Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ 

Wag The Ayatollah

February 15, 2012 by  

Wag The Ayatollah

“Why [wage war against] Albania?”
“Why not?”
–From the movie “Wag The Dog”

The power brokers who dictate our future and destroy the freedoms they claim to protect are hell-bent on engaging America in another war. The tom-toms that Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul warns of are thunderous. This year, they summon more of our young men and women to wage war against Iran, a country smack-dab between Iraq and Afghanistan.

Expect President Barack Obama’s impending war to look very much like the conflicts that George W. Bush launched a decade ago. But don’t be surprised if the new war isn’t bigger and more bitterly contested than the one against Iraq. After all, there are only nine months until the Presidential election. Obama and his backers understand that millions of Americans will resist abandoning the Nation’s Commander in Chief when U.S. troops are engaged in combat.

That brings us back to why America went to war against Iraq. Few people noticed that the Bush Administration fabricated lies regarding weapons of mass destruction, and they even spread falsehoods that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was fast friends with the terrorists who struck on 9/11.

Coming Soon: Thirty Seconds Over Tehran

American jingoism could reach a fever pitch. Already, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is selling us on war with Iran. Earlier this month, he boasted to U.S. troops stationed in Germany that U.S. armed forces could wage and win simultaneous conflicts against North Korea and Iran.

“We could be fighting a land war in Korea and suddenly Iran moves to close the Straits of Hormuz,” Panetta said.  “We’ve got to have the capability to be able to confront each adversary, to not only deter them, but defeat them.  And we can do that with the force that we’ve put in place.”

It wasn’t hard for Panetta to find U.S. troops in Germany or almost anywhere else. A 2010 report showed there were 1,000 U.S. military bases outside the United States. The cost, not including bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, was more than $100 billion per year. According to anthropologist Hugh Gusterson, U.S. bases “constitute 95 percent of all the military bases any country in the world maintains on any other country’s territory.”

It is beyond me why our government keeps wasting men and materials in Europe two decades after the Cold War ended. Exactly whom must we brace ourselves against?

Perhaps the ruling elite that Bob Livingston alerts us of will not permit us to stand down regardless of the circumstances.

According to Institute for Policy Studies fellow Phyllis Bennis, the Pentagon has been brilliant at spreading military production across virtually every Congressional district. As a result, even the most antiwar members of Congress won’t challenge big Department of Defense projects no matter how high Federal debt levels reach.

Last summer, Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of the The Nation, concluded that: “The staggering resources we spend to support an empire of bases isn’t making us more secure. Instead, they fuel resentment and consume resources desperately needed to invest here at home”

The members of the ruling elite don’t care an iota about such deficit spending that is eroding our future while encouraging anti-American sentiment. Whether they are our elected officials or behind-the-scenes puppet masters, their goal is to increase their wealth and influence. As billionare Ted Turner once remarked: “War has been good to me from a financial standpoint.”

In 1947, the Federal government introduced doublespeak when the Department of Defense of War became the Department of Defense. Since then, the United States has not been engaged in much defense, nor has Congressional approval been required for what Presidents are apt to call either a “police action” or “terrorist interdiction.”

Fast-forward to today. How can another President, this one a Democrat, proclaim two additional enemies just as America has pulled out of one war (Iraq) and has announced the pullout of another (Afghanistan)? Yet the groundwork is being laid. Iran is a threat to world peace.

Is it possible that George W. Bush and Barack Obama are really pawns to a secret establishment, perhaps a military-industrial complex that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned against? I can only speculate, but I wonder if those people really calling the shots ever took an Oath of Office or ever had their names on a ballot. America seems to be falling toward a blueprint that George Orwell predicted in his novel 1984.

As I thought about what seems the inevitable march toward more war, I re-read 1984. I first read it 40 years ago after my English teacher made it compulsory. Over the years, the world has changed and not for the better. This from 1984 struck me hardest:

“To understand the nature of the present war — for in spite of the re-grouping which occurs every few years, it is always the same war — one must realise in the first place that it is impossible for it to be decisive… The labor of the exploited peoples… is not really necessary to the world’s economy. They add nothing to the wealth of the world, since whatever they produce is used for purposes of war, and the object of waging the war is always to be in a better position to wage the next war.”

Consider the impending war with Iran. On Jan. 31, The Washington Post reported that U.S. spy agencies are providing information to the Obama Administration that Tehran may be actively planning to attack U.S. targets on U.S. soil.

Let’s give that idea a quick examination. No sovereign nation has attacked U.S. soil since World War II. (Of course, this doesn’t include U.S. embassies or other American targets on foreign soil.) Let us remember that 9/11 was undertaken by renegade terrorists who were offered protection by the government of Afghanistan. The government of Afghanistan did not attack New York and Washington, yet even its tacit support of al-Qaida resulted in swift and terrible retribution.

Are we to believe that the leadership in Iran is stupid enough to attack Americans within U.S. borders? It sounds like a recipe for Iran to be wiped from the map.

I don’t believe for a moment that Iran’s leadership is stupid enough to launch an attack on American soil. I do believe our government is planting such misinformation to make us fearful and to drum up support for another war. How handy with a Presidential election approaching.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers
Editor, Myers’ Energy & Gold Report

Editor’s note: Over the next several days, we will be making upgrades to our site. During this time, you may see some issues, including but not limited to the site loading more slowly than normal. Additionally, on Thursday morning your ability to post comments will be turned off for a few hours. These upgrades should be completed by Friday morning if all goes as planned. Thanks for your patience. –BL

John Myers

is editor of Myers’ Energy and Gold Report. The son of C.V. Myers, the original publisher of Oilweek Magazine, John has worked with two of the world’s largest investment publishers, Phillips and Agora. He was the original editor for Outstanding Investments and has more than 20 years experience as an investment writer. John is a graduate of the University of Calgary. He has worked for Prudential Securities in Spokane, Wash., as a registered investment advisor. His office location in Calgary, Alberta, is just minutes away from the headquarters of some of the biggest players in today’s energy markets. This gives him personal access to everyone from oil CEOs to roughnecks, where he learns secrets from oil insiders he passes on to his subscribers. Plus, during his years in Spokane he cultivated a network of relationships with mining insiders in Idaho, Oregon and Washington.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Wag The Ayatollah”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • http://DoULoveJesus.Wordpress.com Mark Dabney

    Actually sir, I have lawfully demanded the evidence that we were promised years ago that Bin Laden orchestrated 9/11, that document was delivered on 6 April 2011. Since then, Rep. Phil Gingrey has yet to produce ANY evidence whatsoever that Bin Laden did it – actually he has not responded in any meaningful way – by default he has admitted that there is no actual evidence that Bin Laden did it.

    THE TALIBAN WAS RIGHT – THE “EVIDENCE” THAT THEY WERE GIVEN DID NOT PROVE BIN LADEN CULPABLE FOR 9/11! Apparently Congress was given a TRANSLATION that made Bin Laden APPEAR to be culpable.

    I will provide the letter sent to Rep. Gingrey to anyone that e-mails me @ MarkAnabaptist@ATT.net

    • Dukeye

      It’s no longer on the FBI website, but while he was alive I thought it interesting that Bin Laden was not wanted for 9/11 by the FBI. The U.S.S. Cole and other things, but not 9/11. Did someone forget to update the website for 10 years, or was there not enough evidence?

      • Flashy

        Wasn’t he removed from the list sometime late in the Bush administration?

      • John

        Its a known fact that the Taliban told bush they would hand over Bin Laden if Bush would give them evidence that Bin Laden was responsible for the attack…something Bush was unable to provide. And thus the Afghan war started. i.m.h.o., Bin Laden was Bush’s fall guy on the deal for the 9/11 attack between Bush and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia.
        Bush needed the attack on 9/11 to further his ambitions and the Saudis in exchange got Bush removing Saddam who was a thorn in Saudi Arabia’s side. Remember, all the 9/11 attackers where from Saudi Arabia…none from Iraq, Iran or Afghanistan.

  • http://jenersea@comcast.net jenersea

    Maybe if the Persians and Syria pulled their troops out of Lebanon, then we would trust them more.

    • John

      Maybe if the US would pull their troops out of the rest of the world, other countries would trust us more?

  • http://911justasking.com metroman

    How many false flags to we need before we realize we (the people) are only pawns in this chess game. I just read an articular that said: “Justice Breyer The 73-year-old justice was robbed last week at his vacation home in the West Indies by a man wielding a machete, a court spokeswoman said Monday.” I find that kind of strange that a Chief Justice of the S.C. would have a home in the West Indies. Why the West Indies? Why not in Naples, Fla or some other garden spot of the U.S.?Is that where the NWO guys told him to go when the implode the U.S.? Just Asking? Yes Alice there is a Wonder Land.

    • John

      The question is, will he be able to reach his 2nd home should the crap hit the fan….

    • Karolyn

      Hey, maybe the guy just likes the West Indies.

      • Flashy

        West indies over Florida any day …

      • John

        actually, I prefer French Polynesia.

  • Bob M

    Since the earliest days of the republic we have been in a constant state of war. Google U.S. conflicts, wars, police actions, interventions; our nation’s military is always fighting someone. It’s what we do, it’s how our economy works, it’s how we employ our young people, it’s how our politicians get elected.
    After two ans a half centuries, how do we change?

    • DaveH

      The Leaders may work that way, but the citizens don’t have to keep falling for the Propaganda that wars are good for economies. To believe they are takes a very large suspension of logic.
      The most prosperous time in our country’s history came in the 1880s between the Civil War and the Spanish American War.

  • PatricHenry

    What kind of an idiot would think that fighting North Korea would
    be easy? Panetta needs to face reality. Our nation has been bankrupted
    by engaging in two needless wars. The Armed Forces are worn out and
    now Iran?
    Americans don’t want or need another war. The man who calls
    himself Obama would find no support from the American People for
    such foolishness. Is this what a Peace Prize winner is supposed to
    do?
    It is all one big act of Fraud. Restore the Republuc by voting for Ron Paul in 2012. He alone is our last hope for true change.

    • Karolyn

      That’s what I don’t get. Why do so many think having another “war” would bode well for the President when most people don’t want any more war?

      • DaveH

        It’s historical fact, Karolyn, that wars rally the blindered citizens behind the President.

      • Flashy

        DaveH … noted you haven’t stated what YOU would do in the situation. Sirian, Dukeye, myself…all have stated our ideas and thoughts. What would you do? (time to look at Mises)

      • DaveH

        I would butt out of other countries’ business, take a moral stance (look it up in the dictionary, Flashman, as I know you’re unfamiliar with that concept), and let the immoral leaders of those countries sort it out among themselves.
        I would trade voluntarily with the world free of Government’s meddlesome Crony Capitalism. The businesses that pleased the consumers would succeed, and those who didn’t would fail, as it should be.

      • DaveH

        I would set an example of moral behavior, and the peace and prosperity that comes with it, for other countries to emulate. Those who chose a different path would be allowed to fail for their mistakes.
        I certainly would never dream of forcing my choices on my fellow man at the point of a gun.

      • Flashy

        In other words, we’d be screwed, blued and tatoo’d.

        Figured. Simple minds cannot grasp complex issues.

      • DaveH

        I figured you would come back with that.
        In truth Ignorant and Unproductive people strive for complexity because it’s much easier to mask their immoral and self-centered behavior behind complex machinations.
        And how many times do I have to remind you, Flashman, that I have exposed your dishonesty and lack of integrity many, many times. So, you’re saying that even a simple-minded guy can upstage you? I wouldn’t brag about that, Flashdunce.

      • Karolyn

        Flashy – If people did not make things so complex, we would be a lot better off. “Keep it simple” is a great adage to live by.

      • Jay

        Flashy, you’re witty, clever, and contentious. What else you got?

      • DaveH

        Pass that doobie this way, Jay.
        ‘Unprincipled’ pretty much sums up Flashman.

  • http://Hotmail Sam Cecil

    If this administration is gearing up for war with Iran, then why is he cutting the Defence budget so radically and threatening to cut our nuclear arsenal by 80%?

    • John

      The remaining 20% are still enough to let any country think twice about attacking us. Remember we have thousands upon thousands of nuclear weapons and many of them are NOT affected by this.

    • kkflash

      Obama’s proposed budget increases spending from the prior fiscal year, though political and public outcry to trim spending has been massive. He has no intention of loosening his grip on the financial fabric of the nation. It is however, an election year, and he can buy a lot more votes with social redistribution than with military escalation. Don’t worry. He’ll return to supporting the military industrial complex through crony capitalism soon enough, IF we’re foolish enough to re-elect him.

  • Scott in SC

    There is no doubt that the US and Israel are assinating Iranians and perpetrating false flag attacks around the world to prepare for yet another unprevoked war against a soveriegn nation.

    • Flashy

      what’s scary is I think I am more aligned with Sirian and Dukeye on this issue than any other …

      I believe it’s already an active undeclared war going on with both sides knocking off , or attempting to knock off, key personnel.

  • Dukeye

    Everyone has heard that Ahmadinejad wants to “wipe Israel off the map”, right? Isn’t that justification enough to leave all options on the table, since all of Iran is nothing more than crazy anti-Semites?

    That viewpoint, apparently shared by a majority of Repubs and Dems alike, is based on a lack of historical context, ignorance, and susceptibility to propaganda.

    1) We have been interfering in Iran’s internal affairs since at least 1954, when our CIA aided in deposing the democratically elected Mossadeq (who had the nerve to nationalize the oil fields, kicking the Americans and Brits out) and installing the Shah. This led to the Islamic Revolution and all our problems with the theocracy since.

    2) Yes, Bush/Cheney obviously lied about WMD’s to get us into Iraq. They weren’t the only ones; the Pentagon gave talking points to all those ‘independent military analysts’ you saw on the MSM in the lead-up to Iraq; thus, the MSM was complicit in passing straight-up Pentagon propaganda to you and everyone you know. Yet, you believe everything the MSM and the new president says about the latest ‘existential threat’, our need to keep ‘all options on the table’ etc. Where is the great discernment here?

    3) Yes, Ahmadinejad is a blow-hard and Holocaust-denier. Yet, his term is up next year – why on earth would you want to push the Iranians toward a similar leader by making them feel as if they could be under attack any minute?

    4) Long-term, our safety and peace are not strengthened by this ridiculous policy of permanent aggressive war against ‘rogue states’. Eisenhower said “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing.” And yet here we are again, on the brink of ‘preventive’ war – as if Iran had any more ability to hurt us than Iraq did.

    • Karolyn

      Ahmadinejad is a leader in name only anyway. It doesn’t matter who the people elect. The real leader is the Ayatollah.

  • Karolyn

    I would not be surprised if the recent terrorist attacks attributed to Iran are a setup to gain ppublic sympathy for aggression against Iran. I heard yesterday that we get only 10% of our oil via the Strait of Hormuz.

    • Flashy

      We may receive only 10%…but what of the remainder of the world? And as we are tied into the world economy, not to mention if those Straits were closed those sources we obtain our oil imports from will become VERY busy and supply/demand will have the price skyrocketing in days, if not hours.

      • Karolyn

        It’s a moot point, really. How can Iran possibly “close” the strait?

      • Flashy

        Sink a few tanker ships … target it with missiles ….

      • John

        Easy, the straight and its usable shipping lane is relative narrow and shallow. All you really need to do is sink a few tankers and mine the rest.

      • Karolyn

        Not with our ships there now.

      • John

        Karolyn, Our ships are NOT in the straits, they are past it. Even with our ships there, Iran could just as easy sink a US carrier as they can sink oil tankers. After all at that moment it would not mater as either one would be the start of war. And if war would be their goal, what better target then a US carrier? They do have the ability to take them out. Iran’s shore to ship missiles are nothing to scoff about and a carrier is an awful large target.

      • Flashy

        karolyn….a missle attack on a tanker is all it takes. if our ships are there, they have defend each tanker as they go through (empty or full) as well as the fleet itself. I don’t know how many support ships our carriers require, but i assume it’s many.

        One missile getting through is all it would take.

      • kkflash

        Your military intelligence is clearly lacking if you think it would be “easy” for Iran to sink one of our carriers. The point isn’t worth arguing anyway, because it’s not in Iran’s economic interest to attempt to close the Straits of Hormuz. Any threat to do so is hollow political posturing. Iran is a poor country, even with its vast supplies of oil. Without oil exports through the Straits, their people will starve. So, will they cut off their own hand to spite their face?

      • eddie47d

        Sure you can sink a few ships but Iran also uses the Straits of Hormuz and would cut off their own economy by doing so. Since one third of China’s oil comes from Iran such an act would do more harm than good to Iran.

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear Karolyn,

        Thank you for the proper use of the word “moot.” I can count on one hand the number of commenters who do so.

        Best wishes,
        Bob

      • Karolyn

        Thank you, Bob. I was raised by a mother who was not allowed to go to high school (She had to go to work.) and who, as a result, self-educated and was very particular about grammar. I owe my writing ability to her.

      • DaveH
      • Karolyn

        OMG, Dave! If I were that mother, I would be raising hell! How dare they!

      • Karolyn

        According to the news on WABC Charlotte this morning, the only thing the FDA person did was to tell the child it needed milk to go along with his lunch. Much ado about nothing?

  • James

    “Few people noticed that the Bush Administration fabricated lies regarding weapons of mass destruction.”

    Please provide your proof. We have proof that weapons were used on the Kurds before our invasion, so what lies? We found chemical weapons during my last two tours there as well, just not in large quantities. Then again, if you tell someone that you’re coming for almost two years before you come, then you won’t find much since they will hide it. Have you forgotten the weapons inspections that were denied and harrassed? We also found mortars with hollowed tips for chemical/biological use. It seems in your case, and many others, that history is easily rewritten to fit a narrative, and a lie told enough times comes to be believed as the truth.

    • John

      Remember, the chemical weapons where sold to Iraq by the US for the war against Iran…and yes for the war against the Kurds. Or do you really believe that the US was not aware that Saddam would use them against the Kurds too? The hunt for WMDs was a witch hunt from the start. It was not a hunt for chemical weapons, we KNEW they where there, it was the hunt for nuclear weapons and there where NONE.

      • James

        Sorry, John. You are not correct. I’m not new to this game. I’m a Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Southern Watch and Iraqi Freedom vet that has a dual background in Infantry and Intelligence. Iraq had a declaring intent of developing nuclear weapons (which is why Israel bombed the Osiraq facility), but we were inspecting for all three: nuclear, chemical and biological. We did so for twelve years before the invasion of 2003. There were 17 U.N. resolutions that built up to the 2003 invasion. Are you are saying that Bush lied in 2002 to start a war in 1990, or 1981 in the case of Osiraq?

      • Flashy

        what is being said is that the invasion by Bush II was not needed. We had Sammy contained and under control. Iraq was not an immediate danger to the US. Bush II lied. Straight up, not a doubt.

      • James

        I am not a defender of Bush, especially since he repeatedly violated the Constitution, but I am a defender of truth and history. Apparently, a lot of people just want to repeat what the media has told them to say. Propaganda works, that’s why it’s used. Control the media, control the mind.

      • John

        what i said was is that Bush lied, we the US sold Iraq the chemical weapons he used in the Iran war and on the Kurds. We KNEW he had them, we got handsomely paid for delivering them to him…plain and simple. The inspectors NEVER found conclusive evidence that Iraq was pursuing its quest for nuclear weapons… The Iraq war to oust Saddam was nothing but an act of private revenge by Bush and our men and women in the military went along with it, not realizing just how much wool has been pulled over their eyes.

      • James

        Private revenge? Is that just your theory, or do you have proof?

      • DaveH

        And when warned in advance by the Iraqi Government of Saddam’s Kuwait intentions, the US ambassador told the Iraqis that the United States took no position on that.

      • James

        John, the ‘James Desert Storm replies are not mine. I’m a purple heart Korean War vet.

    • John

      Moreover, all the weapons inspections where for nuclear weapons only NOT for chemical weapons… the hunt for nuclear weapons that bush was so certain was there, was then turned into the hunt for generic WMDs just so we could say look we found something

  • Jay

    Did Ahmadinejad Really Called for Israel To Be ‘Wiped Off the Map’?

    This is pure, mad Zionist propaganda! Keep in mind that the majority of the western media is owned and controlled by the Illuminati ruling class. Their intent is a global fascist police state. One of the key to it, is natural resources like OIL. In the coming months they will be ratcheting up their propaganda, building an Axis of Evil, to prepare the world for the coming war. They will try to paint linkages and alignments when there are non. For eg. trying to link Iran, North Korea, Myanmar… together… Al Qaeda (which is really Al CIAda).. terrorism…etc.. There is a likely hood that they will use Al CIAda to attack their targets like China for example. After all Al CIAda is really pissed with China over XinJiang right? Over the deaths of their Muslim brethren right? This is total bull!

    The Guardian UK reports :
    Experts confirm that Iran’s president did not call for Israel to be ‘wiped off the map’. Reports that he did serve to strengthen western hawks.

    Iran’s president was badly misquoted when he allegedly called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” has caused a welcome little storm. The phrase has been seized on by western and Israeli hawks to re-double suspicions of the Iranian government’s intentions, so it is important to get the truth of what he really said.

    The translation – “the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time” – from the indefatigable Professor Juan Cole’s website where it has been for several weeks. But it seems to be mainly thanks to the Guardian giving it prominence that the New York Times, which was one of the first papers to misquote Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, came out on Sunday with a defensive piece attempting to justify its reporter’s original “wiped off the map” translation. Joining the “off the map” crowd is David Aaronovitch, a columnist on the Times (of London), who attacked analysis. I won’t waste time on him since his knowledge of Farsi is as minimal as that of his Latin. The poor man thinks the plural of casus belli is casi belli, unaware that casus is fourth declension with the plural casus (long u).

    The New York Times’s Ethan Bronner and Nazila Fathi, one of the paper’s Tehran staff, make a more serious case. They consulted several sources in Tehran. “Sohrab Mahdavi, one of Iran’s most prominent translators, and Siamak Namazi, managing director of a Tehran consulting firm, who is bilingual, both say ‘wipe off’ or ‘wipe away’ is more accurate than ‘vanish’ because the Persian verb is active and transitive,” Bronner writes.

    The New York Times goes on: “The second translation issue concerns the word ‘map’. Khomeini’s words were abstract: ‘Sahneh roozgar.’ Sahneh means scene or stage, and roozgar means time. The phrase was widely interpreted as ‘map’, and for years, no one objected. In October, when Mr Ahmadinejad quoted Khomeini, he actually misquoted him, saying not ‘Sahneh roozgar’ but ‘Safheh roozgar’, meaning pages of time or history. No one noticed the change, and news agencies used the word ‘map’ again.”
    This, is the crucial point and I’m glad the NYT accepts that the word “map” was not used by Ahmadinejad. (By the way, the Wikipedia entry on the controversy gets the NYT wrong, claiming falsely that Ethan Bronner “concluded that Ahmadinejad had in fact said that Israel was to be wiped off the map”.)

    If the Iranian president made a mistake and used “safheh” rather than “sahneh”, that is of little moment. A native English speaker could equally confuse “stage of history” with “page of history”. The significant issue is that both phrases refer to time rather than place. The Iranian president was expressing a vague wish for the future. He was not threatening an Iranian-initiated war to remove Israeli control over Jerusalem. Two other well-established translation sources confirm that Ahmadinejad was referring to time, not place. The version of the October 26 2005 speech put out by the Middle East Media Research Institute, based on the Farsi text released by the official Iranian Students News Agency, says: “This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history.” (NB: not “wiped”. I accept that “eliminated” is almost the same, indeed some might argue it is more sinister than “wiped”, though it is a bit more of a mouthful if you are trying to find four catchy and easily memorable words with which to incite anger against Iran.) MEMRI is headed by a former Isareli military intelligence officer and has sometimes been attacked for alleged distortion of Farsi and Arabic quotations for the benefit of Israeli foreign policy. On this occasion they supported the doveish view of what Ahmadinejad said.

    Finally we come to the BBC monitoring service which every day puts out hundreds of highly respected English translations of broadcasts from all round the globe to their subscribers – mainly governments, intelligence services, think-tanks and other specialists. A spokesperson for the monitoring service’s marketing unit, who did not want his name used, revealed that their original version of the Ahmadinejad quote was “eliminated from the map of the world”. As a result of the inquiry and the controversy generated, they had gone back to the native Farsi-speakers who had translated the speech from a voice recording made available by Iranian TV on October 29 2005. Here is what the spokesman told me about the “off the map” section: “The monitor has checked again. It’s a difficult expression to translate. They’re under time pressure to produce a translation quickly and they were searching for the right phrase. With more time to reflect they would say the translation should be “eliminated from the page of history”. Would the BBC put out a correction, given that the issue had become so controversial? “It would be a long time after the original version”, came the reply. Another words, “probably not”, but let’s see.
    Finally, Iradj Bagherzade, the Iranian-born founder and chairman of the renowned publishing house, IB Tauris was asked. He thought hard about the word “roozgar”. “History” was not the right word, he said, but he could not decide between several better alternatives “this day and age”, “these times”, “our times”, “time”.

    So there we have it. Starting with Juan Cole, and going via the New York Times’ experts through MEMRI to the BBC’s monitors, the consensus is that Ahmadinejad did not talk about any maps. He was offering a vague wish for the future.

    A very last point. The fact that he compared his desired option – the elimination of “the regime occupying Jerusalem” – with the fall of the Shah’s regime in Iran makes it crystal clear that he is talking about regime change, not the end of Israel. As a schoolboy opponent of the Shah in the 1970′s he surely did not favour Iran’s removal from the page of time. He just wanted the Shah out.

    The same with regard to Israel. The Iranian president is undeniably an opponent of Zionism or, if you prefer the phrase, the Zionist regime. But so are substantial numbers of Israeli citizens, Jews as well as Arabs. The anti-Zionist and non-Zionist traditions in Israel are not insignificant. So we should not demonise Ahmadinejad on those grounds alone.

    Does this quibbling over phrases matter? Yes, of course. Within days of the Ahmadinejad speech the then Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, was calling for Iran to be expelled from the United Nations. Other foreign leaders have quoted the map phrase. The United States is piling pressure on its allies to be tough with Iran.

    • Flashy

      Jay…I’ll ask you the same I asked a few others. What would you do in the situation today?

      What would you have done the past year or so as far as iran’s nuclear production research and international affairs?

      • Dukeye

        I would take the nuclear option off the table. I would tell the American people that Iran is not an existential threat. I would explain that Iran has every incentive to get a nuke; Pakistan (has nuke) gets subsidies despite harboring terrorists, while Iraq (no nuke) has no terrorists and gets destroyed.

        I would tell the people that Iran is not a country full of suicidal people who are salivating at the chops to take a suicide suitcase nuke to Israel or the US. I would say that should Iran make any move towards attack, Israel will annihilate them.

        I would say that free trade is the best way to long-term peace. After all, the Soviets had hundreds of nukes pointing at us and yet we perservered by keeping the peace and winning economically. I would explain that our national and personal debt is the greatest existential threat we currently face, and fighting an unnecessary war is a slap in the face to people who are losing health/unemployment benefits, jobs, homes, purchasing power from inflation, etc. because our federal government can’t stop spending money we don’t have. I’d be honest with the people, instead of treating them like children who can’t make an informed decision on all available facts.

        I’d tell the American people that we will not enter another war without a Declaration of War from the Congress – this allowing the people to have a say in our military action, and thus following the law (War Powers Resolution, also the Constitution). I would say that we are finally learning our lessons from Eisenhower’s admonition to beware the undue influence of the military-industrial-complex.

        I would explain how we deposed a democratically elected leader in Iran in 1953 (just one example), and how ‘making the world safe for democracy’ is nothing more than propaganda. I would explain how the Gulf of Tonkin incident that started the Vietnam War was a fabricated excuse to go to war. I would explain the lies that caused the Iraq War, and I would show the footage of blown-up children from our ‘Shock and Awe’ assault on a crowded civilian city.

        So, what would you do?

      • DaveH

        Very good, Dukeye. Thank you.

      • Flashy

        wow … excuse me while i catch my breath as i recover from shock. Thank you Dukeye. Well thought out and rational thoughts. gives a very good concise viewpoint and alternative. it will be interesting to read the reactions and comments.

        Me? taking from the time Pres. Obama took office, given the atmosphere was poisoned by the corrupt and incompetent Bush/Cheney regime and the control over them that Big Oil had…

        Iran has a border with several “stans” as well as Russia. China has an influence as they filled the vacuum created by Bush/Cheney. We have to consider the complexities of the Arab world and the Sunni/Shiite issues, the fact that (as Mark in LA pointed out yesterday) Iran is Persian and not Arab (yet is involved in Arab affairs). The Arab Spring Movement has an effect as does our Israeli alliance and the Assad regime being slowly torn asunder. Mix in Iran’s actions in Syria, the fact they have to maintain a direct line for supplying Hezbollah and Hamas, their falling behind in technology and a civil population in unrest. Economically they are a mess.

        Add in while we can most likely operate without the Straits allowing free passage of oil, the remainder of the world cannot, and we rely on the world for our economic well being.

        I’d be hard pressed to suggest anything other than what Obama has done. Do everything possible to keep Iran from having nukes. It is in no one’s best interests, not even Iran’s, for them to have nukes. Short and long term.

        Slowly tighten the noose increasing pressure on iran to allow UN and/or Arab league inspection teams and continuous monitoring and renounce nuke weaponry. In exchange for peace and dropping of sanctions.

        I think this administration is doing a masterful job in playing The Great Game on the international affairs front, including when Iran forst started making noises about closing the Starits, arranging with the industrial countries for all to set aside enough oil reserves as a “Commons” to allow world industrial consumption at current levels for 90 days.

        I guess if I were hard pressed to add anything, I’d say i would make it a world wide open question to Iran…what would you require to renounce nukes and allow UN inspection and monitoring of the nuclear production facilities?

      • DaveH

        Which country has the second largest stockpile of Nuclear Weapons in the World?
        Which is the only country to have actually used a Nuclear Weapon against another country? The victim country, by the way, was an ally to the US in World War I.
        Should the Iranians be allowed to inspect our Nuclear Facilities?

      • Flashy

        Should the UN be allowed? I’d say “yes” if it were part of an overall agreement that everyone’s nuke facilities be inspected and monitored.

        I believe we allowed inspections for the SALT Treaties did we not?

      • DaveH

        Of course Flashman would like to get the UN involved because Flashman is a shill for Big Government which is unaccountable to the people and intrusive on their every personal decision.
        As the people allow Government to centralize far away from the average citizens oversight, there is less scrutiny on the Government which gives them more unaccountable Power, which gives the rest of us less Freedom.
        The minority (which Flashman is no doubt attached to) get to live like parasites on the labors of the rest of us.

      • kkflash

        Thank you Dukeye, for putting it so well.

      • Jay

        Dukeye, although the question was directed at me, your answer is an excellent one, and most appreciated! TY

    • Wendell

      Jay, I am glad you are close enough to ahmadinejad to translate his words into what he actually did mean to say, not what he actually said. What a fool and joke you are.

      • John

        Are you afraid to learn the truth?

      • Jay

        Wendell, your anti-semitism blinds you!

  • RIMILITIA

    Thank you Freedom friend…………….Charles

  • PW from TX

    You said “Obama and his backers understand that millions of Americans will resist abandoning the Nation’s Commander in Chief when U.S. troops are engaged in combat.” I would still resist Obama and vote against him no matter what ridiculous reason he comes up with to go to war with Iran.

    You also brought up another real good point “Is it possible that George W. Bush and Barack Obama are really pawns to a secret establishment, perhaps a military-industrial complex that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned against?” It is not only possible it is an absolute TRUTH that they are both pawns to the Military Industrial Complex.

    Everybody should spend 15 minutes and listen to President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s Farewell Address since it has largely been forgotten. You can watch the full address at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWiIYW_fBfY

    Got Bless America

    • Flashy

      OK PW…. what would you have done before this and as of today’s situation, what would you do henceforth?

      Drill for more oil isn’t the answer. We are dependent on the world economy, and unless you’re able to supply the world with oil, you can’t smack talk the easy way out.

    • Jay

      Correct, PWfromTX, it is the military/industrial/complex that determines American, foreign policy. The so-called, commander-in- chief, and the clowns that surround him, are nothing more then employees of the MIC corporation!

    • CommonSense4America

      PW: were you ever at ZFW?

  • PATRIOT 101

    Unless and until a lot more people are made aware of the corruption, deceit in our government and Media, and a leader rises up for the patriots to rally around, no change will occur.
    Ron Paul is attempting to be the rallying point, but even patriots are miss-led to denounce him as “an old unelectable fool” because they are so led by “popular opinion” and polls.!!!

    • John

      And why do you believe it necessary for the leader to be elected to the highest office in this country? He would be a lame duck trying to get the rest of the corrupt administration to work with him. Would it not be far more efficient to have a “leader” period? A lot can be archived without being burdened down by the constraints of the federal government. Unfortunately as of today, i have NOT seen a real leader emerge. A real leader would lead the most powerful force in this country…the people.
      A real leader has to be impartial and acceptable to the majority of ALL political directions. If you have only a strong conservative leader you will fail, same is true with any other political direction. What we need is a leader for the people, a leader that everyone can align with, only then will the people have a voice and change the direction of this country.

      • DaveH

        Ron Paul wants to quit the US meddling in other countries’ politics. Let those countries determine their own destinies free of US Hegemony.
        Ron Paul wants to Free our Markets so people can trade with their fellows voluntarily and unfettered by Government meddlers.
        Ron Paul wants to greatly shrink the resource-guzzling Federal Government which is fast running our country over the financial cliff.
        What more could the “people” want?

      • John

        Someone with a agenda that all can rally around, someone charismatic enough for people to rally around, someone strong enough and acceptable enough that if he would say to the nation stay away from work tomorrow 90% of the nation would follow… that person, and its NOT Ron Paul, his agenda is too narrow minded. He is not able to get more then maybe 15-20% to rally around him and that is NOT enough to force any change in this country by the people. The only way anything will change is if the people change the corrupt government,and that will not be done with a revolution or a strictly conservative figurehead that only a relative small amount of people would participate in. Change like this will come only if the vast overwhelming majority of the people want it and more importantly support it…not if only the left or only the right wants it.

      • kkflash

        John, no intelligent person would deny Obama is charismatic, but all would agree that so was Hitler. Charisma is a powerful weapon, particularly in this age of media controlled by the politically connected, and so I’d rather have a man whose principles are fundamentally correct according to natural and Constitutional law, than a man of charisma, whose integrity and principles could not be trusted.

      • DaveH

        The problem is, John, that many (if not most) of the people have been effectively propagandized to be blind to reality. So getting them to rally around a Principled man is indeed difficult. But to advocate rallying around a superficial Leader (most of them are) just because they’re charismatic just continues the enslavement of our citizens to Big Government.
        We need to wake up and quit voting for Presidents based on their looks, or their stirring speeches, or their substanceless promises. And start voting for the Principled guys who can’t and won’t promise a car in every garage or other such sweet-sounding lies.

      • John

        Dave, the person to rally around does not only have to be principled, he also has to charismatic…that’s just a fact because if not, most people will not rally around him… as Ron Paul knows to well.

      • DaveH

        Coming from my standpoint of being highly educated in matters economic and political (so I can understand what Ron is saying), I find Ron Paul to be highly charismatic.
        I find people like Romney and Santorum to be very plastic.
        I have always preferred honesty to sweet-sounding lies.

      • Flashy

        “Coming from my standpoint of being highly educated in matters economic and political ” <– DaveH

        Dave…i thought you said you didn’t lie? ROFLMAO

      • DaveH

        Flashman,
        I could beat you in any mental test except one.
        If the test was based on lying, you would win — Hands Down.

      • kkflash

        Remember John, that Ron Paul is only conservative fiscally, while he is egalitarian socially. He has not advocated isolationism, as some have claimed, but simply an end to US imperialism. Of course, his philosophies don’t sit well with those who depend on the government to give them what they don’t deserve, and that includes the powerful crony-capitalists at one end and the lazy self-pitying socialist liberals at the other end. But in the end how can one argue successfully against the concepts of freedom, personal responsibility and the rule of law based on the Constitution?

  • steve

    When i comment on material such as this i usually end up insulting one or more proponents of whatever
    foolishness USA seems to be headed towards. So with that in mind i will keep quiet and let others
    tell a story in a much more level headed manner. The question is “who is the real threat to world peace?”
    Its not a simple question but this fellow seems to have a fair answer (i haven’t looked into his background,
    i haven’t completely fact checked his material but at a glance even if only partly true, it points to a fairly straight forward answer …. i asked the question in google and found this link)

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/dangertopeace.php

    and on another entertaining note

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/RPposters.php

  • Warrior

    Do people actually believe that somehow we ensure the free flow of oil from the ME? Listen up kids, oil is the source of their leaders wealth. If we didn’t have a presence there, the oil would be flowing. Period!

  • Ted Crawford

    I am contuinually amazed at the number of people who view the fact that we maintain a significant military presents throughout the World as a “bad thing”! It is, in fact exactly the opposite!
    It’s almost universally understood, in financial circles that it is unwise “to have all the eggs in one basket”, yet, by some strange logic, it’s advocated in National Defence strategys! It’s equally wrong in both cases! The standard military tactic is to isolate, surround and pin the enemy into a single location where it can easily be destroyed at leisure!
    Whenever I hear this concept put foward I’m reminded of Rome. They, too had become weary of the cost to maintain a strong military and decieded it was better to attempt to buy off their enemies, how well did that workout for them?
    There was a statement that I remember from my business days about leadership, “If you chose to stick your head above the crowd and lead, someone will begin to throw tomatoes. You then have a choice. Learn to like tomatoes or pull your head back into the crowd”!
    If we wish to continue to be a major player in World affairs, we’de better learn to love tomatoes! The alternative, for me, is unthinkable!

    • DaveH

      The Roman Leaders spread their empire widely, creating vast numbers of enemies in the process, and impoverished their country, making it easier for their enemies to overrun them. Very much like the US Leaders are doing with our own country.
      Leaders always look out for themselves first:
      http://mises.org/daily/3663

    • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

      Dear Ted Crawford,

      The “presents” we are maintaining aren’t being well received. Perhaps it’s time to stop playing Santa Claus with our military and bring our troops home. We’re certainly not getting safer under the current modus operandi.

      Best wishes.
      Bob

    • kkflash

      The notion that a weaker combatant may more easily defeat its opponent’s superior forces by attacking when and where such forces are gathered together en masse is a foolish one. Any seasoned military strategist knows that a weaker combatant must resort to “divide and conquer” and guerrilla-type tactics to have any success and avoid being wiped out themselves. Since the US without question has the most powerful military force on earth, we’re just doing our enemies a favor by spreading our forces throughout the globe, unless of course, our goal is not to defend our nation, but rather to imperialistically stretch our political power through military force.

      • Flashy

        Ever read Sun Tzu’s “Art of War” ? I highly suggest it

      • DaveH

        You saw that on Person of Interest last week, didn’t you? Like I expect you to admit it.
        So what’s next, another line of Sniper Bull Dung?

      • Flashy

        What’s Person of Interest?

        DaveH…FYI, Art of War is required reading in most upper level business college courses. And anyone interested in business should have a copy in their library. Jeesh …

    • eddie47d

      Ted seems to believe that we should have a strong military presence and continual wars to achieve status in the world. Why not have economic status and a strong defense through fair trade.If we can’t negotiate with another country then stop doing business with them. Make it their loss of economic business not ours.

    • TML

      “I am contuinually amazed at the number of people who view the fact that we maintain a significant military presents throughout the World as a “bad thing”! It is, in fact exactly the opposite!
      It’s almost universally understood, in financial circles that it is unwise “to have all the eggs in one basket”, yet, by some strange logic, it’s advocated in National Defence strategys!”

      Comparing military strategy with financial strategy doesn’t seem to be realistic and a kind of dichotomy, since the cost of maintaining this imperialistic presence eats away at the economy… weakening the nation from within, while spreading forces apart. These forces require supply lines that could be cut off… a lessen learned by anyone who, in yester year, attempted to invade Russia, including Napoleon (who led the most massive army ever assembled in Europe) and Nazi Germany. In war, spreading forces too thin is error.

      Add to that the idea that this imperialistic presence, in the name of spreading democracy (a hypocrisy in itself), isn’t making friends, but instead, multiplies it’s enemies, and I would say that maintaining a significant military presence throughout the world is not only bad, but just plain stupid and unnecessary, and serves no real interest in the United States national security.

      There is a difference between just sticking your head above the crowd, and sticking your head above the crowd with a gun, threatening to shoot anyone who throws a tomato.

  • Gordon in Texas

    Expect another false flag operation against a US target (most likely a soft target) that will infuriate and “unite” the American people in support for waging a war against the responsible party/nation (Iran???). These false flag operations have worked in the past and they will work today, as long as we continue to have a misinformed public the MSM is on board…and they will be on board. Mid- to late summer will a good time to ensure obama another term.

    • DaveH

      For those who are new to the term “False Flags”:
      http://www.wanttoknow.info/falseflag

      • DaveH

        List of False Flags in US History:
        http://911review.com/articles/anon/false_flag_perations.html

        Fort Sumter, which was the excuse for “Honest” Abe to engage the South in War, was engineered by Lincoln and thus should be included on the list.

      • Flashy

        Such is from DaveH’s recent publication “Revisionist History and Fractured Fairy Tales”

      • Average Joe

        Speaking of Fairy Tales…..TROLL!

      • DaveH

        Which one of your personalities came up with that slander, Flashman?

      • Flashy

        DaveH..it wasn’t slander … have a nice day.

      • DaveH

        Recess is over?

      • eddie47d

        Okay Dave H and Flashy;enough of the continual name calling. I don’t agree with Dave very often and I do with Flashy yet most of our wars have been False Flag wars and Dave is correct. I believe Iran will be another one.

    • Average Joe

      “Expect another false flag operation against a US target (most likely a soft target) that will infuriate and “unite” the American people in support for waging a war against the responsible party/nation (Iran???).”

      Do you mean like a certain nuclear Aircraft Carrier (USS Enterprise) that is due to be decommissioned in 2013 (hanging out in the Persian Gulf as we speak), a nuclear carrier that must be properly shut down and all nuclear materials disposed of ( at a substantial cost)…which could be more cheaply disposed of in say…the Persian Gulf?
      This would allow for the sinking to be blamed on Iran, while at the same time…make someone else responsible for the clean up of said nuclear material…..What a deal!
      Any bets on this one?

      • Average Joe

        I figure Israel can help us out with this…Just like they did with the USS Liberty…..maybe send a couple of Torpedoes our way so to speak.

      • eddie47d

        Yes Average Joe keep our eye on the prize in how it materializes.Try and stay one step ahead of the False Flag game.

      • Jay

        Dittos, AJ!!!

  • Sirian

    There are who knows how many different factors/players involved in this and it will become of the utmost importance to Obummer, as Mark mentioned, to slap us into a war with Iran. Why? Once again, it would be to his “political” advantage which in turn would push us closer and closer to not only his, but several side players – Soros for instance – profit and or reach for their NWO. Are the banks involved on the periphery? Without doubt they too have their hands in the widespread variety of political/ideological moves such as this. Have they not shown their hands before? If in doubt, research history a bit – it’s quite easy to find.

    • Flashy

      Sirian…easy to smack talk ain’t it? OK what would you do? Realistically … what would you do?

      • Sirian

        Logical reasoning, critical thinking based on historical/present day facts is not smack talk – far from. Realistically, shall I return that question to you – what would you do? Obviously it is of no consequence to you as to what I may think would be the best path to follow. For without doubt you would gleefully discount it as nothing more than mere fantasy. Is that not rather evident in your usual day to day responses Flashy? Quite so. With that, enjoy your un-biased sources of information, Al Jazeera especially, and have a good day.

      • Flashy

        It was a serious inquiry. Too bad you displayed you don’t have an alternative.

        I’ve read enough of your posts in the past to realize logic and critical thinking isn’t a strong point of yours, but in this situation…I asked. Given the iranian position in the past, and given the situation today…what would you have done differently?

        Or…are you just spouting off as usual and, as usual, don’t have a clue?

      • DaveH

        As usual, Flashman, the person with very little personal integrity, chooses to Personally attack a commenter in lieu of providing a logical rebuttal.
        Flashman lies, slanders, condones theft, advocates violence to those with opposing points of view, plagiarizes other peoples’ writings as if they were his own, and promotes the vilest of all forms of slavery — the draft.
        Ask me to prove any of the above, Flashman.

      • Flashy

        DaveH…you forgot that accfording to FF, I also send out erroneous links on protection from zombies.

        I asked Srian to walk his talk. You have a problem with that? If I were Mr. Livingston, I’d be telling you “Strike One” …

      • DaveH

        The difference, Flashman? I tell the truth.

      • Sirian

        Very well Flashy,
        Since you must know what I would do in relation to the present situation with Iran, alright, hows this. . . by means of covert internal Iranian information sources, seek out when the next full meeting of the parliament, President, Ayatollah present also, will take place. Upon further confirmation of said date/time launch three cruise missiles. Each with the largest warhead – non nuclear – as possible. In effect, elimination of the primary heads of the theocratic regime. With there being no other attacks initiated it would then be left up to the people of Iran to reorganize and establish a new government. It has been openly displayed and known for quite some time that the Iranian people are no longer pleased with the government that is directing their lives. Remember the last election that was rigged to the hilt? From an action of this type it would allow them much more room to do so than what they are restricted from doing now. With the Iranian totalitarian theocracy eliminated – total killed held to a minimal number in reality – this in turn would surface as a side financial blockade to various radical Islamic fronts. Hamas, Hezbollah, Muslim Brotherhood (Egypt-Libya-Iraq-Syria) etc. that are relentlessly pushing to reestablish a Caliphate. In simple terms, a return to the Ottoman Empire which was eliminated in 1923. As to that being their ultimate objective what may come afterwards from an action such as this is unknown. Final outcomes are in that area until it has arrived. Even so, with the various proxies I mentioned above being set back, limited, Turkey also could be minimized from the political/religious direction they are presently moving. May I assume you are aware of this? Unfortunately, that too shall remain an unknown yet in reality the political/religious maneuvers Turkey’s president has been making recently draws light to them also, does it not? Would there possibly be any Russian or Chinese rhetoric to follow – obviously so. Possible threats of actions against us – very doubtful. Money is the main obstruction to both of them insofar as taking any action against us. Their economies and their own military buildups are far more important. They would toss plenty of rhetoric but as long as they can maintain a close arms customer they will go no further than that. So, overall, no full scale undeclared war which is to obvious as to the shadowed political intent that lies within. Let the Iranian people determine what they feel is best for themselves. I have a strong feeling that there would be a very strong resurgence by part of the Iranian people to return to a much more limited government – not a theocracy. The same may occur within other peoples of that region. In the end it only seems plausible that actions of this sort will also eliminate the possibility of Iran becoming a Mid-East Region Nuclear Armed Threat to the World. Are you in support of returning to a new “Cold War”? Yet keep in mind, if they have nuclear weapons they would never hesitate to use them. To them, martyrdom is sought without question. Presumedly, you are also concerned with what Israel may do? Subjective determinations are open. Only they know for sure. Would we support Israel? In my view, yes, no question in supporting them whatsoever. What other ally do we honestly have in that region of the world? Turkey is becoming much more questionable in that regard. Insofar as whether Obama may support Israel, well, very doubtful. Need I explain that? I don’t think so. As I have posted before, you cut off the head of the snake and the body will die. So, with that I’ll leave it to you. I’ve given you my thoughts on the matter as to what would or could be done to eliminate the overall threat – political/religious – in the Mid-East. If you wish to play with what I’ve said, which isn’t unusual, then please do so. You asked for an answer, you now have it.

      • FreedomFighter

        You did Flash, they eat brains remember?

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkmS6JrWSPU&feature=related

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • Sirian

        OK Flashy, it’s now your turn to state what you would do. I asked that before, and so far I see no response. And you question my integrity? Really?

      • Flashy

        Sirian..thank you. i did later on post what i would do if i had any say in the matter. I won’t argue with you…you gave a well thought out statement. I do disagree with some, especially the wait until all their leaders get together stance as well as knocking off leaders when war is not officially declared as well as being the aggressor without warning … but that’s what issues are debated over.

        For the most part, I agree with you re; Turkey

        I don’t know about Russia and China’s reactions. i think it won’t be money which will keep them on the sidelines more than they’ll have an Ace to play when it comes time for their turn in expanding their spheres of influence.

        I think I ouched on most of the remainder in my other post.

        Thanx. It was refreshing to read.

      • Flashy

        FF .. I know. that’s why I was surprised when such wasn’t included on DaveH’s list of crimes. Awhile ago, my daughter sent me a list of the types of zombies and effective measures against each type. i’ll see if i can locate it.

        we know one thing for certain. In case of zombie attacks, you and i will still be ones continuing debating on this site (provided Mr. Livingston takes the necessary preventative measures )

      • eddie47d

        Good comments Sirian yet Pakistan has had nukes for decades and the same with North Korea. The USA,the Saudis and Israel threaten Iran so who is to say they don’t have a right to defend themselves? Even small tactical strikes against Iran to kill Ahmadinejad would damage Mosques and create sectarian violence,such as it did in Iraq. Iran can be mischievous for they were caught in Thailand yesterday ready to bomb the Israeli consulate and should be monitored. They are now doing what Gaddafi encouraged (bombings) and that can be a biggest threat than for them having nukes.

      • DaveH

        Flashman admits his Ignorance:
        FreedomFighter says “You did Flash, they eat brains remember?”
        Flashman says “we know one thing for certain. In case of zombie attacks, you and i will still be ones continuing debating on this site”.

        Lol. I doubt that FreedomFighter appreciates you lumping him with yourself, Flashman. I’m sure I will have to explain that one to Flashman, but the rest of you will get it.

      • Average Joe

        Don’t feed the TROLL!….if he gets hungry enough, he will search for food elsewhere.

  • http://www.c-c-c.ws Charles Hanna

    I share some interesting experiences with John Myers, including the oil industry and my current involvement with a marble quarry in the Dominican Republic. Maybe that’s why we agree that the tyrannical False Flag incidents are not in the process of slowing down … unless we get Ron Paul in office.

  • https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1650589057 Jeff Chiacchieri

    We have been drumming up support for war for how long now? When Eisenhower ended the war he inherited he avoided another and left Office with his now famous warning of the Military Industrial Complex who at that time had a “vested” interest in a very long cold war! We didn’t listen then, and it still has not sunk in! Leaving out the horrific fiscal policies and social disease destroying America for the last several decades, fast forward to the last 2 decades and can anyone tell me what we actually got out of the following?

    Under Bush one we were involved in Panama, attacked Iraq, liberated Kuwait, put forces in Saudi Arabia, and set up the events leading to the massacre Black Hawk Down.

    Under Clinton we invaded Haiti, bombed Serbia for 3 months, and meddled in Bosnia.

    Under Bush 2 we declared North Korea, Iraq, and Iran the axis of evil, invaded Afghanistan, told the ENTIRE world we would maintain military supremacy of the globe. And called it a crusade for “democracy” with demonstrations in Serbia, Ukraine, Georgia and Lebanon.

    Under Obama we doubled our forces in Afghanistan, have drone strikes in Pakistan, and launched a war on Libya.

    Is the World better off? And are we not less respected, less powerful, less secure then we were in 1991? Will enough of the people ever awaken enough to understand the globalist’s ideology? When will the foreign policy elites stop with their empire games? It’s one of the engines driving us into bankruptcy. Public understanding of the globalist ideology is required to save what is left of this republic! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

  • Capitalist at Birth

    This sites constant promotion of Ron Paul has become boring. To believe that the Iranians are not stupid is like believing in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and Tooth Fairy. The Iranians have expressed the desire and intention of destroying Western Civilization. What are you missing, Mr. Myer?

    • Jay

      Another mindless sponge for western propaganda! If your only source is western media, how balanced can your perspective be? A better question, how strong is your faith in your church of propaganda? Is it possible that your own, may be lying to you? Legitimate questions, don’t you think?

      • CP

        Jay, go study some history, and not just the rightwing BS that passes for same. Here you have a group of religious leaders whose whole aim is to convert the whole world to their nasty version of Islam, and you think they are nothing to worry about. Son, you have been sitting in that right wing springwater too long, and your brain is shriveling up.

      • John

        And in the US and Vatican you have leaders trying to convert the world into a nasty version of christian superstition… so, where is the difference? Are you aware that many of our soldiers call them self gods warriors believing they are the new crusades? That comes from my brother in law a courier military right now in Afghanistan…again…

      • Flashy

        Another sound reason for the draft..keep the military civilian based and not allow a professional ‘elitism’ to foster and become established.

      • ChristyK

        Can you explain the difference between the draft and slavery? Both are forcing someone to work for someone else with no choice to leave on pain of death. If we really need to defend ourselves, Americans will volunteer. If all the government wants to do is “make war”, then those who disagree with this policy should not be forced to participate against their will.

      • Flashy

        Sure…

        The draft as i suggested…two years military or three years civilian CCC type … there would be that choice, is not slavery. It’s two things. one is payment for being a membr of the society. It’s a return to JFK’s calling of doing something for your country. It’s paid, and there are skills taught/learned. And…afterwards, a subsidized education at a college or trade school.

        The second is it prevents a military from being too pure, too professional. It prevents a military from having a “we” versus “them” (us) mindset. The seperation between civilian and military does not become a sharp, defined edge.

        And there’s a third. It brings the entire nation into the conversation because it will impact evryone. Just as there is danger from the military of a “we” versus “them” mindset, the opposite is true. It’s not as impactive if your blood isn’t at risk. The civilians have a stake in the matter, and i believe they’d want to have more of a say and pay more attention.

        A few months ago, I read a study which gave results from polling both the military offer corps and the civilian on the street. I was amazed. The military officer corp was far more against a draft than the civilians. Blew me away until i read the commentary. Seems the major objection from the military OC was they didn’t want the civilians “mucking things up”.

        That was when I went from a strong “possible” in considering a draft, to a firm “heck yes!”.

      • TML

        “The draft as i suggested…two years military or three years civilian CCC type … there would be that choice, is not slavery”

        A military draft is still force, regardless of compensation and term limits. While you’re reasoning in this matter is sound in regards to why you think everyone (civilian’s) should become more involved (which I don’t disagree), I could never support something that would force them against their will. The ends, do not justify the means.

      • DaveH

        CP says “Here you have a group of religious leaders whose whole aim is to convert the whole world to their nasty version of Islam”.
        Hmmm, what would happen if we replaced the word “Islam” with “Americanism”?

        Beauty (and nastiness) is in the eyes of the beholder. Here is the story of one man who learned that Beauty was not so Beautiful:
        http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-big-screen-documentary-exposes-pat-tillman-cover-up.html

      • Jay

        CP states: Jay, go study some history, and not just the rightwing BS that passes for same.

        JAY: CP,i have, studied history, you know, the fabricated version from our fabulous education system. Of course, i didn’t realize what a fabulous re-write that was until i exited the system, and began studying it from various perspectives, and authors, asking myself; why are there such discrepancies, and why so many different versions? Why do you think that is, CP?

        CP states: Here you have a group of religious leaders whose whole aim is to convert the whole world to their nasty version of Islam, and you think they are nothing to worry about.

        Jay: CP, and here, we have a group of money, and power hungry, fanatics, bankers, the military-industrial-complex, right-wing and left-wing wackos, every special interest group that you can shake a stick at, religious nuts, crime syndicates, communists, socialists, fascists, who seem the only ones, constantly, and for eons, invading their neighbors, and now, hell-bent on converting all of the middle-east to their version of democracy and hypocritical religion, while at the same time pointing their self-righteous finger at Iran, whom, btw, has yet to invade anyone. It seems to me CP, the only religious fanatics who seem dedicated to converting the whole world to their version of democracy/religion, is the WEST!!! Yeah, CP, if i lived in the middle-east, i would certainly be worried about the religious loons, right here, in the West!

        CP: Son, you have been sitting in that right wing springwater too long, and your brain is shriveling up.

        Jay: Pops, interesting you should mention shriveled brains! It appears you may still be in possession of some, awareness!

    • DaveH

      We have only the word of our MSM for that. And as those with the blinders off know — their word isn’t too reliable. But even if true, could anybody blame the Iranians for hating us? If Brazil was practicing Imperialistic Hegemony in our country would we love them?

      • DaveH

        Here is just one example of US Leadership meddling with Iran:
        http://www.iranchamber.com/history/coup53/coup53p1.php

      • DaveH

        And don’t forget the 8-year war between Iraq and Iran (1980-1988) in which the US took Iraq’s side.

      • John

        and supplied them with enough chemical weapons to sterilize most of the mid east.

      • eddie47d

        Thanks Ronald Reagan!!! Bull pucky! Look out Obama I may be saying the same thing about you if you spread death and destruction courtesy of the USA. America has become the world’s war machine and is the devil we supposedly despise. Tojo and Hitler may have been on steroids but we’ve had our own turkey shoots. Vietnam,Central America and Iraq. None have brought us a lick of respect!

    • TML

      “This sites constant promotion of Ron Paul has become boring.”

      The article only mentions Ron once, so I think this would hardly qualify as a promotion, although I must say… DUH… he’s the only Presidential Candidate that is calling for no more war.

      “To believe that the Iranians are not stupid is like believing in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and Tooth Fairy.”

      To believe that you are smart is like believing in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy.

      “The Iranians have expressed the desire and intention of destroying Western Civilization.”

      If so, can you please cite the source(s) where Iranians have expressed a desire, and intent, to destroy Western Civilization outside their own country, rather than just regurgitating sound bites? I challenge thee

      • Capitalist at Birth

        I have more important things to do, than debate anyone who regularly writes on this site. There are many books published on this very topic. If you care to do your OWN research, you might become as enlightened as me. Otherwise you choose ignorance over knowledge. I will not assist you in your endeavor. You are on your own.

      • Average Joe

        In other words, you have nothing relevant to add to the conversation….you just came by to TROLL?
        Or is it …that you may possibly learn something from the experience and that scares you?
        Certainly, it couldn’t be that you are just plain… too lazy to do the work….or incapable….could it?

        ANSWER: D. All of the above.

      • DaveH

        Crony Capitalist knows his ideas are indefensible, so he takes the easy way out.

      • John

        lol, the same cop out as always… at least he did not declare that this site is boring and he will leave to read a book lol…

      • TML

        I will take that as, you can’t cite a source which supports your assertion.

        Thank you.

      • kkflash

        Try and make a cogent argument against any of Ron Paul’s stated political positions, and back your position with facts. I dare you. I give you warning though. You’re opting to be the underdog in a debate you can’t win, because Ron’s positions are correct, according to the supreme law of the land, the Constitution. To disagree with him is to take a position against that Constitution and the principles on which this country was founded. If that’s what you wish to do, then you can’t also call yourself a patriotic American without proving you’re a liar.

      • DaveH
  • Flashy

    “How can another President, this one a Democrat, proclaim two additional enemies just as America has pulled out of one war (Iraq) and has announced the pullout of another (Afghanistan)? Yet the groundwork is being laid. Iran is a threat to world peace.”

    So all the attacks on this site by various posters (and correct me if I err, and a few articles as well) on president Obama for being “soft’ on iran were…faked hype or in the alternative, born of ignorance?

    Given we are so dependent upon oil imports, as is the industrial world, we must be concernd with maintaining a free flow of oil from the ME. The screams and rants of those who desire to block and impede any effort to wean ourselves off the old energy emphasize this concern. If we step forward into the future, move into the 21st century with an energy independence leading the world out of the old and restrictive energy base, we would be able to say ‘do whatever.”

    Buut very attempt is met with vocal cries based in ignornce and a seeming willingness to continue to enrich the sheikdoms and Big Oil.

    Is an Iran with nuclear weapons a national security threat?

    Would a president be failing in his oath to not begin to prepare and study all options?

    Would a president be failing by not utilizing all efforts -diplomatic, economic, and military – to set up a proper response and defensive posture?

    This morning we have the news of US aircraft carriers going through the Straits of Hormuz. Anyone with an IQ above 10 knows Israel will attack Iran’s production facilities the moment Iran can produce weapons grade material. With the fleet movement, the message is the time is getting near. Would you criticize the President if he did not have the fleet in place?

    Using Iraq as an example is erroneous. By every account, Bush/Cheney lied to us. They lied to the world. Those demonstrating against the lies were castigated and denigrated…many such denigrations coming from the posters on this site. Sammy said ‘come look” and opened up. The UN inspectors were given free acess anywhere they chose. Bush said ‘we know where they [WMDs] are’, but refused to tell the UN teams. he was lyin’…and ya’ll swallowed it.

    Here…Iran won’t allow inspections.

    OK folks..what would you do?

    • cawmun cents

      I would pray that our leaders wont involve us in another war.
      -CC.

      • Flashy

        CC…I agree and would add not only our leaders, but other’s leaders as well.

      • FreedomFighter
      • eddie47d

        War! What Is It Good For: Absolutely Nothing!! Thanks again Freedom Fighter.

    • http://www.motorcars Brad

      Flashy I dont trust any of them and they are all liers. Everything the MSM spew out at us is BS. They may have moved the weapons back in 2002. Do you really know? Does anyone really know past the greed hungy elites? It is what it is and YOU my friend can do nothing about it. But I know one thing is for sure you cannot spend your way out of debt and all this BS overseas is just a ploy to take or eyes of the devastation the President is putting the country through with class warefare and lies to the American people.

      • Flashy

        Class warfare is the GOP and the TP trademark, didn’t you get the memo?

        As to “can’t spend … out of debt”, such is a mistaen impression oft times the death knell of companies. To get out of debt, and maintain a healthy structure, one has to continue to spend, and ensure such spending equates into increased revenues. taken with sound, wise, cost controls and cutting measures, such is the only way a company can ease from debt and maintain a viable structure and entity.

      • Robert

        Yesterday I asked Flushy if he was a natural born idiot or was it just a well polished act. Today I know for sure. He’s a natural born idiot.

      • Flashy

        You disagree with my comments, opinions, and renditions? Feel free to counter. But you won’t, because you can’t. LOL

      • kkflash

        For the sake of argument, let’s say your philosophy were true, and that you can spend your way out of debt, as long as the spending produce a return on investment. How does that bear any resemblance at all to what Obama and the Congress has done since 2008?

      • Flashy

        KKF …

        When the administration took office, we had two wars not on the “official” books, losing over 700,000 jobs a month with a long line of already lost jobs, a financial system broken with no cash nor credit being given, major manufacturers about to go belly up and needing cash, a housing market in freefall and we were on the abyss of a Depression. Toss in a GOP which placed politics and the wealthy and big Corporate elite over that of nation.

        The ‘company” (in very loose terms) was hemorraging badly. Can anyone with reasonable expectations see a reversal in a short time period?

        Oh, and toss in the financial crisis Europe has been going through which adds to our economic woes.

        If i remember correctly, the budget proposed last week by President Obama is less than that of the last year of the Bush budget. Employment numbers in the private sector has grown for almost two years now. Public sector jobs have been less each month for about the same period of time.

        We have stopped the hemoragging, and from the economic signs we are headed back…slowly, but we have signs of a recovery.

        Raise revenues with increased employment in the private sector, cut subsidies to Ag etc, reduce military spending, and cut into the welfare sysem for the eilte, target the areas which will show a high, long term return (infrastructure and new cutting edge non oil energy, heavy manufacturing) and those areas which can be see spending, but in reforming…i.e. Health, SSI etc.

        In other words…exactly as is proposed and hopefully with a GOP which is more willing to place Nation and Country first.

        And no..i’m not a shill for the administration…i just happen to agree with the path being pursued.

      • kkflash

        Flashy, as usual you either lack facts or distort them. This time you sound like Obama’s Budget Director in their press conference on Monday trying to still blame their failures on prior administration, while continuing to promote policies that have made the problems far worse. We’re no longer buying the finger-pointing, nor the phony claims of progress.

        “If i remember correctly, the budget proposed last week by President Obama is less than that of the last year of the Bush budget.”
        Well, you DON’T remember correctly: Under Bush the annual budget deficit decreased each year from 2004-07 while he worked with a Republican Congress, falling from -$413B to -$160B. Upon Congressional control being assumed by the Democrats in 2007, the 2008 budget deficit ballooned to $458B, and reached $1.4T in 2009. That was the last budget passed by Democrats in the Bush era, totalled $3.5T in spending (much higher than Bush had proposed)and included $800B in bailouts. Obama’s 2013 proposed budget is $3.8T WITHOUT any bailouts, and a projected deficit of $900B, using his rosy 3% economic growth assumption, which is .8% higher than even the FED would have us believe. His assumption is nearly double the 1.7% GDP growth that most economists are using. In other words, he’s lying through his teeth and spending $1T more each year than when Bush left office. Check out the facts here:
        http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/

        So, on to the second part of the question. Has that massive deficit spending increase produced any positive results?

        “Employment numbers in the private sector has grown for almost two years now.”
        The truth is there are many more unemployed now than in January of 2009 when BO took office. The non-institutionalized labor force has increased from 234.7M to 242.2M, while the number employed has dropped from 140.4M to 139.9M. While BO likes to talk about the massaged UNemployment rate, the unemployed pay no taxes. The numbers that matter are the number of employed, and even more importantly the % of employed, because the rest are benefitting from society without paying taxes. Alas, on both of these scores, the numbers continue to drop, from 72% in Jan2009 to 69.6% in 2012. Not coincidentally, the last year in which the %employed increased was the last year of Republican Congress. You can see the numbers here:
        http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab1.htm

        Obama’s budget, submitted last week, projects a total federal debt in 10 years of nearly $27T, which does not include unfunded pension liabilities, or deficits in Medicare or Social Security. By his own admission, his plan will increase our debt by more than $11T from its current unsustainable position. The annual interest on the debt 10 years from now is projected by BO to be $850B. These are his numbers, using his plan, which is an admitted total failure economically.

      • DaveH

        Flashman says “To get out of debt, and maintain a healthy structure, one has to continue to spend [Where does that money come from? More Debt?], and ensure such spending equates into increased revenues [How did the debt occur in the first place? Spending of course]. taken with sound, wise, cost controls and cutting measures, such is the only way a company can ease from debt and maintain a viable structure and entity”.
        If sound, wise cost controls will reverse the debt, then why weren’t those sound, wise cost controls implemented prior to the incurring of the debt? Imagine how much easier it is to not incur the debt in the first place as opposed to the added burden of servicing the costs of the debt after it is incurred?
        If people can’t live within their means now without debt, how are they going to live within their means later when they have the burden of debt service added to their monthly payments?

      • Flashy

        DaveH, you said nothing. Go back and stay a self-proclaimed “expert” in economics.

      • DaveH

        So, basically, Flashdunce is trying to tell us that if a company (or country) is badly managed and as a result builds up a crushing debt, we should lend them more money in the hopes that the bad managers are going to run the company (or country) so much better next time that they are able to pay off the crushing debt.
        Yeah right.

      • Jay

        Flashy, sometimes you’re just a damn fool! When it comes to economics, DaveH, will eat you for lunch. You’re not fooling anyone, Flash, so stop trying to over-compensate for deficiencies, with personal attacks, and insults! No one will criticize for admitting you are in over your head. Why heck, you never know, some people may even lend you a hand-up!

      • Flashy

        DaveH…where did i state to maintain the current management plans while trying to increase revenues? If there were factors beyond the control of management, or if the resulting problems were a cause of bad management…that wasn’t the question.

        The question was, can one spend out of debt. The answer is simple. Yes. It can also spend itself into BK. But to made a bald assertion one cannot spend out of debt is ridiculous. In many cases, that’s the only way the company has a hope to survive.

        Now go back to your window, the next car is driving up to get their order

    • Bill

      If the inspectors in Iraq were given free access to look for WMD’s then the newspapers and other media were lying to us, as the reports were that they would deny access except to some designated places. Ask Syria who has the WMD now? They were taken out of the country because they were granted the time to do so. Believe no one, not me, not the govt. not other people and especially don’t believe yourself. You don’t know the truth because you were told the truth. You will believe the truth only if it matches up with what you already believe. To believe otherwise you would have to do a lot more homework. Things are what they are and not what someone tell you they are because they are in the same boat as you trying to get you to believe the same lies that they believe. Its all nonsense, but apparently people will die telling you their “truthful” lies.

  • Patriotic nut

    If we are to believe this article then we must believe that every administration has lied to the American people for years on end. I, personally, cannot go to Iran and talk to their leaders to see what the real story is, and if I could, would they be honest and forthright about their intentions. Publicly they have said time and again how they wished to wipe both Israel and the U.S. off the face of the earth. Now they may wish to, but, will they ever be capable of it? I doubt it. If per chance they ever were, I have little doubt that they would try and fail, resulting in the untimely death of Iran as a country. Many in Israel and the U.S. would die from such an attack but the retribution would be swift and horrible for them. I don’t believe that the leaders there would care as long as they escaped injury.

    • Jay

      PN: Publicly they have said time and again how they wished to wipe both Israel and the U.S. off the face of the earth.

      Not Israel, PN, Zionism. Research Zionism; and while you’re at it, research anti-antisemitism, and you will shocked to learn that most in our current administration, including Israel, are anti-Semitic!!!

      • FreedomFighter

        When you understand WAR is a political solution instituted by politicians and carried out by the common man, we should put the leaders in a arena an let them kill themselves to decide the issue:

        Universal Soldier

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=to5d4p4aYiQ

        Im no fan of starting up WWIII, the entire world will lose, but if the lunatics in charge to it, fire all them NUKES, chems, bios and get it over quick.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • eddie47d

        Will Peace make a come back or will the Universal Soldier continue to accept his fate and the lies from the Elites.

      • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

        Jay,
        I have being saying that for years.Zionism is not only a dangerous threat,it historically has been behind every revolution,including the Russian and the bloody French revolution.Check it out,look up what Rabbi Ravage had wrote. You will be horrified. Good post,Jay

      • clyde crow jr

        you and jay have clearly dont know what your talking about. zionist believes that jews have the right to come back home to their homeland isreal. they are a peaceful org.in fact pakistan is stealing isreal land anyway their isnt such a thing called pakistan country. they are transplant muslims and terroist.if you read the bible you get all the answers you need about this.instead posting things that are not true and make you sound like your stupid.

      • Tom W.

        I clyde as a Christian Zionist believe that the rebirth of the nation of Israel in 1948 was the literal fulfillment of Bible prophecy concerning Israel in the Last Days, how that God will in the Last Days regather His chosen people (The Jews) back into the land that He gave to their forefathers (The Land of Canaan, Palestine, the Holy Land) where He will deal with them there, whether or not they’re saved in Jesus Christ, the seven year Tribulation will be how God will deal with the unsaved Jews leading up to Armegedon. It is our job as Christians to support the Jews and help lead them to salvation, for we know that the end of this senerio will be the 1000 yr. reign of Christ! Hallelujah!!! There is not one Bible prophecy that has to be fulfilled before the Rapture can happen, as a matter of fact, I believe that it could happen at any moment! ARE YOU READY!!!

      • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

        Jay,

        Also.Jewish World Government
        http://www.pgorg.com/ – Cached
        Jan 6, 2005 … To quote the words of The Jewish Philospher, Rabbi Marcus Eli Ravage from an article for The Century Magazine, Vol. 115, January 1928, No.

      • Jay

        You are absolutely correct, coal! What puzzles me is that, when you bring up the topic of Zionism, the nay-Sayers won’t even take a minute to investigate it, and always responding with; “You guys don’t understand what’s going on!” And another thing, the same nay-Sayers, swear up and down, froth at the mouth, while pointing-out the corruption gushing-forth from our political system, yet, from the same source, will swallow, hook-line and sinker, all the propaganda with respect to the middle-east, and in particular, big-bad Iran. Whom, btw, is rich in resources, and more then self-sufficient. Which is more that can be said of the US. Having scarcely an industry to speak of, and stubbornly refuses to harvest its own resources! Goodness gracious!

      • Tom W.

        Then why don’t you wrap your bath towel around your head and go join the Ayatollah’s Jay, I’m sure they’ll welcome ya with open arms!

      • Jay

        I might just do that, Tom, and while i am at it, I’ll put in a good word for ya! I think I have an extra towel laying around. Btw, what size is your head?

      • Tom W.

        7 & 3/4″!!! The only thing that i’ll need a towel for is to turn it into a “cracker” to chase you Ayatollah’s around with it! POW!!!

      • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

        clyde crow jr and Jay:
        The Holocaust Hoax.Hitler was a Zionist ploy in order to create the Zionist State of Israel.Clyde you are wrong,Jay you are right. Jay keep up the good research.Here are more articles that proves you are right,past and present.
        A Comprehensive History of Zionist Crimes
        http://www.takeourworldback.com/zionistcrimes.htm -
        Nov 26, 2011 … But Zionism did not stop with the creation of Israel in 1948. … In order to throw people off the scent, a theory about “reptilians” would be ….. In 1933, World Jewry demanded that Hitler be replaced, and German Jews be ….. mass murder to satisfy their lust for power and riches, are labelled as “right-wing” …

    • Gordon in Texas

      You have to understand their beliefs and their resolve in achieving their goals. The leaders of Iran have said publically that they are ready to sacrifice themselves and their people to achieve such a goal. To them, this is honor and just. Don’t try to understand their way of thinking while thinking like an American. It will not compute.

      • Flashy

        Personally, I don’t think they’re all that hot to go down with the ship if you catch the drift there. Push comes to shove, my guess is they’ll be heading for what they perceive is a safe place to rise the storm if they attack and retaliation is forthcoming.

        Most psycho’s who are power hungry and have a religious holy man complex legitimize hiding in that they will be needed to rebuild the world, and who else but they to do it correctly?

      • Jay

        Flashy: Most psycho’s who are power hungry and have a religious holy man complex legitimize hiding in that they will be needed to rebuild the world, and who else but they to do it correctly?

        You have an amazing understanding of our current, and previous, administration(s), Flashy. There may be hope for you yet…

      • Tom W.
      • DaveH

        Gordon,
        You say “Don’t try to understand their way of thinking while thinking like an American”.
        I say “Don’t try to understand the Leaders way of thinking in the US”.
        As John said we dominate the world in extra-national military presence, even though only one of the many countries we have presence in has remotely attacked the United States. And we don’t even know for sure that the justification for attacking Afghanistan wasn’t a False Flag event. But we do know that even if it wasn’t a False Flag, it was an attack generated by the hatred that our Leaders have fomented with their meddling in the Middle East.
        For those who scream that it couldn’t have been a False Flag because our Government wouldn’t kill 3 thousand of its own people to manipulate us, I offer you the example of WWII where indeed our Government sacrificed 2400 military personnel at Pearl Harbor to justify FDR getting us further into WWII:
        http://mises.org/books/pearl_harbor_greaves.pdf

        Virtually every war we’ve gotten involved in, since and including the Civil War up to at least the Vietnam War, has been the result of a False Flag event engineered to sway the opinions of the Propagandized citizens.

      • DaveH

        Fool us once, shame on them. Fool us twice, three times, four times, five times and probably more — shame on us:
        http://modernsurvivalblog.com/current-events-economics-politics/false-flag-events/

      • Flashy

        DaveH….i cannot believe this, but for one time i will justify the going into Afghanistan. Bin laden was there. The Taliban refused to give him up. We went in to take him out. Bush failed because, as in all things, he was incompetent.

        What Bush then did was oust the Taliban in a regime change. Which we never went in for and which changed the Afghan issue ionto war to prevent the Taliban from regaining power…and promptly forgot about bin Laden.

        As to pearl harbor and your charge he was complicit in the attack? Where do you get this stuff from?

        There is little doubt we knew war with Japan was coming. The day we turned off the oil to japan, war was inevitable. Alerts were sent out to the military forces. No one expected Pearl Harbor as a target. Far removed from Japan and the aircraft carrier was still an untested theory of warfare. Yamamoto was a genius, and no one , even the fleet commanders, knew where the targeting was until the flotilla was at sea…and only then via written orders. Complete radio silence.

        The question is why MacArthur was unprepared in the Phillipines? he had ample warning. Ample time. And yet was as undefended as a new born babe.

        I know the fad is to lay blame on FDR for Pearl harbvor. But just as the birther movement, it has no legs to stand on. All hype and wild conjecture going against any standard of sanity and reasoning.

      • DaveH

        I posted the book for anybody to read, Flashman. You see, even though I’m an honest person, I don’t expect people to just take my word for anything.

      • DaveH

        You should try it, Flashman, you will find honesty to be much more productive than lying, fabricating facts, and personally attacking people constantly.

      • Flashy

        true enough. Your posts are a perfect example of what you accuse….

      • eddie47d

        One thing for sure there are no honest wars. Each and everyone have been manipulated and maneuvered to serve someones quest for power. Going to war against Iran will be no different.

      • libertytrain

        flash – picking and choosing which war is ok to him… hmmm. I am so glad you are “honest” with your appraisals as to whom we should take on and whom we shouldn’t and who did the right job as far as your lowly opinion is concerned. Pick and choose -

      • Tom W.

        Flushy NEWSFLASH!!! Osama Bin Laden was discovered in Pakistan living in a compound less than a football field length away from the Pakistani equivilent of West Point!!! And the Pakistani’s expect us to believe that they knew nothing of it! I think that they somehow think that we’re all as gullible as you Flush!

      • Tom W.

        Forget it Dave, the boy is hooked! There’s no helping him, the only option left with dealing with our beloved Flush is like when you’ve laid that load that you’re so proud of, you go looking for a camera so you can send a picture of it to “Hustler” magazine! But there comes a time when you’ve stood there and admired it enough, it’s time to pull the handle!!! Say goodbye Flush!

      • Tom W.

        LT, did ya even notice that the reason he gave for the war in Afghanistan being justified turned out to be untrue?! He was right nextdoor living in somewhat luxury in the country we send more in aid to than any other Muslim coutry!!!

      • Flashy

        Tom…and what does where bin Laden was killed have to do with what i wrote about Bush/Cheney and regime change in Afghanistan?

      • libertytrain

        flash you are consistent with your inconsistencies.

      • Mike in MI

        I doubt, DaveH, we have anything to be concerned about in terms of starting another war. We’re so broke the government couldn’t stage a decent county fair piglet mud-wrassle.

      • DaveH

        Mike,
        The Leaders usually come out on top (unless the people finally get fed-up beyond self-control), so why should they care if they impoverish our country? Witness our very close neighbor — Cuba.

    • TML

      “If we are to believe this article then we must believe that every administration has lied to the American people for years on end.”

      Is that so hard to believe? Do understand that their resentment toward us comes from the United States over-throwing their Democracy through a coup d’état in 1953 and installing a Pro-U.S. dictator which ruled with an iron fist? And the reason they did this was to gain control over Iran’s oil using the pretense fear of communism.

      “Publicly they have said time and again how they wished to wipe both Israel and the U.S. off the face of the earth.”

      This is simply NOT true. This is why it isn’t so hard to believe that the American government lies to us… whether from ignorance between cultures, religious indifference, or special interest.

      Ahmadinejad was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini (the father of the Iranian Revolution in 1979, which took their government back and installed a theocracy) in the specific speech under discussion: what he said was that “the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time.” This doesn’t refer to “wiping Israel off the map” as there is no such idiom in Persian. This suggests that he was referring to the occupying regime, and calls for no military action, but instead says “should” (as in, a wish, a hope) and does not mean “nuking the Israeli land mass from the face of the earth”, as many American’s foolishly swallow.

      And for the record, Iranian’s saying “Death to ‘this or that” is just like saying “Damn ‘this or that” in America. It’s a cultural difference.

      • DaveH

        And the US Leaders were Iraq’s friends until they decided to become Iraq’s enemies. Friendship with the US Leadership is not too bright.

      • DaveH
      • Flashy

        Reagan did send them WMDs … and Cheney was Sammy’s ‘good friend’ for awhile as long as Haliburton raked in the cash.

      • CP

        IRAN? Had a democracy in the early 50′s? Which wine bottle have you been sipping on? Do know it isn’t “liberal ‘kool-aide’”. Iran, like most of the rest of the middle east, was under various shahs, pashahs, and other potentates for most of recent history.

      • John

        CP, please don’t show the world your lack of historical education.
        Fact: Iran had a democratic elected government that the US overthrew and installed the Shah, a despot and dictator directly responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of Iranians. And why did the US do it? Because of oil… the rightfully elected government in Iran did not renew the contracts with British oil and the US oil corporations, and thus cut off access to cheap Iranian oil. That is the only reason. The revolution in the late 70s was the direct result of people being suppressed by a US puppet dictator..sounds familiar…hmm can you say Persian spring?

      • TML

        Indeed their democracy was short lived. After Reza Shah was forced to abdicate following the British/Soviet invasion of WWII, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi came to power in 1941. In 1951, Dr. Mosaddegh was appointed Prime Minister and committed to nationalizing the Iranian petroleum industry controlled by the Anglo-Persian Oil Company.

        Under the leadership of the democratically-elected nationalist movement of Dr. Mohammed Mosaddeq, the Iranian parliament unanimously voted to nationalize the oil industry, which shut out the Anglo-Persian Oil Company.

        The American CIA and British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) funded and led a covert operation to depose Mosaddegh with the help of military forces loyal to the Shah. Despite the high-level coordination and planning, the coup initially failed, causing the Shah to flee to Baghdad, then Rome. After a brief exile in Italy, the Shah returned to Iran, this time through a successful second attempt at a coup.

      • vicki

        Lots of talk but no actual history. Let us look at the history to verify the claims.

        “Raised by a wave of popularity, Mosaddeq showed signs of demagoguery and dictatorial government. When the Shah refused his demand for control of the army forces in 1952, Dr. Mosaddeq resigned. He was reinstated in the face of popular riots as he very probably knew he would be. Next he conducted a national referendum to dissolve parliament. ”
        http://www.mideastweb.org/iranhistory.htm

        So you see the conspiracies of man are a bit more complex then simple “The CIA did it” or “the British did it” or “Its about oil” accusations would allow.

      • TML

        “Lots of talk but no actual history. Let us look at the history to verify the claims.”

        I see no inconsistencies in the information I provided, and the information provided in your link. So I’m not sure of the point you’re trying to make.

      • Bob Marshall

        Good post. I am glad to see some people still do research.

    • Old Henry

      “If we are to believe this article then we must believe that every administration has lied to the American people for years on end.”

      You are catching on Patriotic Nut.

    • ToeTagTunny

      “I don’t believe that the leaders there would care as long as they escaped injury”..

      This is true Pn.. And I’ve come out of my dead like stupor to tell you that we must therefore insure that if they do challenge us that there will be not one of them to escape.. Find them and charge them with war crimes toward us and their own people, THEN hang’um high..!

    • Tom W.

      I’ll say it like this Pn, When I look at a Masonic map Of DC (http://www.cuttingedge.org/n1040.html) I see that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was right, we are the great Satan!!! But I guess that he actually thinks that he’s Mother Teresa!!! Sorry ——, Iran has no one to blame for whatever happens to them but their beloved Ayatollahs! You cannot make peace with anyone who is HELLBENT on your demise!!! I fully take them at their word as to what they want to do to us! And I’m HELLBENT on seeing to it that that doesn’t happen!!!

      • James

        Tom W., Your ignorance of the Bible is showing. At the time of Christ, most of the twelve tribes of Israel weren’t in Palestine and hadn’t been there for centuries. And back when all Israelites were under King David, in Palestine, the Lord told Nathan the prophet to tell King David this (2 Sam, 7:10): “Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime.”
        Since they were in Palestine when this promise was made, this “place for my people” can’t be in Palestine, and if they will “move no more” from this new place, then they would never return to Palestine.

  • John Carey

    Excellent read–on the mark!

    • DaveH

      Ditto that.

      • Daniel-Christopher

        I too agree, hit the nail on the head. Glad there are still some rational people who can see through the B/S handed to us daily.

    • John

      And yet, Iranians are fanatics, they are peaceful if you leave them alone, but they are fanatics and will pull all stops if attacked.
      I.m.h.o., Iran will attack targets inside the US if they are attacked by us. For one simple reason, it’s WAR, they are already under attack, they know they are going down, and thus, they will do their uttermost to take down as many of us as they can manage.They will launch everything they have toward Israel, and as I posted yesterday, I would not be surprised finding out that they use their hundreds of pounds of 20% enriched uranium they have to make dirty bombs… remember, rockets that contain radio active material will still disburse it if blown up by defensive action, it does not burn up. Nothing is preventing them to have a crew in place that will disperse biological warfare materials within US cities. In fact, prayer rugs found along the US Mexican border that display Iranian designs lets me to believe that the enemy is within and ready to strike. The US is woefully unprepared for an biological or chemical attack from within and millions could die before we get it under control. if they release it in an domestic airport, it will spread 100 times faster then the black plaque did in Europe during the dark ages……and the rulers of Iran know it. We know they have the capability to do so, what makes anyone believe they will not? The fear of retribution? Laughable, a people that are being bombed and attacked already does not care about more bombs and more death. I.M.H.O., a war with Iran will not be the easy walk in the park that many people believe it will be… Rome did not take the barbarians serious and relied on the fear of reprisals from it legions…and just look what the end result was. A people that have nothing to loose, don’t fear reprisals, period.

      • http://n/a Scrappy

        I could not have said it better. What you outlined is exactly what I firmly believe. America is not prepared for the ‘kind’ of warfare that will ensue on our soil. The world knows Iran and its leaders cannot be trusted for anything they say or deny; their goal is to destroy America. At times,I also believe that is what our government wants to do….the enemy within. Whether or not war is enacted in this election year, this entire administration needs to be voted out and one elected that will fight to save America and its people.

      • John

        This could be the answer to the puzzle of why the LEOs and the FBI are so concerned about shias in the US. After all, the attackers on 9/11 were Sunnis looking to Saudi Arabia whereas shias look to Iran for leadership.

      • Old Henry

        “And yet, Iranians are fanatics, they are peaceful if you leave them alone, but they are fanatics and will pull all stops if attacked.”

        Sounds like the U.S., or any other nation worth its salt…

      • Old Henry

        Yep John, and if our “government” cannot get them to do it our “government” will do it for them and then blame them so they can steal even more of our liberties, or even completely end our Constitution.

      • Phil

        Iran can attack on US soil in-directly. With support of terrorist groups, aid from Central American countries crossing our southern border. This will be a clandestin attack on our city streets, not direct against the military. The only defense against something like this is the second admendment and the armed citizens. If Obama has his way 2013 will be the year gun confisication starts. After that America will be defenseless. That’s why Japan didn’t attack the west coast, they were afaraid of the armed citizens, not the military. After 2013 we won’t have the military strength or the fuel to fight a major war.

      • Tom W.

        And John, this is the time WE all need to be on our toes!!! If you see something, say something! There are still enough good decent people just like you and me working in government and they’re out for what is right, as a matter of fact, if it wasn’t for them on the front lines guys, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation!!! and as a famous president once said, “We have nothing to fear, but fear itself!” We’re already living under fear! If we weren’t, the TSA would be obsolete!!!

    • Tom W.

      Mr. Myers, are you insinuating that the planned assassination attempt by the Iranians on a Saudi prince right here on US soil was anything but legit?!! You and a couple of your fellow writers seem to think that Mahmoud is just being silly when he says that he wants to wipe us and Israel off the face of the map!!! I for one sir take him completely at his word and have no problem whatsoever with hasting his reunion with his Mahdi!!!

      • Old Henry

        Strange isn’t it TomW, and I know you will agree, that our SOUTHERN border is left completly unlocked…

      • CommonSense4America

        I just saw on the news yesterday that Arizona is trying to get a new law passed that would allow a volunteer militia to patrol their border with Mexico.

      • Marine72

        I am from California and will volunteer to serve a couple of weeks at a time along Arizona’s border to protect us from ALL who do not belong here. Arizona’s only problem will be finding a way to quietly haul the captured illegals to Los Angeles or San Francisco where the murders will be loved to stupidity in the sanctuary of the stupid.

      • Tom W.

        And why is that OH?!! There is no excuse whatsoever for that border to be as wide open as the Great Plains! Explain that one to me OH!!! No matter who has been in the WH, for some reason that border has remained open! You can not tell me that the savings on cheap labor has outweighed the burdens it has created on our system. There is no freakin’ way! So explain that one to me OH! It’s OK, I know that you don’t know either.

      • Tom W.

        What a great training grounds for our new recruits!

      • metalflyer11

        Tom W you live in FEAR??? Stop drinking the Kool Aid. FEAR is what the US Gov wants you to have so you surrender your liberties so they can keep you safe. We need the TSA??? No we need our Constitution back. The Patriot Act and the NDAA completely render the Constitution non existent. Iran or the middle east are not the threat. You are living in the Matrix. Things are not what they seem.

    • Marten, Canadian Libertarian

      Amen

    • Dan Gray

      While I couldn’t agree more with the author’s outrage over the fascist corporate war machine in this country, I am disappointed in his combining facts with fantasy. “Is it possible that George W. Bush and Barack Obama are really pawns to a secret establishment, perhaps a military-industrial complex that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned against? I can only speculate, ” Save your speculations for Vegas, buddy. Barack Obama INHERITED two wars which he has and is winding down. The two military actions he did initiate were to actually get Osama Bin Laden and to tactically support the allied effort that brought down Moamar Qadaffi. These actions cost no American lives and no additional expenditures. What more could you ask of a leader? Barack Obama my be our best president since FDR and we are EXTREMELY fortunate to have him in the whitehouse during these troubling times. Thank you Mr. President!

blog comments powered by Disqus
Bottom