Iraq’s Foreign Minister Confirms Diplomatic Mission of Detained Iranians

-

zebari-zakaria.jpg
(Iraq Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari and Newsweek International Editor Fareed Zakaria)
Now, this is a fine mess.
The U.S. raided a Consulate like facility and detained five Iranian nationals in northern Iraq. U.S. intelligence apparently worried that the five Iranians were aiding insurgents inside Iraq.
Iraq’s Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, has now confirmed the diplomatic status of these detainees and the mission in Northern Iraq and called for their release.
This should be an interesting test of the reality of Iraqi sovereignty — and will no doubt cause a number of ulcers among U.S. military now ordered to disrupt and attack Iranian operations inside Iraq — and perhaps beyond.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

61 comments on “Iraq’s Foreign Minister Confirms Diplomatic Mission of Detained Iranians

  1. Carroll says:

    If Israel was to in one fell swoop return all the land conquered in the 1967 it would not stop palestinian insurgents or other islamic extremist groups, but rather strengthen them. The only solution is to broker peace talks where both sides can build credibility, incrementaly, towards two contiguous independent states.
    >>>>>>>>>
    Also wrong. If Isr gave back the land it would remove at least 80% of the support for terrorism against Israel among Arab nations and Palestine.
    Also if by brokered talks you mean the US conducting them and pushing Isr final benefits over Palestine benefits as they have done in the past…forget it…even if declared a settlement…there is no peace without justice.
    And the conflict will continue.

    Reply

  2. Carroll says:

    RE: Carrol,
    You said “Israel . . . troubles arise solely from its unwillingness to give back land it seized in the 1967 war in return for peace with its neighbors.” This, however, misses the point that Israel’s enemies have shown time and timne again that their sole goal is the complete destruction of the Israeli state. If Israel was to in one fell swoop return all the land conquered in the 1967 it would not stop palestinian insurgents or other islamic extremist groups, but rather strengthen them. The only solution is to broker peace talks where both sides can build credibility, incrementaly, towards two contiguous independent states.
    Posted by SD Law Student at January 16, 2007 02:59 PM
    >>>>>>>
    Actually I didn’t say that. The author of the article said it.
    But I agree with him partly.
    The attempt to frame the problem solely as one where the “Arabs” or Palestines want to “wipe out Israel” is dishonest.
    There are small groups who do want to wipe out Israel and there are Israelis who would gladly wipe out Palestine.
    But let us not pretend that the group in Israel who wants to wipe out Palestine doesn’t use the small group of Arabs who want to wipe out Israel as an excuse for land grabbing and refusing to come to a peace settlement. That is what they have done for decades, are doing and probably will continue to do untill someone stops them.
    Your onesided bullshit doesn’t help the cause of peace. Until everyone in this mess owns up to the truth of their responsibility there won’t be any peace. And your Israel is the only victim in this conflict doesn’t hold water.
    Be a man.

    Reply

  3. rich says:

    MP,
    I think we agree. Where a statement is factually true, but coincides with a stereotype, how are we to claim offense? Germans complaining that ~’They said we trink bier! Und wait for the light to change before crossing!!! You are prejudice!!’ –won’t get much sympathy.
    Point being, forthright engagement in the political realm, and fruitful and honest public debate, would go a long way towards erasing the supposed bite of seemingly anti-Semitic statements.
    Granted that one facet taken out of context cannot describe a nuanced, multi-dimensional picture. But that’s the point: insisting on that facet is a corrective, and without recognition of that facet against an ideological line of purity and victimhood, NO nuanced, very human, 360-degree appreciation for the complex truth can emerge.
    I don’t agree that posters here “lean to the left/port.” They’re more conservative than most Republicans, by any measure.

    Reply

  4. ... says:

    carroll, although you aren’t the only one doing this, it would be nice if a link was left rather then a long post so that those of us who choose not to read them, can more easily find the personal comments of others here which we like to read.

    Reply

  5. MP says:

    Carroll wrote: “Be still my heart! My lonely little repub congressman has done it…I guess there is no point in asking why the dems didn’t do this in their “first 100 hours” And you shall know them by how they vote on this…and get slaughtered in 2008…take names.”
    It must feel great to see your Congressman doing something important that is so in keeping with your strongest wishes. And you supported him. Congratulations.

    Reply

  6. SD Law Student says:

    RE: Carrol,
    You said “Israel . . . troubles arise solely from its unwillingness to give back land it seized in the 1967 war in return for peace with its neighbors.” This, however, misses the point that Israel’s enemies have shown time and timne again that their sole goal is the complete destruction of the Israeli state. If Israel was to in one fell swoop return all the land conquered in the 1967 it would not stop palestinian insurgents or other islamic extremist groups, but rather strengthen them. The only solution is to broker peace talks where both sides can build credibility, incrementaly, towards two contiguous independent states.

    Reply

  7. Easy E says:

    Breaking……….
    Saudi Arabia mulls sending troops to Iraq ‘to protect their interests there’
    http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/MSNBC_Breaking_Saudi_Arabia_mulls_sending_0116.html

    Reply

  8. Carroll says:

    Be still my heart! My lonely little repub congressman has done it…
    I guess there is no point in asking why the dems didn’t do this in their “first 100 hours”
    And you shall know them by how they vote on this…and get slaughtered in 2008…take names.
    January 16, 2007
    Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones
    by Patrick J. Buchanan
    “Enter Rep. Walter Jones, Republican of North Carolina.
    The day after Bush’s threat to Iran, Jones introduced a Joint Resolution, “Concerning the Use of Military Force by the United States Against Iran.” Under HJR 14, “Absent a national emergency created by attack by Iran, or a demonstrably imminent attack by Iran, upon the United States, its territories, possessions, or its armed forces, the president shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of force on Iran.”
    Jones’ resolution further declares, “No provision of law enacted before the date of the enactment of this joint resolution shall be construed to authorize the use of military force by the United States against Iran.”
    If we are going to war on Iran, Jones is saying, we must follow the Constitution and Congress must authorize it.
    If Biden, Kerry, Clinton, and Obama refuse to sign on to the Jones resolution, they will be silently conceding that Bush indeed does have the power to start a war on Iran. And America should pay no further attention to the Democrats’ wailing about being misled on the Iraq war.”
    http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=10333

    Reply

  9. MP says:

    Dear Rich:
    I agree with your post and, in particular, this: “Point is, to ALSO let AIPAC get a pass on the rhetoric–scratch that– for AIPAC to CONTINUE pressing PR lies, funneling funding to proxies, etc., certainly plays into the ‘hands’ of those exploiting Jewish stereotypes to stir up anti-Semitism. To carry maximum impact, and to minimize blowback or ‘collateral damage’ to their own political cause, wielding charges of anti-Semitism more judiciously is critical. Wrongly accusing observers merely for saying out loud the available facts just doesn’t help the anti-defamation cause. Where people are simply stating political facts and documented rhetoric and audited/reported funding, that contradicts the charge of anti-Semitism.
    Lies are lies and they need to called out as such. I have no problem with it. Further, I’m FOR it. Either one’s cause has true merit or it doesn’t. Wrongly accusing folks of anti-Semitism when they are just stating the facts is…wrong.
    I will say this, though, and we’ve mentioned this before: If I bring up a fact or even two about you…and fail to bring up other facts…am I really telling the truth? Similarly, if I tell a fact about you…and neglect to say that this is also a fact about me…am I really telling the truth if I leave the impression that this is just you, or in particular you?
    I understand that one can’t–particularly when posting in this medium–quickly and briefly–cover the terrain 360 degrees. And often it’s important to lean to starboard when everyone else is leaning to port. We need a severe redress in the direction of the Palestinians and their cause. But it actually doesn’t help the Palestinian cause for people (not you) to demonize Israel.
    So I often lean to starboard because most people here, but not all, lean to port.

    Reply

  10. NSA says:

    Vote for anti-war campaigner Brian Haw
    Pass it on………

    Reply

  11. Ruddock says:

    Name Ruddock
    Subject human rights
    Visit Time 16/01/2007 11:16 PM
    Remark Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Ruddock
    Subject human rights
    Visit Time 16/01/2007 11:15 PM
    Remark Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS. Ruddock
    Subject human rights
    Visit Time 16/01/2007 11:15 PM
    Remark Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS.Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy of every democracy and HUMAN RIGHTS. Ruddock
    Subject human rights
    Visit Time 16/01/2007 11:15 PM
    Remark Fucken RUDDOCK burn in HELL!The ugliest BEAST in the LIBERAL party.Ugly NAZIKOMMUNIST.You are the enemy o

    Reply

  12. Carroll says:

    Continuing with my new years resolution.
    Did you know that my state got 1 billion in federal funds or only 8% more than we paid to the federal goverment? While Israel got 3 billion in aid or 3 billion more than they paid to the US treasury? Did you know that for 3 billion every uninsured child in American could be vacinated but congress voted it down because of the cost.
    Americans, I give you the biggest robbery since the world began…after all it’s your money they steal.
    The Cost of Israel to US Taxpayers
    (Richard H. Curtiss servered as a military reporter in Berlin, Germany after the war. After earning a B.A. in journalism from the University of Southern California and working on newspapers and for the United Press, he served as a career Foreign Service officer with the Department of State and the U.S. Information Agency throughout the world and in Washington D.C. During his U.S. government career he received the U.S. Information AgencyÂ’s Superior Honor Award and the Edward R. Murrow award for excellence in Public Diplomacy, U.S.I.A.Â’s highest professional recognition.
    Curtiss is currently the Executive Editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.
    By Richard H. Curtiss
    Former U.S. Foreign Service Officer
    The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
    For many years the American media said that “Israel receives $1.8 billion in military aid” or that “Israel receives $1.2 billion in economic aid.” Both statements were true, but since they were never combined to give us the complete total of annual U.S. aid to Israel, they also were lies—true lies.
    Recently Americans have begun to read and hear that “Israel receives $3 billion in annual U.S. foreign aid.” That’s true. But it’s still a lie. The problem is that in fiscal 1997 alone, Israel received from a variety of other U.S. federal budgets at least $525.8 million above and beyond its $3 billion from the foreign aid budget, and yet another $2 billion in federal loan guarantees. So the complete total of U.S. grants and loan guarantees to Israel for fiscal 1997 was $5,525,800,000.
    One can truthfully blame the mainstream media for never digging out these figures for themselves, because none ever have. They were compiled by the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. But the mainstream media certainly are not alone. Although Congress authorizes America’s foreign aid total, the fact that more than a third of it goes to a country smaller in both area and population than Hong Kong probably never has been mentioned on the floor of the Senate or House. Yet it’s been going on for more than a generation.
    Probably the only members of Congress who even suspect the full total of U.S. funds received by Israel each year are the privileged few committee members who actually mark it up. And almost all members of the concerned committees are Jewish, have taken huge campaign donations orchestrated by Israel’s Washington, DC lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), or both. These congressional committee members are paid to act, not talk. So they do and they don’t.
    The same applies to the president, the secretary of state, and the foreign aid administrator. They all submit a budget that includes aid for Israel, which Congress approves, or increases, but never cuts. But no one in the executive branch mentions that of the few remaining U.S. aid recipients worldwide, all of the others are developing nations which either make their military bases available to the U.S., are key members of international alliances in which the U.S. participates, or have suffered some crippling blow of nature to their abilities to feed their people such as earthquakes, floods or droughts.
    Israel, whose troubles arise solely from its unwillingness to give back land it seized in the 1967 war in return for peace with its neighbors, does not fit those criteria. In fact, Israel’s 1995 per capita gross domestic product was $15,800. That put it below Britain at $19,500 and Italy at $18,700 and just above Ireland at $15,400 and Spain at $14,300.
    All four of those European countries have contributed a very large share of immigrants to the U.S., yet none has organized an ethnic group to lobby for U.S. foreign aid. Instead, all four send funds and volunteers to do economic development and emergency relief work in other less fortunate parts of the world.
    The lobby that Israel and its supporters have built in the United States to make all this aid happen, and to ban discussion of it from the national dialogue, goes far beyond AIPAC, with its $15 million budget, its 150 employees, and its five or six registered lobbyists who manage to visit every member of Congress individually once or twice a year.
    AIPAC, in turn, can draw upon the resources of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, a roof group set up solely to coordinate the efforts of some 52 national Jewish organizations on behalf of Israel.
    Among them are Hadassah, the Zionist women’s organization, which organizes a steady stream of American Jewish visitors to Israel; the American Jewish Congress, which mobilizes support for Israel among members of the traditionally left-of-center Jewish mainstream; and the American Jewish Committee, which plays the same role within the growing middle-of-the-road and right-of-center Jewish community. The American Jewish Committee also publishes Commentary, one of the Israel lobby’s principal national publications.
    Perhaps the most controversial of these groups is B’nai B’rith’s Anti-Defamation League. Its original highly commendable purpose was to protect the civil rights of American Jews. Over the past generation, however, the ADL has regressed into a conspiratorial and, with a $45 million budget, extremely well funded hate group.
    In the 1980s, during the tenure of chairman Seymour Reich, who went on to become chairman of the Conference of Presidents, ADL was found to have circulated two annual fund-raising letters warning Jewish parents against allegedly negative influences on their children arising from the increasing Arab presence on American university campuses.
    More recently, FBI raids on ADL’s Los Angeles and San Francisco offices revealed that an ADL operative had purchased files stolen from the San Francisco police department that a court had ordered destroyed because they violated the civil rights of the individuals on whom they had been compiled. ADL, it was shown, had added the illegally prepared and illegally obtained material to its own secret files, compiled by planting informants among Arab-American, African-American, anti-Apartheid and peace and justice groups.
    The ADL infiltrators took notes of the names and remarks of speakers and members of audiences at programs organized by such groups. ADL agents even recorded the license plates of persons attending such programs and then suborned corrupt motor vehicles department employees or renegade police officers to identify the owners.
    Although one of the principal offenders fled the United States to escape prosecution, no significant penalties were assessed. ADL’s Northern California office was ordered to comply with requests by persons upon whom dossiers had been prepared to see their own files, but no one went to jail and as yet no one has paid fines.
    Not surprisingly, a defecting employee revealed in an article he published in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs that AIPAC, too, has such “enemies” files. They are compiled for use by pro-Israel journalists like Steven Emerson and other so-called “Terrorism experts,” and also by professional, academic or journalistic rivals of the persons described for use in blacklisting, defaming, or denouncing them. What is never revealed is that AIPAC’s “opposition research“ department, under the supervision of Michael Lewis, son of famed Princeton University Orientalist Bernard Lewis, is the source of this defamatory material.
    But this is not AIPAC’s most controversial activity. In the 1970s, when Congress put a cap on the amount its members could earn from speakers’ fees and book royalties over and above their salaries, it halted AIPAC’s most effective ways of paying off members for voting according to AIPAC recommendations. Members of AIPAC’s national board of directors solved the problem by returning to their home states and creating political action committees (PACs).
    Most special interests have PACs, as do many major corporations, labor unions, trade associations and public-interest groups. But the pro-Israel groups went wild. To date some 126 pro-Israel PACs have been registered, and no fewer than 50 have been active in every national election over the past generation.
    An individual voter can give up to $2,000 to a candidate in an election cycle, and a PAC can give a candidate up to $10,000. However, a single special interest with 50 PACs can give a candidate who is facing a tough opponent, and who has voted according to its recommendations, up to half a million dollars. That’s enough to buy all the television time needed to get elected in most parts of the country.
    Even candidates who don’t need this kind of money certainly don’t want it to become available to a rival from their own party in a primary election, or to an opponent from the opposing party in a general election. As a result, all but a handful of the 535 members of the Senate and House vote as AIPAC instructs when it comes to aid to Israel, or other aspects of U.S. Middle East policy.
    There is something else very special about AIPAC’s network of political action committees. Nearly all have deceptive names. Who could possibly know that the Delaware Valley Good Government Association in Philadelphia, San Franciscans for Good Government in California, Cactus PAC in Arizona, Beaver PAC in Wisconsin, and even Icepac in New York are really pro-Israel PACs under deep cover?
    Hiding AIPAC’s Tracks
    In fact, the congress members know it when they list the contributions they receive on the campaign statements they have to prepare for the Federal Election Commission. But their constituents don’t know this when they read these statements. So just as no other special interest can put so much “hard money” into any candidate’s election campaign as can the Israel lobby, no other special interest has gone to such elaborate lengths to hide its tracks.
    Although AIPAC, Washington’s most feared special-interest lobby, can hide how it uses both carrots and sticks to bribe or intimidate members of Congress, it can’t hide all of the results.
    Anyone can ask one of their representatives in Congress for a chart prepared by the Congressional Research Service, a branch of the Library of Congress, that shows Israel received $62.5 billion in foreign aid from fiscal year 1949 through fiscal year 1996. People in the national capital area also can visit the library of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in Rosslyn, Virginia, and obtain the same information, plus charts showing how much foreign aid the U.S. has given other countries as well.
    Visitors will learn that in precisely the same 1949-1996 time frame, the total of U.S. foreign aid to all of the countries of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean combined was $62,497,800,000–almost exactly the amount given to tiny Israel.
    According to the Population Reference Bureau of Washington, DC, in mid-1995 the sub-Saharan countries had a combined population of 568 million. The $24,415,700,000 in foreign aid they had received by then amounted to $42.99 per sub-Saharan African.
    Similarly, with a combined population of 486 million, all of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean together had received $38,254,400,000. This amounted to $79 per person.
    The per capita U.S. foreign aid to Israel’s 5.8 million people during the same period was $10,775.48. This meant that for every dollar the U.S. spent on an African, it spent $250.65 on an Israeli, and for every dollar it spent on someone from the Western Hemisphere outside the United States, it spent $214 on an Israeli.
    Shocking Comparisons
    These comparisons already seem shocking, but they are far from the whole truth. Using reports compiled by Clyde Mark of the Congressional Research Service and other sources, freelance writer Frank Collins tallied for the Washington Report all of the extra items for Israel buried in the budgets of the Pentagon and other federal agencies in fiscal year 1993.Washington Report news editor Shawn Twing did the same thing for fiscal years 1996 and 1997.
    They uncovered $1.271 billion in extras in FY 1993, $355.3 million in FY 1996 and $525.8 million in FY 1997. These represent an average increase of 12.2 percent over the officially recorded foreign aid totals for the same fiscal years, and they probably are not complete. It’s reasonable to assume, therefore, that a similar 12.2 percent hidden increase has prevailed over all of the years Israel has received aid.
    As of Oct. 31, 1997 Israel will have received $3.05 billion in U.S. foreign aid for fiscal year 1997 and $3.08 billion in foreign aid for fiscal year 1998. Adding the 1997 and 1998 totals to those of previous years since 1949 yields a total of $74,157,600,000 in foreign aid grants and loans. Assuming that the actual totals from other budgets average 12.2 percent of that amount, that brings the grand total to $83,204,827,200.
    But that’s not quite all. Receiving its annual foreign aid appropriation during the first month of the fiscal year, instead of in quarterly installments as do other recipients, is just another special privilege Congress has voted for Israel. It enables Israel to invest the money in U.S. Treasury notes. That means that the U.S., which has to borrow the money it gives to Israel, pays interest on the money it has granted to Israel in advance, while at the same time Israel is collecting interest on the money. That interest to Israel from advance payments adds another $1.650 billion to the total, making it $84,854,827,200.That’s the number you should write down for total aid to Israel. And that’s $14,346 each for each man, woman and child in Israel.
    It’s worth noting that that figure does not include U.S. government loan guarantees to Israel, of which Israel has drawn $9.8 billion to date. They greatly reduce the interest rate the Israeli government pays on commercial loans, and they place additional burdens on U.S. taxpayers, especially if the Israeli government should default on any of them. But since neither the savings to Israel nor the costs to U.S. taxpayers can be accurately quantified, they are excluded from consideration here.
    Further, friends of Israel never tire of saying that Israel has never defaulted on repayment of a U.S. government loan. It would be equally accurate to say Israel has never been required to repay a U.S. government loan. The truth of the matter is complex, and designed to be so by those who seek to conceal it from the U.S. taxpayer.
    Most U.S. loans to Israel are forgiven, and many were made with the explicit understanding that they would be forgiven before Israel was required to repay them. By disguising as loans what in fact were grants, cooperating members of Congress exempted Israel from the U.S. oversight that would have accompanied grants. On other loans, Israel was expected to pay the interest and eventually to begin repaying the principal. But the so-called Cranston Amendment, which has been attached by Congress to every foreign aid appropriation since 1983, provides that economic aid to Israel will never dip below the amount Israel is required to pay on its outstanding loans. In short, whether U.S. aid is extended as grants or loans to Israel, it never returns to the Treasury.
    Israel enjoys other privileges. While most countries receiving U.S. military aid funds are expected to use them for U.S. arms, ammunition and training, Israel can spend part of these funds on weapons made by Israeli manufacturers. Also, when it spends its U.S. military aid money on U.S. products, Israel frequently requires the U.S. vendor to buy components or materials from Israeli manufacturers. Thus, though Israeli politicians say that their own manufacturers and exporters are making them progressively less dependent upon U.S. aid, in fact those Israeli manufacturers and exporters are heavily subsidized by U.S. aid.
    Although it’s beyond the parameters of this study, it’s worth mentioning that Israel also receives foreign aid from some other countries. After the United States, the principal donor of both economic and military aid to Israel is Germany.
    By far the largest component of German aid has been in the form of restitution payments to victims of Nazi atrocities. But there also has been extensive German military assistance to Israel during and since the Gulf war, and a variety of German educational and research grants go to Israeli institutions. The total of German assistance in all of these categories to the Israeli government, Israeli individuals and Israeli private institutions has been some $31 billion or $5,345 per capita, bringing the per capita total of U.S. and German assistance combined to almost $20,000 per Israeli. Since very little public money is spent on the more than 20 percent of Israeli citizens who are Muslim or Christian, the actual per capita benefits received by Israel’s Jewish citizens would be considerably higher.
    True Cost to U.S. Taxpayers
    Generous as it is, what Israelis actually got in U.S. aid is considerably less than what it has cost U.S. taxpayers to provide it. The principal difference is that so long as the U.S. runs an annual budget deficit, every dollar of aid the U.S. gives Israel has to be raised through U.S. government borrowing.
    In an article in the Washington Report for December 1991/January 1992, Frank Collins estimated the costs of this interest, based upon prevailing interest rates for every year since 1949. I have updated this by applying a very conservative 5 percent interest rate for subsequent years, and confined the amount upon which the interest is calculated to grants, not loans or loan guarantees.
    On this basis the $84.8 billion in grants, loans and commodities Israel has received from the U.S. since 1949 cost the U.S. an additional $49,936,880,000 in interest.
    There are many other costs of Israel to U.S. taxpayers, such as most or all of the $45.6 billion in U.S. foreign aid to Egypt since Egypt made peace with Israel in 1979 (compared to $4.2 billion in U.S. aid to Egypt for the preceding 26 years). U.S. foreign aid to Egypt, which is pegged at two-thirds of U.S. foreign aid to Israel, averages $2.2 billion per year.
    There also have been immense political and military costs to the U.S. for its consistent support of Israel during Israel’s half-century of disputes with the Palestinians and all of its Arab neighbors. In addition, there have been the approximately $10 billion in U.S. loan guarantees and perhaps $20 billion in tax-exempt contributions made to Israel by American Jews in the nearly half-century since Israel was created.
    Even excluding all of these extra costs, America’s $84.8 billion in aid to Israel from fiscal years 1949 through 1998, and the interest the U.S. paid to borrow this money, has cost U.S. taxpayers $134.8 billion, not adjusted for inflation. Or, put another way, the nearly $14,630 every one of 5.8 million Israelis received from the U.S. government by Oct. 31, 1997 has cost American taxpayers $23,240 per Israeli.
    It would be interesting to know how many of those American taxpayers believe they and their families have received as much from the U.S. Treasury as has everyone who has chosen to become a citizen of Israel. But it’s a question that will never occur to the American public because, so long as America’s mainstream media, Congress and president maintain their pact of silence, few Americans will ever know the true cost of Israel to U.S. taxpayers.

    Reply

  13. steambomb says:

    We (the United States) are now basically pissing up a rope. What we now have is a government in Iraq that is beholden to Iran. Our government is naive to think that they will see any cooperation from the Maliki led, Shia majority government in Iraq. This little puppet has been adopted by Iran. They will continue to set us up. Situation after situation will occur where our government is going to think we have made a little progress and find that we have been sorely mistaken. Gentlemen I present to you “New Iran”.

    Reply

  14. ET says:

    i am sure they are working towards something similar in the move to iran as we speak..
    Posted by …
    ~~~~~~~~~~
    You got it.

    Reply

  15. Carroll says:

    Posted by Pissed Off American at January 15, 2007 11:40 PM
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/21/60minutes/main1527749.shtml
    Posted by ET at January 15, 2007 11:50 PM
    >>>>>>>>
    How many people think the congress will go after the liars? I don’t. That’s another reason America is finished, no accountability, no responsibility, no justice.

    Reply

  16. ... says:

    i am sure they are working towards something similar in the move to iran as we speak..

    Reply

  17. ET says:

    CBS citation for “A Spy (Drumheller)Speaks Out,” April 23, 2006:
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/21/60minutes/main1527749.shtml

    Reply

  18. Pissed Off American says:

    http://tinyurl.com/r5tgo
    BRADLEY: According to Drumheller, CIA Director George Tenet delivered the news about the Iraqi foreign minister at a high level meeting at the White House.
    DRUMHELLER: The President, the Vice President, Dr. Rice…
    BRADLEY: And at that meeting…?
    DRUMHELLER: They were enthusiastic because they said they were excited that we had a high-level penetration of Iraqis.
    BRADLEY: And what did this high level source tell you?
    DRUMHELLER: He told us that they had no active weapons of mass destruction program.
    BRADLEY: So, in the fall of 2002, before going to war, we had it on good authority from a source within Saddam’s inner circle that he didn’t have an active program for weapons of mass destruction?
    DRUMHELLER: Yes.
    BRADLEY: There’s no doubt in your mind about that?
    DRUMHELLER: No doubt in my mind at all.
    BRADLEY: It directly contradicts, though, what the President and his staff were telling us.
    DRUMHELLER: The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy.

    Reply

  19. Pissed Off American says:

    “(The) Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude.”-George Bush, babbling insanely.

    Reply

  20. Blacked out says:

    Bush Rape Victim’s Suicide ? News Story Blacked Out Nation Wide ! ?
    ThoughtCrime News – Cutting through the propaganda
    Address: http://wwwthoughtcrimenews.com/bushrape.htm
    In the western world, only one newspaper reports the suicide of the
    woman who accused George W Bush of rape
    by Simon Aronowitz
    Saturday 13th December 2003
    Despite the enormity of the story, a virtual news blackout has remained
    in place since Margie Schoedinger first filed charges against George W
    Bush in 2002.
    Schoedinger had accused Bush of rape and other sexual crimes against
    both her and her husband, only one publication in the USA saw fit to
    print anything about her or her allegations. That publication was her
    local newspaper.
    Her subsequent suicide earlier this year raised many eyebrows amongst
    those who learned of her death via the internet. Even though the
    sequence of events was bizarre, again the American media ignored
    Schoedinger completely.
    However, the US press were not alone. Both the (London) Times newspaper
    and the BBC as well as other major news organisations in the UK were
    furnished with the story and sources for the original court filings.
    This should have garnered some attention for the story from the big
    media sources, if only to ridicule the allegations. Instead, in the same
    way the American media served its audience a stream of controlled news,
    so too did the British media by pretending Schoedinger didn’t exist.
    Schoedinger apparently committed suicide on 22nd September of 2003 but
    her death only attracted new attention on the internet in November of
    2003. Only now has one small-circulation newspaper in the UK run the
    story of her demise. It found the story so newsworthy it ran its
    headline on the front page next to the title header.
    The New Nation serves the black community of London and, according to a
    spokesperson for the newspaper, has a circulation of 25,000. This
    spokesperson also stated that the newspaper had confirmed the details of
    the story before publishing and apologised for the misprinting of
    Schoedinger’s death as 12th December 2003.
    That a newspaper in the English-speaking part of the world has finally
    deemed this story worthy of publication finally gives legitimacy to it.
    If one paper can cover this then so can others.
    Many regular readers of `quality´ newspapers such as the Times,
    Telegraph and even the NY Times have never heard of Margie Schoedinger.
    Her tale illustrates how the news available on the internet is often of
    greater value than that which is paid for. Editors should be asked by
    their paying readers and viewers why this story has been censored.
    One can only deduce that the likes of Rupert Murdoch, Lord Conrad Black
    and Greg Dyke of the BBC have chosen to keep their political masters
    happy by blacking out any reference to the allegations and apparent
    suicide of Margie Schoedinger.
    Hopefully the public will learn that what is news by the standards of
    big-money radio, television and print may not be news according to their
    readers. The support of independent media and its reference as a
    reliable source is increasingly the only effective way to inform the
    public of the real events in the world.

    Reply

  21. Peter says:

    If David Hicks is a POW, and on the likely assumption that he has suffered mental illness to a significant degree by his prolonged imprisonment in Guantanamo Bay, much of it in solitary confinement, under article 110 of the Third Geneva Convention, as recognised in section 268.99 of the Australian Criminal Code, Hicks is entitled to immediate repatriation to Australia, pending any trial before a properly constituted court of law.
    In this context, it is disturbing that US authorities have recently refused an independent medical assessment of Hicks to be undertaken by a senior Melbourne psychiatrist, Professor Paul Mullen. Mullen visited Hicks in February 2005 and has expressed serious concerns for his mental health.
    In a United Nations report on the situation of detainees at Guantanamo dated February 15, 2006, the first recommendation was that: “Terrorism suspects should be detained in accordance with criminal procedure that respects the safeguards enshrined in relevant international law. Accordingly, the United States Government should either expeditiously bring all Guantanamo Bay detainees to trial, in compliance with articles 9(3) and 14 of the ICCPR, or release them without further delay. Consideration should also be given to trying suspected terrorists before a competent international tribunal.” The US Government rejected the report.
    A practical solution, which would comply with both the laws of war, international law and Australian law is simply this: if, as US prosecutor Colonel Morris Davis suggests, the case against Hicks is strong, immediately put him up for trial before a regular US criminal court or a court martial. Besides avoiding the established unfairness of a trial before a military commission by Australian and international standards, this would have the additional advantage of avoiding the further and inevitable delays, possibly for years, by legal challenges to the experimental military commissions.
    On the other hand, if the evidence is not sufficient to survive the fairness rules of a regular court, rather than have him tried before the now discredited military commission, permit Hicks to exercise his rights of return to Australia. If considered necessary, place him under an appropriately strict control order now available under Australia’s anti-terrorism legislation.
    Continuing to press the US to have Hicks tried by military commission and to detain him at Guantanamo Bay in the meantime contravenes accepted standards of Australian fairness and defies the rule of law as it should be applied in this country.
    Peter Vickery, QC, is special rapporteur, International Commission of Jurists, Victoria.

    Reply

  22. Carroll says:

    The cabals of our War…
    Corporate cabals, oil, arms, multinationals, they buy and bribe contracts and tax deals thru congress and gov agencies and getting a corp friendly capitalist in the WH.
    These corp cabals , their individuals, and their minions do it strictly for greed. And if you read Steve’s Playboy article post on Jackson you see they do indeed partake in starting or aiding the start of wars. For them it is money.
    The Jewish cabal, they operate mainly thru congress. They are generally right wing jews, although it includes the retarded of the evangelicals and a stable of bought pundits and goverment agency officials. They fund campigns to elect jews or gentiles who will agree to support right wing Israeli policies and fund Israel. Even the not so right wing jews believe they are justified in using the US democracy and taxpayers for Israel’s benefit and because their ancestors were holocaust victims. Several jewish orgs spend millions to convince the public, jews and gentile alike that this dual loyalty or in the case of the right wing jews, higher loyalty, is not out of the normal because of our democratic requirement of everyone’s right to “representation”. The two most effective jewish orgs at lobbying congress are AIPAC, of course, and JINSA, the weapons and defense lobbying arm. The right wing jews and evangelicals most resembles a cult in their thinking. For the others, the people that hire out to them it is once again nothing but money.
    The Cuban exile cabal and various others like the Iranian exiles differ somewhat from the jewish lobby and could be put in the “ideology” cabal. Those who have an interst in the US overthrowing their former homeland for “democracy” or for other purposes, like reclaiming their former fiefdoms or installing themselves as the goverment or rulers after the overthrow. The difference between most foreign cabals and the jewish cabal is that most foreign cabals want to return to their former homeland for their various purposes whereas the jewish cabal wants to stay in the US as a more desirable place to live but continue to control US policy toward Israel and the ME.
    The ideology (in current terms) cabal, they are people who hold to a “theory”. They are fixated on theories that can be emotional or egotiscal or simiply lucrative. Either a emotional bond to an “idea” caused by God knows what in their childhood psyche (like paranoids) or in a lot of cases they just adopt some big picture hairbrain scheme they think will make them stand out from the crowd in conventional thinking and be regarded as intellectuals or heroes. Some get into the ideologue cabal business to be accepted by some circle they think is elite and that will elevate their personal status and to make a easier paycheck by helping out the cause, whatever it may be.
    So there are your current war cabals, …. each one draws support from whoever sees something in it for themselves or their cult…whether it be jobs in the district of some multinational who is lobbying congress and the public doesn’t want to know what else the corp are doing, they just want a job and if it is poisoning their children, they don’t see that yet…some love the identification of being with the ideologue cabal beucase they think it makes them look smarter even though they might not even understand exactly what the cabal is saying, it sound interesting and gives them something to talk about and impress their friends with…some gravitate to the jewish cabal because, well, they are jewish, or of some religion into the doomday and day of the locust stuff and US support of Israel is important to their aspirations for Israel.
    Yep,. you too can have your way with lady Liberty…all it takes is 30 pieces of silver.

    Reply

  23. rich says:

    MP–I’m well aware of WHY specific types of language, rhetoric, and accusations make people edgy. They’re right to be vigilant about it, and I am also very uncomfortable with anti-Semitic rhetoric, for the same reasons.
    Folks on this board had leveled charges of anti-Semitism agaisnt other posters–because the rhetoric was over-the-top, in general language, or resonated with longstanding stereotypes/scapegoat narratives.
    Point is, to ALSO let AIPAC get a pass on the rhetoric–scratch that– for AIPAC to CONTINUE pressing PR lies, funneling funding to proxies, etc., certainly plays into the ‘hands’ of those exploiting Jewish stereotypes to stir up anti-Semitism.
    To carry maximum impact, and to minimize blowback or ‘collateral damage’ to their own political cause, wielding charges of anti-Semitism more judiciously is critical. Wrongly accusing observers merely for saying out loud the available facts just doesn’t help the anti-defamation cause. Where people are simply stating political facts and documented rhetoric and audited/reported funding, that contradicts the charge of anti-Semitism.
    Participation in the political system is great. But dishonest and corrosive engagement with fellow citizens in the public arena or in the body politic will never win the high ground.
    The point is not Foxman’s grudging acknowledgment–it was the initial hue and cry over something all parties knew was accurate.

    Reply

  24. wisedup says:

    for pauline, mass demonstrations are only truly effective in the main cities. For the rest of the country car rallies would be easier to initiate — harder to control — but the impact would be oh so more effective.
    Jan 27, throughout America, you can make a difference by showing Bush that you’re going to take you country back.

    Reply

  25. MP says:

    Rich wrote: “Every political group uses money, subterfuge, and lies. That’s politics. But anyone concerned with ending a pernicious lie used historically to justify eliminationist policies should think twice about so obviously living up to some of those stereotypes. I.e,–participation is a great thing; engaging in American politics forthrightly and for the common good is another matter.”
    I read the article and your post, Rich, and, in all honesty, I’m not sure which “stereotypes” you’re referring to.
    I don’t think anyone is denying that a lot of Jews are in the financial district, give a lot of money to Jewish causes, and participate in politics with money. Neither is anyone denying a chunk of the Jewish establishment here and in Israel is pushing for a strike against Iran. That’s a matter of public record.
    What gets people edgy is the the idea that Jews and Israel are somehow in control and manipulating the US into a war that she otherwise would not choose. As if, somehow, if war comes, it’s the Jews who are responsible and not (also) many other Americans who are also pushing for war. It’s the intimation that there is this small cabal–small, but extremely powerful–that decides how things will go and the rest of the country is helpless to do anything but the Jews’ bidding.
    It’s this suggestion that got Foxman edgy…
    It’s worth noting, too, that Foxman made a point of saying that Clarke was NOT an anti-Semite…even though he disagreed with some of what Clarke had said.

    Reply

  26. Carroll says:

    Posted by dan at January 15, 2007 05:28 PM
    >>>>>>>>>
    Yes.
    The Sunni’s are the “old elites”…who are fighting the upstart Shiites for conrol of Iraq.
    If Iran is aiding the Shiites, then we must also admit the Saudi’s are aiding their Sunni brethern….but no one wants to talk about who that country is that is financing the Sunni death squads do they?

    Reply

  27. Marcia says:

    There is a Jan 9 memo from ING Bank on Raw Story with a Jan 15 update.
    http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Major_investment_bank_issues_warning_on_0115.html

    Reply

  28. ET says:

    Breaking News: Two Saddam Aides Executed, One Beheaded
    Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s attempt to close a chapter in Saddam Hussein’s repressive quarter-century in power, by hanging two of his henchmen Monday, further enraged Sunnis when the former leader’s half brother was decapitated on the gallows…
    http://americaabroad.tpmcafe.com/blog/ticia/2007/jan/15/breaking_news_two_saddam_aides_executed_one_beheaded

    Reply

  29. dan says:

    I am puzzled as to why anyone believes that Iran is aiding Sunni insurgents in their fight against Shiites. I have read that the Washington establishment is totally clueless about the difference between Shias and Sunnis, but by now shouldn’t they have learned some of the basic differences? (basic difference, kindergarten level: Iran = Shia, Saudi Arabia = Sunni)
    The insurgents that are fighting against the US military are primarily Sunnis since we are doing such a good job of helping the Shiites, so why are Bush & Co. now on track to get the Shiites pissed off at us as well?

    Reply

  30. Holden Minefield says:

    America prepares for war on Iran. Oh boy, this all just gets better by the freaking minute. Bush and Cheney have declared themselves above the American people and Congress. That’s your good old fashioned tyranny. Democracy is done and we all had us good time while it lasted. Didn’t we? Won’t be long and our world will be on fire and quite literally. At least Sen. Joe ‘little butcher’ Lieberman will be happy. Lieberman likes a good war especially when it’s for his first love and that would be Israel.

    Reply

  31. bAkho says:

    The Bush “War first, last and always” policy misfires again.

    Reply

  32. ET says:

    Calling Carroll,
    Got it, thanks. Will look into it and report back. Sick ’em, baby.

    Reply

  33. MP says:

    Carroll wrote: “Because of the internet grapevine as the only source now for uncensored news, a lot of the public knows by now all the various people and groups responsible for this…yet we do nothing really except protest it.”
    Thanks for sending this along. I appreciate it.

    Reply

  34. Carroll says:

    But naming the truth apparently is Taboo in the 21st Century. Clark’s factual statement is seen as a crime b/c he used general language.
    Posted by rich at January 15, 2007 02:39 PM
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    As the Postman said:
    “New Rule”
    No taboos. You end taboo’s by breaking them.
    Go get ’em Clark.

    Reply

  35. Carroll says:

    P.S.
    You could always go into the big blogs like DKos and others and draw out some members. Corruption and bad gov is about the one and only thing everyone except the retarded agree on because it cost them personally.

    Reply

  36. rich says:

    Easy E–
    –that’s a really revealing article in the Jewish Daily Forward.
    “Some” people are upset with Wesley Clark–NOT b/c Israel & Jewish groups are NOT a) in the financial industry, nor b) making political donations, nor c) are advocating strikes against Iran–but rather because Clark SAID IT OUT LOUD.
    They know Israel and/or Jewish groups are doing all these things–and say so right in the article.
    But naming the truth apparently is Taboo in the 21st Century. Clark’s factual statement is seen as a crime b/c he used general language.
    Every political group uses money, subterfuge, and lies. That’s politics. But anyone concerned with ending a pernicious lie used historically to justify eliminationist policies should think twice about so obviously living up to some of those stereotypes. I.e,–participation is a great thing; engaging in American politics forthrightly and for the common good is another matter. There is a necessary integrity which excludes the use of hatemongering and must recognize basic political principles at home and in conducting foreign policy. Meaning, not recklessly endangering our national security, embarking on fruitful and not destructive policies, and respecting our common ground.

    Reply

  37. Carroll says:

    Calling ET, calling ET..here is the link I promised. If you don’t pop in on this thread I will keep inserting it till you show up.
    Registering to lobby is really pretty simple. I have linked to the info on the LD1 form.. Also go thur the index to the left..I think a simple registeration under “Gov ” as a registering code would be all inclusive. You can lobby for yourself or you can solicit lobby members/clients and represent a group.
    A true “grassroots joe lunchbox lobby” composed of millions of both repubs and dems voters not “buying” any influence but demanding ethical gov and anti corruption and representing millions of votes would probably scare our two family mafia gov shitless.
    If there were any large blog sites that weren’t partisan that would the way to start. Beside TWN I don’t know any non partisan ones that draw large numbers but you can start one.
    http://lobbyingdisclosure.house.gov/help/default.htm?url=WordDocuments/generalfilingrequirements.htm

    Reply

  38. Carroll says:

    Yes Virigina, there really is a genocide.
    You know, the one war and genocide we could stop tomorrow…without firing a single bullet or missile or spending a penny …is the Isr-Pal one. And yet we don’t. It would be of benefit to America diplomatically and financially and morally to do so but we don’t.
    We encourage it. We finance it. Our congress approves it. We makes noises about other genocides and shoot up a few Somalians but we really do nothing about any of them…especially about the one we actually could stop with out warfare.
    We, in fact are planning more wars for the arms,oil industry, the jewish lobby and the power brokers.
    Because of the internet grapevine as the only source now for uncensored news, a lot of the public knows by now all the various people and groups responsible for this…yet we do nothing really except protest it.
    http://www.opendemocracy.net/globalization-debate_97/palestine_3176.jsp

    Reply

  39. sheryas-Bahrain says:

    Isn’t it strange when Iraq*s foreign minister, announces that the Iranian captured by the US army are diplomat while the US have said that they are members of the Iranian Revolution Army.Mr foreign Minster has to satisfy his superior and those who are paying his salary.
    Unfortunatly, the Iraqi regime has been for long accusing Sadam hussain*s supporter, or Alzarqawi, or, Alqaeda, although all these do not exist. Now with the new plan by the US administration, it’s clear that Iran has played a good role in all the killing of the US and Iraqi army members, and now realized that Iran had hand in all that.
    Its time to stop Iran from expansion and pretending the innocent person. Iran is the terrorists’ supporter

    Reply

  40. TonyForesta says:

    The world and the heavens are realigning as political, economic, and religious forces intersect and interpenetrate for access to, and/or control of the worlds oil supply.
    Anyone imagining or pretending that oil is not the primary focus of the horrorshow in Iraq is deluded.
    Iran nuclear development programs are a critical, and hedge against their lack of refining capacity, and on the weapons side (if they are actually pursuing such ends) as a potential deterent from attack by hostile entities.
    If there is any good news, and it may be cold comfort, it would appear China is taking the lead
    into pressing Iran in ways that do not involve military http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA13Ak02.html engagement.
    That said, the unspoken, unknown unknowns of http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/IA13Dj02.html “…the complexities of the emerging “multipolar” world order” do not bode well for America now or in the future economically, politically, militarily, or tragically in terms of our moral standing as the beacon of hope for liberty, equality, and justice for all.

    Reply

  41. Easy E says:

    All members of Congress and our institutional leaders should be required to listen to the following immediately:
    “A TIME TO BREAK SILENCE” by Martin Luther King
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2564.htm

    Reply

  42. Easy E says:

    Russian Admiral Says U.S. Navy Prepares Missile Strike on Iran
    http://www.mosnews.com/news/2007/01/15/admiral.shtml

    Reply

  43. Easy E says:

    Wesley Clark Says ‘N.Y. Money People’ Pushing War With Iran…..
    Washington – Retired general Wesley Clark drew harsh criticism this week after reportedly saying that “New York money people” are pushing America into a war against Iran……
    http://www.forward.com/articles/top-dem-wesley-clark-says-ny-money-people-pu/
    Unfortunately, since the ‘Money People’ control the puppets in Congress, they will get their war. Fasten your seatbelts folks.

    Reply

  44. ... says:

    it is interesting that you won’t read this type of info on the opening page of google news, or some of the other news outlets for that matter… wonder who owns google?

    Reply

  45. PrahaPartizan says:

    Of course, none of Dubya’s claims makes any sense. Iran, he argues is supplying weapons and training to folks who attack American forces. Presumably, he’s referring to the insurgents (ex-Baathists) and “terrorists” (by which he must mean al-Qaeda). These folks are Sunni. Rather, the Iranians are supporting the Shia militias, whose principal, if not exclusive target, is the Sunni population.
    So, either the Iranians are supporting the Sunni population in Iraq or the Americans have suddenly become part of the Sunni population. I can’t figure out which one it might be. Otherwise, Dubya’s claims can only be considered lies. Can I get some help here?

    Reply

  46. rich says:

    According to this link–and it may need some followup–Louise Slaughter says that Aspen and AIPAC will be exempted from new Ethics Rules.
    Who’da thunk?
    http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Major_loophole_in_Democrats_ethics_bill_0109.html
    That won’t ensure a fact-based debate about attacking Iran.

    Reply

  47. pauline says:

    from Wayne Madsen —
    January 13-16, 2007 — The neo-cons and their task masters have drawn a major line in the sand.
    “America’s greatest living former President Jimmy Carter is under attack by individuals who favor the narrow interests of a foreign country — Israel — against the wider interests of the United States. People with names like Dershowitz, Foxman, and Lieberman are content to shed the blood of America’s military men and women, not for the interests of people in Oshkosh, Wisconsin; Austin, Texas; or Corvallis, Oregon but for narrow-agenda right-wing elements in Tel Aviv, Netanya, and Jerusalem, Israel. They and their money pipelines of the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) are engaged in a huge propaganda effort to immerse the United States deeper into the Iraq quagmire and fight Binyamin Netanyahu’s “wet dream” wars in Iran and Syria.
    Well, the patience of the American people is wearing thin. If Senators Lieberman and McCain want to represent the interests of Israel’s right-wing expansionists and fascists, this editor will personally drive them both to Dulles International Airport and put them on the next plane to Ben Gurion International, where they can announce at a press conference that they are running for the Knesset as members of the Likud Party. Then, they can vote to commit Israeli troops, not Americans, to fight wars in Iraq, Syria, and Iran.
    The last-ditch propaganda assault by the neo-cons does not stop with the AIPAC and Anti-Defamation League spin machines in Washington. Hollywood is all of a sudden interested in making a movie about Boris Berezovsky agent Alexander Litvinenko, the poisoned ex-Russian agent who was involved in a slimy network of European right-wing disinformation artists and provocateurs and Chechen terrorists. Hopefully, Johnny Depp will not be lulled into the anti-Moscow propaganda of the neo-cons and Russian-Israeli mobsters exiled in Britain and Israel when he stars in his forthcoming movie about Litvinenko. If he does, he should have remained in the belly of the sea monster from his last pic.
    On Saturday, January 27, the American people will mobilize against the Bush administration’s war policies at a major demonstration in Washington, DC. Major themes are Ending the War on Iraq and No War on Iran. This editor and our progressive journalist colleagues from DC and around the country will be supporting the march. Join us in Washington on January 27.”

    Reply

  48. Dennis says:

    Does anyone know if we have a functioning Congress? And if so, what is that Congress acheiving other than twiddling their political thumbs trying to figure out how to get re-elected if they should stand up against the Bush administration?
    We could hope that we are as close to tyranny as this country will ever get. Yet the spy noose gets tighter and tighter around the necks of the American people to the point that even the military (along with the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, Homeland Security, et.al.) is now involved in “homeland” spying on the American people.
    WHAT NEXT, THE MILITARY WITH GUNS ON THE STREETS?
    You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

    Reply

  49. John says:

    Cheney realizes that this is Houston’s last, best chance to grab Iranian energy. Now he just needs some American troops to come under fire…

    Reply

  50. Pissed Off American says:

    Poor monkey boy, he wanted Pinocchio, and he got Chucky.

    Reply

  51. Maude says:

    This is a real mess.
    Deferment Dick is out now against Iran.
    Why would anyone believe him or Bush?
    This is like from the frying pan into the fire.
    Most pundits talk about this situation as if it was a board game.
    If congress sits on its hands, we could be beyond hope.
    This feels as if we are in a car going down an icy hill without any way to stop.

    Reply

  52. Frank says:

    Well there we go….A second pressure point articulated . Who will backoff,…. our military or Iraq? It won’t take long to determine the worth of Bush’s “gamble” to escalate after all..And of course, the two carrier groups are there to ensure further “hoped for” escalation.
    What tune is the piano player playing now for that empty cowboy hat in the White House???…I think it’s……..yes…..it’s….. “We’ll Meet Again”……That haunting tune played after the actor Slim Pickens crowed YIPPY YI YO!!….. Texas style (appropriately),as he rode the “bomb” to a target in Russia depicted in the movie “Dr. Strangelove”.
    Art does indeed mimic life..

    Reply

  53. PoliticalCritic says:

    The U.S. is just getting ready to attack Iran. This incident was just a minor prelude. The question is whether anyone in Congress will stop the madman in the WH.

    Reply

  54. bob h says:

    Of course the Iranians would be helping their fellow Shiites in a civil war that is our fault. If Iranians are directly attacking us, then show us the evidence.

    Reply

  55. liz says:

    I agree that Dick Cheney is a frightening character who only makes the rounds once “the decider” needs more of a sell. These two men are not America. These two men are as close as I hope to ever see as traitors.
    I agree that we in America have a group of radicals out to get us. I do not think every Muslim is a radical. I think Cheney not only thinks it, he dreams it along with bang bang shoot shoot cash cash cash. The more bullets the more money lines Dick’s pockets right? Halliburton$$$$$$$ bang bang shoot shoot ching ching.
    Bush appears stupid enough to be used. He never acts like the same man in speeches and in person. I have trouble reconciling that he can begin to be in charge.
    Who wants war with Iran? The people in Iran don’t want it.
    And I still have trouble thinking that if arabs are given more land in “palestine” that insurgents in Iraq will stop bombing our troops.
    And…..I think most everyone agreed we are less safe because of Bush’s adventure.
    And if I remember correctly, the muslims ( al queda and insurgents , the radicals) want to draw us in further and further into the middle east. They said they would draw us into a swamp and keep us there until they break our pocketbooks and our will. SO far, they keep their word better than our Commander in Chief.
    Frightening…… absolutely frightening.

    Reply

  56. Marcia says:

    When we see Cheney coming up for air we know there is a “fine mess” brewing somewhere. He makes appearences only to hatch some new calamity for us and the world, accompanied by grim warnings that we know from past experience we can take to the bank…he is preparing to enact more foul tricks.
    If the Democratic Party accepts the sacrifice of more young lives to keep this a “Bush War” until 2008, refusing any real action in Congress, then the Iraqi sovereignty one way or the other will be just a stepping stone in planned action.

    Reply

  57. ckrantz says:

    It would be interesting to know the extent of the Iranian-Kurdish relationship. They have apparently operated in the north since 91.
    Lt Col Rick Francona’s Middle East Perspectives blog have much more on Zebari and the Iranians
    http://francona.blogspot.com/2007/01/hoshyar-and-i-iraqi-foreign-minister-on.html

    Reply

  58. neilson says:

    Terrorist- What Terrorist?
    After reviewing the case against David Hicks I can only conclude that the U.S. military wouldn’t recognise a terrorist if he bit their backsides!
    I have reviewed the case against a real terrorist. His name is George.
    George was convicted twice for D.U.I. & drugs (cocaine), stripped of his military pilots license for refusing to have a drugs test & found guilty of desertion in the Vietnam war.
    His failed oil drilling ventures had the financial backing of the Bin Laden group of companies; he consented to uranium treated munitions being used against the Iraqi’s, & rigged the election with his brother Jeb in Florida to beat Al Gore.
    He has blown so much smoke that John Howard now resembles a chimmney, and he has more spin doctors in the White House than Goebbels had in his propaganda ministry.
    His grandfather was a traitor, charged with treason 3 times during WW2 for aiding Hitler’s re-armament program and just as his father lied about babies being thrown out of incubators to start the first gulf war, George lied to the American people about 9/11.
    No commercial airliner crashed into the pentagon, it was hit by an unmanned American missile & the twin towers did not collapse due to plane strikes, they were felled by controlled demolitions, as did wtc building 7.
    George implemented the Project for New American Century Corporations’ plan to coerse America to go to war on the pretext of a terrorist attack & he is not above murdering Americans (or anyone else) to achieve his aim of a New World Order.
    If you need to prosecute a terrorist Colonel Davis, go for the real thing.
    P. Neilson.
    Posted by: P Neilson

    Reply

Add your comment

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