Thursday, June 30, 2005

Target Iran

We all know the US is gearing up for war or at least "surgical" strikes against Iran. Either by using Israel or doing it ourselves. The rhetoric is getting thick around here. Now we are seizing the assets of people conected to Iran and other countries.The newly elected president is being accussed of being a former kidnapper, even though the intel on that is rather flimsy at this time.
Oh, there is no question that Iran has something we want.
On the first page of this CENTCOM report of 1998, the US's intention to target both Iraq and Iran are apparent. They don't even hide their desire for the region's oil reserves...

"In Southwest Asia, both Iraq and Iran
continue to pose threats to the region and to the free flow of oil from the region."

Yeah, but it's THEIR OIL! It's like someone coming into a bookstore you own and saying "I need all of your books now because you're impedeing the flow of information."
"What will you do with them?", you ask.
"Oh, sell them for more. Or sit on them while bookstores freindly to us make better profits."


Sunday, June 26, 2005

Iraqi Insurgency Pigeon holed as Sunni only

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - U.S. and Iraqi officials said on Sunday they were talking to tribal leaders, clerics and some groups linked to the Sunni Arab insurgency as part of attempts to draw more parties into Iraq's political process.

Sunni Arab insurgency. Sunni Arab insugency. Sunni...

See? Portray the insurgency as anything but a united Iraqi front. It's just Sunnis, right? They're just jealous of the Shia dominated puppet govt. that doesn't do anything.

"We're not going to compromise with Zarqawi."

There they go with trying to link them to Al-Queda again. Guys, you cannot have it both ways, to wit:

1.The resistance is linked to Al-Queda through Zarqawi.
2.We have constant talks with the resistance-trying to compromise.
3.We're not going to compromise with Zarqawi.

What bullcrap. Is this propaganda placement or what?

The only people they could possibly talk to would be local Sheiks and religious leaders that will give them the time of day.

Like some guy in a kafiya and an Ak is actually sitting down on a pillow with a US military rep sipping strong tea and deciding what they will do about all the nasty fighting.

The Freedom. The Glorious Freedom.

So they shot the kids by accident, tried to help them, but wound up framing them anyways? This is Sensory War folks-Mythic War dissolves when you're faced with this.

Take a good hard look at this kid. Oh look, same RPGs.

Honor, Valor, DEAD KIDS. You people make me sick.

Read the full story here You want a war big man? You want to shoot up KIDS? Bloody hell.

Poof! All of a sudden, RPGs. What the hell?

No RPGs...

Friday, June 24, 2005

US support of bombings in Iran?

Scott Ritter, a former UNSCOM weapons inspector and political activist had alleged months ago that plans had been "signed off" by George W. Bush to bomb Iran in late June. Well, it's June. No bombs, right? Wrong. Five days before the elections, an "atypical" series of explosions ripped through various spots in Iran, killing eight. There are quite a few of these opposition groups, some more militant than others. Some Iranians have called for the US to empower opposition forces. Members of the Iranian Govt. have talked about pursuing legal action against the US for funding opposition groups.

It is true that the US has been protecting iran opposition forces. Again, I found some intersesting material from the CFR here concerning the US backing opposition in Iran. (Do a search on the page for "opposition" and you will find some CFR guy saying it would be a bad idea to say if we are/aren't supporting opposition groups. Classic. Yeah, we probably are.)

Exaxtly who got what and how much and for not the point of this article. I simply would like to indicate that we have supported groups in the past, one or a few of these groups are suspected of the bombings, and that bombings DID take place in late June. Not aerial attacks, sure. But, is it a possibility that Bush "signed off" for attacks from opposition forces to help disrupt elections. I'd still like to give Ritter the benefit of the doubt. Maybe when plans are "signed off for late June", they mean that the plans are to be implemented (ie. send money to this guy, go over here-do this/that) around late June and the action is executed later-say September. Since urainium is probably on it's way from Russia with love, fears are still projected in the near future of attacks on Bushehr nuclear plant.

Monday, June 13, 2005

"Pervasive fear is the foundation of every dictatorial regime -- the prop that holds up all power not based on consent. And when the regime of fear is broken, and the people find their courage and find their voice, democracy is their goal, and tyrants, themselves, have reason to fear."
-George W. Bush
National Defense University
March 08, 2005

No Kidding.

Here the CFR outlines, rather crudely, what the insurgency in Iraq is(ie. what groups make it up). It also postulates some goals for the "rivaling" factions. Of course the first two are a return to Ba'athist rule and/or the establishment of an Islamic state. Again, regarding the portrayal of the insurgency..."Paint them as Saddam supporters, or Al-Qaeda operatives (Associating the Iraqi resistance with 9/11), or even better-foreign fighters (Future targets Iran, Syria)."

Thursday, June 09, 2005

The following is an exerpt from a Q and A session that followed a speech given by U.S. Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, D.C. Friday, March 12, 2004 entitled Iraq: Intelligence, Facts, and Fantasies Source The Senator is introduced as..."one of the leading Republican voices on national security and foreign policy, and he is the chair of the Senate Policy Committee. He is also in the Senate National Security Working Group, and sits on the Finance, Judiciary, and Energy Committees as well. He is at the forefront of pretty much all of the foreign policy debates swirling around on [Capitol] Hill today, including Iraq."
QUESTIONER: I'm Robert Livingston from the German Historical Institute. Senator, in the interest of rational discourses that you want, let me introduce a subject that's hardly ever discussed, and that is [the] liaison with foreign intelligence services. And I've got two parts of that question.The first one: Dr. [David] Kay at one point testified that, because of personnel cuts at the CIA in the late 1970s, it became too dependent on foreign intelligence liaisons for its information. And Mr. Tenet, at one of his many testimonies, said the two decisive pieces of information for him, that convinced him prior to the Iraq war, both--both of those came from foreign intelligence services. So my first part of my question to you is: have we become too dependent on foreign intelligence services? The second part is more specific of a link to Israel. Now, if there's one country that targeted Iraq for decades with intelligence work it's Israel, and the Mossad [Israeli intelligence service] has a very high reputation. Has your committee looked into how effective [the] liaison with the Israeli intelligence service was prior to the Iraq war?

KYL: That second question is a darn good question, and since I've now been off the committee for about a year I can't speak for what has been done in--since the time that I was gone, and I don't recall ever specifically looking at the relationship with Mossad. I suspect that had we--that had I made a specific inquiry to that effect, I could have learned a lot from our intelligence agencies. I suspect what they would have told me is that the Mossad's intelligence in the Middle East is very good, probably better than almost any other country. And then this melds into your first question. We--and my answer has two parts. We have had an extraordinarily good relationship even with those countries that did not support our effort in Iraq. And I speak of countries like Germany specifically and France and other countries that weren't totally supportive in a diplomatic way, but who have continued to support us with their intelligence gathering and with their law enforcement activities, which has been a big part of rolling the terrorists out--the Hamburg cell, for example. Now, it hasn't always been perfect, but our own intelligence and law enforcement cooperation hasn't all been perfect, either. But we have, to an extraordinary degree, had great cooperation with virtually every liaison--every other intelligence service with whom we've worked that I know. But I also believe and agree with the statement you made, that we have become far too dependent on the cocktail circuit, on liaison services, and on other, easier forms of collection. And in the war on terror, you can't rely on satellites and you can't just go to cocktail parties with lower-level embassy personnel trying to recruit other lower-level--[chuckles]--embassy personnel from other countries and figure out anything about terrorists. You�ve got to figure out a way to get into the countries involved and get involved in those networks. It's very, very difficult. But in the '70s and in the '80s and in the '90s, we did not devote sufficient resources to that problem. We didn't have a mindset to do so. And therefore, when this whole thing broke, we were woefully ill-prepared.

...So, yes we do--the answer to the question is [that] we rely on that liaison too much. But it is also true that we have benefited a great deal from it.

This is not surprising, I know. It does further illustrate an indelible connection between Mossad intel on the ground in Iraq and our own people. "You've got to figure out a way to get into the countries involved and get involved in those networks. It's very, very difficult." Not for Mossad.

The one on top is a leaked photograph of George Herbert Walker Bush and his fellow bonesmen circa 1947.Details here. The second is a recently uncovered 1976 picture of George "Opium Poppy" Bush with what are described as "double-agents" attending a function at the Bohemian Grove or its headquarters in San Francisco. It was taken from a Bohemian Club publication. More details. Keep in mind there is almost a 30 year difference between these two photos. I believe, of course, that these are the same men in each picture. The book's jovial quip about "double-agents" is an inside joke; for these men already belong to a secret club-namely SKULL AND BONES!

Monday, June 06, 2005

Douglas Feith, a former protege of Richard "The Prince of Darkness" Perle, put in his resignation in January. According to a London Telegraph article, this may be due to numerous investigations into classified information that was allegedly leaked to Israeli intelligence, I mean lobbyists. Investigations aside, this Council on Foreign Relations war hawk has not stopped slinging "War on Terror" banter about at speaking engagements. I haven't found any recent comments concerning Iran...yet. In a speech he gave in March of this year, Feith had this to say:
"Societies inevitably adjust to allow the state to fulfill its most basic duty: providing security." Interesting. Is that, in fact, the most basic duty of the state? Security? Wow.
And I thought it was to "...form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity...".

Hell, they didn't even CAPITALIZE the words "common defense". I'm definitely feeling the "domestic Tranquility" with all the fake terror alerts, aren't you? Well, that's OUR state-maybe Feith is talking about Israel. Oh sure, he goes on about "finding a balance" between security and freedom in his speech. But then, there is no balance when security takes precedence over Liberty, is there? And that is what we are seeing-day after day.
Besides..."They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin

June is here folks!

We've been hearing about a plan to attack Iran in late June for some time now.(Go to Raed's site on the right and click on his Attack Iran? NO! banner) For months in fact. Most likely it will be an attack from Israel-since they have a very capable air force with bunker busters donated by the US just about a month ago-I believe. A ground attack would be futile, of course. Now, take a deep breath. The ONLY way to get support for an attack like this would be if Iran was blamed for some horrible atrocity-like Iraq was blamed for 9/11-or was found to be complicit in some wrong-doing. Nuclear ambitions aside, there needs to be more pretext. Something to sell. Maybe they'll just amp up the nuclear development story more-not sure. One thing's for sure-the air feels different this month-there is a disturbance in the force, if you will. Bush's approval rating is slipping again folks, and you know damn well what that can mean. Another attack. Let's hope not. May we all stay strong enough to endure what is assuredly laid out for us in the near future. Peace to you all-let's keep our heads together. NO WAR!