Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Is US on Brink of War with Iran?
FERNDALE- Scott Ritter, one of the former United Nations inspectors who didn't find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, denounced the Bush administration for going to war with WMDs as the primary rationale in March 2003.
Now he fears the United States is on the brink of war with Iran. Ritter points to a military buildup in the region, the so-called threats to the U.S. Navy from Iranian speed boats last week and a U.S. Senate resolution that labels elements of Iran as a terrorist organization.
"It's like filling up a house with gasoline and flicking matches at the door," Ritter said. "Sooner or later it will connect."
Ritter spoke to the Daily Tribune via telephone Friday while on the road in Colorado. He and media critic Jeff Cohen were driving to meet with school and church groups in Boulder and Denver this weekend for U.S. Tour of Duty, a series of public forums aimed at starting a national dialogue about global engagement.
The tour will bring Ritter and Cohen, a former Detroit resident who refers to mainstream media as the "weapons of mass distraction," to First United Methodist Church of Ferndale, 22331 Woodward Ave., from 2-4 p.m. Saturday, Jan. 26.
The local tour stop is sponsored by the Huntington Woods Peace, Citizenship and Education Project. Spokeswoman Linda Ashley said the church can hold 700 people and she urges area residents to attend.
"We think Iran and U.S. foreign policy is a real important topic," Ashley said. "This is a unique forum that gives our community the chance to participate in a national discussion."
Ritter said he will present factual data that the country is heading toward another military conflict in the Middle East.
"I draw heavily on the words of the Bush administration and people can draw their own conclusion," he said.
To him, President George W. Bush has been waging a war of words with Iran for years. He points to the president saying "all options are on the table" regarding Iran and its alleged nuclear program in 2005 and then calling Iran "a threat to world peace" last week.
"The president isn't talking about sending Condoleezza Rice to Iran as an option," Ritter said. "We're not on the path of peaceful resolution through diplomacy."
His conclusion: "What's really going on is a road map for global domination. The war in Iraq initiated a long-term strategy neo conservatives have been formulating to divide the world into spheres of influence and dominate them economically, militarily and diplomatically."
Wouldn't some savvy, headline hungry reporter be following the story if that were the case? Cohen says not if they work for corporate media.
A former on-air commentator and senior producer at MSNBC, Cohen was assigned to Phil Donohue's show before it was canceled in February 2003. He says he obtained a memo criticizing Donohue for seeming to delight in presenting guests who were anti-war, anti-Bush and skeptical of the administration's motives.
"It's because we practiced journalism and had opposing views that were terminated," Cohen said.
After the show's cancellation, Cohen said MSNBC issued ordered that every anti-war guest needed to be countered by two pro-war guests.
"That was their quota system to shift the debate for pro-invasion forces," according to Cohen, who has a book out called "Cable News Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media."
Where does he get his news? Cohen said his home page opens to www.commondreams.org, which bills itself as a news center for the "progressive community."
"The good news in the realm of media is that amazing things are happening with independent journalists," Cohen said. "They are filling a huge vacuum left by corporate media that practice jingoism when it comes to war and tabloidism in general."
Cohen and Ritter scoffed at the USA Today headline in Friday's edition proclaiming "75 percent of Baghdad secure."
The article says data given by the military to the newspaper provides a clear snapshot of how security has improved in Baghdad since 30,000 additional American troops arrived in Iraq last year.
"The average citizen will say things are working, but the small print shows it's a smoke and mirrors game," Cohen said. "It's really quieter in Baghdad because of ethnic cleansing, concrete walls, checkpoints and al-Sadr declared a cease fire. We haven't defeated them or got them on our side. USA Today is a misrepresentation of reality.
© 2007 The Daily Tribune
104 Comments so far
Show AllOne saving grace might be that Bilderberg has refused to support an attack on Iran according to American Free Press. They basically told Dumbya he's on his own.
Unfortunately, that arrogant, stubborn son of a bitch (literally) might just start a war for spite. Because, after all, no one tells Bab's monster creation that he's wrong.
I don't care if the crazy christian zionists drool for the rapture, but can't you fools leave the rest of us out of your madness? Hell, you've already lined your pockets with ALL our money.
It fits Alex Jones theories .
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1070329053600562261
On this eve of all eves please go to this link, listen, learn and realize it is NOW!
Beyond Vietnam: A Time To Break Silence
By Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
4 April 1967
Speech delivered by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. On April 4, 1967 at a meeting of Clergy and Laity Concerned at Riverside Church in New York City.
http://www.ssc.msu.edu/~sw/mlk/brksInc.htm
Hear the strength, care, confusion, a human needing hope trying to motivate but a few. We are there once again, maybe it might spark someone. Please hear that voice of Dr. King, now sshhh
I forgot this speech is not widely realized or offered, be kind and share it with all.
lillulu January 20th, 2008 7:01 pm
I've heard that George Bush, a self-described Christian man, told others that he was going to f*** bin Laden in the a**. I didn't know Christian men talked in such vulgar terms, and I didn't know George Bush was a homosexual. Well, you learn something new every day.
lillulu, do a google search using the terms "george bush victor ashe" without quotation marks and do some reading.
here is one of the main reasons why the United States wants to attack Iran ... which happens to be one of the main reasons why they attacked Iraq
"US Attack on Iran Imminent: Why the US wants to attack Iran"
http://www.chycho.com/?q=us_iran_attack
and here is what will happen if they are allowed to do this
"What an attack on Iran really means: Gwynne Dyer's Secret"
http://www.chycho.com/?q=Gwynne_Dyer
and God help us if they use Nukes in this attack ... only Americans can stop this mad government ... i just hope they are waking up to the reality of what is happening
This came to me in a vision 2 years ago - what's crazier - that I have visions or that this prophetic vision may soon come true?
5-16-2006
Watch now with horror people of the nation of the free, as your false prophets and politicians press hard for their crusade against the people of the nation of Iran.
For in their hearts speak the voices of darkness.
Woe. Woe to the people of the nation of the free.
In their righteous madness they shall seek to bring about their glorious "rapture" as they slaughter the innocent.
And they shall fulfill biblical prophecy as the false prophets who brought Armageddon to God's beloved.
And their tortured souls shall weep at their complicity with the darkness and cry out for forgiveness.
Wow. We are in so much trouble as a nation. We have drifted so very far away from what we were meant to be as a nation...
Peace.
A planetary sister.
If you look at the map and listen to what the President says, this administration has been preparing for war with Iran for many years.
Their main goal is to completely transform the Middle East. Saudi Arabian terrorists and Iraqi weapons of mass destruction may be used as the temporary story line, but the overall strategy is to conquer the Middle East.
The idea is to replace the dictators and monarchies with open markets and democratic elections. This will allow more foreign investment into the region while also opening access to the vast oil resources.
The Bush strategy has also been badly implemented in a way that has caused a lot of death and destruction throughout the region. Another problem is that using military force to change other countries to be more beneficial to our own interests and value systems is a war crime according to international laws.
Even God can't help us now.
There will be only one person to blame for this: Nancy Pelosi and the leadership of "her" Democratic Party.
Which is why I will be voting for Ron Paul on February 5th. No one from the Democratic Party deserves any of our votes and Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate (besides Kucinich) who is forcefully speaking out against this criminality, and look at what the corporately controlled MSM is doing to him:
http://people.ronpaul2008.com/campaign-updates/2008/01/19/fair-and-balanced/
I know there are many politically astute and brilliant people who read Common Dreams and per my previous comments,
I have completely changed my perspective on the whole situation. It happened when I was leaving a public hearing about a housing development and even though the room was packed with opposition to it, the Board of Supervisors in this county voted for the monstrosity anyway. On the way to the car, I realized, no one really cares about the people anymore on any level. We are being ignored. Like screaming to a deaf man. You can scream all you want.
This is true of course of our government now too whether it be ignoring the fact that 70% of the American public want Bush/Cheney gone or the contaminated products from China which are still being pumped into this country in spite of outcries from "consumers" (note consumers, not citizens).
The articles about pulling together, protesting, power to the people, etc make me sick to be honest. This only works in even a semi-operable democracy. What do you say when the people go ignored? I mean, even Nixon stepped down.
The anti-war groups don't have a clue as they continue to
use protests, letter writing, blogs, etc as their tools. Well, get a clue. New game. New rules. Their response now is "we will blow you off now and nothing will happen to us and you will wear yourselves out. Works out great for us. Keep ignoring the public and they go away eventually."
One strategy the Impeach groups are not using is to start a national campaign to demand Bush and Cheney RESIGN. This should be a national shaming effort. Billboards, commercials listing all their many crimes…get the American people to put pressure on them to step down. This would be the true litmus test if the ignore strategy is more powerful than a unified population. But I remain baffled that the ads demanding NOT impeachment but RESIGNATION are not all over every national newspaper. The American people may just corral around this. Then again, I am someone who thinks Nancy Pelosi should step down or be impeached. My fear is the Dems will lose in November because 70% of the American public is also disgusted with them. Their strategy to subvert our Constitution in the name of political strategy will backfire with serious and final consequences to our country–one they seem to care little about on the grand scale.
Assume all politicians are deaf. Assume this then start planning new strategies because as far as the people are concerned, they are now deaf to us.
This means they will not respond to cries to stop with the bombing of Iran or any country. My friends, we are out of the loop.
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hirsch.php?articleid=7649
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nch43wy8Zb8&feature=related
"Is US on Brink of War with Iran?"
No.
The "Brink" got Pinked.
This is a classic example of how the corporate media's obsession with "balance" and "fairness" keeps them from examining a story in detail. For example:
>His conclusion: "What's really going on is a road map for global domination. The war in Iraq initiated a long-term strategy neo conservatives have been formulating to divide the world into spheres of influence and dominate them economically, militarily and diplomatically."
Wouldn't some savvy, headline hungry reporter be following the story if that were the case? Cohen says not if they work for corporate media.<
Before dismissing Cohen as a conspiracy theorist, Kavanaugh might have done a quick Google search and come up with this: The Project for the New American Century at http://www.newamericancentury.org/ where you find the following statements:
"Preserving the desirable strategic situation in which the United States now
finds itself requires a globally preeminent military capability both today and in the
future.";
"Control the new "international commons" of space and "cyberspace," and pave the way for the creation of a new military service – U.S. Space Forces – with the mission of space control.";
An op-ed in the Weekly Standard entitled "How to Attack Iraq" from November 1998;
and other similar statements about the need for the U.S. to "dominate them (i.e, the rest of the world) economically, militarily and diplomatically."
And just who are/were the members of the Project for the New American Century? Oh, just people like Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and John Bolton, all of whom, coincidentally I'm sure, just happened to work for the Bush Administration! If it's a conspiracy, it's hiding in plain sight.
The corporate media's role is not to inform the public in order for them to make intelligent decisions about national plicy. It's main job is to lure eyeballs to advertisers, but it also serves as a keeper and protector of our national myths, chief of which is that the U.S. role in the world is always benevolent (execept for "mistakes," like Vietnam). How fortunate we are that our brave journalists work so hard to keep these cherished myths alive and protect us from the conspiracy-mongers who only wish to destroy our faith in the God-bestowed glory of our country (and let's not forget the majority of our fellow citizens, who enjoy these myths and would probably cling to them ferociously, regardless of the evidence presented to rebut them).
If McCain is the repugnican nominee, and Clinton the dimocratic, and there is some war skirmish with Iran around october--it will no doubt benefit McCain, or any republican other than Clinton.
Of course the US wants to transform the Middle East. Of course it wants to change the Middle East into an area where there are free markets and where it can get easy access to all that oil.
The irony of this is that this probably could have been done with patience, diplomacy and the US's secret weapon ( a weapon so secret even the CIA doesn't seem to be aware of it): tourism.
But George Bush and Co. fubared it.
TimeToMove, it's time to read WAR IS A RACKET by Smedley Butler and IRON HEEL by Jack London and realize that America will always be on the brink of war with someone or something. War not only sells, it now runs the country. Think of Blackwater and Walmart while reading.
Hoa binh
Mr Scott Ritter has been doing his best for more than 6 years to make us buy into the official 9/11 fairytale of 19 Islamist hijackers armed with boxcutters who want to cut our throats because they hate our freedom bullshit. Can we ever believe a word of what he says as long as he sides with fearmongers?
"In April 2006, Iran said it shot down a U.S. surveillance drone flying over the country."
"Teams of US commandos have been operating inside Iran since last summer, selecting suspected weapons sites for possible air strikes, The New Yorker reported Monday."
Technically, the United States of America is at "war" with Iran already. So go out and buy something you can't afford but might keep reality at bay another few minutes...
TimeToMove,
Yes, I was asking the same thing a few years ago and even got hundreds of folks at a peace rally in downtown Sarasota to chant "FOR THE GOOD OF ALL MANKIND BUSH AND CHENEY MUST RESIGN!"
My argument is that before impeachment even officially begins, if it does, they will have to resign in order to be eligible for a pardon.
US Constitution:
"The president has the power of pardon except in cases of impeachment"
The reason why Nixon cut out even before a trial in the Senate.
Also we can directly demand as citizens that they resign, since impeachment is the job of the House, so we are asking them to do it for us.
So they Go together and the demand for Resignation is the other side to the impeachment coin.
The peace movement tends to stick to one theme over and over and the answer to me was "'what makes you think that they will resign?"
Well I don't think they would resign unless they were close to impeachment first but that is no reason to not let the public and the War Criminals know that there are options.
When we say Impeach Bush/Cheney, it sounds too official of a demand.
Since they weren't really elected in the first place, it sounds too nice of a way out for them.
I like both tactics for signs.
IMPEACH THE CREEPS!
and
FOR THE GOOD OF HUMANKIND, BUSH AND CHENEY MUST RESIGN!
Also, People all over the world hate them now and can relate to that simply because it is not "official" because non citizens have no official power to ask the US House Reps to do the right thing... since it is our constitution, that is our law on this matter.
I also like "HANG UM CUT UM DOWN AND HANG UM AGAIN!"
You all are free to use these for the cause of Justice.
Just make sure you smile for the FBI.
I like Scott Ritter very much, but I don't think the US military would follow Bush into a real war with Iran.
Why?
Because they know Bush is waco and Russia and China would not stay out of that fight.
Bin Laden, if he is still alive, knows that this war and our world domination strategy is destroying our economy and our military so all he has to do is watch us beat ourselves.
According to the Prophecy
TimeToMove;
You are well aware, more than most, about the "absentee landlords" in any real sense of the meaning of the term, "representative government" and increasing disdain for the public by the politicians in power.
If the vast majority of the public prefers remaining on the losing end, very little can be done to save this country.
If the Russians and Chinese told our government that if we attack and invade Iran, they would not only come to Iran's defense, but take out Israel as well. If they made a strong enough case, would the AIPAC Lobby restrain Bush/Cheney, or call the bluff and start World War Three?
Is the world supposed to be silent and let the bully terrorize weaker nations? Where and when is the line drawn?
Sorry peaceCoup but you slipped up here...
"The idea is to replace the dictators and monarchies with open markets and democratic elections. This will allow more foreign investment into the region while also opening access to the vast oil resources."
The U.S. goes out of its way to keep dictators and monarchies in power. As having worked for a multi-national Corp before, I can tell you that these corporations would rather deal with absolute dictators than a finicky democracy. In fact what neo-Cons fear more than anything is democracy. Look at Hugo Chavez, Allende and Guzman (Guatemala 1954) for concrete examples!
But probably the best example of anti-democratic forces at work is here at home when the MSM excludes any candidate that threatens runaway corporate theft. Reuters (which is owned by Thomson Corporation as in Thomson Health Care) for example has shown that on their political website (http://www.reuters.com/news/politics) that they will now give daily updates to all of the Dem. and Rep. candidates. Bill Richardson, who dropped out, is included yet Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate from either party that is excluded. As for ABC, NBC and the others, the conspiracy of silence is deafening.
Finally "opening access" to resources such as Middle Eastern oil is misleading at best. The Big Oil companies want to PREVENT open access at every turn and instead have resorted to the military options to ensure "limited access".
I wish people would stop thinking that the current White House Administration has any noble aspirations or fundamentally Libertarian ideas in their quest for quick profits and global hegemony.
Corporate control over Iranian and middle eastern oil to bring prosperity to US of I does not make any sense. There will be no tax benefits as all the big Oil corps are safely ensconced offshore, and pay zilch. The US of I will be charged at the world market rate, currently going through the roof. If the US of I public get no special treatment regards their opinions for anti-war, they will not get any special treatment for cheap oil.
Only people and nations with massive share holdings in Oil corporations are going to get benefit. (For example China and Japan). Plus large share holders in military corporations. Get them out of the country, or at least out of government, and hey, you are done! There are not that many of them. Hey look, there is no one left to promote the war! War forgone with least pain, if the benefiters and folly followers are disallowed from government. Form a internet antiwar-monger web site, with details on each, public donations, run anti war commercials. Run them out of office.
Time to move: Who chooses the county supervisors? Can they be removed? Are elections for county suupervisor popular?
Since 1492: I like your name. Understnding that war is a racket is paramount.
The good news is nobody will support the US. There is no trust when it comes to US foreign policy, arguments, PR spin, evidence etc. Not even Poland will go along with the US, the Security Council won't even discuss this in earnest, no allies will be found (maybe a couple of African dictators would support it for a US passport and a millions on a Swiss bank account, but that's about it). Maybe they work on a totally different strategy and it is not Iran they are working on. Maybe they want to create a situation which will generate fear in the US and drive the voters to God and the Republicans.
[repost]
peaceman: "If the Russians and Chinese told our government that if we attack and invade Iran, they would not only come to Iran's defense, but take out Israel as well. If they made a strong enough case, would the AIPAC Lobby restrain Bush/Cheney, or call the bluff and start World War Three?"
I've read that the Chinese are waiting out these final gasps of the American empire. Our economy is a house of cards, with all history showing that once the financial industry becomes the economic engine of a country it is doomed (cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization). We don't make anything real anymore (except military hardware and support). That is, give us 2-3 years more to secure this noose of debt around our collective neck (due to neocon looting of the treasury) and it's OVER. Why waste time and money intervening in a problem that will burn itself out naturally?
All these years I've been a run-of-the-mill progressive, sitting at the knee of the likes of Nader, Moore, Hightower, Ivins, et al. But apart from this great bogeyman of "corporate greed" always intoned, the real answers, the grand connecting-of-the-dots, the deep reason for this collapse of idealism after the assassinations of JFK, RFK, and MLK Jr, and the elites' sabotage of the McGovern candidacy in 1972, never was answered.
How can we fight something if we don't know what it is we're actually fighting? What we see now is the wholesale implementation of the neoconservative agenda, despite mass protest and dissatisfaction with the same. Why?
[censor]
There is a deeper intentionality at work here requiring elite collaboration among multinational corporate, security, and financial institutions for whom Cheney and Bush are just the public faces du jour. War consolidates wealth and power. US fiscal insolvency benefits those who wish to gut our middle class and soften it up for both the Amero currency and the US's merging with Mexico and Canada (already well underway with advanced trade, military, and police policies). The elites (ie., the Bilderbergers and their kin) basically want a return to feudal society. A dumb, cowed, passive US populace is an essential part of their plan. The MSM have done everything in their power to assist them.
Do your own research on this, but I am already sold. The NAFTA highway is in, 9/11 was an inside job, and Murdoch is stirring anti-American sentiment abroad while fanning false patriotism in the US.
I just gave $100 to Ron Paul, for whom there is buzz of an assassination if he wins the nomination. I've given more to Kucinich, who the Democrats have done a better job of marginalizing. In the end, it will probably be McKinney and the Greens for me. These are the only ones who see through to the heart of the problem. And ladies, sorry about Paul's anti-abortion stance. But IMO we can work on that with him, and that matter is small potatoes compared to his dedication to dismantling the US/multinational corporate fascist death/war machine.
George Bush's epitaph;
I Ran From Iraq, Into Hell
Femme Fatale: That's what a bunch of unemployed factory workers in Venezsuela did. The corporation that had abaondoned the factory freaked! Even tried to get the army to evict them. Hugo Chavez said....'No!'
The factory is still running. Chavez is still in power, even after three attempted coups, and one almost successful CIA abduction, despite the US MSM eforts to malign him.
MiMiCs: We do get money from the countries we dominate. The problem is we're not dominating as well as we used to and our latest attempts have been a major flop. We also spend too much.
At least someone is addressing overpopulation.
shorter URL for audio link posted above:
http://www.singingmountain.org/alex-jones-interviews-tarpley-and-steele.mp3
KW: Bush going to hell
Bush believes he is not going to hell because he does God's work. He will not be going to hell because hell, like the law, does not exist, except on earth, and only for the poor. George is rich .
The world's superpower never tires of shopping for war, does it.
THE WARS ARE NOT ABOUT TERRORISM
The Bush Administration's Curious Behavior
"Hours after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, President Bush told the world the United States would take the fight directly to the terrorists and the states that harbored them. Thus the Bush Administration's "War on Terror" was born.
Less than a month later, on October 7, Mr. Bush launched a savage aerial bombardment of Afghanistan. He had the support of a shocked American citizenry and a sympathetic world, all of whom expected justice to be delivered soon to the terrorist Osama bin Laden and the harboring state embodied in the Taliban.
The incursion into Afghanistan was sold as the first action in the "War on Terror." It was a brilliantly executed charade.
Flashback to October 12, 2000, a year earlier. The USS Cole, an American Navy destroyer in the Yemeni port of Aden, has suffered heavy damage from a terrorist attack, perpetrated by Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda.
Three weeks later officials of the Clinton Administration met with theTaliban in the Sheraton Hotel in Hamburg, Germany. To avoid a violent retaliation of furious bombing, the Taliban offered the unconditional surrender of Osama bin Laden.
Before the details of the transfer were completed, however, a Supreme Court ruling gave George W. Bush the White House, and the message was passed: the actual handover of bin Laden will be deferred until the Bush Administration is sworn in.
Once in office, the new Administration asked the Taliban to delay the handover of Osama bin Laden at least until February. As winter faded into spring, and spring into summer, the Administration demurred twice more.
Then Osama bin Laden struck again, on September 11, 2001.
On September 15, Taliban officials were flown in U.S. Air Force C-130 aircraft to the Pakistani city of Quetta, where the deal was sweetened. The standing offer of surrendering Osama bin Laden was renewed, but now the Taliban would also oversee the closure of bin Laden's bases and training camps.
This time the White House simply rejected the offer out of hand. It did so again when the offer was repeated several weeks later, and days after that President Bush ordered the violence to begin.
The invasion of Afghanistan was something vastly different than a quest to apprehend a terrorist." --- Richard Behan
Sources for this section:
1. "Bush Rejects Taliban Offer to Hand bin Laden Over," Guardian Unlimited (UK), October 14, 2001.
2. "Bush Rejects Taliban Offer to Surrender bin Laden," Andrew Buncombe, The Independent (UK), October 15, 2001.
3. "Dreamers and Idiots: Britain and the US did everything to avoid a peaceful solution in Iraq and Afghanistan," George Monbiot, The Guardian (UK), November 11, 2003.
4. "How Bush Was Offered bin Laden and Blew It," Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, CounterPunch, November 1, 2004.
5. "Did Bush try to stop bin Laden in his first eight months in office?" MSNBC Countdown, September 28, 2006.
@kw January 20th, 2008 4:47 pm
I truly hope you are right.
BUT
No country or media GENUINELY thought that Iraq was somehow a threat.
The masses may have believed it, but all who bothered to find out knew it was a crock of shit. All those in the security council played the diplomatic game, not wanting the consequences of falling out with the US. Follow the link to my home site to verify this. They were all playing the diplomatic game of being along side the U.S. Many countries like Australia have an Aemirican owned media.
I am concerned that they may just play the same diplomatic game of pretending to be very concerned about the "threat" posed by Iran - again.
@abbybwood January 20th, 2008 2:17 pm
"There will be only one person to blame for this: Nancy Pelosi and the leadership of "her" Democratic Party."
GWB & co are probably the most to blame, but you are right. If Pelosi or Hillary were genuine, they would have impeached, and this new war would simply not happen. But then AIPAC wouldn't direct campaign funds to them, would they.
@RAMSHEYI January 20th, 2008 3:06 pm
"Mr Scott Ritter has been doing his best for more than 6 years to make us buy into the official 9/11 fairytale of 19 Islamist hijackers armed with boxcutters who want to cut our throats because they hate our freedom bullshit."
I dont think Scott Ritter tries to sell us the official 9/11, he just does not comment on it much because like me, he does not know the answer, whether it is true or not. I was suspicious from day 1 about the official narrarative, but try as I might, I am still confused and cant come to a decision.
But dont try to tell me that Scott Ritter is pushing war. He is not. He reported in 1996 that Saddam had not WMD since 1992. And he bravely came forth in 2002 and told everyone about it again. He is doing what little he can to try and stop the coming Iran war.
I've heard that George Bush, a self-described Christian man, told others that he was going to f*** bin Laden in the a**. I didn't know Christian men talked in such vulgar terms, and I didn't know George Bush was a homosexual. Well, you learn something new every day.
So the US wants to attack Iran? Bobby Fischer was right, the US deserves to have it's head kicked in. Rest in Peace Bobby!!
"What's really going on is a road map for global domination. The war in Iraq initiated a long-term strategy neo conservatives have been formulating to divide the world into spheres of influence and dominate them economically, militarily and diplomatically." - Scott Ritter in the article.
That's correct. The National Security Strategy of 2002 stated it plainly. Cf. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/national/nss-020920.pdf
What is now happening in the US military "overreach" is an example of the old Greek concept of Hubris: humans going against the gods - or in moderns terms: Natural law. One nation - or a clique derived from it - trying to literally rule the world is Hubris.
That attempt to rule the world is in breach of Natural law for the simple reason that the activity associated with the ruling of the world, called "consumerism", overtaxes the Biosphere's sustainability.
Without this consumerism all of US people drafted into passively supporting the world-rule wouldn't be materially snug and smug enough to NOT say "Hey, wait a minute - isn't that in total breach of Reciprocity, Equality and Justice, and all that fairness we need in order to survive in cooperation – and which the rulers claim to be following?".
As always in cases of Hubris, the Natural laws (gods) eventually win - with tragedy for humans. Climate-extreming is out there to supply the necessary blowback. The sooner we get everyone to cooperate with harmonizing to our natural environment and life-premises, the smaller the tragedy.
Speaking of prophecies, I can remember that someone interpreted one of Nostradamus' as saying that the West would find itself in an all out war with Islam and that this would eventually leave China free to begin its imperial ambitions. If the U.S. attacks Iran, the WWIII will begin. We will see other muslim countries erupting, including Pakistan. The conflict will spread to Europe, and once again, a lone superpower will rise: China.
Trying to predict the future using Nostradamus's centuries is like trying to predict the future by using the Book of Revelation: they're both so cloaked in metaphor that no one really knows what they mean, if anything.
But the Bush regime is sure doing it's best to make the future a bad one. That's something we do know. Maybe, though, if we try to make the future, instead of try to predict it, we can make it turn out all right.
Sad, very sad.
I will limit my participation as I realize that throwing good things on bad ones, doesn't make the
bad ones good.
Through the repeated mental ingestion of the best movie of all times "The Secret", things are
turning around, from subconsciousness to consciousness and from disbelief to understanding.
All this is putting more gasoline on the already bonfire size national 'bush- fire', choking us to
death. Spiritually and physically.
Well now relax for a moment.
Whatever one writes does not have to become true, 'right'? It is the other way around. Most theories
that are based on the past and the present lack to mention the ability of the Universe to turn things
around at any given moment.
We don't have to be afraid of bush cheney et al. Those are small vermin, put into place by a larger
power. This power only understands the language of profit. As long as the cash drawer opens and
more money flows into it, 'their' world is great.
The very moment bush et al become an obstacle to 'their' profit making puppet players, they are gone.
So to get back to "The Secret", watch it a minimum of 20 times and realize that the only way into peace
and prosperity for all humans on this planet starts inside. The only way to get rid of bush et al and bring
them to justice is to rely entirely on the Universe and nothing else. If You have to call it 'god' I am kind of
sorry for You, as You obviously still believe that story. But with no god and a Universe that will 'react'
to any and everything we better focus on the good times. Because most people on this planet want just
that. They want to feel good. If You feel good, do You go around kicking others?
My recommendation fore all this is simple:
Focus on what You want, not on what You don't want.
War with Iran is off the table, more than impeachment. The US is owned and operated by Israel. But with-
out Middle East oil money, US will go down like a punctured floaty.
Then, if You really believe Your vote is counted the way it was cast, dream on.
Forget Elections. The Only Vote You Have Is At The Register.
My Bumpersticker.
Now I am going to fly some helicopter, over the Lava.
lillulu,
I didn't know all the details of the Bush deal with the Taliban and then the double cross.
It is exactly the same deal his Daddy made with Iran, called the October
Surprise to hold the hostages so that Reagan would beat Carter.
Then they double crossed Iran just like the Taliban.
Obama must be clueless about history outside of Chicago.
He seems to buy into "actionable Intelligence". Not a safe bet for anyone who knows the history of the CIA.
.
It is one thing to have a strategy of Global Domination and another thing to be able to accomplish it... and harder when your empire is bankrupt.
Politicians promise lots of things...
Since1492, I agree with you that everyone should read War is a Racket, and it wouldn't be a bad idea for people to read London's Iron Heel, either.
But are you saying that because America has been at war with one country or another for a long time, we might as well give up trying to change that? I hope not.
Hoa binh
Ok, if we are going to dominate other countries, why are we transferring our wealth to them and not receiving the wealth of those we dominate. I mean, we got this basic element of global domination wrong?. That the cost to dominate should reap rewards that profit the dominator. Even Bush ain't that dumb not to figure this out. Economics 101.
On the other hand, maybe we have sold our foreign policy, and the domination is reaping rewards to those whom we have sold it to? That makes a bit more sense. Who could we have sold it to? Of course, the bankers who control our own economy. But wait, they are having problems themselves, so they say.
So who controls our banks and government?. No one can say really, but some suggest the power rests with elements of Rothschild, Rockefeller and London interests who have Anglo-American and Zionist-American agents in the US that execute their orders. The US taxpayer essentially finances these globalists desire for world domination. They care nothing about money, they have enough, it is all about power, but since we are suckers, they are happy to take our money from us to finance their operations under the guise of peace and democracy.
Those you elect are happy to please the powers that be in return for personal reward and the promises of an elite role in the global government, even if it means acting against Americas sovereign interests. It's the only explanation that makes sense.
No, the USA is not on brink of war with Iran, for lack of troops to send, and because this is election year.
What we are "on brink of" is every possible spin being spoken to us by Republicans about the "danger" for every moment from now through November.
Excellent point Daniel David - political psychops - just because they can...
Invade Iran with what? Our overextended military is already losing two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And now Baby Caligula wants another one? If the American people allow this piece of human filth to go ahead with his delusional plans, then this country deserves everything it gets.
As most knowledgeable people realize that God is on the side of Israel and that is why US will go to war with Iran. It is only God's work that they will be doing.
MiMiCcS, you got it dead-on right. The facade of a democratic government is necessary to keep we the sheeple paying for the military and polices forces we've donated to the ruling elite.