Indict Dick Cheney before he Blows up the entire Planet

[Dig]

Hadley: Bush Learned Of NIE’s Findings ‘In The Last Few Months,’ But Continued To Ratchet Up Rhetoric
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/03/hadley-nie/

This afternoon, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley held a press briefing on the new National Intelligence Estimate, which concludes that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003. As ThinkProgress has documented, Bush administration officials — despite knowing of the NIE — have been ratcheting up their rhetoric on Iran in the past couple of months.

The central question in today’s briefing for Hadley was whether White House officials intentionally disregarded the intelligence community’s findings in order to bang the war drums against Iran. Reporters repeatedly pressed Hadley on the specific date when the White House learned about the NIE’s findings. Yet incredibly, he refused to give a “precise answer,” instead stating that it was within the “last few months.” From the briefing:

QUESTION: Steve, what is the first time the president was given the inkling that something? I’m not clear on this. Was it months ago, when the first information started to become available to intelligence agencies? […]

HADLEY: [W]hen was the president notified that there was new information available? We’ll try and get you a precise answer. As I say, it was, in my recollection, is in the last few months. Whether that’s October — August-September, we’ll try and get you an answer for that.

On at least five different occasions, Hadley said the White House learned of the NIE sometime in the “last few months.” Watch a compilation:


http://video.thinkprogress.org/2007/12/lfw.320.240.flv

The issue is whether the President himself lied to the public about Iran’s intentions, despite knowing that Iran was even “less determined to develop nuclear weapons.” In October, Bush told a reporter that Iran was trying to “build a nuclear weapon“:

Q But you definitively believe Iran wants to build a nuclear weapon?

THE PRESIDENT: I think so long — until they suspend and/or make it clear that they — that their statements aren’t real, yeah, I believe they want to have the capacity, the knowledge, in order to make a nuclear weapon. […]

So I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon. I take the threat of Iran with a nuclear weapon very seriously.

So to recap: Sometime in the “last few months,” Bush learned that Iran is “less determined to develop nuclear weapons.” Yet as late as October, Bush was still claiming that Iran “wants to build a nuclear weapon.” What did Bush know and when did he know it?

[Dig]

White House Continued To Warn Of False Threat
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/03/iran-white-house/

The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) released today concludes that “in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.” It adds that “Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007,” and the country is “less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005.”

The assessment, which relies on data collected through Oct. 31, was reportedly completed in 2006, but was blocked by administration officials who wanted it to be more in line with Vice President Cheney’s hardline views.

As The Washington Monthly’s Kevin Drum notes, the NIE’s “basic parameters were almost certainly common knowledge in the White House” at least by last year, when the document was finished. Yet even in the past two months, the administration has continued to push its faulty, inflammatory rhetoric and claim that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Some examples:

“So I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon. I take the threat of Iran with a nuclear weapon very seriously.” [Bush, 10/17/07]

“Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions. … The Iranian regime needs to know that if it stays on its present course the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences.” [Cheney, 10/21/07]

“The problem is Iran, and Iran has not stepped back from trying to pursue a nuclear weapon, and — or reprocessing and enriching uranium, which would lead to a nuclear weapon.” [White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, 10/26/07]

“We talked about Iran and the desire to work jointly to convince the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear weapons ambitions, for the sake of peace.” [Bush, 11/7/07]

“We’re in a position now, clearly, especially when we look at Iran, where it’s very, very important we succeed in our efforts, our national security efforts, to discourage the Iranians from enriching uranium and producing nuclear weapons.” [Cheney, 11/9/07]

“We are convinced that they are developing nuclear weapons.” [Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, 11/13/07]

The White House isn’t yet ready to give up its spin. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley will be speaking to the press at 3:15 PM EST today, and has already claimed that the NIE “confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons.”

UPDATE: Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recently said, “It would be a strategic calamity to attack Iran at this time.”

[Dig]

Flashback: Bush Warns of World War III: They Knew Iran had stopped all along!
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/03/flashback-bush-warns-of-world-war-iii-they-knew-iran-had-stopped-all-along/
By: John Amato @ 1:26 PM - PST    

If it’s possible to make Bush look any stupider—the new NIE report on certainly Iran does.  Silent Patriot posted this on 10/17/07:


http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/22533/1/Bush-Syria-WWIII.wmv

Bush: But this — we got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel. So I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon…

Is anyone else shocked that it was FOX’s Bret Baier that elicited the “World War III” sound byte? Me neither. Full transcript here if you can stomach it.

Kevin Drum has a good post up and notes:

This NIE was apparently finished a year ago, and its basic parameters were almost certainly common knowledge in the White House well before that. This means that all the leaks, all the World War III stuff, all the blustering about the IAEA — all of it was approved for public consumption after Cheney/Bush/Rice/etc. knew perfectly well it was mostly baseless.

Nothing smells better in the morning to the Neocons than war propaganda. That’s why Cheney tried to hold up the report from coming out.

A National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran has been held up for more than a year in an effort to force the intelligence community to remove dissenting judgments on the Iranian nuclear programme, and thus make the document more supportive of U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney’s militarily aggressive policy toward Iran, according to accounts of the process provided by participants to two former Central Intelligence Agency officers.

via Amanda: “As ThinkProgress has documented, the White House’s manipulation of the Iran NIE bore a striking resemblance to the controversies that played out over pre-war Iraq intelligence.”

[PatriotX]

I don't often listen to Coast to Coast (except for laughs once and a while), but someone I believe named "Shawn Michaels" or something to that effect, had stated that war with Iran was off (a couple weeks back before this related news story); and to expect a nuclear confrontation between Pakistan and India to get things going possibly next year.

Brother Stair (www.overcomerministry) says keep your eyes on Jerusalem...

I still expect sabotage in the Middle East and possible strikes against the U.S. to draw us into WWIII.

Patriot X

[Dig]

I don't often listen to Coast to Coast (except for laughs once and a while), but someone I believe named "Shawn Michaels" or something to that effect, had stated that war with Iran was off (a couple weeks back before this related news story); and to expect a nuclear confrontation between Pakistan and India to get things going possibly next year.

Brother Stair (www.overcomerministry) says keep your eyes on Jerusalem...

I still expect sabotage in the Middle East and possible strikes against the U.S. to draw us into WWIII.

Patriot X

yeas I have heard that from other sources.

Since NIE, Iran is not an option, but Pak/India/Israel all have nukes, so they can sell that story better.

We cotrol much of the military in Pak, the economy of India and both in Israel.

[bigron]

US spies give shock verdict on Iran threat!!

Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Monday December 3, 2007

Guardian Unlimited
http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2221408,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=12 US intelligence agencies undercut the White House today by disclosing for the first time that Iran has not been pursuing a nuclear weapons development programme for the last four years. The disclosure makes it harder for President George Bush and the vice-president, Dick Cheney, to make a case for a military strike against Iran next year. It also makes it more difficult to persuade countries such as Russia and China to join the US, Britain and France in imposing a new round of sanctions on Tehran. The national security estimate, which pulls together the work of the 16 US intelligence agencies, today published a declassified report revising previous assessments of Iran's weapons programme. "Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons programme suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005," it said. Bush and Cheney have been claiming that Tehran is bent on achieving a nuclear weapon. The British government, which is planning to discuss the report with its US counterparts over the next few days, has also repeatedly said it suspects Iran of seeking a nuclear weapons capability.

The Iranian government insists it is only pursuing a civilian nuclear programme. The US national security estimate disclosed that Tehran had halted its nuclear weapons programme in 2003 and had not restarted it. Two years ago, the national security estimate reached a different conclusion, saying Iran was still developing its nuclear weapons programme. The White House continued to claim today that Iran remains a threat to the region and the world as a whole. Although a halt to nuclear weapons development is significant, the national security estimate is far from a clean bill of health for Iran. The country is pushing ahead with its uranium enrichment programme, which has only limited civilian use and could be quickly converted to nuclear military use. The national intelligence estimate warned that Iran could secure a nuclear weapon by 2010. The US state department's intelligence and research office says the more likely timescale would be 2013. All the agencies concede that Iran may not have enough enriched uranium until after 2015. Referring to Iran's decision to halt the military programme in the autumn of 2003, Stephen Hadley, the White House national security adviser, said today: "Today's national intelligence estimate offers some positive news. It confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons. It tells us that we have made progress in trying to ensure that this does not happen.

"But the intelligence also tells us that the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains a very serious problem. The estimate offers grounds for hope that the problem can be solved diplomatically, without the use of force, as the administration has been trying to do." Hadley said the White House would continue to try to intensify international pressure on Iran. Russia and China, two of the permanent members of the UN security council, have scuppered attempts by the US over the last six months to impose tough new sanctions on Iran. Bush and Cheney stepped up rhetoric against Iran this year. Bush said in October: "If you're interested in avoiding world war III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon." Cheney warned of "serious consequences" if the government in Tehran did not abandon its nuclear programme. The decision to publish the national intelligence estimate is aimed at trying to recover the public credibility lost when the agencies wrongly claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction in the years running up to 2003. A US official said this time "there was a very rigorous scrub using all the trade craft available, using the lessons of 2002". Mitch McConnell, the director of national intelligence, last month decided that its reports would not longer be released automatically. But an exception is being made in this case because the new conclusion contradicts the 2005 findings. In a separate statement accompanying the report, the deputy director, Donald Kerr, said that given the new conclusions, it was important to release the report publicly "to ensure that an accurate presentation is available".

The national intelligence report says that Iran would have to go flat out to secure enough highly enriched uranium by 2010. The state department's intelligence and research office says that the more likely timescale would be 2013. All the agencies concede that Iran may not have enough enriched uranium until after 2015. The report says that ultimately Iran has the technical and industrial capability to build a bomb "if it decides to do so" but it Iran may be amenable to pressure. Tehran's "decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs." It adds: "Some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways might - if perceived by Iran's leaders as credible - prompt Tehran to extend the current halt to its nuclear weapons programme."

[bigron]

US: Iran Halted Weapons Program in 2003

By PAMELA HESS
Associated Press Writer
 http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_NUCLEAR?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-12-03-13-17-17


WASHINGTON (AP) -- A new U.S. intelligence report concludes that Iran's nuclear weapons development program has been halted since the fall of 2003 because of international pressure - a stark contrast to the conclusions U.S. spy agencies drew just two years ago.

The finding is part of a National Intelligence Estimate on Iran that also cautions that Tehran continues to enrich uranium and still could develop a bomb between 2010 and 2015 if it decided to do so.

The conclusion that Iran's weapons program was still frozen, through at least mid-2007, represents a sharp turnaround from the previous intelligence assessment in 2005. Then, U.S. intelligence agencies believed Tehran was determined to develop a nuclear weapons capability and was continuing its weapons development program. The new report concludes that Iran's decisions are rational and pragmatic, and that Tehran is more susceptible to diplomatic and financial pressure than previously thought.

"Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005," says the unclassified summary of the secret report.

The findings come at a time of escalating tensions between the United States and Iran, which President Bush has labeled part of an "axis of evil," along with Iraq and North Korea. At an Oct. 17 news conference, Bush said, "If you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

Rand Beers, who resigned from Bush's National Security Council just before the Iraq war, said the report should derail any appetite for war on the administration's part, and should reinvigorate regional diplomacy. "The new NIE throws cold water on the efforts of those urging military confrontation with Iran," he said.

A spokesman for Iran's U.N. mission declined to comment.

Senior intelligence officials said Monday they failed to detect Iran's fall 2003 halt in nuclear weapons development in time to reflect it in the 2005 estimate.

One of the officials said Iran is the most challenging country to spy on - harder even than North Korea, a notoriously closed society. "We put a lot more collection assets against this," the official said, "but gaps remain." The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject.

Some of the changes in the new report reflect the use of "open source" intelligence - public information from sources such as the news media and international organizations. An official said, for example, that photos taken at Iran's Natanz nuclear facility during U.N. inspections in 2002 were particularly useful in assessing the capabilities of the civilian uranium enrichment program.

U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, said the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains "a serious problem." The estimate suggests Bush "has the right strategy: intensified international pressure along with a willingness to negotiate a solution that serves Iranian interests, while ensuring the world will never have to face a nuclear armed Iran," Hadley said. He was less interested in what the 2005 assessment missed than what it got right: that Iran had a covert nuclear program.

Bush was briefed on the 100-page document on Nov. 28. National Intelligence Estimates represent the most authoritative written judgments of all 16 U.S. spy agencies. Congress and other executive agencies were briefed Monday, and foreign governments will be briefed beginning Tuesday, the officials said.

Despite the suspension of its weapons program, it may be difficult to ultimately dissuade Tehran from developing a nuclear bomb because Iran believes such a weapon would give it international prestige and leverage to achieve its national security and foreign policy goals, the assessment concluded.

"The bottom line is this: For that strategy to succeed, the international community has to turn up the pressure on Iran with diplomatic isolation, United Nations sanctions, and with other financial pressure and Iran has to decide it wants to negotiate a solution," Hadley said.

The intelligence officials said they do not know all the reasons why Iran halted its weapons program, or what might trigger its resumption. They said they are confident that diplomatic and political pressure played a key role, but said the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Libya's termination of its nuclear program and the implosion of the illegal nuclear smuggling network run by Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan might also have influenced Tehran.

To develop a nuclear weapon, Iran needs to design and engineer a warhead, obtain enough fissile material, and build a delivery vehicle such as a missile. The intelligence agencies now believe Iran halted warhead engineering four years ago and as of mid-2007 had not restarted it.

But Iran is still enriching uranium for its civilian nuclear reactors that produce electricity. That leaves open the possibility that fissile material could be diverted to covert nuclear sites to produce highly enriched uranium for a warhead. Engineers have known the design for a nuclear weapon for 60 years. The countdown to a nuclear weapon is determined more by the availability of fissile material than anything else, the officials said.

Even if the country went all out with present enrichment capability, it is unlikely to have enough until late 2009 or 2010 at the earliest, the officials said. The State Department's Intelligence and Research office believes the earliest likely time it would have enough highly enriched uranium would be 2013. But all agencies concede Iran may not have sufficient enriched uranium until after 2015.

Iran would not be able to technically produce and reprocess enough plutonium for a weapon before about 2015, the report says. But ultimately it has the technical and industrial capacity to build a bomb, "if it decides to do so," the intelligence agencies found. They said Iran's immediate intentions are a mystery.

"We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options, or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to restart its program," the report says.

This national intelligence estimate was originally due in the spring of 2007 but was delayed because the agencies wanted more confidence their findings were accurate, given the inaccuracy of the 2002 intelligence estimate of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W. Va., said the report showed "a level of independence from political leadership that was lacking in the recent past."

The CIA, which did most of the analysis, considered at least six alternate scenarios that could explain the new findings, including whether Iran was intentionally trying to deceive them into believing weapons work had stopped.

Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell decided last month that key judgments of NIEs should not be declassified and released. The intelligence officials said an exception was made in this case because the last assessment of Iran's nuclear program in 2005 has influenced public debate about U.S. policy toward Iran, and must be updated to reflect the latest findings.

Also Monday, a top U.S. diplomat said China may be open to discussing fresh U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran. China and Russia, both veto-wielding members of the Security Council, have been reluctant to support new sanctions.

©

[bigron]

Like Iraq, US intel on Iran faulty !!

By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
Mon Dec 3, 9:06 PM ET
 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071204/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iran_analysis


First Iraq, now Iran. The United States has operated under a cloud of faulty intelligence in both countries.

In a bombshell intelligence assessment, the United States has backed away from its once-ironclad assertion that Tehran is intent on building nuclear bombs.

Where there once was certainty, there now is doubt. "We do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons," the new estimate said Monday.

Compare that with what then-National Intelligence Director John Negroponte told Congress in January. "Our assessment is that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons."

Just last month, President Bush, at a news conference with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, said, "We talked about Iran and the desire to work jointly to convince the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear weapons ambitions, for the sake of peace."

More ominously, Bush told a news conference Oct. 17, "I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

Asked then if he definitely believed that Iran wanted to build a nuclear bomb, Bush said, "Yeah, I believe they want to have the capacity, the knowledge, in order to make a nuclear weapon."

Bush's National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said the president made comments like those "because he was describing the threat as the intelligence community itself had been describing the threat both publicly and in their briefings to him."

Intelligence officials advised Bush several months ago that they were reevaluating their assessments about Iran. They came to the White House last Wednesday and briefed him on their new findings.

The intelligence flip-flop recalled the embarrassing reversal that Bush was forced to make on whether Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. The conviction that Saddam Hussein had such weapons was one of the factors behind Bush's decision to invade Iraq. It since has been determined that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.

Democrats on Monday did not hesitate to suggest an Iran-Iraq comparison.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Democrats had requested the new Iran assessment "so that the administration could not rush this Congress and the country to another war based on flawed intelligence."

"I hope this administration reads this report carefully and appropriately adjusts its rhetoric and policy vis-a-vis Iran," Reid said. "The administration should begin this process by finally undertaking a diplomatic surge necessary to effectively address the challenges posed by Iran."

In the case of Iran, though, the White House has not dropped its suspicions that Tehran could pursue a nuclear bomb.

Iran continues to develop, test and deploy ballistic missiles, and its civilian uranium enrichment program is continuing. "It can readily use the same technology to produce weapons-grade uranium," Hadley said.

In rewriting the conclusions about Iran, the new estimate said Tehran was pursuing a nuclear weapons program but halted that effort in the fall of 2003 under the weight of international pressure. Importantly, the estimate said Iran has not restarted the nuclear bomb program.

"Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005," the new estimate said.

While key facts have changed, the administration's strategy has not.

The White House says it will continue to try to build pressure on Iran to prevent it from ever acquiring nuclear bombs.

"The bottom line is that for that strategy to succeed, the international community has to turn up the pressure on Iran with diplomatic isolation, United Nations sanctions and with other financial pressure," Hadley said. "And Iran has to decide that it wants to negotiate a solution."

Some analysts believe the new conclusions will be a roadblock for Vice President Dick Cheney and other hawkish members of the administration to be more confrontational toward Iran.

"It's a good thing that we caught this before we marched headlong into another military conflict," said Jon Wolfsthal, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "This isn't the timebomb the administration made it out to be for the last several years."

Wolfsthal said the conclusion that international pressure prompted Iran to halt its program "is the piece of information that we missed in Iraq" where Bush believed that Iraq's pursuit of WMD was continuing despite sanctions. He said the administration did not appear inclined to change its strategy toward Iran. He said that "suggests they can't take yes for an answer."

___

[bigron]

A Miracle: Honest Intel on Iran Nukes
 
by Ray McGovern
http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?articleid=12001


For those who have doubts about miracles, a double one occurred today. An honest National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran's nuclear program has been issued, and its "Key Judgments" were made public.

With redraft after redraft, it was what the Germans call eine schwere Geburt – a difficult birth, 10 months in gestation.

I do not know how often Vice President Dick Cheney visited CIA headquarters during the gestation period, but I am told he voiced his displeasure as soon as he saw the first sonogram/draft very early this year and is so displeased with what issued that he has refused to be the godfather.

This time Cheney and his neocon colleagues were unable to abort the process. And after delivery to the press, this child is going to be very hard to explain – the more so since it is legitimate.

The main points of the NIE:

"We judge that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program…

"We assess with moderate confidence Tehran has not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007.

"We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely…

"We judge with moderate confidence Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame.

"We judge with high confidence that Iran will not be technically capable of producing and reprocessing enough plutonium for a weapon before about 2015."

Having reached these conclusions, it is not surprising that the NIE's authors make a point of saying up front (in bold type), "This NIE does not [italics in original] assume that Iran intends to acquire nuclear weapons."

This, of course, pulls out the rug from under Cheney's claim of a "fairly robust new nuclear program" in Iran and President Bush's inaccurate assertion that Iranian leaders have even admitted they are developing nuclear weapons.

Apparently, intelligence community analysts are no longer required to produce the faith-based intelligence that brought us the Oct. 1, 2002, NIE "Iraq's Continuing Program for Weapons of Mass Destruction" – the worst in the history of U.S. intelligence.

Truth be told, one of the Iran NIE's findings was written into its first draft, from which Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell drew in telling the Senate Armed Services Committee on Feb. 27 that Iran could possibly develop a nuclear weapon by early-to-mid-next decade.

McConnell said not a word, though, about Iran's having halted its nuclear weapons program in fall 2003. And in February, he was still adhering to the faith-based approach, saying, "We assess that Iran seeks to develop a nuclear weapon."

At which point Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) tried to sum up the proceedings with the disingenuous comment "We all agree, then, that the Iranians are trying to get nuclear weapons."

Curiously, McConnell indicated recently that the key findings of NIEs would no longer be made public.

My guess is that the Pentagon, and especially Adm. William Fallon, commander of our forces in the Middle East, succeeded in persuading McConnell to go public. Several months ago, Fallon was reliably reported to have said, "We are not going to do Iran on my watch."

And it is an open secret that he and other senior military officers, except those of the Air Force, are strongly opposed to getting into a war with Iran for which the U.S. is so ill prepared.

Will President George W. Bush and our domesticated media succeed in dismissing this latest NIE as "guesswork," as he has in the past? It is going to be highly interesting to see how the White House will try to spin this one.

 

[bigron]

Distorting fascism to demonize Iran
03/12/2007 08:30:00 AM GMT
Neoconservative champions of war and militarism often use terms & adjectives such as fascist or Hitler to characterize opponents of U.S.-Israeli policies in the Middle East.
By Ismael Hossein-zadeh
http://aljazeera.com/news/newsfull.php?newid=62672

In their frantic drive to pave the way for a military strike against Iran, leading figures in the neoconservative pro-Israel lobby have embarked on a vicious campaign of demonizing that country by comparing it with the early years of Nazi Germany and its President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, with Hitler. These champions of war and militarism are the same trigger happy characters who helped orchestrate the criminal war against Iraq on the basis of ghastly lies and criminal fabrications of evidence. Instead of being held responsible for all of the grisly lies and evidence manufacturing, they are let loose to once again beat the drums of war—this time against Iran. Top among these civilian militarists are Norm Podhoretz, a senior foreign policy adviser to the Republican frontrunner Rudy Giuliani, Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman, and the leader of Israel’s Likud Party Benjamin Netanyahu. These are part of the leading members of the “war party” that include, among others, Vice President Dick Cheney in the White House and Elliot Abrams in the State Department. Podhoretz’s wild charges of fascism against Ahmadinejad, Iran, and Islam—at times bordering on delirium and self-parody—are unabashedly spelled out in his recently published book, “World War IV: the Long Struggle against Islamofascism.” Although Elliot Cohen was the original author of the concept of World War IV, Norman Podhoretz has been the major popularizer of the concept. Describing the Cold War as World War III, he sets out to explain both the rationale for the projected World War IV and the strategies to win it. Benjamin Netanyahu has also frequently called upon the Bush administration to launch a military strike against Iran on the grounds that, “like Nazi Germany,” it is a menace to world peace: "It's 1938 and Iran is Germany. And Iran is racing to arm itself with atomic bombs. . . . Believe him [Ahmadinejad] and stop him. . . . This is what we must do. Everything else pales before this." While the Iranian president “denies the Holocaust,” Netanyahu said, "he is preparing another Holocaust for the Jewish state."[2]

Senator Lieberman’s characterization of Ahmadinejad as being another Hitler is somewhat subtle and indirect: “I'm proud that I co-sponsored that bipartisan resolution calling for regime change in Iran because there are some leaders you can't negotiate with. Look at what Ahmadinejad has said. History reminds us in the case of Hitler and Osama bin Laden that they said exactly what they ultimately did. . . . We need to be working with people in Iran, who hate this government, to help them overthrow it.”[3] Anyone even faintly familiar with the socio-economic and historical characteristics of fascism would dismiss these wild accusations and characterizations of Iran as bogus. Ahmadinejad differs from Hitler on a number of major grounds.  To begin with, Ahmadinejad is known as a grassroots leader or fighter, not an agent or collaborator of big business, as would be the case with fascist or fascistic figures and characters. Indeed, he came to power by challenging and running against the presidential candidate of big business, whereas fascist leaders like Hitler or Mussolini were promoted by big business. Second, Hitler represented an expansionist imperial power. By contrast, Ahmadinejad (and the Iranian government in general) represent an anti-imperialist challenge or force in the Middle East that harbors no expansionist ambitions or territorial claims. Third, Hitler was an unrivaled and unchallenged dictator. He had complete monopoly of power; not only commanding the German armed forces, but also controlling all the branches of government and, indeed, the entire German society. By contrast, Ahmadinejad is not a dictator; he is an elected president without much power. The real power rests with the “Supreme Leader,” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is commander in chief of all of Iran's armed forces. Khamenei has the final say on all major foreign policy issues. Ahmadinejad is also constantly and relentlessly challenged by both the parliament and the Judiciary. For example, the legislature rejected more than two-thirds of his recommendations for ministers, which meant that it took nearly a year before his cabinet was fully staffed.

As intelligent and educated individuals, Lieberman, Podhoretz, Netanyahu and their neoconservative cohorts must certainly be aware of these glaring differences between Hitler and Ahmadinejad, or between today’s Iran and the late 1930s Nazi Germany. So, why are they disregarding such obvious differences and deliberately obfuscating the historic characteristics of fascism? The answer is clear: they want to justify another war of aggression, a military strike against Iran. The more fundamental question, however, is why do they want to attack Iran? The answer, in a nutshell, is that the pro-Israel lobby is determined to eliminate any and all obstacles to the continued occupation of the Palestinian land. And since the lobby views Iran as one of those obstacles, it is therefore driven to demonize that country as the next target of a military strike. All other publicly stated or implied reasons such as national interests, democratic ideals, Iran’s nuclear technology, and the like are simply harebrained pretexts for achieving this overriding goal. There are, of course, additional factors or forces behind the drive to attack Iran. For example, President Bush and the neoconservative handlers of his administration hope that, by accusing Iran of arming Iraqi fighters, they can blame their disastrous failure in Iraq on Iran. They also hope that by expanding the war to Iran they can stifle or preempt calls for accountability and/or impeachment of those responsible for the illegal war on Iraq.

Another driving force behind the plan to attack Iran is the armaments lobby and the powerful Pentagon contractors who view the extension of war to Iran as an unmistakable expansion of their economic fortunes. President Bush’s neoconservative policies of war and militarism have been a boon for the arms industry and related businesses of war profiteering. It is obvious, then, that the major forces behind the war juggernaut against Iran are driven not by the interests of the American people or “national interests,” as the champions of war and militarism claim, but by some powerful special interests that converge on war and political convulsion in the Middle East: the economic interests of the armaments lobby and the geopolitical interests of the pro-Israel lobby. Since the interests of these two highly influential forces converge on war and international conflicts in the Middle East, they often play into each others hand in their pursuit of war and militarism in the region. More importantly, however, they also coordinate their politics and/or policy agendas to influence U.S. foreign in the area.[4] Although there is no formal alliance between these two powerful forces, their collaboration can often be seen through their identical views of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Institutionally, this de facto collaboration is carried out through a number of militaristic think tanks such as Project for the New American Century, the American Enterprise Institute, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, Center for Security Policy, Middle East Media Research Institute, Middle East Forum, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and National Institute for Public Policy.

A closer look at the records of these militaristic think tanks shows that they are set up to essentially serve as institutional fronts to camouflage the dubious relationship between the Pentagon, its major contractors, and the Israeli lobby, on the one hand, and the war-mongering neoconservative politicians, on the other. Major components of the Bush administration’s foreign policy, including the war on Iraq and the plans to strike Iran, have been designed largely at the drawing boards of these think thanks.[5] It is ironic—indeed, tragic—that hardline Zionist leaders, who constantly (and rightly so) remind us to not forget the atrocities of fascism, so callously distort the socio-economic and historical characteristics of fascism in order to use it in the service of their short-sighted and misguided agenda for the Middle East. They hope—in vain—that they can permanently keep the occupation of the Palestinian land by force, and that by destroying Iran and/or other opponents of occupation the Palestinian question would somehow go away. Yet, as the late Albert Einstein put it, peace can be achieved only by understanding, not force. Calling Ahmadinejad and/or Iran fascist is even more ironic (it is, in fact, a perfect case of chutzpah) in light of the fact that the expansionist policies of unilateral aggression promoted by the leading figures of Neoconservatism are more akin to Hitler’s policies of unprovoked invasion of other countries than is Iran’s foreign policy, which respects the sovereignty of its neighbors and harbors no territorial ambition or military aggression against any country.

Neoconservative champions of war and militarism often use terms and adjectives such as fascist or Hitler to characterize opponents of U.S.-Israeli policies in the Middle East in order to justify their agenda of “regime change” in the region. Such wanton or opportunistic use of political rhetoric for nefarious political purposes represents a gross misreading of social structures and historical developments. Fascism cannot be defined or characterized capriciously; it is a specific historical category that evolves out of particular socio-economic circumstances or structures. It cannot be haphazardly applied to any socio-economic system or political leader that is at odds with the neoconservative agenda of regime change in the Middle East. Nor can fascism be reduced to the “sins” of political personas and individual leaders of Nazi Germany, or the pathological problems of Hitler’s mind. While simplistic or obfuscationist judgments of this sort may succeed in dressing in the uniform of Adolf Hitler the horrific acts that the capitalist system can occasionally perform, such reductionist judgments would not be very useful for the purposes of averting social conditions that may lead to the recurrence of fascism. Hitler was not any more responsible for the rise of fascism in Europe than is President George W. Bush for the rise of neoconservative militarists in the United States, or for the control of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East by the representatives of the military-industrial-Likud interests.

Some friendly critics attribute the aggressive militaristic policies of militant Zionism to the traumatic memories of fascism and the attendant brutalities that were committed against Jewish people. Thus, political commentator Jim Lobe writes, for example, “the horrific experience of European Jewry in the twentieth century, culminating as it did with the Nazi Holocaust, is critical to understanding the neoconservative mindset.”[6] While this may explain radical Zionists’ “mindset” and their policies of unilateral militarism, it does not justify their plans of war and “regime change” in the Middle East. Palestinians and other Arab/Muslim people had nothing to do with the Nazi Holocaust. That these peoples have been subjected to horrendous punishment for the crimes committed by others simply defies logic—let alone any sense of justice. Hard-line Zionist ideologues like Lieberman, Podhoretz, Netanyahu and their cohorts in the misguided pro-Israel lobby, who sloppily coin terminologies such as Hitler or fascism in reference to the opponents of their policies of aggression, are misrepresenting fascism, drawing wrong lessons from it, and punishing the wrong people for its crimes. With friends like these fanatical Zionists, the Jewish people need no enemies!

References:
[1] Norman Podhoretz, “World War IV: How It Started, What It Means, and Why We Have to Win,” Commentary (September 2004), .
[2] Evan Derkacz, “Netanyahu cries: "Hitler! Hitler! Hitler!" alternet.org (Posted on November 17, 2006), .
[3] Joseph Lieberman in Connecticut 2006 Senate general campaign Debate, .
[4] Ismael Hossein-zadeh, The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave-Macmillan 2007).
[5] Ibid.
[6] Jim Lobe, “New Book Attacks Neo-Cons from the Right,” commondreams.org (August 5, 2004), .
-- Ismael Hossein-zadeh, author of The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave-Macmillan 2007), is a Professor of economics at Drake University
 

[mr anderson]

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSWBT00801220071203

[EchelonMonitor]

Yes, this is interesting.

Did people in intelligence want to prevent Cheney's war on Iran or was it allowed to slip through only once Cheney and his gang decided they had no hope of waging their war on Iran given the opposition and current weak US military strength?

[Triadtropz]

Yes, this is interesting.

Did people in intelligence want to prevent Cheney's war on Iran or was it allowed to slip through only once Cheney and his gang decided they had no hope of waging their war on Iran given the opposition and current weak US military strength?

I think the US is afraid of the chinese/russian/iranian alliance...cheneys a chicken-hawk..

[Dig]

Just say NO when Dick Cheney tries to enact the 25th Amendment.

This charade is just killing any possibility for saving American stature in the world.  He said that the NIE report shows that "although Iran stopped their nuclear program, they could start it up again."

WTF?

He spent 2 years scaring the shit out of everyone, and now even after everyone knows it is all fake, he sticks to the lies.  George Bush is the biggest terrorist in the world.

Man I cannot wait till this press conference is YouTubed.  He sounds worse than Clinton squirming about banging his young intern.

[Dig]

hahahaha

"it is a chance to rally our partners, we need to work the phones, Condi is working the phones."


Our secretary of State has been demoted to a cold calling telemarketer for George Bush's Bullshit!

[Dig]

Distractor Question #1: How did you feel about the Saudi rape victim that got punished?

Answer: First thing I thought is what if that happened to my daughter

WTF, how could that happen to your daughter?  She has 24/7 secret service protection.  And this married woman was pulled out of a car and raped by 7 guys for no reason.  Then she got sentenced by a Saudi court for being in a car with a male (a friend she was retrieving photos from).  When she tried to appeal, her sentence was increased as there is no justice system there. If you try and point this fact out you are punished.  In comparison to what this married women did in the eyes of public opinion, here are pictures of your daughter:






Click here for a larger image.

The question (besides being distracting) was about how George is BFF with the house of Saud.
_____________________________________
UPDATE WITH VIDEO: Bush On Saudi Rape Case: I ‘Don’t Remember’ If I Brought It Up With King Abdullah http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/04/bush-saudi-rape/
This morning, CNN’s Ed Henry pointedly asked President Bush why he hasn’t used his “influence” to “do something” about the 12-year old Saudi woman who was the victim of a brutal gang rape and later sentenced to 200 lashes. The Saudi court blamed her for being an “adulteress who invited the attack.”  Bush refused to answer Henry’s question, simply stating that King Abdullah “knows our position loud and clear.” He said he recently spoke to King Abdullah “about the Middle Eastern peace,” but isn’t sure if he mentioned the Saudi case. “I don’t remember if that subject came up.” When asked what went through his mind when he first heard about the case, Bush brushed aside his role as head of state, instead saying he would have been “very emotional” if it had happened to his daughter.

BUSH: My first thoughts were these. What happens if this happened to my daughter? How would I react? And I would have been — I would have been — I’d had — I would have been very emotional, of course. I’d have been angry at those who committed the crime. And I would be angry at the state that didn’t support the victim. And our opinions were expressed by Dana Perino from the pulpit — from the podium.

Watch it:

http://video.thinkprogress.org/2007/12/bushsaudiedcnn.320.240.flv

Despite the President’s strident rhetoric supporting global human rights, the administration has so far refused to condemn the Saudi government and push it to lift the sentence. When asked about the case last month, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said only that the situation is “very discouraging and outrageous. There is an appeals process and we hope that the verdict changes.” State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that the administration was “astonished,” but had “nothing else to offer.” Looks like human rights aren’t as important as old “family friends.”

[gEEk squad]

He said Iran hasn't disclosed their nuclear program. What a bald face lie. I read last week that they disclosed certain documents they've been asking for for years. Ridiculous.

[Dig]

He said Iran hasn't disclosed their nuclear program. What a bald face lie. I read last week that they disclosed certain documents they've been asking for for years. Ridiculous.

Bush logic, "even though all evidence points to me lying and genociding races...if you look deeply, you will find that the evidence actually supports my earlier statements.  Now go f**k yourselves."

[Dig]

WTF?  Now he is reminiscing about his time caucasing in 2000.  He is like a dirty old man telling perverted stories while the cops get closer to gathering all the evidence against him.

[gEEk squad]

These questions are so stupid. They are probably asking stupid questions because they'll only get stupid answers. After watching this crap, I'm looking forward to watching The View. What has this world come to?

[Murray Von Hayek]

Bush says Iran remains a danger despite report
By Daniel Dombey in Washington and Stephen Fidler, James Blitz in London and Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran

Published: December 3 2007 18:42 | Last updated: December 4 2007 15:33

President George W. Bush said on Tuesday that Iran remains a danger despite a US intelligence report that declared Tehran halted its atomic weapons programme four years ago and may not have restarted it.

Speaking at a press conference the day after intelligence agencies released an assessment that contradicted his administration’s assertions that Iran was developing a nuclear bomb, Mr Bush said: “All options are on the table for dealing with Iran” He went on to declare “Iran was dangerous, Iran is dangerous and Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.”

Iran earlier welcomed the report which downgraded its assessment of the risks posed by the country’s nuclear ambitions.

Tehran interpreted the admission as an Iranian victory which backed up its argument that its nuclear programme was for peaceful purposes.

Mohammad-Ali Hosseini, Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman, said it showed the previous reports by the US administration and officials were “baseless and untrustworthy”. He urged Europe to rethink its current “unrealistic policies”.

Alaeddin Boroujerdi, the head of the Iranian parliament’s national security committee, said the US administration had to follow the “confessions by one of its most sensitive organisations”.

A former senior Iranian official said the downgrade decreased the possibility of a US attack against the country’s nuclear sites “at least in the near future”. However, he warned that some parts in the report which do not rule out Iran’s future nuclear intentions clear the way for the US to go for military confrontation against in the future. “We still have to wait to understand why the US published this report now. Its intention can be to decrease the possibility of attack in order to let sanctions get tougher in the next resolutions.”

Monday’s National Intelligence Estimate by the US undermines arguments for prompt US military action against Iran to stop its nuclear programme and provides support for intensifying international diplomatic and economic pressures on Tehran.

It provides the most comprehensive and nuanced unclassified picture yet of how US intelligence agencies view Iran’s nuclear intentions and capabilities.

It says Tehran halted its weapons programme four years ago “primarily in response to international pressure” and suggests Tehran’s decisions “are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs”.

The last declassified assessment on the subject, in 2005, said the weapons programme was continuing and expressed “high confidence” that Iran was determined to develop nuclear weapons. Since then, leading US officials have used the 2005 report to claim Iran is actively pursuing nuclear weapons, which senior intelligence officials now believe is not the case. Monday’s report said: “Tehran’s decision to halt its nuclear weapons programme suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005.”

The White House said it would be a mistake for the international community to ease pressure on Iran. “It confirms we were right to be concerned about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons,” said Stephen Hadley, national security adviser. “The estimate offers grounds for hope that the problem can be solved diplomatically without the use of force as the administration has been trying to do.”

John Rockefeller, chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, said the judgments demonstrated lessons learned from failures over Iraq. “They reflect a real difference from the views espoused by top administration officials,” he said. “This demonstrates a new willingness to question assumptions.”

The assessment distinguishes between the military’s weapons efforts – which Iran has never admitted – and Iran’s continuing uranium enrichment programme, which is public. The report estimates the public programme could produce enough material for a nuclear weapon in 2009 at the earliest – but more likely in the 2010-15 time frame. Iran is also continuing to develop longer range missiles, it notes.

It states that Iran would probably use covert facilities rather than its declared nuclear sites for the production of weapons-grade uranium. If true, this would reduce the efficacy of military action.

Additional reporting by Andrew Ward in Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007

[Murray Von Hayek]

Antiwar.com

For those who have doubts about miracles, a double one occurred today. An honest National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran's nuclear program has been issued, and its "Key Judgments" were made public.

With redraft after redraft, it was what the Germans call eine schwere Geburt – a difficult birth, 10 months in gestation.

I do not know how often Vice President Dick Cheney visited CIA headquarters during the gestation period, but I am told he voiced his displeasure as soon as he saw the first sonogram/draft very early this year and is so displeased with what issued that he has refused to be the godfather.

This time Cheney and his neocon colleagues were unable to abort the process. And after delivery to the press, this child is going to be very hard to explain – the more so since it is legitimate.

The main points of the NIE:

"We judge that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program…

"We assess with moderate confidence Tehran has not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007.

"We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely…

"We judge with moderate confidence Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame.

"We judge with high confidence that Iran will not be technically capable of producing and reprocessing enough plutonium for a weapon before about 2015."

Having reached these conclusions, it is not surprising that the NIE's authors make a point of saying up front (in bold type), "This NIE does not [italics in original] assume that Iran intends to acquire nuclear weapons."

This, of course, pulls out the rug from under Cheney's claim of a "fairly robust new nuclear program" in Iran and President Bush's inaccurate assertion that Iranian leaders have even admitted they are developing nuclear weapons.

Apparently, intelligence community analysts are no longer required to produce the faith-based intelligence that brought us the Oct. 1, 2002, NIE "Iraq's Continuing Program for Weapons of Mass Destruction" – the worst in the history of U.S. intelligence.

Truth be told, one of the Iran NIE's findings was written into its first draft, from which Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell drew in telling the Senate Armed Services Committee on Feb. 27 that Iran could possibly develop a nuclear weapon by early-to-mid-next decade.

McConnell said not a word, though, about Iran's having halted its nuclear weapons program in fall 2003. And in February, he was still adhering to the faith-based approach, saying, "We assess that Iran seeks to develop a nuclear weapon."

At which point Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) tried to sum up the proceedings with the disingenuous comment "We all agree, then, that the Iranians are trying to get nuclear weapons."

Curiously, McConnell indicated recently that the key findings of NIEs would no longer be made public.

My guess is that the Pentagon, and especially Adm. William Fallon, commander of our forces in the Middle East, succeeded in persuading McConnell to go public. Several months ago, Fallon was reliably reported to have said, "We are not going to do Iran on my watch."

And it is an open secret that he and other senior military officers, except those of the Air Force, are strongly opposed to getting into a war with Iran for which the U.S. is so ill prepared.

Will President George W. Bush and our domesticated media succeed in dismissing this latest NIE as "guesswork," as he has in the past? It is going to be highly interesting to see how the White House will try to spin this one.
 

[Dig]

Cheney’s office advocated for Iran attacks ‘on a daily basis.’
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/04/cheneys-office-advocated-for-iran-attacks-on-a-daily-basis/
The BBC reports:

[T]he new NIE will make it harder for proponents of military action against Iran to argue their case.

One source, who has close links to US intelligence, said that members of Vice President Dick Cheney’s staff continued to call for military strikes against Iran “on a daily basis”.

Atrios adds: “It must be understood that since our intelligence agencies don’t believe Iran has a nuclear weapons program, it also means that they don’t know where such a program would be physically located if it did exist. This means that any desires of Dick Cheney and his people to bomb Iran simply involve… bombing the shit out of Iran.”

[Dig]

Bush: DNI Told Me ‘We Have Some New Information, He Didn’t Tell Me What The Information Was’ »
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/04/bush-never-learned-of-nie/

At a press briefing this morning, President Bush said he was told by his Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell “in August” that “we have some new information” regarding Iran’s nuclear program. But Bush asserted “he didn’t tell me what the information was”:

BUSH: I was made aware of the NIE last week. In August, I think it was John — Mike McConnell came in and said, We have some new information. He didn’t tell me what the information was. He did tell me it was going to take a while to analyze.

Later, when a reporter followed-up on this statement, Bush asserted no one ever told him to stop ratcheting up the rhetoric against Iran:

REPORTER: Are you saying at no point while the rhetoric was escalating, as World War III was making it into conversation — at no point, nobody from your intelligence team or your administration was saying, Maybe you want to back it down a little bit?

BUSH: No — I’ve never — nobody ever told me that.

Watch it:

http://video.thinkprogress.org/2007/12/bushirannie.320.240.jpg

Yesterday, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said, “when the President was told that we had some additional information, he was basically told: stand down; needs to be evaluated; we’ll come to you and tell you what we think it means.” Later in the briefing, Hadley reversed course and said, “In terms of stand down, they did not tell the President to stand down and stop talking about Iran’s nuclear program.” White House officials are obfuscating on what they knew and when they knew it because the answer has the potential of further damaging the credibility of what they have asserted about Iran in the past few months. As ThinkProgress has noted, while the intelligence community was processing new information that Iran was “less determined to develop nuclear weapons,” President Bush was specifically warning that Iran was trying to “build a nuclear weapon.”

To recap: At the same time Bush was ratcheting up the rhetoric on Iran, he was told by his National Intelligence Director that that have “some new information.” Yet Bush wants the public to believe he never learned what the information was, nor was he interested.

UPDATE: The Washington Post reports this morning that “intelligence officials began briefing senior members of the Bush administration” about the new information “beginning in July.” But apparently, Bush was left completely in the dark until last Tuesday.

[Biggs]

Click here for a larger image.

The question (besides being distracting) was about how George is BFF with the house of Saud.
_____________________________________

I did click to enlarge and had an experience I never thought a likely one, a full view of Jenna Bush's *%$!^%**   

I feel a bit stranger than I did 2 minutes ago.   

[Triadtropz]

He spent 2 years scaring the shit out of everyone, and now even after everyone knows it is all fake, he sticks to the lies.  George Bush is the biggest terrorist in the world.

I watched the press conference..I felt i was watching true evil...when he makes those quirky lil faces I squirm...I cant believe he turned the whole thing into uncertainty and fear...what do we pay the intelligence people for ?..so he can mock their findings and turn it into danger...this guy needed to be arrested yesterday!!

[Dig]

I did click to enlarge and had an experience I never thought a likely one, a full view of Jenna Bush's *%$!^%**    I feel a bit stranger than I did 2 minutes ago.   

BTW the woman was Shiite, and Saudi is Wahabi extremist Sunni.  What is going on over there is genocide and the Shiites are the new target.  She has no secret service protection, no influence in the courts and she was emprisoned after being gang raped. Different then Jenna I would say.  She was sentenced to 90 lashes, when she appealed she got 200 lashes and 6 months prison.  Also the Sunnis that were arrested got 2-9 years when shiites in Saudi Arabia who are convicted for attempted rape get beheaded.

George...

does not equal

Not condoning how anyone dresses, but how the hell can Bush say, "first thing I thought was what if that happened to my daughter..."  when this was just more evidence of the Wahabi system of elitest justice.  If anything this shows that it could never happen to Bush's daughter, but Bush condones it happening to other people's daughters. 

WTF? 

[Dig]

I watched the press conference..I felt i was watching true evil...when he makes those quirky lil faces I squirm...I cant believe he turned the whole thing into uncertainty and fear...what do we pay the intelligence people for ?..so he can mock their findings and turn it into danger...this guy needed to be arrested yesterday!!

He has just basically said that he will continue to lie and promote genocide as he kills more Americans and depleats the economy.

Why is he not in jail?

[Sasha]

Why is he not in jail?

He should be, its just that they co-own many of the jails with the judges that might sentance them.  Not all, but enough.

[Sasha]

Btw, WOOOOOO.  That Jenna Bush pict needs to be on the news next to every Paris Hilton and Britney stripping pict.  I won't hold my breath though, and more WOOOOOOOO.  That was rough viewing without any form of painkiller.  Too many jokes to make.  Must refrain.

But back to the origional topic, Dictator Bush looked like a mental patient in that speech earlier.  He hadn't recieved any Intel assessments before last week?!?  about Iran?!?  I couldn't believe someone in the reporters gaggle didn't leap to their feet yelling, "BULLSHIT"!  I certainly did.

[Dig]

Btw, WOOOOOO.  That Jenna Bush pict needs to be on the news next to every Paris Hilton and Britney stripping pict.  I won't hold my breath though, and more WOOOOOOOO.  That was rough viewing without any form of painkiller.  Too many jokes to make.  Must refrain.

But back to the origional topic, Dictator Bush looked like a mental patient in that speech earlier.  He hadn't recieved any Intel assessments before last week?!?  about Iran?!?  I couldn't believe someone in the reporters gaggle didn't leap to their feet yelling, "BULLSHIT"!  I certainly did.

why do you think they are showing the brit/paris pics?

that pic was taken over 2 years ago (7/2005). http://www.freedomunderground.org/view.php?v=3&t=3&aid=18073

conditioning for when it goes viral (which judging by the reaction I guess it has not yet).

[Dig]

Podhoretz’s ‘Dark Suspicion’: Intel Community Trying To Sabotage Bush With NIE «
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/04/podhoretz-nie-iran/



Norman Podhoretz, widely reputed to be the “godfather” of neoconservatism, has been one of the most aggressive hawks clamoring for war with Iran. Podhoretz laid out the “The Case For Bombing Iran” in a June cover story in the right-wing Commentary Magazine. He insisted that the Iranians were very close to developing a nuclear weapon:

[Iran’s] effort to build a nuclear arsenal makes it the potentially most dangerous one of all. […] [A]ll this negotiating has had the same result as Munich had with Hitler. That is, it has bought the Iranians more time in which they have moved closer and closer to developing nuclear weapons.

Yesterday’s NIE proved Podhoretz’s claims were false. Rather than modify his views on Iran, Podhoretz — who was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2004 — aired a nasty conspiracy theory yesterday, attacking the authors of the NIE and accusing the intelligence community of deliberately “leaking material calculated to undermine George W. Bush:”

I must confess to suspecting that the intelligence community, having been excoriated for supporting the then universal belief that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, is now bending over backward to counter what has up to now been a similarly universal view (including as is evident from the 2005 NIE, within the intelligence community itself) that Iran is hell-bent on developing nuclear weapons. […] But I entertain an even darker suspicion. It is that the intelligence community, which has for some years now been leaking material calculated to undermine George W. Bush, is doing it again. This time the purpose is to head off the possibility that the President may order air strikes on the Iranian nuclear installations.

After insisting that Iran was “only a small step away from producing nuclear weapons,” and after pushing for military strikes against Iran for months, Podhoretz is apparently determined not to let facts get in the way of his prayers for an Iran war.

UPDATE: Podhoretz isn’t the only conservative desperately spinning the NIE to buttress his hawkish positions. Some other examples from conservative blogs: 

Strata-Strata: “This smells like another leak by forces in our intel community trying to — once again — influence our national elections.”

Powerline: “But the report offers no reason to be less concerned about the likelihood that Iran will possess nuclear weapons in the near future, and no reason to doubt that our own willingness to take military action is one of the factors that will influence decision-making in Tehran.”

Michelle Malkin: “What’s not making headlines (the certainty that Iran indeed had a nuke program) is as telling as what is making news (the halting of the program in 2003).”

Seth Liebelson at the Corner: If Iran shut its program down in the fall of 2003 MIGHT, MIGHT, MIGHT it have anything to do with it noticing that the US militarily took out its neighbor (another enemy of the U.S.) earlier that year for, among other things, having a concealed WMD program?

Michael Rubin at the Corner: “If Iran was working on a nuclear weapons program until 2003, what does this say about U.S. policy in the late Clinton period and European engagement?”

[Sasha]

why do you think they are showing the brit/paris pics?

that pic was taken 2 years ago (7/205). http://www.freedomunderground.org/view.php?v=3&t=3&aid=18073

conditioning for when it goes viral (which judging by the reaction I guess it has not yet).

Very interesting.  No, I don't think the Jenna picts have gone viral, at least I can say I haven't seen 'em.  Two years ago,... candid celebrity nude shots have been going on for awhile, but I'd have to agree that it hasn't been that long since the mass media was pushing the pictures, and in a sense advocating with publicity their drunken unfortunates.

[Sub-X]

Bush claims Iran remains a threat
Tuesday, 4 December 2007 20:22
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1204/iran.html
                   
US President George W Bush is working to shore up his embattled Iran strategy after a US intelligence report said Iran halted its nuclear weapons programme in 2003.

The intelligence assessment has reopened the international controversy over Iran's disputed programme.


Iran said the US report had vindicated its stance, while UN atomic watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei said the document could help defuse tension though he added that Iran must step up cooperation with his agency.

However Mr Bush is adamant. 'Iran was dangerous, Iran is dangerous and Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon,' he told a White House press conference.

President Bush even called on US allies to step up pressure on Iran. 'The best way to ensure that the world is peaceful in the future is for the international community to continue to work together to say to the Iranians we are going to isolate you.'

Iran welcomed the report, which confirmed that it had halted a drive for atomic weapons in 2003.

The National Intelligence Estimate said that US allegations about Iran's atomic goals had been exaggerated for at least two years, although it could have the capability to make a nuclear weapon by 2015.

'This report proves that Mr Bush's statements - which always speak of the serious threat of Iran's nuclear programme - are unreliable and fictitious,' said foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini.

International Atomic Energy Agency head Mohamed ElBaradei, whose inspectors have been investigating Iran's nuclear drive for four years, called for immediate negotiations between Iran and its western critics.

'This new assessment by the US should help to defuse the current crisis,' he said in a statement. 'At the same time, it should prompt Iran to work actively with the IAEA.'

In October, President Bush had sounded the alarm over Iran's nuclear drive, raising the spectre of 'World War III' or a 'nuclear holocaust' if it obtained an atomic arsenal.

The US report, a consensus view of all 16 US spy agencies, said Iran appeared 'less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005'.

It concluded that 'the programme probably was halted primarily in response to international pressure (which) suggests that Iran may be more vulnerable to influence on the issue than we judged previously'.

The assessment said US agencies had 'moderate confidence' that Iran would be able to produce enough enriched uranium for a weapon sometime between 2010 and 2015.

[MarkCentury]

This story:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/041207Hadley.htm

and the follow on today is HUGE.

Yesterday Hadley said the final NIE conclusion had only been reached DAYS before!! (it was YEARS!)

This is one of the biggest bombshells to expose the lies of the Bush administration.

In a nutshell the story is:

For years Bush and company KNEW there was no Iranian nuclear weapons program.  With this full knowledge they:

1) Suppressed the release of the NIE
2) Sent in special ops forces to foment violence in Iran.
3) Publicly declared the Iranians DID have a nuclear weapons program under way.
4) Publicly called for PRE-EMPTIVE NUCLEAR STRIKES on Iran!!!!!!!!!!!
5) Several of the current "mainstream" Presidential candidates chimed in saying that a preemptive nuclear strike against Iran was on the table, and a serious possibility.
6) Cheney had full knowledge of the truth during his aircraft carrier photo-op where he threatened Iran.

So we have the highest officials in our nation taking us to the brink of an unprecedented NUCLEAR FIRST STRIKE while they had FULL KNOWLEGE that they were blatantly LIEING!!

The ONLY voice of reason on the current political stage was (and is) RON PAUL.  He was ridiculed when he suggested we had no business even contemplating attacking Iran.  He looks might good now!

How many hundreds of thousands (millions?) of deaths would have resulted from such an insane rush to nuclear war???

This story needs to be layed out in terms so unmistakable that we drive a stake through the souless hearts of these bastards!!!!

Mark

[Dig]

SITUATION ROOM - WOLF SHOWS HE LOVES KILLING INNOCENT ARABS IN GENOCIDES

Wolf said that people are NOW doubting US intelligence agencies because this report on Iran is obvioulsy flawed.  He then said that many are questioning how accurate our intelligence systems are.  Then he said that Israel is questioning it too.

BULLSHIT WOLF - it is not Israel, it is your neocon fraudsters and traitors at AIPAC.

Thankfully Sy Hersch is on to give it to Wolf and his satanic and apocolyptic visions.

Sy Hersh told Wolf, well if Israel feels that the data is wrong they can do what they want.  It should not involve us.

BTW - Sy reported a year ago that this report was available and was being supressed.  We need to get out of the entire region and that includes all weapons to Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, and Lebenon.

Just stop it, just get the hell out already!

[Dig]

This story:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/041207Hadley.htm

and the follow on today is HUGE.

Yesterday Hadley said the final NIE conclusion had only been reached DAYS before!! (it was YEARS!)

This is one of the biggest bombshells to expose the lies of the Bush administration.

In a nutshell the story is:

For years Bush and company KNEW there was no Iranian nuclear weapons program.  With this full knowledge they:

1) Suppressed the release of the NIE
2) Sent in special ops forces to foment violence in Iran.
3) Publicly declared the Iranians DID have a nuclear weapons program under way.
4) Publicly called for PRE-EMPTIVE NUCLEAR STRIKES on Iran!!!!!!!!!!!
5) Several of the current "mainstream" Presidential candidates chimed in saying that a preemptive nuclear strike against Iran was on the table, and a serious possibility.
6) Cheney had full knowledge of the truth during his aircraft carrier photo-op where he threatened Iran.

So we have the highest officials in our nation taking us to the brink of an unprecedented NUCLEAR FIRST STRIKE while they had FULL KNOWLEGE that they were blatantly LIEING!!

The ONLY voice of reason on the current political stage was (and is) RON PAUL.  He was ridiculed when he suggested we had no business even contemplating attacking Iran.  He looks might good now!

How many hundreds of thousands (millions?) of deaths would have resulted from such an insane rush to nuclear war???

This story needs to be layed out in terms so unmistakable that we drive a stake through the souless hearts of these bastards!!!!

Mark

No matter how you slice it, it is treason.

There is no other possibility.

[MarkCentury]

No matter how you slice it, it is treason.

There is no other possibility.

I totally agree!!  And good job on the details you've laid out here in the forum!

[gEEk squad]

Pat Buchanon is on CNN right now basically saying what Bush has done is treason (indirectly of course). He also gave a near endorsement of Ron Paul. He spoke very kindly to all of Ron Paul's views but went on to say that only Giuliani, Romney or Huckabee can win the nomination. Just imagine if he added Ron Paul into that. 

[Dig]

Pat Buchanon is on CNN right now basically saying what Bush has done is treason (indirectly of course). He also gave a near endorsement of Ron Paul. He spoke very kindly to all of Ron Paul's views but went on to say that only Giuliani, Romney or Huckabee can win the nomination. Just imagine if he added Ron Paul into that. 

I predict in 2 weeks he will!

That piece on Ron Paul was outstanding!  Cannot wait till it is YouTubed - BTW did you notice the subliminal association?  The word Huckabee was behing Wolf's head 2x when talking about Ron Paul.  How is that possible if they are showing random headlines?