Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Saturday, September 29, 2012
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Friday, June 1, 2012
Obama Ordered CStuxnet Cyber Attack On Iran
SOURCE
When Iran's nuclear facilities were publicly crippled in 2011 by what then was considered a revolutionary computer virus which destroys physical equipment, many immediately assumed the virus originated in Israel for obvious reasons. They were wrong. In what can be described as the first presidentially-mandated and condoned act of cyberwarfare, one circumventing the War Powers Act of course, the NYT informs us that the order to physically impair Iranian sovereignty came from none other than the Nobel Peace prize winning president: Barack Obama.
From the NYT:
From his first months in office, President Obama secretly ordered increasingly sophisticated attacks on the computer systems that run Iran's main nuclear enrichment facilities, significantly expanding America's first sustained use of cyberweapons, according to participants in the program.
Mr. Obama decided to accelerate the attacks - begun in the Bush administration and code-named Olympic Games - even after an element of the program accidentally became public in the summer of 2010 because of a programming error that allowed it to escape Iran's Natanz plant and sent it around the world on the Internet. Computer security experts who began studying the worm, which had been developed by the United States and Israel, gave it a name: Stuxnet.
At a tense meeting in the White House Situation Room within days of the worm's "escape," Mr. Obama, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and the director of the Central Intelligence Agency at the time, Leon E. Panetta, considered whether America's most ambitious attempt to slow the progress of Iran's nuclear efforts had been fatally compromised.
"Should we shut this thing down?" Mr. Obama asked, according to members of the president's national security team who were in the room.
Told it was unclear how much the Iranians knew about the code, and offered evidence that it was still causing havoc, Mr. Obama decided that the cyberattacks should proceed. In the following weeks, the Natanz plant was hit by a newer version of the computer worm, and then another after that. The last of that series of attacks, a few weeks after Stuxnet was detected around the world, temporarily took out nearly 1,000 of the 5,000 centrifuges Iran had spinning at the time to purify uranium.
This account of the American and Israeli effort to undermine the Iranian nuclear program is based on interviews over the past 18 months with current and former American, European and Israeli officials involved in the program, as well as a range of outside experts. None would allow their names to be used because the effort remains highly classified, and parts of it continue to this day.
For those confused - yes: this is an act of war. A New Normal war.
It appears to be the first time the United States has repeatedly used cyberweapons to cripple another country's infrastructure, achieving, with computer code, what until then could be accomplished only by bombing a country or sending in agents to plant explosives. The code itself is 50 times as big as the typical computer worm, Carey Nachenberg, a vice president of Symantec, one of the many groups that have dissected the code, said at a symposium at Stanford University in April. Those forensic investigations into the inner workings of the code, while picking apart how it worked, came to no conclusions about who was responsible.
And still America continues to wage war, subverting the constitution, without any Congressional approval, and without even telling the population what is really happening. Because it is "for its own good."
A similar process is now under way to figure out the origins of another cyberweapon called Flame that was recently discovered to have attacked the computers of Iranian officials, sweeping up information from those machines. But the computer code appears to be at least five years old, and American officials say that it was not part of Olympic Games. They have declined to say whether the United States was responsible for the Flame attack.
The "New Normal Gulf of Tonkin":
Mr. Obama, according to participants in the many Situation Room meetings on Olympic Games, was acutely aware that with every attack he was pushing the United States into new territory, much as his predecessors had with the first use of atomic weapons in the 1940s, of intercontinental missiles in the 1950s and of drones in the past decade. He repeatedly expressed concerns that any American acknowledgment that it was using cyberweapons - even under the most careful and limited circumstances - could enable other countries, terrorists or hackers to justify their own attacks.
"We discussed the irony, more than once," one of his aides said. Another said that the administration was resistant to developing a "grand theory for a weapon whose possibilities they were still discovering." Yet Mr. Obama concluded that when it came to stopping Iran, the United States had no other choice.
If Olympic Games failed, he told aides, there would be no time for sanctions and diplomacy with Iran to work. Israel could carry out a conventional military attack, prompting a conflict that could spread throughout the region.
Some call it irony, others collateral damage where people lose everything, including their lives. Semantics.
Remember though: they hate America for its freedoms.
Mr. Obama has repeatedly told his aides that there are risks to using - and particularly to overusing - the weapon. In fact, no country's infrastructure is more dependent on computer systems, and thus more vulnerable to attack, than that of the United States. It is only a matter of time, most experts believe, before it becomes the target of the same kind of weapon that the Americans have used, secretly, against Iran.
And it will be a shock, SHOCK when the world retaliates against America.
When Iran's nuclear facilities were publicly crippled in 2011 by what then was considered a revolutionary computer virus which destroys physical equipment, many immediately assumed the virus originated in Israel for obvious reasons. They were wrong. In what can be described as the first presidentially-mandated and condoned act of cyberwarfare, one circumventing the War Powers Act of course, the NYT informs us that the order to physically impair Iranian sovereignty came from none other than the Nobel Peace prize winning president: Barack Obama.
From the NYT:
From his first months in office, President Obama secretly ordered increasingly sophisticated attacks on the computer systems that run Iran's main nuclear enrichment facilities, significantly expanding America's first sustained use of cyberweapons, according to participants in the program.
Mr. Obama decided to accelerate the attacks - begun in the Bush administration and code-named Olympic Games - even after an element of the program accidentally became public in the summer of 2010 because of a programming error that allowed it to escape Iran's Natanz plant and sent it around the world on the Internet. Computer security experts who began studying the worm, which had been developed by the United States and Israel, gave it a name: Stuxnet.
At a tense meeting in the White House Situation Room within days of the worm's "escape," Mr. Obama, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and the director of the Central Intelligence Agency at the time, Leon E. Panetta, considered whether America's most ambitious attempt to slow the progress of Iran's nuclear efforts had been fatally compromised.
"Should we shut this thing down?" Mr. Obama asked, according to members of the president's national security team who were in the room.
Told it was unclear how much the Iranians knew about the code, and offered evidence that it was still causing havoc, Mr. Obama decided that the cyberattacks should proceed. In the following weeks, the Natanz plant was hit by a newer version of the computer worm, and then another after that. The last of that series of attacks, a few weeks after Stuxnet was detected around the world, temporarily took out nearly 1,000 of the 5,000 centrifuges Iran had spinning at the time to purify uranium.
This account of the American and Israeli effort to undermine the Iranian nuclear program is based on interviews over the past 18 months with current and former American, European and Israeli officials involved in the program, as well as a range of outside experts. None would allow their names to be used because the effort remains highly classified, and parts of it continue to this day.
For those confused - yes: this is an act of war. A New Normal war.
It appears to be the first time the United States has repeatedly used cyberweapons to cripple another country's infrastructure, achieving, with computer code, what until then could be accomplished only by bombing a country or sending in agents to plant explosives. The code itself is 50 times as big as the typical computer worm, Carey Nachenberg, a vice president of Symantec, one of the many groups that have dissected the code, said at a symposium at Stanford University in April. Those forensic investigations into the inner workings of the code, while picking apart how it worked, came to no conclusions about who was responsible.
And still America continues to wage war, subverting the constitution, without any Congressional approval, and without even telling the population what is really happening. Because it is "for its own good."
A similar process is now under way to figure out the origins of another cyberweapon called Flame that was recently discovered to have attacked the computers of Iranian officials, sweeping up information from those machines. But the computer code appears to be at least five years old, and American officials say that it was not part of Olympic Games. They have declined to say whether the United States was responsible for the Flame attack.
The "New Normal Gulf of Tonkin":
Mr. Obama, according to participants in the many Situation Room meetings on Olympic Games, was acutely aware that with every attack he was pushing the United States into new territory, much as his predecessors had with the first use of atomic weapons in the 1940s, of intercontinental missiles in the 1950s and of drones in the past decade. He repeatedly expressed concerns that any American acknowledgment that it was using cyberweapons - even under the most careful and limited circumstances - could enable other countries, terrorists or hackers to justify their own attacks.
"We discussed the irony, more than once," one of his aides said. Another said that the administration was resistant to developing a "grand theory for a weapon whose possibilities they were still discovering." Yet Mr. Obama concluded that when it came to stopping Iran, the United States had no other choice.
If Olympic Games failed, he told aides, there would be no time for sanctions and diplomacy with Iran to work. Israel could carry out a conventional military attack, prompting a conflict that could spread throughout the region.
Some call it irony, others collateral damage where people lose everything, including their lives. Semantics.
Remember though: they hate America for its freedoms.
Mr. Obama has repeatedly told his aides that there are risks to using - and particularly to overusing - the weapon. In fact, no country's infrastructure is more dependent on computer systems, and thus more vulnerable to attack, than that of the United States. It is only a matter of time, most experts believe, before it becomes the target of the same kind of weapon that the Americans have used, secretly, against Iran.
And it will be a shock, SHOCK when the world retaliates against America.
Monday, April 30, 2012
"Wiped Off The Map" - The Rumor of the Century
Across the world, a dangerous rumor has spread that could have catastrophic implications. According to legend, Iran's
President has threatened to destroy Israel, or, to quote the misquote,
"Israel must be wiped off the map". Contrary to popular belief, this
statement was never made, as the following article will prove.
BACKGROUND:
On Tuesday, October 25th, 2005 at the Ministry of Interior conference hall in Tehran, newly
elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivered a speech at a
program, reportedly attended by thousands, titled "The World Without
Zionism". Large posters surrounding him displayed this title prominently
in English, obviously for the benefit of the international press. Below
the poster's title was a slick graphic depicting an hour glass
containing planet Earth at its top. Two small round orbs representing
the United States and Israel are shown falling through the hour glass' narrow neck and crashing to the bottom.
Before
we get to the infamous remark, it's important to note that the "quote"
in question was itself a quote— they are the words of the late Ayatollah
Khomeini, the father of the Islamic Revolution. Although he quoted
Khomeini to affirm his own position on Zionism, the actual words belong
to Khomeini and not Ahmadinejad. Thus, Ahmadinejad has
essentially been credited (or blamed) for a quote that is not
only unoriginal, but represents a viewpoint already in place well before
he ever took office.
THE ACTUAL QUOTE:
So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi:
"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."
That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word "Regime", pronounced just like the English word with an extra "eh" sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime
off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he
instead uses the specific phrase "rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods" (regime
occupying Jerusalem).
So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh",
is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that
matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe
out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's
President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having
uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel".
THE PROOF:
The full quote translated directly to English:
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".
Word by word translation:
Imam
(Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e
(occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page
of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
Here is the full transcript of the speech in farsi, archived on Ahmadinejad's web site
THE SPEECH AND CONTEXT:
While
the false "wiped off the map" extract has been repeated infinitely
without verification, Ahmadinejad's actual speech itself has been almost
entirely ignored. Given the importance placed on the "map" comment, it
would be sensible to present his words in their full context to get a
fuller understanding of his position. In fact, by looking at the entire
speech, there is a clear, logical trajectory leading up to his call
for a "world without Zionism". One may disagree with his reasoning, but
critical appraisals are infeasible without first knowing what that
reasoning is.
In
his speech, Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West's apparatus
of political oppression against Muslims. He says the "Zionist regime"
was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure
domination of the region and its assets. Palestine, he insists, is the
frontline of the Islamic world's struggle with American hegemony,
and its fate will have repercussions for the entire Middle East.
Ahmadinejad acknowledges that the removal of America's powerful grip on the region via the Zionists may seem unimaginable to some, but reminds the audience that, as Khomeini predicted, other seemingly invincible empires have disappeared and now only exist in history books. He then proceeds to list three such regimes that have collapsed, crumbled or vanished, all within the last 30 years:
(1) The Shah of Iran- the U.S. installed monarch(2) The Soviet Union(3) Iran's former arch-enemy, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein
In the
first and third examples, Ahmadinejad prefaces their
mention with Khomeini's own words foretelling that individual regime's
demise. He concludes by referring to Khomeini's unfulfilled wish: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time. This statement is very wise". This
is the passage that has been isolated, twisted and distorted so
famously. By measure of comparison, Ahmadinejad would seem to be calling
for regime change, not war.
THE ORIGIN:
One
may wonder: where did this false interpretation originate? Who is
responsible for the translation that has sparked such worldwide
controversy? The answer is surprising.
The inflammatory "wiped off the map" quote was first disseminated not by Iran's enemies, but by Iran itself. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's
official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of
some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism
conference. International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Time
magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made
headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring
to the source. Iran's
Foreign Minister soon attempted to clarify the statement, but the quote
had a life of its own. Though the IRNA wording was inaccurate and
misleading, the media assumed it was true, and besides, it made great
copy.
Amid heated wrangling over Iran's nuclear program, and months of continuous, unfounded accusations against Iran in an attempt to rally support for preemptive strikes against the country, the imperialists had just been handed the perfect raison d'être to invade. To the war hawks, it was a gift from the skies.
It
should be noted that in other references to the conference, the IRNA's
translation changed. For instance, "map" was replaced with "earth". In
some articles it was "The Qods occupier regime should be eliminated from
the surface of earth", or the similar "The Qods occupying regime must
be eliminated from the surface of earth". The inconsistency of the
IRNA's translation should be evidence enough of the unreliability of the
source, particularly when transcribing their news from Farsi into the
English language.
THE REACTION:
The mistranslated "wiped off the map" quote attributed to Iran's
President has been spread worldwide, repeated thousands of times in
international media, and prompted the denouncements of numerous world
leaders. Virtually every major and minor media outlet has published or
broadcast this false statement to the masses. Big news agencies such as
The Associated Press and Reuters refer to the misquote, literally, on an
almost daily basis.
Following
news of Iran's remark, condemnation was swift. British Prime
Minister Tony Blair expressed "revulsion" and implied that it might be
necessary to attack Iran. U.N. chief Kofi Annan cancelled his scheduled trip to Iran due to the controversy. Ariel Sharon demanded that Iran be expelled from the United Nations for calling for Israel's destruction. Shimon Peres, more than once, threatened to wipe Iran off the map. More recently, Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu, who has warned that Iran
is "preparing another holocaust for the Jewish state" is calling for
Ahmadinejad to be tried for war crimes for inciting genocide.
The artificial
quote has also been subject to additional alterations. U.S. officials
and media often take the liberty of dropping the "map" reference
altogether, replacing it with the more acutely threatening phrase "wipe
Israel off the face of the earth". Newspaper and magazine articles
dutifully report Ahmadinejad has "called for the destruction of Israel",
as do senior officials in the United States government.
President
George W. Bush said the comments represented a "specific threat" to
destroy Israel. In a March 2006 speech in Cleveland, Bush vowed he
would resort to war to protect Israel from Iran, because, "..the threat from Iran
is, of course, their stated objective to destroy our strong ally
Israel." Former Presidential advisor Richard Clarke told Australian TV
that Iran "talks openly about destroying Israel", and insists, "The President of Iran
has said repeatedly that he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the
earth". In an October 2006 interview with Amy Goodman, former UN Weapons
Inspector Scott Ritter referred to Ahmadinejad as "the idiot that comes
out and says really stupid, vile things, such as, 'It is the goal of Iran to wipe Israel off the face of the earth' ". The consensus is clear.
Confusing
matters further, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pontificates rather than give a
direct answer when questioned about the statement, such as in Lally Weymouth's Washington Post interview in September 2006:
Are you really serious when you say that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth?
We need to look at the scene in the Middle East — 60 years of war, 60 years of displacement, 60 years of conflict, not even a day of peace. Look at the war in Lebanon, the war in Gaza — what are the reasons for these conditions? We need to address and resolve the root problem.
Your suggestion is to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth?
Our
suggestion is very clear:... Let the Palestinian people decide their
fate in a free and fair referendum, and the result, whatever it is,
should be accepted.... The people with no roots there are now ruling the
land.
You've been quoted as saying that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth. Is that your belief?
What I have said has made my position clear. If we look at a map of the Middle East from 70 years ago...
So, the answer is yes, you do believe that it should be wiped off the face of the Earth?
Are
you asking me yes or no? Is this a test? Do you respect the right to
self-determination for the Palestinian nation? Yes or no? Is Palestine,
as a nation, considered a nation with the right to live under humane
conditions or not? Let's allow those rights to be enforced for these 5
million displaced people.
The
exchange is typical of Ahmadinejad's interviews with the American
media. Predictably, both Mike Wallace of 60 Minutes and CNN's Anderson
Cooper asked if he wants to "wipe Israel off the map". As usual, the
question is thrown back in the reporter's face with his standard "Don't
the Palestinians have rights?, etc." retort (which is never directly
answered either). Yet he never confirms the "map" comment to be
true. This did not prevent Anderson Cooper from referring to earlier
portions of his interview after a commercial break and lying, "as he
said earlier, he wants Israel wiped off the map".
Even
if every media outlet in the world were to retract the mistranslated
quote tomorrow, the major damage has already been done, providing the
groundwork for the next phase of disinformation: complete character
demonization. Ahmadinejad, we are told, is the next Hitler, a grave
threat to world peace who wants to bring about a new Holocaust.
According to some detractors, he not only wants to destroy Israel, but
after that, he will nuke America, and then Europe! An October 2006 memo titled Words of Hate: Iran's Escalating Threats released by the powerful Israeli lobby group AIPAC opens with the warning, "Ahmadinejad and other top Iranian leaders are issuing increasingly belligerent statements threatening to destroy the United States, Europe and Israel."
These claims not only fabricate an unsubstantiated threat, but assume
far more power than he actually possesses. Alarmists would be better off
monitoring the statements of the ultra-conservative Supreme Leader,
Ayatollah Khamenei, who holds the most power in Iran.
As Iran's U.N. Press Officer, M.A. Mohammadi, complained to The Washington Post in a June 2006 letter:
It
is not amazing at all, the pick-and-choose approach of highlighting the
misinterpreted remarks of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in
October and ignoring this month's remarks by Iran's
supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, that "We have no problem with
the world. We are not a threat whatsoever to the world, and the world
knows it. We will never start a war. We have no intention of going to
war with any state."
The
Israeli government has milked every drop of the spurious quote to its
supposed advantage. In her September 2006 address to the United Nations
General Assembly, Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni accused Iran
of working to nuke Israel and bully the world. "They speak proudly and
openly of their desire to 'wipe Israel off the map.' And now, by their
actions, they pursue the weapons to achieve this objective to imperil
the region and threaten the world." Addressing the threat in December, a
fervent Prime Minister Ehud Olmert inadvertently disclosed that his
country already possesses nuclear weapons: "We have never threatened any
nation with annihilation. Iran, openly, explicitly and publicly
threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Can you say that this is the same
level, when they are aspiring to have nuclear weapons, as America,
France, Israel, Russia?"
MEDIA IRRESPONSIBILITY:
On December 13, 2006, more than a year after The World Without Zionism conference, two leading Israeli newspapers, The Jerusalem Post and Haaretz, published reports of a renewed threat from Ahmadinejad. The Jerusalem Post's headline was Ahmadinejad: Israel will be 'wiped out', while Haaretz posted the title Ahmadinejad at Holocaust conference: Israel will 'soon be wiped out'.
Where did they get their information? It turns out that both papers, like most American and western media, rely heavily on write ups by news wire services such as the Associated Press and Reuters as a source for their articles. Sure enough, their sources are in fact December 12th articles by Reuter's Paul Hughes [Iran president says Israel's days are numbered], and the AP's Ali Akbar Dareini [Iran President: Israel Will be wiped out].
The
first five paragraphs of the Haaretz article, credited to "Haaretz
Service and Agencies", are plagiarized almost 100% from the first five
paragraphs of the Reuters piece. The only difference is that Haaretz
changed "the Jewish state" to "Israel" in the second paragraph,
otherwise they are identical.
The Jerusalem
Post article by Herb Keinon pilfers from both the Reuters and AP
stories. Like Haaretz, it uses the following Ahmadinejad quote without
attribution: ["Just as the Soviet Union
was wiped out and today does not exist, so will the Zionist regime soon
be wiped out," he added]. Another passage apparently relies on an IRNA
report:
"The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon the same way the Soviet Union
was, and humanity will achieve freedom," Ahmadinejad said at Tuesday's
meeting with the conference participants in his offices, according to Iran's official news agency, IRNA.
He said elections should be held among "Jews, Christians and Muslims so the population of Palestine can select their government and destiny for themselves in a democratic manner."
Once
again, the first sentence above was wholly plagiarized from the AP
article. The second sentence was also the same, except "He called for
elections" became "He said elections should be held..".
It gets more interesting.
The quote used in the original AP article and copied in The Jerusalem Post article supposedly derives from the IRNA. If true, this can easily be checked. Care to find out? Go to:
There you will discover the actual IRNA quote was:
"As the Soviet Union disappeared, the Zionist regime will also vanish and humanity will be liberated".
Compare this to the alleged IRNA quote reported by the Associated Press:
"The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon the same way the Soviet Union was, and humanity will achieve freedom".
In the IRNA's actual report, the Zionist regime will vanish just as the Soviet Union disappeared. Vanish. Disappear. In the dishonest AP version, the Zionist regime will be "wiped out". And how will it be wiped out? "The same way the Soviet Union was". Rather than imply a military threat or escalation in rhetoric, this reference to Russia actually validates the intended meaning of Ahmadinejad's previous misinterpreted anti-Zionist statements.
What
has just been demonstrated is irrefutable proof of media manipulation
and propaganda in action. The AP deliberately alters an IRNA quote to
sound more threatening. The Israeli media not only repeats the fake
quote but also steals the original authors' words. The unsuspecting
public reads this, forms an opinion and supports unnecessary wars of
aggression, presented as self defense, based on the misinformation.
This scenario mirrors the kind of false claims that led to the illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq, a war now widely viewed as a catastrophic mistake. And yet the Bush administration and the compliant corporate media continue to marinate in propaganda and speculation about attacking Iraq's much larger and more formidable neighbor, Iran. Most of this rests on the unproven assumption that Iran is building nuclear weapons, and the lie that Iran has vowed to physically destroy Israel. Given its scope and potentially disastrous outcome, all this amounts to what is arguably the rumor of the century.
Iran's
President has written two rather philosophical letters to America. In
his first letter, he pointed out that "History shows us that oppressive
and cruel governments do not survive". With this statement, Ahmadinejad
has also projected the outcome of his own backwards regime, which will
likewise "vanish from the page of time".
Saturday, March 31, 2012
VP Biden Will Move To Impeach President If He Invades Iran Without Approval
Oh, not the current president........ I guess all of your "Constitutional Law" experience only applies to the opposite party.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Obama to GOP Crusaders: Slow Down
SOURCE
Israel’s American supporters, terrified by claims that a second Holocaust looms for the Jewish state, are crying out for war against Iran.
The entire Republican Party – with the exception of the intrepid Dr. Ron Paul – is consumed by crusading fever against Iran, though many members would be hard-pressed to locate the Islamic Republic on a map.
Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney, whose foreign affairs experience is, to put it politely, limited, vows unlimited military support for Israel, with no understanding of the possible consequences. His rivals are even more fulsome in their calls for "jihad" against Iran and its allies.
Israel’s right wing government insists it must attack Iran before the "crazy" Islamic Republic gets nuclear weapons that will be used, it claims, to obliterate Israel.
"Time is running out," thundered Israeli leader Bibi Netanyahu last week while visiting Washington to show Americans who really runs US Mideast policy.
Netanyahu said nothing about his own nation’s estimated 300 nuclear weapons, or why it needs so many when 16-20 would obliterate the entire Arab world and Iran. There was not a peep from Congress or the media about Mideast nuclear disarmament.
Netanyahu’s claim raises an interesting question. Since many Americans think it’s essential to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities – even though US intelligence denies Iran is even working on nuclear weapons – then what about North Korea?
Why shouldn’t Japan and its protector, the United States, attack North Korea’s nuclear infrastructure? Unlike Iran, North Korea actually has an estimated four operational nuclear weapons and some 800 short and medium-ranged missiles that can strike US bases in South Korea and Japan.
The North’s new Taepodong missile can cover much of Japan. It is uncertain if North Korea has yet developed nuclear warheads for its missiles, but Pyongyang certainly has chemical and biological ones. The North has routinely threatened to turn South Korea and Japan into a "sea of fire." That’s even more fevered than Iranian rhetoric.
Iran has only a handful of highly inaccurate Shahab-II missiles with small, conventional warheads, but no nuclear warheads. Iran has much less offensive military capability than North Korea. In spite of intense political pressure, all US intelligence agencies still concur that Iran is not working on nuclear weapons.
Meir Dagan, former chief of Israel’s intelligence service Mossad, just told CBC News that it would be a mistake to attack Iran, and diplomacy should be given more time – pulling the Persian carpet from under the fire-eating Republican candidates and their hero, Bibi Netanyahu.
Having followed Iran’s nuclear policies for 20 years, I’m amazed that Tehran has not by now managed to deploy nuclear weapons. Even Israel’s defense minister recently wondered aloud why Iran hadn’t already produced such weapons.
Even though US troops in North Asia are seriously threatened by North Korea’s weapons, there are no calls in the US Congress or media to launch a war against North Korea. To the contrary, Pyongyang is opening new nuclear talks with the US, South Korea, Japan, Russia and China.
Contrast this sensible diplomacy to the rush to war against Iran now being marketed in the US. The United States faced thousands of Soviet nuclear weapons for fifty years. Could not nuclear-armed Israel do the same with Iran, assuming Tehran had a few nuclear weapons?
Israel’s indestructible triad of ground, air and submarine launched nuclear weapons would immediately obliterate Iran in any war. In fact, Israel might strike Iran just as soon as its and America’s recon satellites spotted Iranian missiles being set up for fueling and launch.
Last week, President Obama had the courage to stand up to the Israel lobby in an election year and say, "slow down." He rightly called Republican leaders irresponsible for shamelessly beating the war drums to pander to evangelical voters whose world view is shaped by far right Christian radio networks and Fox News. What ever happened to "love thy neighbor?"
In fact, President Obama might also have told Republicans, "your leader John McCain denounced me last week for not leading US military intervention in Syria and Iran. Well, he backed our wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, and look where that got us!"
"What’s more, the Afghan and Iraq Wars will end up costing American taxpayers $2 trillion. This vast sum was piled on the US national debt, undermining our economy.
"A new, drawn out war against Iran – never mind Syria – could cost us another trillion. How about asking those who demand this war to pay for it?
"Let’s level with Americans and tell them that smashing Iran and keeping it down by repeated bombings will cost each family $30,000 in new taxes.
"That’s facing reality. See how many Americans want a new war after that."
Israel’s American supporters, terrified by claims that a second Holocaust looms for the Jewish state, are crying out for war against Iran.
The entire Republican Party – with the exception of the intrepid Dr. Ron Paul – is consumed by crusading fever against Iran, though many members would be hard-pressed to locate the Islamic Republic on a map.
Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney, whose foreign affairs experience is, to put it politely, limited, vows unlimited military support for Israel, with no understanding of the possible consequences. His rivals are even more fulsome in their calls for "jihad" against Iran and its allies.
Israel’s right wing government insists it must attack Iran before the "crazy" Islamic Republic gets nuclear weapons that will be used, it claims, to obliterate Israel.
"Time is running out," thundered Israeli leader Bibi Netanyahu last week while visiting Washington to show Americans who really runs US Mideast policy.
Netanyahu said nothing about his own nation’s estimated 300 nuclear weapons, or why it needs so many when 16-20 would obliterate the entire Arab world and Iran. There was not a peep from Congress or the media about Mideast nuclear disarmament.
Netanyahu’s claim raises an interesting question. Since many Americans think it’s essential to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities – even though US intelligence denies Iran is even working on nuclear weapons – then what about North Korea?
Why shouldn’t Japan and its protector, the United States, attack North Korea’s nuclear infrastructure? Unlike Iran, North Korea actually has an estimated four operational nuclear weapons and some 800 short and medium-ranged missiles that can strike US bases in South Korea and Japan.
The North’s new Taepodong missile can cover much of Japan. It is uncertain if North Korea has yet developed nuclear warheads for its missiles, but Pyongyang certainly has chemical and biological ones. The North has routinely threatened to turn South Korea and Japan into a "sea of fire." That’s even more fevered than Iranian rhetoric.
Iran has only a handful of highly inaccurate Shahab-II missiles with small, conventional warheads, but no nuclear warheads. Iran has much less offensive military capability than North Korea. In spite of intense political pressure, all US intelligence agencies still concur that Iran is not working on nuclear weapons.
Meir Dagan, former chief of Israel’s intelligence service Mossad, just told CBC News that it would be a mistake to attack Iran, and diplomacy should be given more time – pulling the Persian carpet from under the fire-eating Republican candidates and their hero, Bibi Netanyahu.
Having followed Iran’s nuclear policies for 20 years, I’m amazed that Tehran has not by now managed to deploy nuclear weapons. Even Israel’s defense minister recently wondered aloud why Iran hadn’t already produced such weapons.
Even though US troops in North Asia are seriously threatened by North Korea’s weapons, there are no calls in the US Congress or media to launch a war against North Korea. To the contrary, Pyongyang is opening new nuclear talks with the US, South Korea, Japan, Russia and China.
Contrast this sensible diplomacy to the rush to war against Iran now being marketed in the US. The United States faced thousands of Soviet nuclear weapons for fifty years. Could not nuclear-armed Israel do the same with Iran, assuming Tehran had a few nuclear weapons?
Israel’s indestructible triad of ground, air and submarine launched nuclear weapons would immediately obliterate Iran in any war. In fact, Israel might strike Iran just as soon as its and America’s recon satellites spotted Iranian missiles being set up for fueling and launch.
Last week, President Obama had the courage to stand up to the Israel lobby in an election year and say, "slow down." He rightly called Republican leaders irresponsible for shamelessly beating the war drums to pander to evangelical voters whose world view is shaped by far right Christian radio networks and Fox News. What ever happened to "love thy neighbor?"
In fact, President Obama might also have told Republicans, "your leader John McCain denounced me last week for not leading US military intervention in Syria and Iran. Well, he backed our wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, and look where that got us!"
"What’s more, the Afghan and Iraq Wars will end up costing American taxpayers $2 trillion. This vast sum was piled on the US national debt, undermining our economy.
"A new, drawn out war against Iran – never mind Syria – could cost us another trillion. How about asking those who demand this war to pay for it?
"Let’s level with Americans and tell them that smashing Iran and keeping it down by repeated bombings will cost each family $30,000 in new taxes.
"That’s facing reality. See how many Americans want a new war after that."
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Monday, March 5, 2012
Friday, March 2, 2012
Thursday, March 1, 2012
NYT: "U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb"
SOURCE
WASHINGTON — Even as the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog said in a new report Friday that Iran had accelerated its uranium enrichment program, American intelligence analysts continue to believe that there is no hard evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb.
Full Story at the link above.
WASHINGTON — Even as the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog said in a new report Friday that Iran had accelerated its uranium enrichment program, American intelligence analysts continue to believe that there is no hard evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb.
Full Story at the link above.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Turncoat Asskisser Tucker Carlson Says "Iran Deserves To Be Annihilated"
This is Orwellian language in action. Mr. Carlson states that because the US has moral authority (we're the good guys) and do not seek hegemony, the US can destroy Iran (and all its people?) in a pre-emptive strike because they're evil (the bad guys). This "good/bad" comparison is overt in this clip, but always covert in US corporate media coverage: the US is "good" and Iran is "bad" (remember from W. Bush they are among the "axis of evil"). Mr. Carlson later clarified his remarks that he says Iran's government is evil and his real concern is about US energy prices; with no remorse over "wiping Iran off the map.”
What is never mentioned in US corporate media reporting is the history that it is the US that has waged war on Iran by overthrowing their democracy from 1953-1979, and then acting with Iraq for an unlawful War of Aggression that killed up to a million Iranians from 1980-1988. Because these facts are not disputed as far as I know, and in obvious violation of war law, that makes the US guilty of Wars of Aggression on Iran that again killed up to a million of their people.
So how does this history of US war on Iran for 35 consecutive years match with FOX News' Mr. Carlson's statement that the US does not seek hegemony and has moral authority while Iran is the evil one?
FOX news not reporting the history of US takeover of Iran's government and war upon them makes their reporting an obvious lie of omission that anyone concerned with comprehensive reporting immediately notices. For those interested in this history:
US overthrew Iran’s democracy 1953-1979, helped Iraq invade 1980-1988, now lies for more war (and an analogy if the US were the victim of empire)
What Iran’s president said about Israel, and how the US lies for war
What IAEA reports on Iran’s nuclear energy/medicine, how US lies
Analogy: US wars on Iraq, Iran as US criminal gangster “business”
Are US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan well-intended mistakes? What we now know from the evidence
US war law explained
US war history in 2 minutes
There are more lies of omission and commission from US corporate media that also publishes our texts. How many of you are familiar with Abraham Lincoln as a freshman member of Congress in his famously powerful prose delivering a speech that proved President Polk in obvious violation of the Adams-Onis Treaty, and that US soldiers were 400 miles into land forever promised to Mexico? Our texts today call this a "border dispute;" a lie of commission that the US violated a treaty in crystal-clear language, and a lie of omission to remove Lincoln's refutation of the President's "reasons" for war. From US war history in 2 minutes:
US war history brief to put the present in context:
1. The US regularly violated treaties with Native Americans, as well as manipulating their meaning for the purpose of stealing their land.
2. US President Polk lied to Congress to initiate a War of Aggression in Mexico. The result was the US taking 40% of Mexico in 1848. This occurred despite Abraham Lincoln's crystal-clear explanation as a member of Congress that the Adams-Onis Treaty placed the "border dispute" 400 miles within land forever promised to Mexico and forever promised as outside any US claim.
3. The US violated our treaty with Hawaii and stole their country in 1898.
4. The US reneged on promises of freedom after the Spanish American War to impose our rule on the Philippines and install US-friendly dictators in Cuba.
5. The US entered WW1 upon no national security threat to the US and put the 3rd party presidential candidate in prison for public speeches questioning the war.
6. The CIA had several covert wars; perhaps most important in today's context of war on Iran: "Operation Ajax" that overthrew Iran's democracy and installed a US-friendly and brutal dictator. When that dictator was overthrown and Iran refused another, the US aided Iraq to unlawfully invade and attack Iran from 1980-1988; killing up to a million Iranians. If the US lied and acted twice to unlawfully overthrew Iran’s democracy within our own lifetimes, shouldn’t we assume first another lie-started unlawful war today? Upon confirmation of the lies (documented below), shouldn’t we arrest the US War Criminals rather than allow them to kill again?!?
7. The Vietnam War occurred after the US allowed the cancellation of an election to unify the country, as escalated with the Gulf of Tonkin incident: false intelligence at best, but then manipulated into a false-flag event for a "defensive" war.
8. Perhaps most disturbing is the King Family civil suit that found the US government guilty in the assassination of Dr. King. Corporate media, including our text publishers, omit this history. The King family’s conclusion is that Martin was assassinated to prevent his “Occupy DC” plan beginning for the sumer of 1968 to end his version of today’s wars.
9. We now know from Congressional reports that all "reasons" for war with Iraq were known to be false as they were told.
10. The two "reasons" for war with Iran are as false as the "reasons" for war with Iraq. Beware a false flag attack by the US or Israel to blame on Iran as pretext for another “defensive” war:
- Iran’s president never physically threatened Israel.
- All of Iran’s nuclear material is fully accounted for peaceful and legal use for energy and medicine.
10 Excellent Reasons To Attack Iran
SOURCE
1. Iran has threatened to fight back if attacked, and that’s a war crime. War crimes must be punished.
2. My television says Iran has nukes. I’m sure it’s true this time. Just like with North Korea. I’m sure they’re next. We only bomb places that really truly have nukes and are in the Axis of Evil. Except Iraq, which was different.
3. Iraq didn’t go so badly. Considering how lousy its government is, the place is better off with so many people having left or died. Really, that one couldn’t have worked out better if we’d planned it.
4. When we threaten to cut off Iran’s oil, Iran threatens to cut off Iran’s oil, which is absolutely intolerable. What would we do without that oil? And what good is buying it if they want to sell it?
5. Iran was secretly behind 9-11. I read it online. And if it wasn’t, that’s worse. Iran hasn’t attacked another nation in centuries, which means its next attack is guaranteed to be coming very soon.
6. Iranians are religious nuts, unlike Israelis and Americans. Most Israelis don’t want to attack Iran, but the Holy Israeli government does. To oppose that decision would be to sin against God.
7. Iranians are so stupid that when we murder their scientists they try to hire a car dealer in Texas to hire a drug gang in Mexico to murder a Saudi ambassador in Washington, and then they don’t do it — just to make us look bad for catching them.
7. b. Oh, and stupid people should be bombed. They’re not civilized.
8. War is good for the U.S. economy, and the Iranian economy too. Troops stationed in Iran would buy stuff. And women who survived the war would have more rights. Like in Virginia. We owe Iranians this after that little mishap in 1953.
9. This is the only way to unite the region. Either we bomb Iran and it swears its eternal love to us. Or, if necessary, we occupy Iran to liberate it like its neighbors. Which shouldn’t take long. Look how well Afghanistan is going already.
10. They won’t give our drone back. Enough said.
1. Iran has threatened to fight back if attacked, and that’s a war crime. War crimes must be punished.
2. My television says Iran has nukes. I’m sure it’s true this time. Just like with North Korea. I’m sure they’re next. We only bomb places that really truly have nukes and are in the Axis of Evil. Except Iraq, which was different.
3. Iraq didn’t go so badly. Considering how lousy its government is, the place is better off with so many people having left or died. Really, that one couldn’t have worked out better if we’d planned it.
4. When we threaten to cut off Iran’s oil, Iran threatens to cut off Iran’s oil, which is absolutely intolerable. What would we do without that oil? And what good is buying it if they want to sell it?
5. Iran was secretly behind 9-11. I read it online. And if it wasn’t, that’s worse. Iran hasn’t attacked another nation in centuries, which means its next attack is guaranteed to be coming very soon.
6. Iranians are religious nuts, unlike Israelis and Americans. Most Israelis don’t want to attack Iran, but the Holy Israeli government does. To oppose that decision would be to sin against God.
7. Iranians are so stupid that when we murder their scientists they try to hire a car dealer in Texas to hire a drug gang in Mexico to murder a Saudi ambassador in Washington, and then they don’t do it — just to make us look bad for catching them.
7. b. Oh, and stupid people should be bombed. They’re not civilized.
8. War is good for the U.S. economy, and the Iranian economy too. Troops stationed in Iran would buy stuff. And women who survived the war would have more rights. Like in Virginia. We owe Iranians this after that little mishap in 1953.
9. This is the only way to unite the region. Either we bomb Iran and it swears its eternal love to us. Or, if necessary, we occupy Iran to liberate it like its neighbors. Which shouldn’t take long. Look how well Afghanistan is going already.
10. They won’t give our drone back. Enough said.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Mossad Kills Another Iranian Scientist
Can you even FATHOM what it would be like here if China were assassinating our scientists?
Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, "has been working as the deputy in charge of commerce at the Natanz site," said a posting on the website of Sharif University in Tehran, from which Ahmadi Roshan graduated around a decade ago.
The killing of Roshan was similar to previous assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists that Tehran has blamed on Israel and the United States. Both countries have denied the accusations.
"The responsibility of this explosion falls on the Zionist regime," the governor of Tehran province, Safar Ali Bratloo, told Iran's Arabic-language Al-Alam broadcaster.
"The method of this terrorist action is similar to previous actions that targeted Iran's nuclear scientists," he said.
Full Story
Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, "has been working as the deputy in charge of commerce at the Natanz site," said a posting on the website of Sharif University in Tehran, from which Ahmadi Roshan graduated around a decade ago.
The killing of Roshan was similar to previous assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists that Tehran has blamed on Israel and the United States. Both countries have denied the accusations.
"The responsibility of this explosion falls on the Zionist regime," the governor of Tehran province, Safar Ali Bratloo, told Iran's Arabic-language Al-Alam broadcaster.
"The method of this terrorist action is similar to previous actions that targeted Iran's nuclear scientists," he said.
Full Story
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)