Senate Republicans yesterday blocked a resolution that would have condemned
President Bush's plan to send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq.
On a 49-47 vote that largely followed partisan lines,
Democrats fell 11 "ayes" short of the 60 needed to bring about a vote
on the resolution, which is nonbinding but is widely viewed as a declaration of
no confidence in the continued mission of the Iraq war and Mr. Bush's handling
Among those who voted against last night's motion was
Sen. John W. Warner of Virginia, who wrote the resolution but joined other
Republicans in opposition to holding a vote because the new Democratic majority
is not allowing votes on other war resolutions.
Only two Republicans -- Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and
Norm Coleman of Minnesota -- backed voting on the resolution, and there was
opposition from only two members of the Democratic caucus -- independent Joe
Lieberman of Connecticut and, in a parliamentary maneuver that gives him the
right to bring the resolution back up for debate, Majority Leader Harry Reid of
Mr. Lieberman voted "no" because, he said, the
resolution is meaningless.
"This resolution is not about Congress taking
responsibility," said Mr. Lieberman, who was among the broad, bipartisan
majority in Congress who in 2002 voted to go to war. "It is the opposite.
It is a resolution of irresolution."
Before and after the vote, Democrats accused Republicans
of trying to dodge a debate on the increasingly unpopular war.
"You can run, but you can't hide," declared
Mr. Reid, a 2002 war supporter. "We are going to debate Iraq."
He promised that the resolution would resurface again
during debates and votes on other matters.
Last night's "cloture motion," which Democrats
supported, was a parliamentary procedure to end debate so that a final vote can
be taken. Republicans accused Mr. Reid of restricting debate on the Iraq war.
"Senate Republicans are ready to proceed with a
full and open debate on the president's strategy in Iraq," Sen. Jon Kyl,
Arizona Republican, said after the vote. "But we want a full debate on all
the various resolutions, not just one that was handpicked by the Democratic
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said
Republicans will not allow a vote on the Warner resolution unless it is
accompanied by at least two others.
A relentless and unmistakable American buildup for war
against Iran is currently underway. Military preparations are being
accompanied by a daily barrage of propaganda against Tehran issuing from US
sources and relayed uncritically via a compliant media.
The chief accusation currently being leveled against the Iranian regime is
that its agents are supporting and arming Shiite militias inside Iraq to
attack US troops—a charge that has yet to be
substantiated with concrete evidence.
Downing Street Memo'ed ( M.O )
President Bush last month not only ordered the US military
to “seek out and destroy” Iranian networks in Iraq, but confirmed last
week that he had authorised American troops to capture or kill Iranian agents.
On Monday, in an interview with National Public Radio, Bush reiterated:
“If Iran escalates its military action in Iraq to the detriment of our
troops and/or innocent Iraqi people, we will respond firmly.”
then of course all they need is the
manipulation of the Marakan apostate bloodlust anti-Christ, anti-life,
In Congressional confirmation hearings this week, Bush’s
new appointees echoed the same message. John Negroponte, who has been
nominated as deputy secretary of state, told the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee on Tuesday, that Iran’s “behaviour, such as supporting Shia
extremists in Iraq, should not go unchallenged. If they feel they can continue
with this kind of activity with impunity, that will be harmful to the security
of Iraq and to our interests
in that country.”
Admiral William Fallon, who has been nominated as head of
Central Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday that
Iran’s involvement in terrorism and sectarian violence was “destabilising
and troubling”. “They have not been helpful in Iraq. It seems to me that
in the region, as they grow their military capabilities, we’re going to have
to pay close attention to what they do and what they may bring to the
table,” he added.
Fallon indicated that he intended to assist
in building a regional coalition “to address Iran’s actions”. As
the first naval officer to be appointed head of Central Command, his role will
obviously not be limited to diplomatic activity. Fallon
will preside over a huge US naval buildup in the Persian Gulf, which,
for the first time since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, will include two
aircraft carrier groups.
The Jerusalem Post reported
that the assault ship, USS Bataan, steamed through the Suez Canal on Tuesday
on its way to the Persian Gulf. The seven-vessel battle group includes 2,200
US Marines and sailors, helicopters and Harrier fighter jets. The aircraft
carrier USS John C. Stennis and its associated warships are due in the region
later this month, joining the carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower which is
already in the Gulf. In all, Fallon will have around 50 warships as well as
hundreds of warplanes at his disposal.
A comment in the French newspaper Le Figaro on
January 27 noted that with the two carrier groups, “the United States now
has the ability to conduct an air offensive 24 hours a day for 30 to 40 days.
It can rely on Bahrain, the huge al-Udaid airbase in Qatar and its operational
command centre, and the Diego Garcia base in the Indian Ocean for supply. The
American satellites have reportedly identified 1,500 targets linked to the
Iranian nuclear weapon program, distributed over 18 main sites. No one doubts
that considerable damage could be inflicted on them. Industrial and oil
targets could be added to them.”
Ominously, an article appeared in the Los Angeles Times
yesterday outlining plans for more aggressive patrols by US warplanes along
the Iran-Iraq border, ostensibly to counter the smuggling of weapons into
Iraq. A senior Pentagon official told the newspaper: “Air power plays major
roles, and one of those is as a deterrent, whether it be in border control,
air sovereignty or something more kinetic.” As the Times noted,
“kinetic” is a term used to denote offensive military action. Whatever the
stated purpose, provocative US air
patrols close to Iranian air space could quickly escalate into open conflict.
While top US officials keep repeating
as fact that Iranian agents are involved in supporting anti-US militia
in Iraq, no proof has been offered for the allegation. US ambassador to Iraq,
Zalmay Khalilzad, was scheduled yesterday to present a “dossier” of
specific evidence of Iranian arms shipments to Iraq, including serial numbers
and shipping documents. But the plan was put on hold, indicating
that the “proof” is just as threadbare as the lies about weapons of mass
destruction that were concocted to justify Iraq’s military occupation.
A propaganda war
Lack of evidence has not stopped the US media from
publishing stories that have all the hallmarks of planted articles from the
Bush administration, the CIA or Pentagon. An article appeared in the New
York Times yesterday based on anonymous US and Iraqi officials suggesting
that Iranian agents were involved in an attack on a secure compound in Karbala
on January 20 in which five American soldiers were killed.
The report provided details of the raid, emphasising its
sophistication—the use of forged identity cards, “American-style”
uniforms and rifles, sports utility vehicles and communications devices. But
it did not offer a shred of evidence that any Iranians, let alone Iranian
government agents, were involved. As “proof,” all
that was offered was the argument that the operation was too complex for Iraqi
insurgents to have carried out alone.
An unnamed senior Iraqi official alleged
that rogue elements of the Mahdi Army of Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr were
being armed and controlled directly from Iran. An American military official
hinted at a broad conspiracy involving senior Iraqi officials, asking: “Was
the [Karbala] governor involved? Were the Iraqi police that were on guard
complicit or just incompetent?”
The New York Times pointed quite openly to the real
purpose of the story, which has been recycled throughout the media: “Tying
Iran to the deadly attack could be helpful to the Bush administration, which
has been engaged in an escalating war of words with Iran.”
The article followed another dubious New York Times
report on January 29 alleging that “Iranian intelligence” had been
involved in the assassination of the Egyptian ambassador to Iraq, Ihab Al
Sharif, shortly after his posting in June 2005. The story was based on a
front-page article in the Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram, which offered no
evidence other than the comments of anonymous sources. Both the Iranian and
Egyptian foreign ministries denied the allegations. Al Qaeda claimed
responsibility for the murder at the time. None of this, however, stopped the New
York Times (Jew York Hiames)
circulating the story as good coin.
It is certainly possible that Iranian intelligence agents
operate inside Iraq, like those of other countries, including American allies
like Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Iran has close links with Shiite parties and
militia, including those in the US puppet regime in Baghdad, and may well be
supplying them with assistance. It is also possible that insurgents are
purchasing arms legally or illegally inside Iran, as well as in other
countries. But there is no proof that the Iranian
government is backing anti-US insurgents in Iraq.
So it must be produced by
In comments for the US-based Council on Foreign Relations
website, Kenneth Pollack from the Brookings Institution remarked: “The Bush
administration seems to be regarding the Iranians as the source of many, if
not all, of Iraq’s problems today. To me, it is dangerously reminiscent of
how they talked about the Syrians in 2004 and 2005, when they ridiculously
exaggerated Syria’s role in the Sunni insurgency.”
An article in the Los Angeles Times on January 23
noted: “For all the aggressive rhetoric, the Bush administration has
provided scant evidence to support these claims [of Iranian involvement]. Nor
have reporters travelling with US troops seen extensive signs of Iranian
involvement. During a recent sweep through a stronghold of Sunni insurgents
here, a single Iranian machine gun turned up among dozens of arms caches US
troops uncovered. British officials have similarly accused Iran of meddling in
Iraqi affairs, but say they have not found Iranian-made weapons in areas they
In an interview with an obviously hostile New York Times
journalist on January 29, Iran’s ambassador to Iraq, Hassan Kazemi Qumi
vigorously denied Iranian support for anti-US militias. He dismissed evidence
seized by US troops in provocative raids in which a number of Iranians were
detained in December and January.
“He ridiculed the evidence that the American military
said it had collected, including maps of Baghdad delineating Sunni, Shiite and
mixed neighbourhoods—the kind of maps, American officials have said, that
would be useful for militias engaged in ethnic slaughter. Mr Qumi said the
maps were so common and easily obtainable that they proved nothing,” the
In the coming weeks, the US
propaganda offensive will undoubtedly intensify in order to obscure the real
reasons for the war preparations against Iran. In the first instance,
Washington is determined to prevent Iran from expanding its influence as a
result of the disasters that the US has created in neighbouring Iraq and
Afghanistan. More broadly, however, the Bush administration views the eventual
subjugation of Iran as a necessary stage in its long-held plans for US
dominance over the Middle East and Central Asia and their rich reserves of oil
Madman Dershowitz Before It’s Too Late
Tuesday January 30th 2007, 12:32 am
In the video below, Alan Dershowitz threatens to unleash World War Four
under false pretense.
Dershowitz makes a direct threat against a sovereign country that has not
invaded or threatened Israel, although Israel recently invaded a neighbor,
killed over a thousand people, dispensed a million cluster bombs, used
phosphorus bombs, and targeted children, war crimes all.
Dershowitz makes baseless and irresponsible claims about nuclear weapons
and genocide, and then suggests killing thousands,
possibly millions of people.
As this racial supremacist diatribe reveals,
Alan Dershowitz threatens to hold the entire world responsible for the
actions of Iran,
Collective Punishment of the BORG, How Ever JOHN
& Luke says no to the Collective
although of course Iran has done nothing (except hold a Holocaust
conference) and has no intention of invading or harming Israel.
Iran does not have a single nuclear bomb.
Dershowitz’s Israel has over 400.
Iran has not called for Israel to be “wiped off the map,” as claimed
every day in the corporate media.
Israel and its apologists demand Iran be wiped off
the map every day.
Dershowitz and the leaders of Israel are warmongering criminals who
continually and incessantly beat the drums of war—not simply any old war, but
In a more perfect world, they would be rounded up and put behind bars so
we may prevent them from inflicting harm the rest of humanity.
Unfortunately, we live in a less than perfect world, a far less than perfect
But the Saints of God are rounded up, and they
Dershowitz, Olmert, Bush, Clinton, Pelosi, the neocons (Talmudic
Hassidim and their proselytes of Hell) and those
who support them, a small but influential number, remain on the
loose, making threats with arrogant disregard.
May God forgive us for not arresting them in self