Chris Nelson Provides Reality Check on Iran’s Nuke Capacity

-

Chris Nelson has some great stuff on Iran tonight. I had not heard until tonight that Iran failed to bring its centrifuges on line and that the 50 they assembled blew up.
Every time I post something from Chris Nelson’s Nelson Report, I get besieged by requests for it. People want to know how they can get it — or what the web links are.
There simply is no easy way. It’s not on the web. Nelson created his own email version of a daily blog — filled with gossip, policy analysis, and the most addictive kind of DC intrigue — before blogs were really on line. He does this for a living and is a consultant for numerous political players, but they pay him big bucks. He doesn’t do Google ads.
If folks are interested in paying in the low five-figure range for his high quality daily reports, I’ll link you up.
The good news is that Chris Nelson has given me permission to re-post his excellent material on occasion. The bad news is that the salivary glands of a lot of folks out there get too hyperactive. I can’t get you on his list. Sorry.
But back to substance. Chris wrote up this exchange below regarding Iran and the quality of its nuclear energy enterprise and the recent change in tone in the administration:

The Nelson Report, 16 January 2007
IRAN. . .recent news stories out of the Middle East seem to be generating a sense that Iran is closer to a successful nuclear weapons capability than had previously been thought, and that the risk to Israel is rising to the point where Israel is moving closer to a decision to “take out” the Iranian nuclear weapons facilities.
Balderdash, our informed sources continue to maintain.
Yes, it does seem to be true that Iran has accelerated its program to bring on line the 3,000 centrifuges required to generate nuclear fuel. . .but it also seems true (and not Iranian disinformation) that of the 50 centrifuges recently hooked up, all 50 blew up.
An informed friend speculates:

Could be sabotage. Or it just could be the temperamental character of the devices. Especially if they’re rushing production. Supposedly they solved an earlier problem by making technicians wear gloves when assembling the devices. The grease on their fingerprints was apparently causing the rotors to tip and crash once they got spinning in earnest. That is how sensitive these things are.

OK, but what about all the neo-con noises here in the US about meeting militarily the “accelerating threat” from Iran? Our source offers this perspective:

The change is in atmospherics. So far as I know, the technical developments are correctly described here.

The real story is that Iran is going to go right ahead defying the UN, the Russians will protect them from being squeezed too hard, the Israelis will fret, the Sunday Times of London will make up alarming tales, the State Dept will temporize, and despite all this, the Iranians will not have the wherewithal for a Bomb until the next Administration takes office.
By then, they will be closer, of course. Nobody knows what’s going to happen when they get there, including whether they will try to take advantage of having the wherewithal. It’s an unwelcome development, but it’s going to happen, subject only to the identity and inclinations of the next president of the U.S.
So don’t panic. There’s no point.

Last but not least for tonite, what’s the strategic implication of the recent US Navy carrier deployment announcements to all this? Obviously, as we have been reporting, the professionals have been warning the White House and associated neo-cons that any actual military action against Iran itself runs a huge risk of effective Iranian retaliation against US interests, allied shipping, and oil.
We asked a friend out on the West Coast for his assessment of the new deployments, which confirms the actions ARE aimed at Iran, but in a balanced way, all things considered. For something really “up”, he warns, watch to see a change in deploying the Nimitz:

Carrier USS John C. Stennis today (16 Jan 07) departs home port Bremerton, Washington, en route to San Diego to pick up its carrier air wing before sailing west to the Persian Gulf.
There, the Stennis strike group will join the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower strike group. The Eisenhower recently has been operating off Somalia.
(Stennis strike group had been scheduled to cover routinely for USS Kitty Hawk in the western Pacific this spring while the Yokohama-based carrier underwent repairs. The Pentagon announced 20 Dec 2006 that Stennis strike group would sail early, deploying instead to the Gulf. The Pentagon announced 11 Jan 07 USS Ronald Reagan would skip normal work-up phases and deploy within several weeks to provide the routine coverage in western Pacific during Kitty Hawk’s repairs.)

Last week the Pentagon also announced deployment to the Persian Gulf region of a Patriot battalion of the 11th Air Defense Artillery Brigade, which is primarily suited for defense against short-range ballistic missile attack. The primary ballistic missile threat in theater is Iran. UK will contribute two minesweepers and a frigate.

OK…so what does this mean?

The deployments are aimed primarily at Iran. USG cites Iranian material support for attacks on US personnel and states concern that Iran and other opponents may view U.S. as vulnerable. As the new strategy unfolds to clear and hold Baghdad neighborhoods, protecting both Shi’a and Sunni populations while jump-starting economic and political recovery, and as US clears Iranian networks providing material support for attacks on US forces, USG is rational to have theoretical concern for possible retaliatory strikes.
This concern is amplified at the margins by tensions over Iran’s nuclear program. Scenarios could include opposition strikes on US assets and Persian Gulf shipping.

Isn’t this going to spur on the crazies in the Amadinejad camp?

This deployment is carefully calibrated. It could have been larger. Increasing to two carrier strike groups in the AOR serves as a firm signal and deterrent, reminding everyone US has bench strength; the US also still can “reach out and touch someone.”
Along with announced deployments of two UK minesweepers and the Patriot battery, it is also an actual contingency force that has significant defensive and offensive capability (e.g. ., could initiate heavy 24 hour air ops if necessary).

OK. . .what to watch for if the US really thinks bad things are about to happen?

On the other hand, increasing to three carrier strike groups would be noticeably more ‘robust’, belligerent and suggestive of intending or anticipating attack. The difference between two and three strike groups is huge. Two =’s strong and capable, but existing offensive intent is less probable; three =’s ‘we don’t care about provocation, we’re preparing to fight in this new dimension’.
(An indicator would be to watch for announcements about Nimitz strike group; Nimitz reportedly has completed the routine pre-deployment work-up and is in San Diego.)

50 hooked up centrifuges blew up? That seems to me to be material.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

58 comments on “Chris Nelson Provides Reality Check on Iran’s Nuke Capacity

  1. George Bernard says:

    “For something really “up”, he warns, watch to see a change in deploying the Nimitz”
    Well, it looks like things will be coming to a boil April or May
    http://www.dailyitem.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070130/NEWS/701300309
    …Francis is stationed aboard the USS Nimitz and will be deploying to the Middle East in April.

    Reply

  2. Dompierre says:

    Interesting. But does Chris Nelson ever mention that the US is carrying out a borderline act of war with the US carriers?
    Doesn’t matter what his info is if Bush is intent on provoking Iran.

    Reply

  3. Den Valdron says:

    To lapse into Godwinism, Israel is like Mussolini to America’s Hitler. It’s a noisy and impressive sideshow, its an enabler, all that. But bottom line, its on the fringe of real decisions.
    Or alternately, its like that little mouse that accompanies the big mouse in Tom and Jerry.

    Reply

  4. MP says:

    POA writes: “Fine, I’ll concede your point. Now, you want to talk about the REAL AND PROVEN acts of espionage Israel and AIPAC have been caught committing against the United States?”
    Okay…and several threads back I said that ANYONE convicted of espionage or treason should suffer the punishment. I have NO problems with that. I’m FOR that. That includes AIPAC. I did say, and I think it’s true, that AIPAC per se hasn’t been accused of spying–only some of its employees (albeit important ones)–and I still think that’s an important distinction.
    Otherwise, you would have to start indicting the Navy and the CIA and the FBI when its agents are caught spying.
    But let’s leave all that aside: I’m no apologist for AIPAC. I’m AGAINST AIPAC on much stronger policy grounds: They are fucking things up, or trying to. They are working AGAINST the TRUE interests of Israel and America. But mine is a policy issue, albeit a strong one.
    Moreover, all the US or the Congress has to do to counteract the AIPAC effect is to stop voting their way. We’ve seen McCollum and others stand up to AIPAC…and frankly, I don’t see why others can’t if they truly disagree with them. AIPAC isn’t the only one in America that controls the flow of money to candidates.
    In that sense AIPAC IS just like any other strong lobby that pulls strings because it gives tons of money. Take money out of the equation and you’ve cut those strings. I think this point is undeniable.
    Correction: I NEVER said they weren’t lying about the lead up to Iraq. And I don’t believe I’ve commented on Iran, except to say that the AIPAC link looked like lies to me. So, I have no idea who you’re talking about here.

    Reply

  5. Den Valdron says:

    It took AIPAC to demonize Iran? Who’s kidding who? Maybe if the revolution, the hostages, the failed rescue, Iran Contra, etc. etc. had never happened.
    Sure, they’ll demonize Iran, but that ground is already well prepared. Something was going to sprout there no matter what.

    Reply

  6. pauline says:

    from Justin Raimondo —
    “Last year, the Israel lobby in the U.S. launched a major campaign to demonize the Iranians and ramp us up for a showdown with Tehran. The last AIPAC national convention, held in Washington, D.C., featured lurid exhibits detailing the horrors and imminence of a nuclear-armed Iran. Here is what Pelosi had to say about Iran to the 2006 AIPAC conference:
    “The greatest threat to Israel’s right to exist, with the prospect of devastating violence, now comes from Iran. For too long, leaders of both political parties in the United States have not done nearly enough to confront the Russians and the Chinese, who have supplied Iran as it has plowed ahead with its nuclear and missile technology. Proliferation represents a clear threat to Israel and to America. It must be confronted by an international coalition against proliferation, with a commitment and a coalition every bit as strong as our commitment to the war against terror.”
    As the Israelis, and their American lobby, push Washington to take action against Tehran, Pelosi and her fellow Democrats are meekly going along, just as they went along with the President in the run-up to war with Iraq.”
    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10353

    Reply

  7. Den Valdron says:

    You ever throw gasoline on a bonfire? It’s quite spectacular, there’s a big whoosh and a gout of flame and if you’re not careful you can lose some eyebrows. But its ultimately irrelevant, it doesn’t burn the fire hotter or brighter, it didn’t start the fire, and it doesn’t make if worse. It’s just pyrotechnics.
    Same thing for Israel. Sure, the right wing nutbars in Israel would love for America to take down Iran for them. Or they’d love to drop a few nukes of their own on Iran.
    But let’s face it. They got nowhere with Bush I or Reagan on that score. Nowhere with Clinton. They would have been nowhere with Dukakis, or Gore, or Bob Dole, or John Kerry or Al Gore.
    The reason they might get somewhere with George W. Bush is George W. Bush.
    Here’s a guy who is fully psychotic, he’s a clinical sadist, a self absorbed sociopathic frat boy with Oedipal complications. Here’s a guy who fantasized about taking out Iraq before he was ever elected, who saw a chance and went for it.
    If Israel didn’t exist, George W. Bush would have still gone into Iraq. It was unfinished business for him, both completing and transcending his fathers legacy, it was his ticket to history, to being a ‘War President’ and one of the Great Ones.
    Iran is also in his sites. The scene of several American humiliations, from the overthrow of the Shah, to the hostage crisis, the bungled and humiliating rescue effort, the Iran-Contra scandal that almost unmade his father. There’s a huge psychological cachet in Iran for Bush, its the site of failures and humiliations, so big payback. If he takes out Iran, he transcends not only his Dad, but Reagan.
    That roving sense of himself as America’s payback helps to explain the recent adventures in Somalia, and the meddling in Lebanon as well, site of national humiliations under Clinton and Reagan.
    And then there’s that whole world domination thing. You can’t own the Persian Gulf without owning Iran. Owning the Persian Gulf gives you effective control of the most strategic resource in the world. So of course he’s going after it.
    So, there’s your bonfire, and Bush has it stacked high and burning bright in his runaway psychosis.
    Lunatics in Israel are bent on feeding that psychosis, but they’re not essential to it. Frankly, they’re barely in control of their own country, and their more lunatic fantasies are out of their own reach. That’s why they’re jerking off over Der Shrubher.
    The reality is that Iran represents no actual threat to Israel. It’s thousands of miles and two countries away, and its got no particular history of animosity. For the Iranians, Israel is this far away place that the can buy some cheap street cred by talking tough about, but for which they have no interest in ever doing anything about.
    So what’s the danger of Iran for Israel? Practically nothing really. At worst, its an irritant. The Israeli extremists are gorged on runaway paranoia and delusional fantasies of indefinite domination of the middle east, much as the American extremists dream of a new american century.
    Of course, the bizarre thing is that Israel is mostly irrelevant in the middle east. It has no substantial trading relations with its neighbors, it has no oil, it controls no crucial resources, crucial harbours, vital river deltas and vital waterways. It’s not a dominant cultural power, not a literary or artistic center for the region, it is not a social or political leader in the region. So… what? What’s so significant about Israel in the middle east?
    In middle eastern terms, Israel for all its importance and influence might as well be located in Yugoslavia. It’s a pariah state, armed to the teeth, militarily impregnable, but largely without relevance. It’s not even as marginal as a place like Turkey.
    Oh sure, its the supreme military power in the region. But how significant is that. It tried to take Lebanon, and was driven out. It can barely hold down Gaza and the West Bank. Aside from the occasional punitive raid on one of its neighbors which produces no political or diplomatic benefits, its military is irrelevant. It hasn’t fought a real war in 33 years, and its neighbors have no interest in starting one. Admittedly, that has a lot to do with the military domination, but it also has a lot to do with other factors, such as peace processes.
    The Israeli PNACer’s recognize that Israel’s a wart on the end of the middle east nose. The dreams of a territorial ‘greater Israel’ are largely dead. But in its place, they see an Israeli Hegemony. The fantasy is of the Arab world partitioned and divided into impotent, squabbling states, with Israel lording it over in a position of real political, economic and cultural domination. It’s even more delusional than PNAC.
    But having said that, despite endless dreams of domination, they’re just flakes telling each other their fantasies and sucking each others cocks. Which, of course, makes them perfect peers and companions to the American lunatic fringe. But no more than that.

    Reply

  8. Pissed Off American says:

    Excuse my language, but does every fucking thread have to be about Israel?
    It’s a small country of about ten million people committed to internal dysfunction, external paranoia and an immense self absorbed and quite destructive lobby in the United States.
    But get over it. Latin America is not all about Cuba. East Asia is not all about Taiwan. The Middle East is not all about Israel.
    Posted by Den Valdron
    With all due respect, Den, I honestly don’t think that Israel can be separated from a debate or commentary on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, real or fabricated.
    You see Israel’s contributions to the current state of my nation as somewhat residual. But I assign Israel a far more insidious role in what is now occurring in regards to United States’ foreign policy. I believe they are actively engaged in seeking to incite an attack on Iran, through espionage, misinformation, bribery of members of Congress, and very possibly false flag terrorist operations.

    Reply

  9. Pissed Off American says:

    Look, heres the deal. Israel’s, and by extension, AIPAC’s, rhetoric has become immorally dishonest. In fact, it has been so for far too long. MP snivels this horsecrap about no one here decrying Palestinian violence. Well guess what MP? I don’t feel I need to state my abhorance of acts of violence that terrorize, maim, or murder innocent civilians. UNLESS of course, some lying sack of shit individual, agency, government, or organization denies that such acts of inhumanity are taking place. Have you ever seen anyone here condone Palestinian violence or acts of terrorism? I haven’t. But I sure as shit have seen flagrant and unabashed defenses of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians offered here, by you and others.
    Your stance, and some of your statements are offensive and not well thought out. Who the hell are you to say to me “I understand that these “niceties” don’t mean much to you, but they do to a lot of other people”? Keep that condescending horseshit to yourself, will you? Have you any idea how friggin asinine it is for you to keep launching these shallow straw attacks? Every defense and argument you have offered here in regards to AIPAC has been SHREDDED by the facts, BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION.
    You know, and admit, they are lying to us about Iran. You used to deny it. You now know they lied about the intelligence leading up to the Iraq invasion. You used to deny it. And, at long last, it appears that you have finally abandoned that patently ridiculous horseshit you used to natter about AIPAC “being just like any other lobby”. So don’t throw condenscension at me, MP. It is YOUR arguments that have been shown to be woefully ill advised, if not downright deceptive.
    You want to quibble about whether or not feeding us purposeful disinformation is an act of espionage? Fine, I’ll concede your point. Now, you want to talk about the REAL AND PROVEN acts of espionage Israel and AIPAC have been caught committing against the United States?
    Stop throwing straw, MP. And your condescension is neither appreciated nor warranted. A comment such as the one quoted above is hardly appropriate coming from someone that has shown such a consistent willingness to defend the indefensible.

    Reply

  10. Den Valdron says:

    Excuse my language, but does every fucking thread have to be about Israel?
    It’s a small country of about ten million people committed to internal dysfunction, external paranoia and an immense self absorbed and quite destructive lobby in the United States.
    But get over it. Latin America is not all about Cuba. East Asia is not all about Taiwan. The Middle East is not all about Israel.

    Reply

  11. MP says:

    “Taken only at face value, “espionage” is usually thought of as just gathering useful information. But one long-understood, standard function of espionage and covert agents is also to disseminate false information. I.e., propoganda.”
    Alright. I agree.

    Reply

  12. reticulant says:

    “An indicator would be to watch for announcements about Nimitz strike group; Nimitz reportedly has completed the routine pre-deployment work-up and is in San Diego…”
    We can recommend http://www.news.navy.mil/local/cvn68/ as one source for related “general” announcements, among others. Also http://www.news.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=27314 re the deployment of CVN 74 (Stennis).

    Reply

  13. rich says:

    MP:
    Taken only at face value, “espionage” is usually thought of as just gathering useful information. But one long-understood, standard function of espionage and covert agents is also to disseminate false information. I.e., propoganda.
    Useful for influencing decisions, social climate, instilling fear, etc.
    This is not new.
    As far as proving it, the issue is hardly formal ties w/Mossad, etc. (Though you’re surely naive to think such ties wouldn’t/don’t exist.) We all know what the line of lies was in Iraq, and will be in Iran. That AIPAC is pushing lies into the public sphere is not in question. That AIPAC is well aware that those lies need to be repeated, and a “crisis” inflated, is also not in question. There doesn’t need to be a conspiracy for this to be true. The neocons knew what they needed to say. Plus, people agreeing that this was & is to be the agenda is all a conspiracy is anyway–and that’s what the PNAC did, on the literal level.
    4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
    5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.
    Not so scary, is it, when you check the dictionary and compare definitions to the open workings of lobbyists and scaremongers.

    Reply

  14. MP says:

    POA writes: “If you criticize Israel, you get branded as anti-semite. If you criticize Islam, you are lauded as being anti-terrorism. We’ve seen it here on this blog a thousand times. Generally, if any of us offer an opinion critical of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, we are immediately provided with examples of acts of terrorism allegedly committed by Palestinians, as if we are expected to lump all of the Palestinian men, women, and children in with same grouping as the ones committing the acts of terror. So, defending the Palestinians is painted as defending terrorism.”
    * Actually, as a long-time reader of this blog I would say–and a post count would confirm me–that 93% of the I/P comments on THIS blog are pro-Palestinian.
    * I don’t recall ANY criticisms of Islam on this blog–maybe a few wackos here and there, but you could count any such attacks on one hand.
    * No one expects you to attribute Pal acts of terror to all Palestinian people. But the Pals do have a government and they do have armed movements. These groups are right subject to criticism for their actions–as is the Israeli government for its oppression of the Palestinian people in ways that you’ve amply documented here.
    • But, on THIS blog, you won’t find all that many people criticizing Palestinian violence of any sort. I’d have to say that most people here who comment on this issue at all are sympathetic to it. Who knows what the others think?
    I got a 444

    Reply

  15. MP says:

    Den writes: “Actually, under certain circumstances it would be a species of espionage or covert operation.”
    I can see that, but the operative phrase is “under certain circumstances” and I think those would have to be shown.

    Reply

  16. pauline says:

    LONDON (AFP) – Iran offered to cut off aid and support for the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah and the Palestinian group Hamas, and promised full transparency on its nuclear program in a secret letter to the United States soon after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the British media reported.
    According to the BBC, the letter, which it obtained, was unsigned, but the US State Department understood that it came with the approval of the highest Iranian authorities.
    The Islamic republic also offered to use its influence to support stabilisation in Iraq, and in return asked for a halt in hostile American behaviour, an abolition of all sanctions, and the pursuit and repatriation of members of the Mujahedeen Khalq (People’s Mujahedeen MKO).
    The MKO is an exiled Iranian opposition group which fought alongside former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s army in the eight-year Iran-Iraq war, and is currently based in Iraq.
    Initially, the State Department was positive on the offer, according to Lawrence Wilkerson, former US secretary of state Colin Powell’s chief of staff, who spoke to the BBC.
    “As soon as it got to the White House, and as soon as it got to the Vice-President’s ( Dick Cheney) office, the old mantra of ‘we don’t talk to evil’ … reasserted itself,” Wilkerson told the broadcaster.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070117/pl_afp/usiraniraqdiplomacy

    Reply

  17. pauline says:

    from Wayne Madsen —
    January 18, 2007 — Iranians did have links with Bin Ladens.
    The Iran-Bin Laden link the neo-cons don’t want you to know about: Son of Shah hung out at Bin Laden family agent’s (and George W. Bush’s buddy) office in early 1980s.
    According to our confidential sources, Reza Cyrus Pahlavi, the deposed Shah’s oldest son and claimant to the Iranian throne, lived in Houston after the ouster of his father in 1979 and during the early 1980s. Pahlavi reportedly worked out of the Houston offices of James Bath & Associates, the authorized agents for Salem Bin Laden and Bin Laden family interests in the United States. Salem Bin Laden was Osama Bin Laden’s older brother. Salem died in a suspicious plane crash outside of San Antonio in 1988. James Bath was also George W. Bush’s colleague in AWOL status in the Texas Air National Guard in the early 1970s.
    Pahlavi enjoyed full U.S. Secret Service protection while working in the Bin Laden company-financed Houston offices.The Iranian royal pretender worked under cover as an aircraft salesman with James Bath & Associates. In reality, Pahlavi was working with CIA-backed Iranian monarchy supporters who were working to overthrow the Ayatollah Khomeini regime and restore him to the Peacock Throne in Tehran. In 1978, Pahlavi trained as a fighter pilot at Reese Air Force Base in Lubbock, Texas.
    This arrangement was fully known to then-Vice President George H. W. Bush who had, in 1980, engaged in treasonous negotiations with the Iranian Revolutionary Government to ensure that the U.S. Embassy hostages were not released until after the 1980 presidential election. As Vice President, Bush, Sr. re-engaged the same Iranian interlocutors in swapping arms for U.S. hostages being held in Lebanon in what became known as the Iran-contra scandal.
    Reza Pahlavi now lives in Potomac, Maryland and maintains a political exile organization with headquarters in Falls Church, Virginia. He has been tied to various neo-con activities designed to foment dissension among Iran’s youth, including the U.S.-government-funded Radio Farda.

    Reply

  18. ... says:

    poa 9:27am – i think your first paragraph sums it up pretty well.. it is clear to most that the lopsidedness of usa foreign policy has been the result of undue influence of certain countries and the absence of others. it has also been the influence of certain groups within the usa who have vested interests that have nothing to do with the usas best interests.. that is all quite obvious to most, but as a system that is run by big money, for big money, i see nothing that is going to come along to change any of that.. liars and deceivers are the regular working crew for this group and even a politician who would like to rise above it all will be hard pressed to bite the hand that feeds him. until the whole political process is changed, or things get a hell of a lot worse, i suspect things will remain the same in the running of the usa.

    Reply

  19. Den Valdron says:

    Actually, under certain circumstances it would be a species of espionage or covert operation.
    Hmmmm. I notice 666 comes up constantly in my security codes on this sight. A glitch in the random number software? Or is someone trying to tell me something?

    Reply

  20. MP says:

    POA asks: “Isn’t the organized pandering of false information to the American people in and of itself an act of espionage?”
    Ah, no, it’s not. It might be propaganda, but it’s not espionage.
    Moreover, the case has to be proven.
    I understand that these “niceties” don’t mean much to you, but they do to a lot of other people.

    Reply

  21. Pissed Off American says:

    Well, really, its about time. If you criticize Israel, you get branded as anti-semite. If you criticize Islam, you are lauded as being anti-terrorism. We’ve seen it here on this blog a thousand times. Generally, if any of us offer an opinion critical of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, we are immediately provided with examples of acts of terrorism allegedly committed by Palestinians, as if we are expected to lump all of the Palestinian men, women, and children in with same grouping as the ones committing the acts of terror. So, defending the Palestinians is painted as defending terrorism.
    It is disheartening, however, that a suit against AIPAC has to be lodged by such a pinpoint focus of the American community. ALL Americans should be incensed at AIPAC’s propaganda and the unreasonable power they exercise over our nation’s perspective of the Muslim community, both foreign and domestic. Here is an organization that has been caught red-handed committing grave acts of espionage against the United States, was directly invloved in misleading and dishonest intelligence concerning Iraq’s weapons capabilities and support of terrorism, and is now repeating the same kind of dishonest and misleading rhetoric against Iran. AIPAC, if allowed to continue to operate in the United States, should be required to register as a foreign agent, and should be subjected to the same vetting and survelience that we would subject a comparable Muslim organization to. And that DEFINITELY includes keeping a watchful eye on them for signs of terrorist activity and espionage. There is no question that Israel has launched false flag covert operations whose purpose was to incite American foreign policy against certain entities. Why should we believe they are no longer conducting such operations? Isn’t the organized pandering of false information to the American people in and of itself an act of espionage?

    Reply

  22. Carroll says:

    This is off topic but concerns one of our usual fighting topics and is funny as hell…
    It seem the Muslims are finally learning how to play the game…they will be giving the ADL a run for their money in using civil rights and law suits in the US system.
    Muslim Women File Complaint with DOJ Against Israeli Lobby
    Friday, January 12, 2007, the National Association of Muslim American Women (NAMAW) filed a formal complaint with the US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Criminal Section, and also with the Executive Office for the United States Attorneys at the US Department of Justice. The complaint alleges that as a result of misleading and false information provided to US law enforcement agencies, the media and also to various governmental bodies, various Jewish organizations and individuals have sought to create an environment in the US that is hostile towards US Muslims, resulting in the deprivation, and violation of Muslim civil liberties and civil rights.
    The complaint lists the American-Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC), American Jewish Committee (AJC), Anti-Defamation League (ADL), American Jewish Congress B’nai B’rith, the Jewish Council on Public Affairs, and individuals such as Daniel Pipes, Steven Emerson, Rita Katz, Steven Schwartz, Evan Kohlman, and others.
    In its complaint, the National Association of Muslim American Women (NAMAW) says, “Jewish organizations and activists in the US may have created enemies lists that include the names of Muslims, Arabs, white nationalists organizations, and others that they have targeted as threats to, or enemies of the state of Israel.” The complaint also says that NAMAW believes that “these Jewish organizations and activists have used their financial resources and also their formidable political influence to purposefully poison public opinion against Muslims, Arabs and Islam in an attempt to demonize and vilify the same for political purposes, and also to create an environment conducive to the deprivation and violation of Muslim and Arab constitutional rights, and especially the repression of Muslim religious and political freedoms, and free speech.”
    The complaint consists of five pages of accusation, supported by more than 100 pages of supporting documentation extracted from transcripts of Congressional testimonies, articles, and public statements. NAMAW along with alleging that Jewish organizations and activists sought to demonize, and vilify Muslims, Arabs, and Islam, says that these same people may have also committed perjury in testimonies provided to the US Congress. The group claims that Jewish organizations and activists may have purposely given false impressions, and made false statements aimed at misleading the media, policy makers, law enforcement, and various government agencies. They believe that these false statements led to an aggressive campaign in the US to suppress Muslim rights. The complaint also says that NAMAW suspects that the Jewish campaign against Muslims and Islam in the US, has been ongoing for more than 10 years.
    The group asks the Department of Justice to investigate its claims, and to work with the Muslim community to dispel myths and lies that have demonized Muslims, Arabs and Islam. They are also requesting that the DOJ develop and implement programs aimed at healing US society of the harsh racial and religious polarization resulting from what they believe is an ongoing and criminal hate campaign against Muslims, Arabs and Islam.
    About National Association of Muslim American Women (NAMAW)

    Reply

  23. Carroll says:

    I am sure Nelson is quite expert in what he does but he seems to ignore the “crazy” factor. Bush and Cheney are crazy, the neos are crazy, the jewish lobby is crazy and the Israeli goverment is crazy. And in addition to being crazy they have proven they are also incompetent at war. I think they are going to do it. I don’t need to know when, ..so two carriers or three, the die has been cast….unless.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    ..a re-cap..
    “It can be no coincidence that an Iranian “office of relations” in Kurdish Erbil was attacked by Americans almost as the president was speaking last week. At the same time the president reminded Americans that he is sending more naval strength to the Persian Gulf and anti missile systems to America’s Sunni allies on the Gulf’s western shore to confront Iran.
    “The confrontation escalation also shows that the hoped for revival of influence by the “realist” wing of the Republican Party is not coming any time soon and that the influence of the party’s high priest of confrontation, Vice President Dick Cheney, remains strong. But having unleashed Shi’ite power by overthrowing Saddam Hussein, and thereby tremendously increasing the influence of Iran, the United States is going to have a difficult time putting that toothpaste back in the tube.
    There remains, of course, the nuclear bomb issue, which the Iraq Study Group hoped to put on a different track than Iranian influence in Iraq. But are we now feeling a renewed undertow toward military action against Iran?
    The New Yorker’s Seymour Hersh has been writing about the Pentagon’s plans to strike Iran, which he says are far beyond anything that ordinary contingency planning could account for. Time Magazine ran a cover story a while back titled “What War With Iran Would Look Like.”
    The American Jewish Committee took out a full page ad in The New York Times showing Iran in the center of concentric circles, including all the Middle East and beyond, asking: “Can anyone within range of Iran’s missiles feel safe?”
    Professor Efraim Inbar of Israel’s Bar Ilan University has written that military action against Iranian nuclear installations “has many risks and is complicated, but the difficulty is exaggerated, and inaction is bound to bring about far worse consequences.”
    …..continued at
    http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/01/16/whats_next____war_with_iran/

    Reply

  24. rich says:

    Summing up, then, Bush is NOT deploying his fave Preznit Teddy Roosevelt’s ‘Big Stick’ in the Persian Gulf becaaauuse . . TWO aircraft carrier groups is an act of subtlety, whereas it would take at LEAST three aircraft carrier groups to cross that bright line into the territory of a crude threat display by a higher primate.
    I agree that adequate backup is necessary & tactically sound–it’s just good chess.
    Problem is, Iran would be foolhardy to openly attack US forces. They WILL NOT do it. It’d be the opening Bush is looking for to go after Iran. Everybody knows this is the American M.O.: Invent a nonexistent attack (Gulf of Tonkin), inflate a standard skirmish (Texas, Israel’06), sucker a dictator (Hussein’91), or just exploit the sinking of Maine.
    Bush will just pick his pretext, when he’s good-n-ready. He won’t have to protect US forces against a Pearl Harbor-like attack by Iran. It’s not coming.
    Bush isn’t credited with the finesse that brought the Salvador Option to bear in Iraq–but he is thought to know his way around a blunt instrument. With empty words like ‘clear & hold’ replacing Vietnam-era euphemisms like ‘search & destroy,’ the Elephant in the room is there’s no concrete strategy. None, unless you count ‘More.’ Or think that’s likely a code-word for ‘More Equals Kill-Them-All.’ Whether “clearing & holding” Baghdad or Sadr City will look more like Hue, Stalingrad, or Fallujah, I really don’t know, but it’s an idiot move through either a military or a political lens. Just think about what “clearing & holding” means in the non-abstract: going door-to-door, block-by-block, removing the innocent and killing the supposedly ‘guilty’–and perhaps not bothering to separate the sheep from the goats in the process.
    Good luck with that.
    And given all that, you have to wonder if the carrier groups (2 or 3) arent’ there so that, if ‘clearing-n-holding’ means holding down whole neighborhoods, communities, peoples, cities by the neck and throttling them til the light dies for good, in full view of everybody–and it provokes the kind of outrage that rightly demands intervention–nothing can be done. Not by Iran, the Saudis, Not by China, Russia, Not by France, Germany.
    The US is in Iraq to PRESIDE over civil war, provoke it, direct it, and pretty much preside over the shattering and extinguishing of every form functional process, institutional coherence, or social cohesion. Everything we know underscores that conclusion. Cynical? Not at all. America actively sinking Israeli-Syrian peace talks… just confirms Bush isn’t done. Iran, the Saudis will continue pouring money and guns across the border, aircraft carriers or not. They’re there to obliterate obstacles and “eliminate” interference. If Bush has ANY new tactical tricks, I say the math goes like this: Surge + Aircraft Carrier GroupS = Lots o’ Killing.
    With Bush purging the DOJ in his own Saturday Night Massacre, it DOES NOT MATTER whether 2 aircraft carrier groups or 3 signal an offensive attack–when 2 have as much capability as they do. Bush has never been about the subtlety.

    Reply

  25. Marky says:

    Pauline,
    Thanks for the poll numbers, which reflect what I’ve seen hundreds of times with individual Iranians.

    Reply

  26. pauline says:

    from Wayne Madsen —
    January 17, 2007 — Only a warmonger like Bush would seek to bomb a country in which 70 percent of the people favor closer ties with the United States. At a meeting yesterday at the Gallup Organization in Washington, DC where it was announced that Gallup and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln are developing the first “World Poll” representing the views of all 6 billion inhabitants of the planet, Gallup President James Clifton reported that a recent poll conducted by Gallup in Iran showed that 70 percent of Iranians want closer ties with the United States. Thirty percent of those polled also considered themselves “pro-American.”
    Of course, there was a similar public support for the United States in Iraq before the American attack and occupation, but that has changed dramatically to the point where a majority of Iraqis now favor insurgent attacks on U.S. occupation forces. A Bush regime attack on Iran will also turn Iran’s public against the United States.
    The Iran poll results are more noteworthy when compared to similar polling conducted in France. French respondents were much more anti-American than the Iranians polled.

    Reply

  27. John Shreffler says:

    The news about the carrriers is huge. If Bush didn’t mean to hit Iran, the Nimitz would have deployed to Japan. The Reagan just came back from deployment in mid November and normally would be refitting until the end of this year. They mean to use the Nimitz this spring against Iran: it’s the only deployment ready carrier left. Great work Steve. I don’t think you need to worry excessively about what the Iranians are doing with the centrifuges. They’re a red herring. Remember the Iraqi mobile bio labs back in 2003?

    Reply

  28. rich says:

    Meanwhile, we have Bush’s own Saturday Night Massacre, in which he summarily FIRES US Attorneys who happen to be prosecuting Republican corruption.
    Bush can re-appoint without Senate approval, under the ‘USA Patriot’ Act–guess who inserted the language allowing that circumvention and manipulation of process?
    Why Arlen Spectre did, of course.
    Ole Arlen finds another method of collaborating with the subversion of process, governance, and accountability.
    Surprised?
    SEVEN Attorneys General have been fired, so far. Josh Marshall, Sen. Feinstein, DKos, and others all have the scoop.
    Recall what happened to Nixon b/c of his Saturday Night Massacre? This seems even more egregious.

    Reply

  29. John says:

    We are long overdue for an honest discussion of the stakes in Iran. Their potential future acquisition of nuclear weapons is mostly just a distraction. Apparently they are years away from making a weapon and even further from being able to put it onto a ballistic missile. Even if they got a weapon, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that they would choose to use it for anything other than deterrence (just like other nuclear powers). Given US aggressiveness and Iranian energy assets, Iran has ample reason for wanting deterrence. The whole nuclear issue is just Rovian smoke, designed to generate alarm and justify conflict.
    The real issues involve:
    1) Control of the world’s largest store of energy.
    2) Iranian revolutionary rhetoric, which advocates for the victimized and threatens entrenched elites throughout the region. Khomeini’s innovation was to link Shi’ites’ ritual victimization to their real world situation under the Shah. Succeeding governments have been good on rhetorically supporting the dispossessed, but short on results.
    Given the real issues, how does the administration’s aggressiveness make the situation better? Answer: it doesn’t. Bombing won’t change the regime or, if even it did, it won’t convince future regimes to cough up oil on the cheap or change the rhetoric. Iraq has proven that quisling regimes under American occupation don’t create a secure environment for energy investment and don’t necessarily change their rhetoric.
    So the only real solution is diplomatic. China is able to do energy deals with Iran, proving that you can do business with the mullahs, though Iranians would probably never accept Houston control again (been there, done that with disastrous consequences). As to the rhetoric, a less revolutionary regime would probably emerge if Iran were left to evolve naturally and as disappointment mounted with the mullahs’ continued inability to match their rhetoric with deeds.
    But the Bush administration and the entrenchd foreign policy/national security establishment refuse to openly discuss the real issues, preferring instead to debate the nuclear issue, even though aggression is almost certainly doomed to failure and could prove disastrous for the US.
    So the real question is why are so many so willfully complicit in this deception. It’s hard to see Houston ever lobbying for an Iraq redux. Pelosi has shown a willingness to increase extravagant, bloated defense budgets even more, essentially buying off defense contractors in advance. So who is driving it? Absent the usual domestic suspects, Wes Clark may well be right: http://www.stephenbainbridge.com/2007/01/wes_clarks_foot.html

    Reply

  30. reticulant says:

    I wouldn’t oversell Nelson “scoops.”
    The usual suspects of security thinktanks, unclassified .mil-.gov sites, scientific organizations, non-prolifieration monitors, assorted NGOs — including ACA (which you link), GlobalSecurity.org, ISIS-online.org, FAS, UCS, theBulletin.org, NTI.org, Jamestown, Janes, Stratfor etc. — carry, link or originate much of the material cited in Nelson’s newsletters.

    Reply

  31. Carroll says:

    Anybody have any information or ideas about that?
    Posted by Linda at January 17, 2007 10:45 AM
    >>>>>>>>>
    I would like to know about that also…I saw a map on air currents in the area somewhere but can’t remember where…I do remember it showed the currents moving west or south west from Iran.

    Reply

  32. Jeffrey Lewis says:

    Hey, I will try to post something on the centrifuge breakdown a little later at Arms Control Wonk.
    But, for the moment, I am sitting in Steve’s office, working on something else!

    Reply

  33. Easy E says:

    ATTACKING IRAN
    What’s In It For Bush?
    By Paul Craig Roberts
    “…Bush will be able to claim victory over Iran, because Iran will avoid responding militarily. Iran will not use its Russian missiles to sink our aircraft carriers, to shut down oil facilities throughout the Middle East, or to destroy US headquarters in the “green zone” in Baghdad. Instead, Iran will adopt the posture of another Muslim victim of US/Israeli aggression and let the anger seep throughout the Muslim world until no pro-US government is safe in the Middle East.
    Bush needs a short-run victory, and Iran will let him have it in order to gain the long-run victory.
    The consequences for the US, Israel, and the US puppet regimes in the Middle East will be catastrophic, but they will not occur in the short-run.
    This explanation solves the dilemma of why Bush would get deeper into the quagmire for the sake of the Israel Lobby. A US attack on Iran allows Bush both to satisfy the powerful Israel Lobby and to claim to have destroyed Iran’s (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction…”
    Article -http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts01172007.html

    Reply

  34. ESaund says:

    The trouble is that reality is never a significant component in the neocon decision making process. Iran is a threat if and only if it is perceived as a threat.

    Reply

  35. Easy E says:

    Iran shoots down U.S. spy drone amid growing military pressure…..
    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-01/17/content_5615540.htm
    U.S. media will of course report this as hostile aggression on the part of Iran.

    Reply

  36. Linda says:

    While this is all confusing and scary, US really doesn’t have any good options that it can use besides bluffing–speak loudly because we aren’t carrying a very big stick. All countries should be talking nuclear disarmament first including US.
    This administration is the first in many years to actually be proposing new nuclear weapons development.
    One thing that I never hear or read about much is how Israel or Iran or from that matter Pakistan or India could ever really use a nuclear bomb against each other, given that a change in wind or something would subject their own countries and neighbors to nuclear fallout.
    Anybody have any information or ideas about that?

    Reply

  37. PoliticalCritic says:

    Bush and his thugs will be talking about mushroom clouds soon enough about Iran. They are preparing to attack and start World War III.

    Reply

  38. Pissed Off American says:

    The Bush Administration seems to think too that Americans have very short memory spans. Have we really to have already forgotten that Bush allowed the countless Iraqi armories to be looted, effectively arming a future insurgency with an army’s worth of arms and explosives?
    Despite Charges, No Evidence Iran Sending IEDs to Iraq
    by Gareth Porter
    For 18 months now, the George W. Bush administration has periodically raised the charge that Iran is supplying anti-coalition forces in Iraq with arms.
    But in the past, high administration officials have always admitted that they have no real evidence to support it. Now, they are going further. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters on her current Middle Eastern trip, “I think there is plenty of evidence that there is Iranian involvement with these networks that are making high-explosive IEDs [improvised explosive devices] and that are endangering our troops, and that’s going to be dealt with.”
    However, Rice failed to provide any evidence of official Iranian involvement.
    The previous pattern had been that U.S. and British officials suggest that Iranian government involvement in the use by Sunni insurgents or Shiite militias of “shaped charges” that can penetrate U.S. armored vehicles is the only logical conclusion that could be drawn from the facts. But when asked point blank, they admit that they have no evidence to support it.
    continues at……
    http://www.antiwar.com/orig/porter.php?articleid=10339

    Reply

  39. Pissed Off American says:

    “This seems to be significantly at odds with the hyping of the threat we have heard this week from Dick Cheney.”
    And, of course from Israel. Not to mention the hysterical paranoia that the AIPAC website is seeking to instill in Americans…….
    http://www.aipac.org/hill/
    Iran Ramping Up Nuclear Work
    Iran said Monday that it is installing 3,000 centrifuges—machines used to enrich uranium, a key step toward developing atomic arms—at a nuclear installation in the city of Natanz, the Associated Press reported. The new centrifuges will allow Iran to move forward with large-scale enrichment. Their installation is the latest sign that Tehran intends to continue its defiance of the U.N. Security Council, which has unanimously imposed sanctions of the Islamic Republic to slow its pursuit of atomic weapons.

    Reply

  40. ET says:

    Impeachment and the Media: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
    In “an urgent demand for media activism” at the National Conference for Media Reform in Memphis, David Swanson makes a call to “put impeachment on the table and the airwaves” :
    http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/ticia/2007/jan/17/impeachment_and_the_media_fairness_and_accuracy_in_reporting

    Reply

  41. Bill Lenner says:

    Are we forgetting what trumps all in the Bush administration, ie politics.
    You probably have noticed that the Bush administration has lost it’s majority.
    Could Karl have convinced the Bush people (oh who are we kidding, I mean Cheney) that they can build a new majority with some Americans who would dearly like to see us deal with Iran in the harshest way?
    That might be much more important than actual facts of how Iran is doing in it’s enrichment attempts.

    Reply

  42. ytu says:

    > I had not heard until tonight that Iran failed
    > to bring its centrifuges on line and that the 50
    > they assembled blew up.
    That’s what armscontrolwonk.com ( http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1085/dudes-with-lightsabers-redux ) is for.
    And the great thing about looking at these issues from a cold technical perspective… Machines and physics lie a little less than politicians and diplomats 😉 People who talk seperative workloads tend to be either reality based or lying on unfamiliar teritory, just look at the Iraq war runup.
    And btw the European newspapers have page after page of Iranian politicians who are completely utterly absolutely unimpressed by all the recent US machismo.
    On the “one man coalition of the macho” list of actions: Carriers, bullying diplomats, tough talk, attempted sanctions, extra troops in Iraq, using big planes on Somalia at a time with Ethiopian fighting to give the maximum impression for a job that used to be done by predator drones. All this while pretending there was a serious chance there were “most wanted” guys in the bombed building…. Submarines bumping into oil tankers. And there are the rumors of tests of the system for calling up people in a draft.
    IIRC no new “colored patches for Iranian jew`s” rumors though, so I guess all this is directed at Iran not at the US/western electorate.
    And the reaction? Elham Amizadeh: “The US wants to draw attention away from its defeat in Iraq”, “We will not act emotionally”
    Regardless of what we think the Cheney/Bush intentions with Iran are, the Iranian government seems to think the US is out of options and will call their bluff by ignoring the west even more. Not that crazy since the US has threatened with bombing for years now, to say nothing of the cold war “regime change through a democratic revolution aka coup 2.0” tactics. This is reportedly what Elizabeth Cheney loves from her Poland years…. There has been lots of talk but not much action on either threat.

    Reply

  43. bob h says:

    Concerning the centrifuge trouble, it could be that the Pakistani technicians and consultants are having to lay low.

    Reply

  44. liz says:

    hmmmmmmm, if this man knows what he is speaking of, Bush is way way off base again. And as the commenter noted, yes Bush has a way of making things much worse.
    The Patriot missile shields bother me. We go around protecting other countries and Bush leaves us completely vunerable at home. I don’t have any patriot missile banks near my home and I do indeed feel threatened. Of course, I know Bush just loves it when I feel ~ threatened.
    To be blunt, I have felt threatened since he took office. My life has drastically changed in America and if yours hasn’t… it is only yet.
    But back to Iran, Bush is attempting to fight Iran by all that we see. I’m not so sure he is going to get his way this time though…. will that be a first?

    Reply

  45. Alex says:

    I love it when you share Chris Nelson’s stuff.
    Does he or do you have any recent indication for whether Prince Bandar is still pushing for the US to attack Iran?

    Reply

  46. Craig says:

    Steve, I can’t vouch for its accuracy but Haaretz has a long article on Iran’s nuclear program with some specific information about the centrifuge cascades.
    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/813809.html

    Reply

  47. Richard W. Crews says:

    If bush didn’t care about other opinions, all he needs for air power is enough to take out the air defense and the threats to the oil. Then he can move in the power after the surprise is out.
    Or, could he attack the Mahdi army with airpower? Kill Al Sadr and lots of his people?

    Reply

  48. Steve Clemons says:

    Den — thanks for that note. I think that is very important and gives some indication of the technical barriers that still lie ahead with the integration of that many centrifuges. This seems to be significantly at odds with the hyping of the threat we have heard this week from Dick Cheney.
    best, Steve

    Reply

  49. Den Valdron says:

    For the record, even 50 centrifuges working is not a big deal. To refine up to fissionable levels, you’d need to hook up 1800 to 2500 centrifuges.

    Reply

  50. Carroll says:

    Two doesn’t signal “offensive intent”
    But is a “deterrent”?
    To what?
    Iran is going to launch an missile attack on someone?
    Or retalitiate when Israel attacks them.
    And then a ‘deterrent” would come in handy.
    I think I will stay in panic mode, thanks anyway.

    Reply

  51. Easy E says:

    Until U.S. media policy is reformed, the general public needs access to better information from the likes of Chris Nelson, etc.
    Why Do We Need a National Conference for Media Reform?
    http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011407F.shtml
    Bush’s Escalation Speech
    Remarks at the National Conference for Media Reform in Memphis, Tennessee.
    http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011607C.shtml
    Help reform media & transform democracy via
    http://www.freepress.net/

    Reply

  52. Marky says:

    Great analysis by CN. What is missing is a discussion of whether Iran’s nuclear program is necessarily aimed at manufacturing nuclear weapons. With Bush as President, you can be sure they are considering it, but Iran’s pursuit of nuclear power is legimitate. Iraq did not pursue nuclear weapons until after the strike on Osirak.
    There is no proof that Iran is attempting to build nuclear weapons, and no urgency even if they are, except for those who know that Bush’s successor will not be a puppet of the neocons.

    Reply

  53. Glen says:

    Steve,
    Care to comment on this:
    http://www.arabtimesonline.com/arabtimes/kuwait/Viewdet.asp?ID=9548&cat=a
    Obviously not a reliable source but it’s been put out there by someone.
    As concerned as I am that Iran is trying their best to become a nuclear player in the great game, I am even more concerned that our current President is trying his best to do something about it. The man has a genuine talent for making a bad situation MUCH worse.

    Reply

  54. OldCoastie says:

    I’m no expert on naval deployments, but observation and the aquaintence of lifer Navy friends – my recollection is before we go completely batsh*t on anyone, there are usually 3 or 4 carrier groups close by… so – sounds pretty reasonable to me…
    50 blew up?!? hope this little incident gets out in the mainstream…

    Reply

  55. OldCoastie says:

    I’m no expert on naval deployments, but observation and the aquaintence of lifer Navy friends – my recollection is before we go completely batsh*t on anyone, there are usually 3 or 4 carrier groups close by… so – sounds pretty reasonable to me…
    50 blew up?!? hope this little incident gets out in the mainstream…

    Reply

  56. steve duncan says:

    Observing Bush over the last several years I have to question whether any intelligence regarding Iran matters as to his intentions towards them. If he’s decided to initiate acts of aggression isn’t he going to go through with them regardless of the state of Iran’s nuclear programs? Can Bush be dissuaded from folly? Certainly if Iraq is offered up as an example the answer is no, he can’t.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *