Archive for August 31st, 2009

Iranian Nuclear Threat Targets U.S., Israel

More Zionist propaganda intended to set the stage for yet another war for Israel!:

 

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/iran_nuclear_threat/2009/08/30/254223.html?s=al&promo_code=8785-1

Iranian Nuclear Threat Targets U.S., Israel

Sunday, August 30, 2009 5:11 PM

By: Chris Wessling

Concerns about Iran’s nuclear capabilities — and their potentially devastating impact on America — are mounting, a special report from Newsmax.TV reveals.

 

You can see Newsmax.TV’s report on the growing Iranian nuclear threat – Click Here Now

 

 

 

The Islamic republic has test-fired missiles capable of reaching Israel, southeastern Europe, and U.S. bases in the Mideast — and published reports say Iran is within a year of developing its own nuclear bomb.

 

Security experts warn that even one nuclear device in the hands of a rogue nation could be used against the United States in a devastating electromagnetic pulse attack, an intense burst of energy from an exploding nuclear warhead high above the Earth.

 

So why isn’t the Obama administration doing more to prevent a nuclear nightmare?

 

“I get very, very nervous about it,” Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., told Newsmax.TV’s Kathleen Walter. “I think Iran will have a nuclear weapon. I think now it’s only a question of when.”

 

The United States is caught in the middle of a Mideast faceoff between one of its strongest allies, Israel, and Iran. Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map, and Israel refuses to rule out a preemptive strike against its adversary, while insisting that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.

 

If the United States tries to prevent Iran from making nuclear weapons, its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has vowed a campaign of bloody revenge.

 

Iran’s hatred of Israel “is rooted in ideology,” said Walid Phares of Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “The Iranian regime is jihadist, and they do not acknowledge nor accept the idea that a non-Islamic, non-jihadist state could exist in the region.”

 

Although Iran is thousands of miles from America’s shores, its belligerent actions could have far-reaching repercussions. A regional war or nuclear attack could cause an already shaky U.S. economy to collapse.

 

Even scarier is the growing threat of an electromagnetic pulse attack, security analysts say. Such an attack could destroy all electronic devices over a massive area, from cell phones to computers to America’s electrical grid, experts say.

 

“Within a year of that attack, nine out of 10 Americans would be dead, because we can’t support a population of the present size in urban centers and the like without electricity,” said Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy. “That would be a world without America, as a practical matter. And that is exactly what I believe the Iranians are working towards.”

 

President Barack Obama has committed the U.S. government to a diplomatic approach for resolving the high-stakes nuclear dispute, but Iran has rebuffed Obama’s overtures. Meanwhile, Congress is working on legislation to grant Obama the power to impose crippling sanctions on Iran if the talk-first approach doesn’t work.

 

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., says such sanctions are long overdue.

 

“A nuclear Iran is a threat to the Iranian people, to Israel, to the Middle East, to the national security of the United States. And what is Congress doing about it? Nothing. We have proposed legislation time and time again to have real, substantial sanctions leveled against Iran. Now, we like to point fingers and say the U.N. has not done enough, but really we should be pointing the fingers at ourselves.”

 

The Obama administration has pressed Israel to halt all settlement building and to refrain from attacking Iran, hoping such efforts will lure Iran and other Mideast Arab nations to the negotiating table.

 

Mort Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, says that sort of approach is wrong.

 

“[Obama] says Arabs can keep building in the West Bank, Arabs can keep building in eastern Jerusalem . . . but Jews can’t. There’s no other way to define this than racist.”

 

Time is running out to stop Iran, Klein says.

 

“America should say that everything is on the table and we will pursue whatever is necessary – military option, severe sanctions, whatever is necessary to stop these weapons. This is serious business. Al-Qaida has made clear how seriously they can harm American interests, and with nuclear weapons it’s just beyond belief the horror that can ensue.”

 

But some critics are pushing for less intervention.

 

“Arguing for sanctions against Iran, and threatening them with bombs, or encouraging Israel to bomb Iran makes no sense whatsoever,” said Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas. “So many other times this argument has been won by pure economics . . . This is what brought the Soviets to their knees – it was financial.”

 

Others wonder whether the United States missed the perfect opportunity to disarm Iran, failing to take advantage of the widespread turmoil and push for reform that occurred in the aftermath of the country’s disputed recent presidential elections.

 

“Eventually the Iranian regime, if not reformed from the inside, is going to get the nukes, is going to use them in a deterrence fashion, and eventually if there is a confrontation it may use them for real,” Phares said. “This revolt of Tehran may well become another Iranian revolution. Now its success is conditioned by how far the United States and the international community go in assisting this democratic movement.”

 

The more time Obama devotes to the diplomatic approach, critics warn, the more time Iran has to realize its nuclear ambitions and even sell its technology to other nations or terrorists.

 

“I think the president’s learning a lesson,” Hoekstra said. “I mean, the president was brutal on the previous administration on foreign policy, saying, you know, ‘Your policy on North Korea is bad; your policy on Iran is bad.’ Everywhere and anything the former president did in foreign policy was terrible [according to Obama], and he was going to come in and fix it. I think he’s finding out that foreign policy is hard.”

 

 

You can see Newsmax.TV’s report on the growing Iranian nuclear threat – Click Here Now

 

———————————————————————-

Look at the real threat to Europe (and the US as well if we get into yet another war for Israel in the Middle East):

Israeli Professor – ‘We Could
Destroy All European Capitals’

http://www.rense.com/general34/esde.htm

Why Not Crippling Sanctions for US and Israel?:

http://america-hijacked.com/2009/08/31/why-not-crippling-sanctions-for-israel-and-the-us/

Obama’s War Signals: Iran in the crosshairs

http://america-hijacked.com/2009/07/18/obama%E2%80%99s-war-signals-iran-in-the-crosshairs/

Cheney: I was isolated over Iran attack idea

Cheney: I was isolated over Iran attack idea

http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=104895&sectionid=351020104

CIA and Dick Cheney:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5bXJPr5MBE&feature=PlayList&p=0C4B5B3F75BFAAF4&index=0&playnext=1

Stephen Sniegoski’s lecture on his book, “The Transparent Cabal” which is mentioned in above youtube:

 http://america-hijacked.com/2009/08/16/stephen-sniegoskis-lecture-on-his-book-the-transparent-cabal/

US launches probe into CIA abuses:

 

http://america-hijacked.com/2009/08/24/us-launches-probe-into-cia-abuses/

Why Not Crippling Sanctions for US and Israel?:

http://america-hijacked.com/2009/08/31/why-not-crippling-sanctions-for-israel-and-the-us/

DEBORCHGRAVE Commentary: Honor among terrorists

DEBORCHGRAVE Commentary: Honor among terrorists:

http://www.upi.com/Emerging_Threats/2009/08/28/Commentary-Honor-among-terrorists/UPI-47801251464845/

Appeasing Israel – At What Cost?

Appeasing Israel – At What Cost?
US President Barack Obama.
By Jeff Gates

Barack Hussein Obama’s June 4th speech in Cairo was awaited with keen anticipation by a global population of 1.3 billion Muslims outraged at the abuse that Zionism has long inflicted on its neighbors—with U.S. support. Ten weeks have since passed. The potentially positive impact of his remarks was immediately offset when he appeared the next day at the Buchenwald death camp in Germany. The timing of that Holocaust photo-op resolved all doubts about who stage-manages this presidency.

 

Media attention immediately shifted back to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In the lead-up to the Cairo speech, Obama’s White House handlers enabled this right-winger to proclaim—from the White House—that peace with the Palestinians ranked a distant second to Tel Aviv’s concerns about Iran. Soon after the Cairo speech, Netanyahu reluctantly referenced a “two state solution”—though only under duress from Middle East envoy George Mitchell. Obama quickly portrayed as an “important step forward” this grudging referral to an agreed-to strategy.

In truth, Netanyahu announced several giant steps backward. Rather than agree to negotiate a two state solution, he set preconditions certain to preclude two states, leaving nothing to negotiate. Again negating the potentially positive impact from Cairo, Obama praised the Israeli leader even as he insisted that Palestinians recognize Israel as a “Jewish state” where Jerusalem as “Israel’s capital will remain united.”

 

Netanyahu also insisted on Israel’s right to colonize even more Palestinian land by expanding the very settlements destined to preclude a viable Palestinian state. By applauding this defiant speech, Obama inflamed the very conditions that have precluded peace in the Middle East for more than six decades. In the ensuing ten weeks, Netanyahu’s stance has only further hardened—with Obama’s tacit approval.

 

Anticipating pressure to negotiate in good faith, Tel Aviv opened a three-front assault. First, Foreign Minister Avignor Lieberman (from Moldova) began talks in Moscow. By conducting diplomacy in fluent Russian, he showed that Israel could—and would—turn elsewhere for the “special relationship” that Tel Aviv has long enjoyed with the U.S.

Second, the Israel lobby opened a domestic assault on Obama by announcing, “Jewish leaders are deeply troubled by his recent Middle East initiatives.” The lobby also reminded Obama, a political product of Ashkenazi funding from West Side Chicago, just where his presidential bread is buttered.

 

Third, as soon as Middle East envoy George Mitchell opened talks with Damascus, the first negotiations since the U.S. withdrew its ambassador in 2005, Netanyahu gave a speech on Syria in which he made no mention of the Golan Heights (seized during Israel’s preemptive 1967 war) while including terms certain to ensure that peace with Syria would also remain beyond reach.

 

Yet again the Obama team appeased the Israeli leader. With no need to cite the high-profile Holocaust photo-op, the official Syrian newspaper noted simply, “This is the principle that always guides Israel when approaching the Zionist-Arab conflict. The Israelis see themselves as victims rather than the aggressor.”

By again failing to stand up to the Zionist state and its extensive lobby in the U.S., Obama once again enabled the very conduct that most endangers U.S. national security. While his words in Cairo promised a “new beginning,” his actions both before and after that speech signaled business-as-usual.

 

If he continues to placate Israeli extremists, his conduct may well induce another terrorist attack. Should another attack occur, recent history suggests that an orgy of evidence will point to Iran-backed Hezbollah while Israel again portrays itself as a hapless victim in need of U.S. protection from an “existential threat.” Absent presidential resolve to ensure that “special” is expunged from the U.S.-Israeli relationship, this entangled alliance will continue to ensure that the U.S. can be portrayed as guilty by its association with this enclave’s extremist behavior.

 

With his remarks, Netanyahu transformed the two state solution into a bargaining chip. By his insistence on terms that preclude a final settlement, he reconfirmed Tel Aviv’s commitment to sustain this conflict. By continuing Israel’s expansion of the settlements, he ensured that peace would remain beyond reach. Obama’s propensity to appease at time-critical junctures suggests he will continue on a course that invites more terrorism—either by Israel or by those provoked by U.S. support of its extremism.

 

Any objective assessment of this presidency would reveal its disproportionate pro-Israeli composition. Democrat Harry Truman, a Christian-Zionist, extended nation-state recognition to this Zionist enclave. Republican G.W. Bush, another Christian-Zionist, staffed his presidency virtually the same as Democrat Obama—with a vast cadre of pro-Israelis. With so little difference in perspective, it is little wonder there is so little difference in Israeli behavior. Or in the risks that this relationship imposes on the U.S.

 

This trans-partisan “insider” operation shares an allegiance neither to party nor president. Its only loyalty is to a shared covenant whose obligations to an expansive Greater Israel take precedence over U.S. interests. The scope and scale of this shared bias suggest that the only way for the U.S. to restore its security is to withhold funding for Israel, withdraw its diplomats and reshape its foreign policy around U.S. interests.

 

Should this latest occupant of the White House continue to act inconsistent with U.S. interests, this young Commander in Chief must be reminded why the Framers set such a low evidentiary standard for proving treason. As a former professor of constitutional law, surely he knows that a conviction for that capital offense requires only proof of “adhering” (or granting “aid and comfort”) to an enemy—whether domestic or foreign.

 

 - Jeff Gates is a widely acclaimed author, attorney, investment banker, educator and consultant to government, corporate and union leaders worldwide, Jeff Gates’ latest book is Guilt By Association—How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War (2008). His previous books include Democracy at Risk: Rescuing Main Street From Wall Street and The Ownership Solution: Toward a Shared Capitalism for the 21st Century. For two decades, an adviser to policy-makers worldwide. Counsel to the U.S. Senate Finance Committee (1980-87). He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com.
 

http://tinyurl.com/nly59g

Americans: Serfs Ruled by Oligarchs

Americans: Serfs Ruled by Oligarchs by Paul Craig Roberts

http://original.antiwar.com/roberts/2009/08/19/americans-serfs-ruled-by-oligarchs/

Why Not Crippling Sanctions for Israel and the US?

 

Why Not Crippling Sanctions for Israel and the US?

By Paul Craig Roberts 

http://vdare.com/roberts/090830_sanctions.htm

Merkel warns Iran on sanctions/Israel calls for ‘crippling’ sanctions against Iran:

http://america-hijacked.com/2009/08/27/merkel-warns-iran-on-sanctions-more-war-for-israel-coming/

Cheney wants skeleton kept in closet

Cheney wants skeleton kept in closet

http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=104877&sectionid=3510203

 

CIA and Dick Cheney:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5bXJPr5MBE&feature=PlayList&p=0C4B5B3F75BFAAF4&index=0&playnext=1

Stephen Sniegoski’s lecture on his book, “The Transparent Cabal” which is mentioned in above youtube:

 http://america-hijacked.com/2009/08/16/stephen-sniegoskis-lecture-on-his-book-the-transparent-cabal/

US launches probe into CIA abuses:

 

http://america-hijacked.com/2009/08/24/us-launches-probe-into-cia-abuses/