9/16/09

the policy is to conflate everything useful until israel gets what israel wants

Over at AA News I covered today how the vast Jewish-controlled media conflates Israel's very specific agenda with "The West." The reader, the listener, the viewer shall not discern any difference between Israel and "The West."

Examples here and here -- that's just one news cycle.

Here we see even more conflating, at a finer level of detail.
A US “bipartisan think-tank” has urged President Obama to prepare sanctions against Iran and announce publicly that a military strike is likely.

“If biting sanctions do not persuade the Islamic Republic to… give up its enrichment activities, the White House will have to begin serious consideration of the option of a US-led military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities,” said the 'Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington'.

The report was put together by Charles Robb, a former Democratic senator from Virginia, Daniel Coats, a former Republican senator from Indiana, and retired General Charles Wald, the former deputy commander of US European command.
Oooh, the trifecta. A former senator from the left, a former senator from the right, and a retired general. Hey why don't these people go off somewhere to play golf in their retirement? No, instead they prefer to make lots of money at "think tanks" and then very helpfully urge the president to do whatever they have just been paid handsomely to recommend, to wit:
It is worthy to note that Charles Robb and Daniel Coats, were both well known recipients of financial support from powerful Israeli lobby groups when they served in congress. General Wald has been quite outspoken in acting as a cheerleader for unlimited American support of Israel. He regularly travels to Israel and has also served in the boards of several Zionist “think tanks” and lobby groups in the US.
The group released its assessment as the US, along with other permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, prepares to participate in preliminary talks with Iran on October 1. The reports claims that by 2010, Iran will have enough enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon, “leaving little time for the United States to prevent both a nuclear- weapons capable Islamic Republic and an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.”
By 2010?! Well, 2010 starts in three point five months. So you see the urgency. Except our very own US NIE concludes that,
"Iran is unlikely to be able to produce the highly enriched uranium (HEU) necessary for a nuclear weapon until at least 2013.
The authors, who support a bill that proposes sanctions against foreign companies that export gasoline to Iran, say the Obama administration should have put together a “sufficient financial, political and military pressure” before agreeing to negotiations.

They say a deadline of 60 days after the start of the negotiations should be set for Iran, adding that the US should adopt tougher sanctions and “prepare overtly for any military option” if it fails to persuade Tehran to bend in the talks.

The proposed preparations include deploying an additional aircraft carrier battle group to Iranian waters and carrying out joint exercises with US allies.
I mean, wow. Look at these guys. They sure do drive a hard bargain, and they aren't shy about sending Americans off to fight and die. It's as if they didn't even *read* the NIE. It's as if they don't even *care* about American lives, let alone the Iranians. It's as if they can't even be bothered to take the time to get it right, they're in such a hurry to start this war. They obviously worry a lot about Israelis however.
The group claims that in the absence of US military action Tel Aviv is more likely to carry out an attack against Iran, adding that an Israeli strike “entails more risks than a US strike.”
That just has such a blackmail ring to it, doesn't it? Either *we* do it, or Israel will do it, and Israel will fuck it up real good so don't be a sap now and get your soldiers over there and Kill Us Some Iranians. Boo yah. I mean, *we* can't risk having our sweet little friend Israel taking risks, now can *we*?
This is while Iran is entitled to continue its uranium enrichment activities based on international regulations as it is conducting the work under the supervision of the UN nuclear watchdog and for peaceful aims.

The 'think thank' is proposing the tough measures without considering a recent US spy report update which concluded that Iran has deliberately not taken the critical steps in making a bomb, despite having produced sufficient nuclear fuel for one.

The new information, collected by the Obama administration, once again confirmed the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate by asserting that there was no convincing evidence to prove Iran's nuclear work had military implications.

Despite the deliberate use of classy, professional sounding terms for the name of the “bipartisan think tank,” it is quite evident that the members of the think tank, although from rival parties, have one basic interest in common and that is their unconditional support for Israel, which itself possesses nuclear warheads without being a signatory to any international atomic regulatory agency.
I don't know people. I don't know how many ways it can be said. We've been here before, we've seen this movie before. This movie has a bad ending. Let's not see it again.

5 comments:

kenny's sideshow said...

Quote from the BPC's site:

"Electoral politics are partisan – policy should not be."

That bipartisan policy is always Israel and war.

This BPC is a dangerous group. A look at who are the principal voices is scary. Besides warmongering; cap and trade and their version of 'health care' are on their agenda. I'm having a hard time finding out who actually funds them but I'm guessing it's the usual suspects.

A. Peasant said...

pretty slick, huh? looking over the staff it seems to have the typical heavy skew toward a certain very powerful interest group that one would expect from a "prestigious" think tank.

Greg Bacon said...

Israel has been singing this same song about Iranian nukes since around 1995, with the same chorus, they're just about to develop an atomic weapon.

If it hadn't been for the inspired resistance of the brave Iraqi's fighting the Armies of Occupation, Syria and Iran would have already been bombed.

Now that the original plan based on 9/11 fear mongering fell by the wayside, it's time to generate fear using the 'Echo Chamber' that will get America pumped up to fight another war for 'Hebrewland.'

Saladin said...

Israel's MAJOR screw-up, bankrupting her pimp. I suppose they thought they could just keep printing up their worthless monopoly money forever and thereby keep the endless wars going forever. They never see the big picture. They think of us as cattle, but don't see the danger of stampede, the stampede is brewing fools, I can't wait to see you murderous fuckers get stomped into oblivion! Great post Peasant.

A. Peasant said...

ha, thanks. they need too many things to line up just right. i really don't see it working out for them, no matter *what* they do. that's the kicker -- whether they'll take millions or billions of people down with them in spite or whether somebody around here with balls *and* power shall see fit in time to stop them.

legal mumbo jumbo

Disclaimer: The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.