truthring.org — Today on CNN, Seymour Hersh of the New Yorker, the one who mainstreamed the Abu Gahrib story, has confirmed with insiders that Bush and the Israeli Government planned months in advance that any incident, no matter how small, would ignite a broad and punishing response by Israel in a preemptive move to start a war with Iran.
Aug 13, 2006 View in Crawl 4
kohathAug 13, 2006
"You mean since we overthrew their elected government?"I guess I don't understand. Whether "we overthrew their elected government" or not, it doesn't really change what Iran has done since 1979 or what they'll do in the future. Elected or not, we need to overthrow the government they have NOW.
americanvikingAug 14, 2006
LMAO, well if you believe S.Hersh then you're kinda of a fool, no wait, you are a fool. S.Hersh, if he were in Berlin in 1940, would have been one of the Jewish 'Police-Officers' in charge of rounding up other Jews for Hitler. Period.Even if it is true, this is brilliant strategy on behalf of the Bush Administration, shows President Bush is proactive and not reactive, and I love that. I will not try to explain this to you liberal-pacifists-appeasers, you'll never get it...until it's too late. No wait, there will be those of us to save you, so you can cry and moan in the future.The United States Military Branches...Second to NONEGive em Hell Israel...and the Cease-Fire is a joke.
bluehensamAug 14, 2006
The story is far from "confirmed" so it should be taken with a grain of salt. But it is compelling, nonetheless, and I can't wait to read the actual article. Sy Hersh is one of the most respected investigative journalists in the world. As most diggers know, he's uncovered some pretty impressive s**t from My Lai to Abu Ghraib. But as I was listening to him, I couldn't help but ask, "So what?" Knowing that Israel is a stated ally of the US and that our military plans for any number of possible conflict scenarios, is it really so surprising that there may have been some coordination and planning here? It all depends on the depth and breadth of this coordination and, even assuming Hersh's story holds water, we don't know the details yet.
williamdyerAug 14, 2006
You meant "neocon," right?Otherwise, as a psychopath, I might be offended.
zlayaAug 14, 2006Submitter
The US you see today, rampaging across the world proclaiming "Democracy and Piece" is nothing but a fraud. As i said, there was an overthrow of our legitimate government on 9/11. 9/11 was a coup d'état. Since then, the criminals have been using an exuse of 'bringing freedom and spreading democracy' to take over the Middle East, 'war on terror' has eroded peoples most basic rights. This is obvius from the gian Military Bases that are beeing built in Iraq and from laws such as the patriot act.Please forgive us. Its really not our fault, we did not elect this regime, it was stolen from us, stolen with FEAR and LIES. However, there is some good news. People of the world are Waking Up to this fraud. The Truth Movement is stronger, and it will destroy this criminality. We do need the help of all peaceful people. Iran has some of the greatest folks out there. So does Israel. Our governments howerver, are forcing us into a collision. Let's not allow them to manipulate us like this.
kohathAug 15, 2006
"You are confusing good intentions with results."No I'm not. Both the intentions and the results are good."We have good intentions, but more Iraqis died because of the invasion than if we had left Saddam alone."FEWER Iraqis died because of the invasion than if we had left Saddam alone:<a class="user" href="http://www.leftwinglies.com/livessaved.html">http://www.leftwinglies.com/livessaved.html</a>"And, of course, there were no WMDs."<a class="user" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/21/AR2006062101837.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/21/AR2006062101837.html</a>
lynxproAug 15, 2006
Given? No, freedom fighters/terrorists fought the British forces in Palestine until the British relented their League of Nations/United Nations mandate to administer Palestine and thus led to those forces declaring independence and proclaiming the modern State of Israel. Which was followed by the gimp Harry Truman automatically granting diplomatic recognition to the new State without consulting any of America's allies. Then started the gravy train of foreign aid given to Israel.Its no wonder the Palestinians despise our foreign policy. Before the Hamas takeover of the Palestinian Authority, the U.S. gave the Palestinians $700 million annually in humanitarian aid. Compare that to the billions annually given to Israel in the form of loans for state-of-the-art military weaponry and the finances that allow for the continued settlement on the occupied lands. Add to that that the U.S. won't support the right-of-return for the 3 million displaced Palestinians so they cannot return to the lands they were forced out of because that would give the Palestinians a majority status amongst the populace of Israel and as such the State would revert back to being Palestine if the democratic process was respected.Even worse, many Evangelical Christians (and their leaders) reflexively and cynically support Israel because many believe if radical Israelis were allowed to destroy the Dome of the Rock and rebuild Solomon's Temple, it would make it possible for Jesus to return because it would set into play the crowning of the Anti-Christ as the "true" Messiah in the Temple. The Evangelicals do this at the expense of the Palestinians, many of which are actually fellow Christians (of the Greek Orthodox branch) but one never hears about them in the American media. Even Araft's wife was a Christian before she had to covert to Islam to marry him.Its enough to make anyone cynical who actually chooses to study the subject instead of ignoring it and getting on with daily life such as finding out when American Idol returns to television.
williamdyerAug 15, 2006
@FrodoSo, what's going to help? Currently, the Bush administration is planning an unprecedented bombing campaign. 45,000 PGMs. These hit their target 95%+ of the time. The destruction of intended targets will be greater than all the bombs previous used in any war. After that, an invasion three to five times as big as that of Iraq.Are you waiting for Iran to be liberated this way? If not, you might consider other options than the agenda pushed by the Israel lobby and neocons.
Closed AccountAug 17, 2006
Wow Kohath, your just like dubya, either with us or against us.And when did anyone say the US cant defend itself? what people are trying to get through your thick skull is that there are better ways of defending the US than launching pre-emptive wars. All you are doing by going to war is creating more enemy's for yourself.Look at Afghanistan, Taliban and Al-Qaeda still reign terror, people die, people blame the US.Look in Iraq, more unstable than ever and thousands of people dieing every month, people blame the USLook at Israel, you supplied weapons, people blame the US because it could have stopped the war in within days, but it waited 34 days.All you are doing is harming your friends and neighbours, remember the ones that you want to protect so much.
yaya765Aug 18, 2006
Doesn't matter if you are Republican or Dem, you need to read this article by Pat Buchanan and get the facts right before you pass judgment on this. (Go to <a class="user" href="http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51116">http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51116</a> )Here is what Buchanan wrote:When Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert unleashed his navy and air force on Lebanon, accusing that tiny nation of an "act of war," the last pillar of Bush's Middle East policy collapsed.First came capitulation on the Bush Doctrine, as Pyongyang and Tehran defied Bush's dictum: The world's worst regimes will not be allowed to acquire the world's worst weapons. Then came suspension of the democracy crusade as Islamic militants exploited free elections to advance to power and office in Egypt, Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank, Iraq and Iran.Now, Israel's rampage against a defenseless Lebanon – smashing airport runways, fuel tanks, power plants, gas stations, lighthouses, bridges, roads and the occasional refugee convoy – has exposed Bush's folly in subcontracting U.S. policy out to Tel Aviv, thus making Israel the custodian of our reputation and interests in the Middle East.The Lebanon that Israel, with Bush's blessing, is smashing up has a pro-American government, heretofore considered a shining example of his democracy crusade. Yet, asked in St. Petersburg if he would urge Israel to use restraint in its airstrikes, Bush sounded less like the leader of the Free World than some bellicose city councilman from Brooklyn Heights.What Israel is up to was described by its army chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, when he threatened to "turn back the clock in Lebanon 20 years."Olmert seized upon Hezbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers to unleash the IDF in a pre-planned attack to make the Lebanese people suffer until the Lebanese government disarms Hezbollah, a task the Israeli army could not accomplish in 18 years of occupation.Israel is doing the same to the Palestinians. To punish these people for the crime of electing Hamas, Olmert imposed an economic blockade of Gaza and the West Bank and withheld the $50 million in monthly tax and customs receipts due the Palestinians.Then, Israel instructed the United States to terminate all aid to the Palestinian Authority, though Bush himself had called for the elections and for the participation of Hamas. Our Crawford cowboy meekly complied.The predictable result: Fatah and Hamas fell to fratricidal fighting, and Hamas militants began launching Qassam rockets over the fence from Gaza into Israel. Hamas then tunneled into Israel, killed two soldiers, captured one, took him back into Gaza and demanded a prisoner exchange.Israel's response was to abduct half of the Palestinian cabinet and parliament and blow up a $50 million U.S.-insured power plant. That cut off electricity for half a million Palestinians. Their food spoiled, their water could not be purified, and their families sweltered in the summer heat of the Gaza desert. One family of seven was wiped out on a beach by what the IDF assures us was an errant artillery shell.Let it be said: Israel has a right to defend herself, a right to counter-attack against Hezbollah and Hamas, a right to clean out bases from which Katyusha or Qassam rockets are being fired and a right to occupy land from which attacks are mounted on her people.But what Israel is doing is imposing deliberate suffering on civilians, collective punishment on innocent people, to force them to do something they are powerless to do: disarm the gunmen among them. Such a policy violates international law and comports neither with our values nor our interests. It is un-American and un-Christian.But where are the Christians? Why is Pope Benedict virtually alone among Christian leaders to have spoken out against what is being done to Lebanese Christians and Muslims?When al-Qaida captured two U.S. soldiers and barbarically butchered them, the U.S. Army did not smash power plants across the Sunni Triangle. Why then is Bush not only silent but openly supportive when Israelis do this?Democrats attack Bush for crimes of which he is not guilty, including Haditha and Abu Ghraib. Why are they, too, silent when Israel pursues a conscious policy of collective punishment of innocent peoples?Britain's diplomatic goal in two world wars was to bring the naive cousins in, to "pull their chestnuts out of the fire." Israel and her paid and pro-bono agents here appear determined to expand the Iraq war into Syria and Iran, and have America fight and finish all of Israel's enemies.That Tel Aviv is maneuvering us to fight its wars is understandable. That Americans are ignorant of, or complicit in this, is deplorable.Already, Bush is ranting about Syria being behind the Hezbollah capture of the Israeli soldiers. But where is the proof?Who is whispering in his ear? The same people who told him Iraq was maybe months away from an atom bomb, that an invasion would be a "cakewalk," that he would be Churchill, that U.S. troops would be greeted with candy and flowers, that democracy would break out across the region, that Palestinians and Israelis would then sit down and make peace?How much must America pay for the education of this man?
pragmaticsenseAug 19, 2006
... and you're worried about someone using the term islamofacist.
zlayaAug 23, 2006Submitter
thats the point, it didnt work out :)