else who stood in Washington's
way?" (Rupert Cornwell =91What the neocons failed to foresee about Iraq=92
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/262583_neoconswrong12.html March
12, 2006).
2002.
President Bush=92s Axis of Evil.
Despite the help iran gave to america during the invasion of
afghanistan, president bush turned his back on iran, "Shortly after
the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Bush officials started meeting with
Iranian officials. The two countries shared an interest in
overthrowing the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, and they took
cooperative steps toward that common goal; two decades of mutual
hostility began to melt away. Then, in January 2002, President Bush
delivered his State of the Union Address - linking Iran with Iraq and
North Korea as an "axis of evil" - and the Iranians instantly ended
all talks." (Fred Kaplan =91Condi's Baffling New Iran Strategy=92
http://www.slate.com/id/2136720/?nav=3Dtap3 Feb. 21, 2006).
2003.
Real Jews push Americans to lay down their lives for the Jewish Cause
in Tehran.
Even before bush had made any public decision to overthrow saddam=92s
regime, the jews-only state in palestine, and its jewish allies in
america, had mounted a propaganda offensive against the next target on
their hit list of enemies. In early 2003, ariel sharon said Iran
should be targeted "the day after" the invasion of iraq. "Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon said yesterday that Iran, Libya and Syria should
be stripped of weapons of mass destruction after Iraq. "These are
irresponsible states, which must be disarmed of weapons mass
destruction, and a successful American move in Iraq as a model will
make that easier to achieve," Sharon said to a visiting delegation of
American congressmen." (Aluf Benn =91Sharon says U.S. should also disarm
Iran, Libya and Syria=92 http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtm=
l?itemNo=3D263941
February 18th 2003). This theme was quickly taken up by the israelis
in the bush administration, "Remember the braggadocio of Bush=92s
advisers in March 2003 when they joked that taking Baghdad wouldn=92t be
enough, nor would taking Damascus, because "real men go to
Tehran." (Robert Parry =91Neocon Amorality=92 http://www.consortiumnews.com=
/2005/030305.html
March 3, 2005).
Reuel Gerecht, Michael Ledeen, Richard Perle.
"Indeed, immediately after the invasion of Iraq, the neocons, led by
ex-CIA spook Reuel Gerecht, Iran-Contra alumnus Michael Ledeen, and
war profiteer Richard Perle, were arguing that Iran should be targeted
next for a regime change. Inside the administration, Rumsfeld and
Feith were advancing those ideas, suggesting that unlike Iraq, the
transformation of Iran could take place peacefully through diplomatic
pressure." (Leon Hadar =91Target: Tehran? http://www.amconmag.com/2004_11_2=
2/article.html
November 22, 2004). The israeli neocons believed the invasion of iraq
would be a cakewalk and that america would soon march into iran.
John Bolton, Undersecretary for Arms Control and International
Security.
Bolton co-operated with his jewish masters to promote a war against
iran. "Bolton, who is undersecretary for arms control and
international security, is in Israel for meetings on preventing the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Bolton said in meetings
with Israeli officials that he had no doubt America would attack Iraq,
and that it would be necessary thereafter to deal with threats from
Syria, Iran and North Korea." (Aluf Benn =91Sharon says U.S. should also
disarm Iran, Libya and Syria=92 http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShA=
rt.jhtml?itemNo=3D263941
February 18th 2003).
Donald Rumsfeld.
"Speaking to reporters after talks with Azerbaijani President Ilham
Aliyev, Rumsfeld noted that Iran had been on a list of countries that
the United States describes as terrorist states for many years. "One
of the gravest concerns the world faces is the nexus between a
terrorist state that has weapons of mass destruction and terrorist
networks," he said. "So it's understandable that nations, not just in
this region but throughout the world, are so deeply concerned about
what's taking place in Iran."" (World worried about Iran nuclear aims:
Rumsfeld=92 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=3Dstory&cid=3D1521&e=3D47=
&u=3D/afp/20040812/pl_afp/azerbaijan_us_rumsfeld_040812141547
Aug 12th 2003).
2004.
Throughout 2004 there were a series of propaganda campaigns in favour
of an american attack on iran. Despite one commentator=92s belief that
bush might attack iran prior to the presidential election to help him
get re-elected, the campaign against iran relented in the run up to
the elections.
Rachel Neuwirth.
"Iran is moving rapidly to become a nuclear power. The Iranian mullahs
have publicly promised to use nuclear weapons to exterminate Israel
even if Israel were to achieve peace with the Palestinians. They also
claim that Iran, with 70 million people, could absorb and survive any
response from Israel while Israel, with only 5.5 million Jews, is
vulnerable to devastating losses if only a few of Iran=92s missiles got
through." (Rachel Neuwirth =91Israel May Be Compelled to Pre-empt=92
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=3D8767 July 31,
2004).
Charles Krauthammer.
"The comments from Bolton and Rice come within weeks of leading neo-
conservative pundits and activists in Washington proclaiming that
Iran's nuclear program had to be destroyed, even if waging war was the
only way to do it. Influential neo-conservative columnist Charles
Krauthammer wrote July 23 column in The Washington Post: "The long
awaited revolution (in Iran) is not happening. Which (makes) the
question of pre-emptive attack all the more urgent. If nothing is
done, a fanatical terrorist regime openly dedicated to the destruction
of 'the Great Satan' will have both nuclear weapons and missiles to
deliver them. All that stands between us and that is either revolution
or pre-emptive attack." (Martin Sieff =91Iran's Very Real War Threat=92
http://www.inthenationalinterest.com/Articles/Vol3Issue34/Vol3Issue34Seiff.=
html
c.August 2004).
Alan Dershowitz.
"Intelligence reports about Iran's capacity to produce nuclear weapons
aimed at Israel are becoming ominous. Unless diplomatic pressure
causes the Iranian mullahs to stop the project, Iran may be ready to
deliver nuclear bombs against Israeli civilian targets within a few
short years. Some Iranian leaders, such as former president Hashemi
Rafsanjani, have made it clear that this is precisely what they intend
to do. Killing 5 million Jews would be worth losing 15 million
Iranians in a retaliatory Israeli strike, according to Rafsanjani's
calculations. Israel, with the help of the United States, should try
everything short of military action first: diplomacy, threats,
bribery, sabotage, targeted killings of individuals essential to the
Iranian nuclear program and other covert actions. But if all else
fails, Israel, or the United States, must be allowed under
international law to take out the Iranian nuclear threat before it is
capable of the genocide for which it is being built." (Alan Dershowitz
=91Amend International Law To Allow Preemptive Strike on Iran=92
http://forward.com/main/article.php?ref=3Ddershowitz20040819155 August
20, 2004). According to this paranoid jew iran should already be in
possession of nuclear weapons and on the verge of bombing the jews
into oblivion.
An Attack on Iran in August.
"As the Bush administration steps up its rhetoric against Iran's
nuclear program, the possibility of Israel following through on veiled
threats to hit Iranian sites remains a wildcard." (Joshua Mitnick
=91Would Israel strike first at Iran?=92 http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0818=
/p06s01-wome.html
August 18, 2004); "Tension between the United States and Iran, fuelled
by a bitter dispute over the aim of the Tehran government's nuclear
program, has begun to complicate the massive task of creating a stable
Iraq as both countries jockey for influence there." (Paul Koring =91U.S.-
Iran tension adds to Iraq's instability=92
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040812/IRA=
NIRAQ12/International/Idx
August 12, 2004).
An Attack on Iran in September.
"Forget an October Surprise, a much worse one could come in September:
full-scale war between the United States and Iran may be far closer
than the American public might imagine." (Martin Sieff =91Iran's Very
Real War Threat=92 http://www.inthenationalinterest.com/Articles/Vol3Issue3=
4/Vol3Issue34Seiff.html
c.Summer 2004).
An Attack on Iran in October.
"According to White House and Washington Beltway insiders, the Bush
administration, worried that it could lose the presidential election
to Senator John F. Kerry, has initiated plans to launch a military
strike on Iran's top Islamic leadership, its nuclear reactor at
Bushehr on the Persian Gulf, and key nuclear targets throughout the
country, including the main underground research site at Natanz in
central Iran and another in Isfahan. Targets of the planned U.S.
attack reportedly include mosques in Tehran, Qom, and Isfahan known by
the U.S. to headquarter Iran's top mullahs." (Wayne Madsen =91A Bush pre-
election strike on Iran 'imminent' http://www.lebanonwire.com/0410/04102002=
LW.asp
October 20, 2004).
Douglas Feith.
"Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith is the neocon Likudnik who
was tasked with cooking up the false "intelligence" that President
Bush used to deceive the U.S. public into supporting an illegal
invasion of Iraq. With the U.S. military now trapped in the Iraqi
quagmire, Feith wants the U.S. to attack Iran." (Paul Craig Roberts
=91Dangerous Delusions About Iran=92 http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articl=
eid=3D4160
December 14, 2004).
2005.
Seymour Hersh.
""This is a war against terrorism, and Iraq is just one campaign. The
Bush Administration is looking at this as a huge war zone," the former
high-level intelligence official told me. "Next, we=92re going to have
the Iranian campaign. We=92ve declared war and the bad guys, wherever
they are, are the enemy. This is the last hurrah - we=92ve got four
years, and want to come out of this saying we won the war on
terrorism."" (Seymour M. Hersh =91The Coming Wars=92
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?050124fa_fact January 17 2005);
"On Jan. 17, the New Yorker posted an article by Hersh entitled The
Coming Wars (New Yorker, January 24-31, 2005). In it, the well-known
investigative journalist claimed that for the Bush administration,
"The next strategic target [is] Iran."" (Mark Jensen =91US Aerial Attack
on Iran Planned for June=92 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/JEN502A.html
February 20th 2005).
The Assassination of Rafiq Hariri.
The jewish campaign for an attack on iran picked up again after the
presidential elections but was forced to take a slight detour at the
beginning of 2005. The former prime minister of lebanon rafiq hariri
was assassinated february 14th 2005 and the israelis in the bush
administration immediately blamed syria although there was no evidence
to support this accusation. For the next few months the israelis
focussed their political propaganda on syria =96many seeing an attack on
syria as an opportunity for extending the war to iran.
Sunni Iraqi Freedom Fighters saving Iran.
One important factor which forced the campaign against iran onto the
back burner was that by 2005 it was obvious that iraqi freedom
fighters were fighting the american military to a standstill. "It was,
then, the swiftly growing Iraqi resistance that, by preventing the
consolidation of an American Iraq, forced an Iranian campaign off the
table and back into the shadows where it has remained to this
day." (Michael Schwartz =91The Ironies of Conquest: The Bush
administration's Iranian Nightmare=92 http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?ar=
ticleid=3D6915
August 10, 2005).
Ritter=92s Allegation.
"On Iran, Ritter said that President George W. Bush has received and
signed off on orders for an aerial attack on Iran planned for June
2005. Its purported goal is the destruction of Iran's alleged program
to develop nuclear weapons, but Ritter said neoconservatives in the
administration also expected that the attack would set in motion a
chain of events leading to regime change in the oil-rich nation of 70
million -- a possibility Ritter regards with the greatest
skepticism." (Mark Jensen =91US Aerial Attack on Iran Planned for June=92
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/JEN502A.html February 20th 2005).
Richard Perle.
""If Iran is on the verge of a nuclear weapon, I think we will have no
choice but to take decisive action," said ex-Pentagon advisor Richard
Perle as he drew loud cheers from the AIPAC loyalists. New York
Senator Hillary Clinton, before she introduced Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon to the crowd, said that a nuclear-armed Iran would be
"unacceptable". Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House also
chimed in, saying, "The greatest threat to Israel's right to exist,
with the prospect of devastating violence, now comes from
Iran."" (Joshua Frank =91Bombing Iran: The Facts Don't Matter=92
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/June05/Frank0602.htm June 2, 2005);
"Richard Perle, a key architect of the U.S.-led war against Iraq, said
on Saturday the West should not make the mistake of waiting too long
to use military force if Iran comes close to getting an atomic weapon.
"If you want to try to wait until the very last minute, you'd better
be very confident of your intelligence because if you're not, you
won't know when the last minute is," Perle told Reuters on the
sidelines of an annual security conference in Munich. "And so,
ironically, one of the lessons of the inadequate intelligence of Iraq
is you'd better be careful how long you choose to wait."" (Richard
Perle quoted in Reuters =91Iraq errors show West must act fast on Iran-
Perle=92 http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L0494245.htm February
4th 2006
Jewish-owned Politicians: Dick Cheney.
Cheney is a jewish-owned politician, an israeli collaborator, a
shabbat goy, whose power base in the united states congress, organized
by tom delay, had been financed by bribes provided by super-zionist
jack abramoff. "Other reports are that the vice president, we might
say the "spiritual leader" of the US hawks, Cheney, has been covertly
aiding the Benjamin Netanyahu candidacy as new head of the right-wing
Likud. Netanyahu is also directly tied to the indicted US Republican
money-launderer, Jack Abramoff, during the time Netanyahu was Sharon's
finance minister." (F William Engdahl =91A high-risk game of nuclear
chicken=92 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA31Ak02.html Jan
31, 2006).
In january 2005 cheney gave the jews-only state the go-ahead to attack
iran, "One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it
without being asked... Given the fact that Iran has a stated policy
that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might
well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about
cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards," (Dick Cheney quoted from
an MSNBC Interview Jan 2005. Michel Chossudovsky =91Planned US-Israeli
Attack on Iran=92 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=3DviewArti=
cle&code=3D%20CH20050501&articleId=3D66
May 1, 2005); "In a January 2005 interview with MSNBC=92s Imus in the
Morning, Vice President Dick Cheney warned that Iran has a "fairly
robust nuclear program," charging that the Islamic republic=92s prime
"objective is the destruction of Israel." He then appeared to be
giving a green light to Israel (with an estimated 200 nuclear heads)
to take on Iran, whose nuclear ambitions, according to the IAEA
itself, are yet to raise serious suspicions. "If, in fact, the
Israelis became convinced the Iranians had significant capabilities,
the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the
world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards," Cheney
exclaimed, in response to Imus=92s thoughtless inquiry: "Why don=92t we
make Israel do it?"" (Ramzy Baroud =91Israel=92s Nuclear Puzzle Resolved:
But To What End?=92 http://www.antiwar.com/orig/baroud.php?articleid=3D6927
August 13, 2005).
Even more ominously, although an american/jews-only state attack on
iran has been publicly discussed for many years, cheney was the first
to float the idea, in july 2005, that the united states might have to
resort to the use of nuclear weapons, "Philip Giraldi's report in the
American Conservative last July that Vice President Cheney has asked
the U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) to draw up concrete, short term
contingency plans for an attack on Iran, to involve "a large-scale air
assault employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons."
This would occur in the aftermath of a terror attack on the U.S.
which, whatever its origins, would be politically used to justify an
attack on Iran, just as the al-Qaeda attack was used to justify the
attack on Iraq. Cheney has also declared matter-of-factly that if the
U.S. doesn't attack Iran, Israel might do so." (Gary Leupp =91Goss
Builds the Case for Turkey-Based Attacks: Targeting Iran and Syria=92
http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp12302005.html December 30, 2005);
The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.
"Predictably the biggest Jewish organization in the US, the Conference
of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations immediately
echoed the Israeli state line. Malcolm Hoenlan, President of the
Conference, lambasted Washington for a "failure of leadership on Iran"
and "contracting the issue to Europe" (Forward, December 9, 2005). He
went on to attack the Bush Administration for not following Israel's
demands by delaying referral of Iran to the UN Security Council for
sanction." (James Petras =91Israel's War Deadline: Iran in the
Crosshairs=92 http://www.counterpunch.org/petras12242005.html December
24/25, 2005).
Forward.
"The Jewish weekly newspaper, Forward, has reported a number of
Israeli attacks on the Bush Administration for not acting more
aggressively on behalf of Israel's policy. According to the Forward,
"Jerusalem is increasingly concerned that the Bush Administration is
not doing enough to block Teheran from acquiring nuclear
weapons" (December 9, 2005)." (James Petras =91Israel's War Deadline:
Iran in the Crosshairs=92 http://www.counterpunch.org/petras12242005.html
December 24/25, 2005).
AIPAC.
"AIPAC is credited for pushing Congress and the administration towards
a number of legislative initiatives hostile to Iran and for placing
Tehran's nuclear programme at the top of the international
agenda." (Emad Mekay =91Groundhog day in Washington=92
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/778/re6.htm January 19 =96 25th 2006).
"The role of AIPAC, the Conference and other pro-Israeli organizations
as transmission belts for Israel's war plans was evident in their
November 28, 2005 condemnation of the Bush Administration agreement to
give Russia a chance to negotiate a plan under which Iran would be
allowed to enrich uranium for non-military purposes under
international supervision. AIPAC's rejection of negotiations and
demands for an immediate confrontation were based on the specious
argument that it would "facilitate Iran's quest for nuclear weapons" -
an argument which flies in the face of all known intelligence data
(including Israel's) which says Iran is at least 3 to 10 years away
from even approaching nuclear weaponry. AIPAC's unconditional and
uncritical transmission of Israeli demands and criticism is usually
clothed in the rhetoric of US interests or security in order to
manipulate US policy. AIPAC chastised the Bush regime for endangering
US security. By relying on negotiations, AIPAC accused the Bush
Administration of "giving Iran yet another chance to manipulate (sic)
the international community" and "pose a severe danger to the United
States" (Forward, Dec. 9, 2005)." (James Petras =91Israel's War
Deadline: Iran in the Crosshairs=92 http://www.counterpunch.org/petras12242=
005.html
December 24/25, 2005).
2006.
This year=92s campaign against iran seems more ominous than its
predecessors partly because it has started very early on in the
outlandish political paranoia season and partly because the jews
succeeded in pushing the americans and the europeans through the
international diplomatic channels clearing the way for the military
option.
Leon Hadar.
Hadar is supposedly anti-war and yet here he provides a justification
for a military attack on iran =96 albeit not a full scale invasion,
"Doing nothing about Iran would not only demolish what remains of the
U.S.-led nuclear arms-control regime, it would also turn the balance
of power in Iraq and the Persian Gulf against the United States and
create incentives for the Saudis and others to make deals with Tehran.
Short of trying to open direct diplomatic channels with Iran (very
unlikely), the United States will probably try to increase the
diplomatic and military pressure on Iran in the coming months,
demonstrating that the Pax Americana project in the Middle East is
becoming more expensive. That the central banks of China and other
Asian economies are paying for it is probably the most intriguing
element in this evolving story." (Leon Hadar =91US Headed for
Confrontation With Iran - But probably not all-out war=92
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hadar.php?articleid=3D8339 January 4, 2006).
Daniel Pipes.
Pipes is director of the middle east forum. He helped to set up campus
watch to encourage jews living in america to spy on american
academics. In the 1970s, his father was the author of =91Plan B=92 which
fabricated evidence that the soviet union posed an overwhelming
military threat to the united states when no such threat existed, "The
most dangerous leaders in modern history are those (like Hitler)
equipped with a totalitarian ideology and a mystical belief in their
own mission. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fulfills both these criteria, as
revealed by his U.N. comments. That combined with his expected nuclear
arsenal make him an adversary who must be stopped, and
urgently." (Daniel Pipes =91Iran's Messianic Menace=92
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=3D20835 January
10, 2006). This loony paranoid jew believes that osama bin laden was
hitler, yasser arafat was hitler, and now mahmoud ahmadinejad is
hitler. It would be safer to say that pipes sees hitler everywhere
under every non-jewish bed.
Haim Saban and Martin Indyk.
"Kenneth M Pollack, director of research at the Saban Centre on Middle
East Policy told a Congressional hearing in September that the US
should study the possibility of waging a targeted air campaign aimed
at Iran's nuclear facilities as a last resort. The Saban Centre is
funded by a grant from Haim Saban, an Egyptian-born Israeli American
billionaire who made his money in the entertainment business. Martin
Indyk, a staunchly pro-Israel former US diplomat who once served as US
ambassador to Israel, directs it." (Emad Mekay =91Groundhog day in
Washington=92 http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/778/re6.htm January 19 =96
25th 2006).
William Kristol.
"More indicative of all is how William Kristol, editor of the neo-
conservative publication The Weekly Standard, entitled in his column:
"And now Iran."" (Emad Mekay =91Groundhog day in Washington=92
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/778/re6.htm January 19 =96 25th 2006).
Kenneth R. Timmerman and Carl Limbacher.
"World renowned investigative reporter and terror expert Kenneth R.
Timmerman, author of the bestselling book "Countdown to Crisis: the
Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran," and Carl Limbacher, reporter for
NewMax.com, reveal that the US and Israel will destroy Iran's nuclear
facilities in less than 10 weeks from now." (=91Military Attack against
Iran Now Imminent=92 On A7radio January 20th 2006).
American Jewish Committee.
.. "the most powerful Israeli lobby in Washington, the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee. In an unprecedented action in November, the
group publicly criticized the Bush administration for failing to act
more aggressively against Iran. The influential American Jewish
Committee also announced its own international campaign to impose a
global and diplomatic and economic embargo against Iran until it halts
its nuclear program." (Jim Lobe =91The Iranian neo-cons love to hate=92
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA26Ak04.html Jan 26, 2006).
Reuel Marc Gerecht.
Gerect works for the american enterprise institute, one of the most
important zionist think tanks, "Eventually, assuming the State
Department's European strategy falls apart because the Europeans will
not play, we will have to make up our minds whether nukes in the hands
of Khamenei, Rafsanjani, and Ahmadinejad are "intolerable" or not. If
so, then we will have to prepare to bomb." (Reuel Marc Gerecht =91How to
Head Off the Imam Bomb=92 The Weekly Standard
http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.23721/pub_detail.asp
January 23, 2006).
Gerect goes on to refer glowingly to america=92s destruction of iranian
democracy in 1953, "Ideally, what the United States needs is to
replicate the economy-crushing sanctions the West threw at Iranian
prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh after he nationalized British
petroleum in Iran in 1951. There are many reasons why Mossadegh fell
to a very lamely executed and inexpensive coup in 1953, but among the
most important was the effective oil embargo, which helped turn a
popular prime minister into an unpopular one in less than a
year." (Reuel Marc Gerecht =91How to Head Off the Imam Bomb=92 The Weekly
Standard http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.23721/pub_detail.=
asp
January 23, 2006).
Jeff Jacoby.
"It is not yet unreasonable to hope that Tehran can be forced to back
down by a combination of economic sanctions, political isolation, and
diplomatic heat. But if a nonmilitary strategy is to have any chance
of success, it must be very clear that military action is Plan B - and
that United States is quite prepared to wield that ''big stick" if
Iran will not abandon its atomic ambitions. Under no circumstances can
such enemies be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons - or to doubt
that we will do what we must to make sure that they don't." (Jeff
Jacoby =91Don't go wobbly on Iran=92
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/01/25=
/dont_go_wobbly_on_iran/
January 25, 2006). Yet another jew manipulating the american people
into supporting a war against iran which the jews-only state cannot
fight. But then why should the jews-only state attack iran when the
jewish traitors living in america seem confident they can get america
to do their dirty business for them even if it involves a colossal
financial cost and large numbers of american lives?
Mortimer B. Zuckerman.
Zuckerman owns the NY Post and the Atlantic Monthly and was formerly
the chair of the conference of presidents of the major jewish american
organizations. "Military action, such as bombing the Iranian plants
with cruise missiles and strike aircraft, would be justified in the
circumstances. But that is hugely difficult politically, and covert
action is very difficult operationally. Still, the risks may have to
be taken because the alternative is so awful. There may now be a
window of opportunity for effective preventive action, but this window
is more likely to be measured in months than years." (Mortimer B.
Zuckerman =91Moscow's Mad Gamble=92 http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/ar=
ticles/060130/30edit.htm
January 30th 2006). This paranoid jew who=92s trying to stir up world
war three believes, "Within a very few years, in all likelihood, Iran
will be able to launch nuclear missiles." This view is not merely
untrue =96 it is a total fabrication. But, this is the propaganda being
pumped out by the jewish ruling classes in america, britain, and
palestine.
worldnetdaily.com.
"If the Iranians persist in creating a market mechanism to settle
world oil transactions in the euro, the United States will attack just
to preserve the oil market for the dollar. If Iran does open an oil
bourse next month, we should expect the warplanes will soon thereafter
begin to fly." (Jerome R. Corsi =91Will Iran's 'petroeuro' threat lead
to war?=92 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=3D48652
February 3, 2006). Corsi is the author of some highly illuminating
works such as co-authoring with John O'Neill the No. 1 New York Times
best-seller, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against
John Kerry." and the sizzler, "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime
Bought the Bomb and American Politicians." Ho, ho, ho. But, yet, large
numbers of americans believe him!
Kenneth R. Timmerman.
"The massive stroke that cut down Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
late on Wednesday night (Jan. 4) not only throws Israeli politics into
turmoil. It also marks the likely starting point of the coming nuclear
showdown that will pit the Jewish state and the free world against the
Islamic Republic of Iran." (Kenneth R. Timmerman =91Within Range=92
http://www.kentimmerman.com/2006_01_05frontpage-iran.htm January 5,
2006). So, who is ken timmerman? "Notably, prominent Washington neo-
conservative, Kenneth Timmerman, told Israeli radio in mid-January
that he expected an Israeli preemptive strike on Iran "within the next
60 days", i.e. just after Israeli elections or just before. Timmerman
is close to Richard Perle, the indicted Cheney chief of staff, Lewis
"Scooter" Libby, Douglas Feith and Michael Ledeen." (F William Engdahl
=91A high-risk game of nuclear chicken=92 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Midd=
le_East/HA31Ak02.html
Jan 31, 2006); "That is Kenneth Timmerman - neocon extraordinaire,
member of the fear-mongering imperial project that calls itself the
Committee on the Present Danger, and contributor to the neocon rag
National Review and its ultra-right counterpart
FrontPagemag.com." (Ron Jacobs =91Iranian =91"Democracy" and the
"Intelligence" Summit=92 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=3Dv=
iewArticle&code=3DJAC20060204&articleId=3D1889
February 4, 2006).
Robert Joseph.
"Robert Joseph, undersecretary of state for arms control, said Tehran
had to be dissuaded by "whatever means are necessary" from acquiring
nuclear arms, but added the West was "giving every chance for
diplomacy to work." Speaking two days after the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) voted to report Tehran to the UN Security Council
for its nuclear work, Joseph gave a worrying assessment of Iran's
nuclear progress. "I would say that Iran does have the capability to
develop nuclear weapons and the delivery means for those weapons,"
Joseph told a news conference at the Foreign Press Center here. He
went a step further than President George W. Bush, who said in a
statement hailing the IAEA action Saturday that Iran was "continuing
to develop the capability to build nuclear weapons." He sidestepped
questions on the use of force yet said, "No options are off the table.
We cannot tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran, but we are giving every
chance for diplomacy to work. What is necessary to stop Iran is a firm
indication that the international community ... will take whatever
measures are necessary to convince Iran that it is in its interest to
forego a nuclear weapons capability."" (Iran has the Ability to
develop a Nuclear Weapon: US Official=92
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060206/pl_afp/irannuclearpoliticsus
February 6th 2006). Joseph was one of the jewish liars, an israeli
traitor to america, who thought nothing about deceiving bush and the
american public into believing that saddam possessed weapons of mass
destruction. "Not a high-profile hardliner like Bolton or Feith,
Joseph successfully avoided the public limelight-that is until the
scandal of the 16 words in Bush's 2003 State of the Union Address
about Iraq's alleged nuclear weapons development program. According to
president, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein
recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." The
State of the Union Address, which laid out the administration's case
for a preemptive invasion of Iraq, used unconfirmed intelligence
reports about Iraq's WMD programs. Press reports and congressional
testimony by CIA officials later revealed that the CIA had vigorously
protested the inclusion of any assertion that Iraq was developing
nuclear weapons since their intelligence would not support such a
conclusion. Alan Foley, the CIA's top expert on weapons of mass
destruction, told Congress that Robert Joseph repeatedly pressed the
CIA to back the inclusion in Bush's speech of a statement about Iraq's
attempts to buy uranium from Niger. Following these revelations about
the inclusion of erroneous and disputed intelligence estimates in this
major speech that readied the U.S. public for war against Iraq, Joseph
said he did not recall Foley's raising concerns about the credibility
of the information to be included in the speech." (Tom Barry =91Meet
John Bolton's Replacement http://www.counterpunch.org/barry06162005.html
June 15, 2005). Joseph=92s reward for lying and pushing america into a
war against iraq which has incurred vast economic costs and the loss
of thousands of american lives, was promotion, "The top U.S.
government official in charge of arms control advocates the offensive
use of nuclear weapons and has deep roots in the neoconservative
political camp . Moving into John Bolton's old job, Robert G. Joseph
is the right-wing's advance man for counterproliferation as the
conceptual core of a new U.S. military policy. Within the
administration, he leads a band of counterproliferationists who -
working closely with such militarist policy institutes as the National
Institute for Public Policy and the Center for Security Policy - have
placed preemptive attacks and weapons of mass destruction at the
center of U.S. national security strategy. Joseph replaced John Bolton
at the State Department as the new undersecretary of state for arms
control and international security affairs. Like the controversial
Bolton, Joseph has established a reputation for breaking or
undermining arms control treaties, rather than supporting or
strengthening international arms control. Joseph, too, has long
believed that U.S. military strategy should be more offensive than
defensive." (Tom Barry =91Meet John Bolton's Replacement
http://www.counterpunch.org/barry06162005.html June 15, 2005). Joseph
is one of the many israelis who have been drafted into the bush
administration to promote the interests of the jews-only state in
palestine. "Although not self-identified as a neoconservative, Joseph
moves in the same circles as other military strategists such as the
CSP's Frank Gaffney, Richard Perle, and Paul Wolfowitz. In a
Washington Post article (May 2, 2002), "Who's Pulling the Foreign
Policy Strings," Dana Milbank wrote: "The vice president sometimes
stays neutral but his sympathies undoubtedly are with the Perle crowd.
Cheney deputies Lewis "Scooter" Libby and Eric Edelman relay
neoconservative views to Rice at the National Security Council. At the
NSC, they have a sympathetic audience in Elliott Abrams, Robert
Joseph, Wayne Downing, and Zalmay Khalilzad."" (Tom Barry =91Meet John
Bolton's Replacement http://www.counterpunch.org/barry06162005.html
June 15, 2005).
Wall Street Journal.
"Today, the editorial page is a fount of neoconservative war
propaganda. All intelligence has vanished. Consider the "Review &
Outlook" of Feb. 3, which declares Iran to be "an intolerable threat."
Iran is portrayed as a threat because the country's new president has
used threatening rhetoric against Israel. But, of course, Bush and
Israel are constantly using threatening rhetoric against Iran. To
avoid being regarded as a wimp by his countrymen and by the Muslim
world, the new Iranian president has to answer back. It doesn't occur
to the editorialists that Iranians might see the nuclear weapons of
Israel and the U.S. as intolerable threats." (Paul Craig Roberts =91How
Conservatives Went Crazy=92 http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=3D851=
3
February 8, 2006).
Max Boot and Nicholas Goldberg.
"Max Boot just wrote in the Los Angeles Times, "In sum, a terrorist-
sponsoring state led by an apocalyptic lunatic will soon have the
ability to incinerate Tel Aviv or New York," which "leaves only one
serious option =96 air strikes by Israel or the U.S." Niall Ferguson
wrote a few days earlier in the same newspaper that a U.S. preemptive
strike against Iran today would prevent an Iranian nuclear strike on
Israel in 2007, ignoring among other things the reality that it is
physically impossible for Iran to produce a nuclear weapon in a year.
Nicholas Goldberg, who edits the Times' opinion page, studiously
avoids publishing any alternative viewpoints. A similar approach is
taken by the rest of the mainstream media in the U.S. and Western
Europe. Is it surprising that a few days after these two opinion
pieces were published the Los Angeles Times found that 57 percent of
the U.S. public backs a military strike on Iran?" (Jorge Hirsch
=91America and Iran: At the Brink of the Abyss=92
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hirsch.php?articleid=3D8577 February 20,
2006).
Joe Lieberman.
"Nevertheless, Dick Cheney himself last year ordered a study of a plan
for an attack on Iran -and leading politicians are beating the war
drums, including Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joe Lieberman (D-
Conn.)." (Lee Sustar =91Target: Iran=92 http://www.counterpunch.org/sustar0=
2252006.html
February 25 / 26, 2006).
The Jewish owned American Media in General.
"The media has assumed its traditional role of fanning the flames for
war by providing ample space for the spurious allegations of
administration officials, right-wing pundits, and disgruntled Iranian
exiles, while carefully omitting the relevant facts in Iran's defense.
As always, the New York Times has spearheaded the propaganda war with
an article by Richard Bernstein and Steven Weisman which lays out the
sketchy case against Iran. In the first paragraph the Bernstein-
Weisman combo suggest that Iran has restarted "research that could
give it technology to create nuclear weapons."" (Mike Whitney =91The
Bombs of March. Countdown to War with Iran? http://www.counterpunch.org/whi=
tney01132006.html
January 13, 2006).
The same commentators who manipulated america into a war against iraq
are now manipulating america into a war against iran, "Besides
convincing the public that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction,
a critical task of the neo-cons was to convince the American public
that there was a link between Al Queda and Saddam. Their colleagues
among the nation's major syndicated columnists such as Safire, Will,
Tom Friedman, Charles Krauthammer, Jeff Jacoby, and Paul Greenberg
were all too willing accomplices. By the time, the U.S. launched its
invasion, more than half of the public was convinced that Saddam had
been behind the attacks." (Jeffrey Blankfort =91A War for Israel=92
http://www.leftcurve.org/LC28WebPages/WarForIsrael.html c.2003).
John Bolton, US ambassador to the UN.
"Significantly, the most hawkish of hawks had to be the US ambassador
to the UN, John Bolton. In a speech, not by accident, at the annual
convention of the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, the
powerful pro-Israel US lobby, he said Iran's nuclear program could be
"taken out"." (Pepe Escobar =91The old lovers' nuclear tango=92
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HC08Ak02.html Mar 8, 2006).
The Jewish-owned Presidency: Bush Professes to fight Proxy Zionist
War.
Bush is making it clear that he is pushing america into a war against
iran for the sake of the jews-only state =96 this incidentally will be
america=92s third proxy zionist war. "What President George W. Bush, Fox
News, and the Washington Times were saying about Iraq three years ago
they are now saying about Iran. After Saturday's vote by the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to report Iran's suspicious
nuclear activities to the UN Security Council, the president wasted no
time in warning, "The world will not permit the Iranian regime to gain
nuclear weapons." More recently, in the case of Iran, President Bush
has been unabashed in naming Israel as the most probable target of any
Iranian nuclear weapons. He has also created a rhetorical lash-up of
the U.S. and Israel, referring three times in the past two weeks to
Israel as an "ally" of the U.S., as if to condition Americans to the
notion that the U.S. is required to join Israel in any confrontation
with Iran. For example, on Feb. 1 the president told the press,
"Israel is a solid ally of the United States; we will rise to Israel's
defense if need be." Asked if he meant the U.S. would rise to Israel's
defense militarily, Bush replied with a startlingly open-ended
commitment, "You bet, we'll defend Israel."" (Ray McGovern Juggernaut
Gathering Momentum: Next Stop, Iran=92 http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?art=
icleid=3D8510
February 8, 2006). F william engdahl raises the pertinent issue as
regards america=92s national interests as opposed to the interests of
the jews-only state in palestine, "It is useful to keep in mind that
even were Iran to possess nuclear missiles, the strike range would not
reach the territory of the US. Israel would be the closest potential
target. A US preemptive nuclear strike to defend Israel would raise
the issue of what the military agreements between Tel Aviv and
Washington actually encompass, a subject neither the Bush
administration nor its predecessors have seen fit to inform the
American public about." (F William Engdahl =91A high-risk game of
nuclear chicken=92 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA31Ak02.html
Jan 31, 2006).
Jews in Palestine stirring up a War against Iran.
2003.
Ariel Sharon, Leader of the Jews-only State.
"Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said yesterday that Iran, Libya and Syria
should be stripped of weapons of mass destruction after Iraq. "These
are irresponsible states, which must be disarmed of weapons mass
destruction, and a successful American move in Iraq as a model will
make that easier to achieve," Sharon said to a visiting delegation of
American congressmen." (Aluf Benn =91Sharon says U.S. should also disarm
Iran, Libya and Syria=92 http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtm=
l?itemNo=3D263941
February 18th 2003).
General Plans.
"Israel is working on a wide range of measures to undermine Iran's
nuclear program, with senior leaders hinting that Israel may take
preemptive action if that is deemed necessary. Analysts here suggest
that action may include a strike similar to Israel's 1981 attack on
Iraq's Osirak reactor. The Israeli initiative includes political,
military, and intelligence wings of government and dovetails with US
efforts to contain Iran within the framework of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)." (Nicole Gaouette =91Israel: Iran is now
danger No. 1=92 http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1128/p06s01-wome.html
November 28, 2003).
Shaul Mofaz, Israeli Minister of Defense.
"On the same US trip, Mr. Mofaz told a pro-Israeli lobby group that a
nuclear Iran was "intolerable." "The implicit message of his
statements was that if the Iranian nuclear program is not stopped in
the next number of months, Israel will have to take action of its own
- perhaps even to attack - to prevent nuclear weapons from falling
into Iranian hands," analyst Amir Rappaport wrote in the Ma'ariv
newspaper." (Nicole Gaouette =91Israel: Iran is now danger No. 1=92
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1128/p06s01-wome.html November 28,
2003); "In November, Israeli media reported that Defense Minister
Shaul Mofaz, on a trip to Washington, told US officials that "under no
circumstances would Israel be able to abide by nuclear weapons in
Iranian possession."" (Nicole Gaouette =91Israel: Iran is now danger No.
1=92 http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1128/p06s01-wome.html November 28,
2003).
Uzi Arad, director of the Institute of Policy and Strategy.
"Iran has a clandestine [nuclear] program that is very ambitious,"
says Uzi Arad, director of the Institute of Policy and Strategy in
Herzilya. "That country thinks big and fast and ... poses a threat
that is very real. Should it acquire nuclear weapons or even come
close, it would completely alter the Middle East. It's a very ominous
threat." (Nicole Gaouette =91Israel: Iran is now danger No. 1=92
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1128/p06s01-wome.html November 28,
2003).
Meir Dagan, director of Mossad.
"Meir Dagan, director of Israel's external intelligence agency, the
Mossad, told a parliamentary committee this month that Iran posed an
"existential threat" to Israel, according to the Yedioth Ahronoth
newspaper. He reportedly assured committee members that Israel could
deal with this threat." (Nicole Gaouette =91Israel: Iran is now danger
No. 1=92 http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1128/p06s01-wome.html November
28, 2003).
2004.
Martin Van-Creveld.
"The remarks - reminiscent of the vitriolic propaganda campaign
against Iraq prior to the Anglo-American invasion of the Arab country
last year - coincided with the publication of an article by a leading
Israeli military historian Martin Van-Creveld, suggesting that Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon might very well order an attack on Iranian
nuclear plants. Writing in the Paris-based International Herald
Tribune on 21 August, Creveld opined an Israeli or American (or a
joint Israeli-American) attack on Iranian nuclear plants might be
carried out before the US November elections. "It all depends on Ariel
Sharon - an old war-horse who back in 1982 led Israel into a
disastrous invasion of Lebanon. One can only hope that this time he
will think twice," the military historian said." (Khalid Amayreh
=91Israel to US: Now for Iran=92 http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/033=
98F16-8119-4A21-83E4-D93E5F161B55.htm
August 29 2004).
Ira Sharkansky.
"In that light, Israel's most workable approach would be to leave it
to the Americans, according to Ira Sharkansky, Professor of Political
Science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. "I think the safest
thing for Israel is to let the Americans do it," he told
Aljazeera.net. And Israel, directly and through its powerful lobby in
Washington, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), has
been making strenuous efforts to get Washington to "do something"
about Iran." (Khalid Amayreh =91Israel to US: Now for Iran=92
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/03398F16-8119-4A21-83E4-D93E5F161B55=
.htm
August 29 2004).
Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Israeli parliament's foreign affairs
and defense committee.
""This is not an Israeli problem. This time it is a world problem,"
said Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Israeli parliament's foreign
affairs and defense committee. "Iran is seeking to become a world
power."" (=91Israel can't go it alone against Iran: politicians,
analysts=92 http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040719014127.fe7l7p6i.html July
19, 2004).
Caroline Glick.
"On Nov. 20, Caroline Glick, deputy managing editor of the Jerusalem
Post, hysterically accused Europe of defending "Iran's ability to
attain the wherewithal to destroy the Jewish state." Glick "exposes"
France's efforts to prevent the outbreak of wider war in the Middle
East as a trick: "France wishes only to box in the U.S. to the point
that the Americans will not be able to continue to fight the war
against terrorism." The neoconservative Heritage Foundation promptly
broadcast Glick's hysterical rants into the Republican noise machine,
reviving talk radio calls for nuking France, "America's oldest
enemy."" (Paul Craig Roberts =91Won't Get Fooled Again?=92
http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=3D4028 November 22, 2004).
2005.
Arieh Eldad and Yoseph Lapid.
"Last week three members of the Israeli Knesset issued a terse warning
that an attack on Iran may be imminent. Arieh Eldad, a member of the
right-wing National Union Party said ominously, "Iran will not be
deterred by anything but force." Yoseph Lapid, head of the Shinui
Party echoed Eldad's sentiments saying, "We feel we are obliged to
warn our friends that Israel should not be pushed into a situation
where we see no other solution but to act unilaterally." The
appearance of three Israeli politicians dispatched to Washington to
reiterate the same message can only mean trouble." (Mike Whitney
=91Edging Towards Disaster with Iran=92 http://www.opednews.com October
9th 2005).
Silvan Shalom, the Foreign Minister.
"The Israeli government is, not surprisingly, skeptical of the
European approach. Silvan Shalom, the Foreign Minister, said in an
interview last week in Jerusalem, with another New Yorker journalist,
"I don=92t like what=92s happening. We were encouraged at first when the
Europeans got involved. For a long time, they thought it was just
Israel=92s problem. But then they saw that the [Iranian] missiles
themselves were longer range and could reach all of Europe, and they
became very concerned. Their attitude has been to use the carrot and
the stick - but all we see so far is the carrot." He added, "If they
can=92t comply, Israel cannot live with Iran having a nuclear
bomb."" (Seymour Hersh =91The Coming Wars=92 http://globalresearch.ca/artic=
les/HER501A.html
January 24th 2005); "Iran may be only six months away from acquiring
the capability to produce nuclear weapons, Israeli Foreign Minister
Silvan Shalom has claimed. The assessment, which he said was based on
Israeli intelligence, differs from US intelligence assessments that
Iran could not begin producing nuclear weapons for another decade.
"Our experts say they are very close to this (production) stage," Mr
Shalom said. "They may need only another six months."" (Abraham
Rabinovich =91Tehran six months off nuclear arms ability: Israel=92
http://theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16668603%255E2703=
,00.html
September 21, 2005).
Ahron Zoevi Farkash, Israeli Military Intelligence Chief.
"In early December, Ahron Zoevi Farkash, the Israeli militar
|
|
|
|
Re: IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - Twibil - 6-:24 -0-09-20
|
|
On Jun 24, 2:24=A0pm, White Man Fight <whitemanfi...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
> The jews-only state in palestine is mobilizing its supporters in
> america (and in europe) to push the bush administration into yet
> another proxy zionist war =96 this time against iran.
#1. Nope, sorry, there's no such place. Israel is closest, but it's
roughly 25% non-Jewish: and those are mostly Muslims.
#2. The Bush administration is long gone.
#3. It would probably help if you at least opened with some truth
before progressing on to the usual bullshit.
|
|
|
|
Re: IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - WeReo_ScoTTy - 6-:24 -0-09-20
|
|
"Twibil" <nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ddafc259-d502-4b8e-8a91-6b1ae0aadbbf@f38g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 24, 2:24 pm, White Man Fight <whitemanfi...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
> The jews-only state in palestine is mobilizing its supporters in
> america (and in europe) to push the bush administration into yet
> another proxy zionist war – this time against iran.
#1. Nope, sorry, there's no such place. Israel is closest, but it's
roughly 25% non-Jewish: and those are mostly Muslims.
#2. The Bush administration is long gone.
#3. It would probably help if you at least opened with some truth
before progressing on to the usual bullshit.
This is too long to read.
|
|
|
|
Re: IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - RS - 6-:24 -0-09-20
|
|
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:20:19 -0700 (PDT), Twibil
<nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 24, 2:24 pm, White Man Fight <whitemanfi...@ymail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The jews-only state in palestine is mobilizing its supporters in
[snipped a ton of futile crap]
> It would probably help if you at least opened with some truth
>before progressing on to the usual bullshit.
I dunno about that. Maybe better if he stays consistently bullshit.
You don't want to confuse everybody.
|
|
|
|
Re: IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - Twibil - 6-:25 -0-09-20
|
|
On Jun 24, 8:58=A0pm, RS <R...@nonspam.com> wrote:
>
> > It would probably help if you at least opened with some truth
> >before progressing on to the usual bullshit.
>
> I dunno about that. =A0Maybe better if he stays consistently bullshit.
> You don't want to confuse everybody.
Eh.
For an idiot like "White Man Fight", confusion isn't an option: it's
factory standard.
|
|
|
|
Re: IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - Billy Brit - 6-:25 -0-09-20
|
|
Twibil wrote:
> On Jun 24, 2:24 pm, White Man Fight <whitemanfi...@ymail.com> wrote:
>> The jews-only state in palestine is mobilizing its supporters in
>> america (and in europe) to push the bush administration into yet
>> another proxy zionist war – this time against iran.
> #1. Nope, sorry, there's no such place. Israel is closest, but it's
> roughly 25% non-Jewish: and those are mostly Muslims.
> #2. The Bush administration is long gone.
> #3. It would probably help if you at least opened with some truth
> before progressing on to the usual bullshit.
Once again I and many others wouldn't be reading his anti-Semitic spam
if you weren't quoting it in your idiotic response. Are you proud of
yourself?
|
|
|
|
Re: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - Carl - 6-:25 -0-09-20
|
|
White Man Fight wrote:
> http://mundiclub.blogspot.com/2006/01/jews-stirring-up-world-war-three-zog_30.html
> www.iamthewitness.com
>
> The jews-only state in palestine is mobilizing its supporters
>
The "jews-only state" is about 70-75% Jewish, the exact same percentage that
the U.S. is Christian. Do you call the U.S. the "christian-only state", or
are you just another run-of-the-mill antisemite who knows how to cut and
paste long, tedious articles but is incapable of objective thought?
By the way, EVERY one of the 20+ Arab countries is well over 90% Muslim.
What are your revered thoughts on that, Mr. Enlightenment?
|
|
|
|
Re: IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - Carl - 6-:25 -0-09-20
|
|
Twibil wrote:
> On Jun 24, 8:58 pm, RS <R...@nonspam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It would probably help if you at least opened with some truth
>>> before progressing on to the usual bullshit.
>>
>> I dunno about that. Maybe better if he stays consistently bullshit.
>> You don't want to confuse everybody.
>
> Eh.
>
> For an idiot like "White Man Fight", confusion isn't an option: it's
> factory standard.
>
He's just another sub-par person trying to cope with his personal
inadequacies. As I said in my other post, "just another run-of-the-mill
antisemite".
|
|
|
|
Re: IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - Twibil - 6-:25 -0-09-20
|
|
On Jun 25, 8:26=A0am, Billy Brit <billyb...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> Twibil wrote:
> > On Jun 24, 2:24 pm, White Man Fight <whitemanfi...@ymail.com> wrote:
> >> The jews-only state in palestine is mobilizing its supporters in
> >> america (and in europe) to push the bush administration into yet
> >> another proxy zionist war =96 this time against iran.
> > #1. Nope, sorry, there's no such place. Israel is closest, but it's
> > roughly 25% non-Jewish: and those are mostly Muslims.
> > #2. The Bush administration is long gone.
> > #3. It would probably help if you at least opened with some truth
> > before progressing on to the usual bullshit.
>
> Once again I and many others wouldn't be reading his anti-Semitic spam
> if you weren't quoting it in your idiotic response. =A0Are you proud of
> yourself?
Dummy, since nobody was holding a gun to your head at the time, you
only read it because you *chose* to. That's how Usenet *works*. You
choose to turn on your computer, you choose to use Usenet, and you
*choose* which posts to read and/or respond to.
(Oooooooooooooooh, but wait! Maybe it's all a *conspiracy* to make you
look bad! Yeah! THAT'S the ticket! There's undoubtably a Venture-
Brothers-style arch-nemesis named "The Twibil" hanging around -just
waiting to get his Super-Villain hands on you! ["The Twibil" *and* his
host of minions, of course.] That would explain your constant
failures! None of them have been *your* fault! They're all the result
of an evil PLOT!!)
Better call Brock Samson for help.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Venture_Bros.
|
|
|
|
Re: IRAN: "Israel's" next biggest regional enemy after Iraq. Ready to die for Jews again, Tool? - Billy Brit - 6-:25 -0-09-20
|
|
Twibil wrote:
>> Once again I and many others wouldn't be reading his anti-Semitic spam
>> if you weren't quoting it in your idiotic response. Are you proud of
>> yourself?
> Dummy, since nobody was holding a gun to your head at the time, you
> only read it because you *chose* to. That's how Usenet *works*. You
> choose to turn on your computer, you choose to use Usenet, and you
> *choose* which posts to read and/or respond to.
The point that you have obviously missed is that in trying to damage his
argument with your equally off-topic responses you are simply giving him
a wider audience. Do you get it now?
> (Oooooooooooooooh, but wait! Maybe it's all a *conspiracy* to make you
> look bad! Yeah! THAT'S the ticket! There's undoubtably a Venture-
> Brothers-style arch-nemesis named "The Twibil" hanging around -just
> waiting to get his Super-Villain hands on you! ["The Twibil" *and* his
> host of minions, of course.] That would explain your constant
> failures! None of them have been *your* fault! They're all the result
> of an evil PLOT!!)
> Better call Brock Samson for help.
I think you'd better swallow a couple of Largactyl and lie down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
