In the Loop

Be it!

Archive for the ‘Bush’ Category

More good news from Seymour Hersh

First watch this video:

Here is the New Yorker article “Preparing the Battlefield” mentioned.  Here is a brief excerpt:

ate last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership. The covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations. They also include gathering intelligence about Iran’s suspected nuclear-weapons program.Clandestine operations against Iran are not new. United States Special Operations Forces have been conducting cross-border operations from southern Iraq, with Presidential authorization, since last year….

Furthermore, here is an interesting interview by teh New Yorker with Seymour Hersh:

There are several things which are interesting (which for example we see in the video), for example the fact that the Democrats are looking on purpose the other way, and accepting the money going to this operation.  Goes to show you how complicit the Democrats are with the war mongering republicans, possibly far worse, since they say one thing and give hope to people and then do the opposite.

on a possibly related news, or at least interesting at the same time as all this, is the Mujadeddin Khalgh demonstrations across Europe (who are proponenets of armed opposition to the current iranian regime), having already been removed from the “terrorist blacklist” by the UK, and well underway in other european countries such as france.

I know i’d said i didnt want to write any more politics, but with SO MUCH good news coming out all at once what can i do?

If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

This is a speech from Ron Paul at the house of representatives in the US, regarding the continual rise of energy cost, and tying it eventually to the situation, the continuous threats by the US and Israel against Iran.  He finally also mentions a bill about ot be passed, which would install sanctions/embargo not unlike what was put against Iraq in the 10 years preceing the illegal invasion in 2003.

While we are spreading this good news, there is this other bill.…now i’m not sure if it is the same bill or another, but here is a taste of what is being proposed:

A US House of Representatives Resolution effectively requiring a naval blockade on Iran seems fast tracked for passage, gaining co-sponsors at a remarkable speed, but experts say the measures called for in the resolutions amount to an act of war [italics added].

H.CON.RES 362 calls on the president to stop all shipments of refined petroleum products from reaching Iran. It also “demands” that the President impose “stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains and cargo entering or departing Iran.”

Analysts say that this would require a US naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz.

Since its introduction three weeks ago, the resolution has attracted 146 cosponsors. Forty-three members added their names to the bill in the past two days.

In the Senate, a sister resolution S.RES 580 has gained co-sponsors with similar speed. The Senate measure was introduced by Indiana Democrat Evan Bayh on June 2. In little more than a week’s time, it has accrued 19 co-sponsors.

It might be the same bill, i’m not sure.  Where is the media coverage of somethign like this? not just in the US, i dont think ANYONE is expecting fair or real media coverage of this in the US. But elsewhere? in Europe? France?

What is also worrisome, is how the democrats are lined up behind this as readily as republicans.  But then again, are we really surprised? Does anyone thing any real change will come, even with a Barak Obama? Not really, at least not me.  did you hear his speech to AIPAC? This new bill has been endorsed by the AIPAC, and all of htis happening a couple of weeks after the AIPAC summit on june 2-4.

We/I can only hope that this nearly inevitable march to war will – somehow – be stopped in its tracks before another step is taken towards this unnecessary and criminal war.

If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

Yes, loopy is back, and he’ll give a full account of the trip, but first this: THE LATE GREAT BILL HICKS about the George Bush (father)’s administration and general ameican politics (warning: strong language). We miss you Bill Hicks

09:53 – April 12, 2007

If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

… filipino “slaves”?

04:49 – July 26, 2007

[tags]embassy, baghdad, US, 592 million dollars, philippines, filipino[/tags]

If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

02:30 – January 28, 2007

If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

An interesting article and video from Think Progress.  It is an interview with one of those hungry neo-cons, Norman Podhoretz.  Here is a very revealing excerpt:

In a new interview, Podhoretz was asked to comment on the possible fallout of the military strikes he advocates. “Well, if we were to bomb the Iranians as I hope and pray we will,” Podhoretz says, “we’ll unleash a wave of anti-Americanism all over the world that will make the anti-Americanism we’ve experienced so far look like a lovefest.”

I find it quite amazing that a man who is wiling to admit such a fact, can still continue to advocate such a thing.  But that’s just me.

On a completely seperate and more amusing note, here is a ‘map’  from STRANGE MAPS.  Each country is represented by teh american State with the same overall GDP.  If you are curious, here is teh original blog post with more info:  Ironically, IRAN is Alabama!

If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

  • Filed under: Bush, Iran, Media, US, politics
  • Finally i’ve been able to find the video of Darren Jordan’s interiew with Seyour Hersh. This was on Al Jazeera English last week. I wish Hersh didn’t have such a good track record as an investigative journalists, because there’s not much in what he says that would give an iranian (or anyone opposed to war) much hope. Enjoy:

    07:08 – March 04, 2007
    06:05 – March 04, 2007

    If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

    Invesigative journalist Seymour Hersh is back with another article, detailing the ominious steps the Bush Administration is taken in their upcoming war with Iran.

    Just a brief excerpt:

    To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

    and then, more concretely,

    Still, the Pentagon is continuing intensive planning for a possible bombing attack on Iran, a process that began last year, at the direction of the President. In recent months, the former intelligence official told me, a special planning group has been established in the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, charged with creating a contingency bombing plan for Iran that can be implemented, upon orders from the President, within twenty-four hours. [emphasis added]

    He details the concern of mainly the Saudi’s, if the americans actually invade iran, fearing that they would be found guilty by other arab states because of their very close ties to the US; and how they wuold prefer the israelis to be the ones who do the attacking.

    The Saudi said that, in his country’s view, it was taking a political risk by joining the U.S. in challenging Iran: Bandar is already seen in the Arab world as being too close to the Bush Administration. “We have two nightmares,” the former diplomat told me. “For Iran to acquire the bomb and for the United States to attack Iran. I’d rather the Israelis bomb the Iranians, so we can blame them. If America does it, we will be blamed.”

    In the past year, the Saudis, the Israelis, and the Bush Administration have developed a series of informal understandings about their new strategic direction. At least four main elements were involved, the U.S. government consultant told me. First, Israel would be assured that its security was paramount and that Washington and Saudi Arabia and other Sunni states shared its concern about Iran.

    Second, the Saudis would urge Hamas, the Islamist Palestinian party that has received support from Iran, to curtail its anti-Israeli aggression and to begin serious talks about sharing leadership with Fatah, the more secular Palestinian group. (In February, the Saudis brokered a deal at Mecca between the two factions. However, Israel and the U.S. have expressed dissatisfaction with the terms.) [emphasis added]

    The third component was that the Bush Administration would work directly with Sunni nations to counteract Shiite ascendance in the region.

    Fourth, the Saudi government, with Washington’s approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria. The Israelis believe that putting such pressure on the Assad government will make it more conciliatory and open to negotiations. Syria is a major conduit of arms to Hezbollah. The Saudi government is also at odds with the Syrians over the assassination of Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese Prime Minister, in Beirut in 2005, for which it believes the Assad government was responsible. Hariri, a billionaire Sunni, was closely associated with the Saudi regime and with Prince Bandar. (A U.N. inquiry strongly suggested that the Syrians were involved, but offered no direct evidence; there are plans for another investigation, by an international tribunal.)

    As usual Hersh gives incredible details through his many contacts, as he details clandestine agreements between the various factiosn such as sinior’s government and the US, efforts to under Nasrallah’s Hezbollah, and so forth.

    The article is long and detailed as usual. Read it.

    If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

    Here is a list of interesting short articles by various specialists done by Harper’s Magazine as part of an online forum on whether the US will engage Iran in military action:

    This includes commentaries by Richard Norton, professor of international relations at Boston University; Wayne White, an adjunct scholar with Washington’s Middle East Institute, was deputy director of the State Department’s Office of Analysis for the Near East and South Asia until March 2005; and  Bahman Baktiari who is the director of academic and research programming at the University of Maine’s William S. Cohen Center for International Policy and Commerce

    This includes commentaries by Milt Bearden who is an author and film consultant. A former senior CIA officer, he served as station chief in Pakistan from 1986 until the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989; A former CIA official, who asked to remain unnamed. He was stationed in the Persian Gulf during the first Gulf War and served in Iraq after the 2003 invasion; and Frank Anderson worked for the CIA from 1968 until 1995. He served three tours of duty in the Middle East as an agency station chief, headed the Afghan Task Force (1987-1989), and was chief of the Near East Divisionm.

    This includes commentaries by Steven Simon who is the Hasib J. Sabbagh Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relation; Anthony Cordesman who holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He formerly served as national security assistant to Senator John McCain, as director of intelligence assessment in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and as civilian assistant to the deputy secretary of defense; and Patrick Clawson who is deputy director for research of the conservative Washington Institute for Near East Policy

    As is the case usually with Harper’s, there is some good reading in there. However the general idea i got from them was that for the most part, they don’t think military action will take place.  Let’s hope so.

    On other fronts, it seems to me that the Los Angeles Times is slowly becoming one of the more logical, moderate and objective journals i find in the US.  At least that’s how it seems recently, and here is an interesting editorial i found today.  Titled Why Iran ‘Meddles’ in Iraq it is written by Adam Shatz who is the literary editor of The Nation.  Here is just a short excerpt:

    Could it be that Iran’s stake in Iraq is solidly grounded in the same realist principles that drive the behavior of most nations, rather than in "malign intentions" or a desire to export the Islamic revolution?

    If Iran wants to see a friendly government established in Iraq, it hardly lacks for reasons. Unlike the United States, Iran was attacked by Iraq, back when Hussein’s regime enjoyed American support as a bulwark against Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s revolution. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians died during the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88). When Iraq used poison gas against Iranian troops, the United States uttered not a single protest.

    Not surprisingly, Iran wants to ensure that no government in Iraq will threaten it again. That’s why Iran made no secret of its joy over Hussein’s downfall, but it also refuses to accept a potentially hostile American base in the Persian Gulf or to cede absolute control over Iraq’s future to the United States.

    So, that’s it for now.  I hope to very soon, write a nice long detailed article about the upcoming French Elections.  It’s quite the debated subject here, and for interesting reason. 

    If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

    No George, No Iran

    A great article in the Huffington Post by George Karel Bouley, on Bush/Cheney and the lack of their legitimacy in the argument to confrotn Iran. Here are some excepts:

    You see we should not invade Iran because of they give or gave weapons to Iraqi fighters for one solid, very real reason: our hands are not clean in that area. Russia did not attack us when we started this whole thing, when we created Osama Bin Laden, by arming him and his militia in Afghanistan so they could fight off the Russian advances being made in that country. We did not want Russia to succeed, so we supplied money, weapons, training and intelligence to Bin Laden and others. Russia subsequently lost on that front, and the fight nearly bankrupted them. Did they get outraged and the United States and start threatening nuclear retaliation or retaliation of any sort? Was an impending war with Russia a given? Nope. In fact, I could list conflict after conflict where the United States meddled by giving weapons and other support to “protect our interest” and the attacking party did not take it out on the U.S. No, our hands are far from clean in this area so we need to shut up about Iran.

    Iran is a neighboring country to Iraq. It has a vested interest in what happens in that country. If it wants to supply weapons or anything else to the fighters in Iraq, who are we to say they can’t? Oh, I know, those weapons are killing Americans. But those Americans wouldn’t be dying if they weren’t caught up in the middle of a civil war in a place they don’t belong. It is not Iran’s fault Americans are dying, it is George Bush’s, but he won’t fess up to it, so he plays the blame game.

    and further,

    Iran is not a threat to the United States. Let me say it again. Iran is not a threat to the United States. At least not a clear and present danger at this time. While I do not wish to see a nuclear Iran, I have never understood how we, the only nation to ever use such a horrible weapon, the only nation with nuclear blood on our hands, are the ones to tell the rest of the world who can and cannot have a bomb. If you were the leader of a small country, and you saw how George Bush and his cronies manipulate information and the American people right in to war, wouldn’t you be afraid? Wouldn’t you want a big defense mechanism like a bomb or something fearful in your arsenal in case America comes calling? Bush has given new meaning to the Bully Pulpit. He really has painted America as a bully, and now weaker countries want to level the playing field and the only way they feel they can do that is with nuclear technology, or by helping those that would oppose us.

    and finally,

    Iran chose a side in Iraq and it wasn’t ours, that’s what we are truly mad at. Instead of being a member of the coalition of the willing they are advocates of the killing. And while that is sad, it is not a reason to invade their country. They live right next door. If Canada were attacked, would we not provide weapons to them? And if we did, would you want us invaded because of it? Think about it.

    I can only wish that more and more people actually think like this, and get some sense in their heads, and prevent this mad blood thirsty administration to back off.

    America, think about the half-billion dollars your government has spent on an unnecessary war, if they had spent half of that on health care, you’d have the most advaned free health care in the world. If they’d spent a quarter on education, yo’ud have the most well-educated generation of youth in the world. But instead he bruogt you war, death, and the hatred of everyone in the world. Isn’t iit time to do soemthign about that.?

    [tags]Iran, bush, US, war, iraq, huffington[/tags]

    If you want,subscribe to the Loopy RSS feed!

    Quote for this Click

    • Homer no function beer well without. - - - Homer Simpson

    Recent Trackbacks

    Quote for this Click

    I see her as one great stampede of lips directed at the nearest derriere. - - - No?l Coward



    More Photos




    Group Blogs


    News Coverage

    Online Magazines




 blogs For the voting button use: Top
 Blogs Webfeed (RSS/ATOM/RDF) registered at
    Blogarama - The Blog Directory

    Top Blogs
    Blog Flux Directory

    The Ecosystem


    Visitors and Referrers


    Referring Links