Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- Senate Votes to Extend Sweeping Bush Era Surveillance Powers
- Six Weeks After Reelection, Obama Sells Out Liberal Democrats
- The Only Way Left to Beat GOP Fanatics: Call Their Bluff and Go Over the Fabricated "Cliff"
- New Year’s Revolution: Connecting the Dots, Coming Together and Fighting Like Hell
- The Financial Elite's War Against the US Economy
- Six Weeks After Reelection, Obama Sells Out Liberal Democrats
- Revealed: How the FBI Coordinated the Crackdown on Occupy
- The Financial Elite's War Against the US Economy
- Senate Votes to Extend Sweeping Bush Era Surveillance Powers
- New Year’s Revolution: Connecting the Dots, Coming Together and Fighting Like Hell
Popular content
Today's Top News
Wikileaks Files Show 'Truth' On Iraq: Assange
LONDON -- WikiLeaks' founder Julian Assange said Saturday that hundreds of thousands of classified US military documents leaked by the website showed the 'truth' on the Iraq war.
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange speaks during a news conference about the internet release of secret documents about the Iraq War, in London October 23, 2010. Wikileaks released nearly 400,000 classified U.S. files on the Iraq war on Friday, some detailing gruesome cases of prisoner abuse by Iraqi forces that the U.S. military knew about but did not seem to investigate.
REUTERS/Luke MacGregor "This disclosure is about the truth," Assange told a news conference in London after WikiLeaks released 400,000 documents which give a grim snapshot of the Iraq war, including showing the abuse of Iraqi civilians by Iraqi security forces.
"The attack on the truth by war begins long before war starts and continues long after a war ends," Assange added. Profile of the WikiLeaks founder
"We hope to correct some of that attack on the truth that occurred before the war, during the war and which has continued on since the war officially concluded."
WikiLeaks' spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson told the same news conference that it would also soon release a further batch of 15,000 secret files on the war in Afghanistan.
The heavily redacted files released Friday contain graphic accounts of torture, civilian killings and Iran's hand in the Iraq war, giving a grisly picture of years of blood and suffering following the 2003 US invasion to oust Saddam Hussein.
The Iraqi government said the documents "did not contain any surprises". Related article: Wikileaks files held 'no surprises'
Many of the documents, which span from January 2004 to December 2009, chronicle claims of abuse by Iraqi security forces, while others appear to show that US troops did nothing to intervene to stop the abuse.
The documents comprise the second such release from the controversial website, which accused the United States of "war crimes" and earlier released some 92,000 similar secret military files detailing operations in Afghanistan.
WikiLeaks made the files available to selected newspapers and TV channels and then, just before their publication, invited journalists for a three-hour lock-in preview in London. Facts about WikiLeaks
In one report, US military personnel describe detainee abuse by Iraqis at a facility in Baghdad that is holding 95 detainees in a single room where they are "sitting cross-legged with blindfolds, all facing the same direction."
It says "many of them bear marks of abuse to include cigarette burns, bruising consistent with beatings and open sores... according to one of the detainees questioned on site, 12 detainees have died of disease in recent weeks."
Other reports describe Iraqis beating prisoners and civilian women being killed at US military checkpoints.
The Guardian newspaper said the leak showed "US authorities failed to investigate hundreds of reports of abuse, torture, rape and even murder by Iraqi police and soldiers whose conduct appears to be systematic and normally unpunished."
It added that "more than 15,000 civilians died in previously unknown incidents," going on to say that "US and UK officials have insisted that no official record of civilian casualties exists but the logs record 66,081 non-combatant deaths out of a total of 109,000 fatalities."
The Guardian said WikiLeaks is thought to have obtained the electronic archive from the "same dissident US army intelligence analyst" who leaked 90,000 logs about the war in Afghanistan this year. WikiLeaks has not revealed its source.
Al-Jazeera concluded that major findings of the leaked papers included a US military cover-up of Iraqi state-sanctioned torture and "hundreds" of civilians deaths at manned American checkpoints.
On Iran's role in the conflict, the secret US files show Tehran waging a shadow war with US troops in Iraq, with a firefight erupting on the border and Tehran allegedly using militias to kill and kidnap American soldiers.
The documents describe Iran arming and training Iraqi hit squads to carry out attacks on coalition troops and Iraqi government officials, with the elite Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps suspected of playing a crucial role, the Times and the Guardian reported, citing the files.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemned "in the most clear terms" the leaks of any documents putting Americans at risk, while the Pentagon warned that releasing secret military documents could endanger US troops and Iraqi civilians.
Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said the documents were "essentially snapshots of events, both tragic and mundane, and do not tell the whole story."
A spokesman for the Iraqi rights ministry said: "The report did not contain any surprises, because we had already mentioned many things that happened, including at Abu Ghraib prison, and many cases involving US forces."
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
185 Comments so far
Show AllPlease forward this article to any and all of those clamoring for their personal and group "freedom, liberation and equality" through membership in the worldwide US military murder and torture machine. After years of revelations of slaughter, grotesque tortures, and every conceiveable kind of attacks from land, sea and air on the peoples of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, what moral and ethical values can be held that would motivate people to want to be "equal" participants in all this and claim that their personal and group "liberation" demands that they be accepted? The "freedom and equality" of being just as good torturers, murderers, thugs as the straights?
I'd recommend forwarding the writings of Arthur Silber and Chris Floyd:
http://www.chris-floyd.com/
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/
This is some of the most powerful, best writing on the web.
Hillary Clinton's comment is the epitome of hypocrisy! Her actions and that of her colleagues in the current administration are the epitome of evil! Assange is in the company of the brave and courtageous truth tellers! Thank you Julian for your courage and steadfastness in the face of the 'evil empire'.
Clinton: The Little Warmongeress of the Democratic Party.
She'll probably challenge Obama in 2012.
word in punditland is that she could step in for v.p. position.
Hilary Clinton said she deplored the leaks, saying that it could endanger coalition troops. Our MoD here in the UK has said it deplores the leaks of confidential information.
The truth is this:
Our governments deplore the leaks, because it shows the rest of the World exactly what we do, how we behave, and of course the way in which we expect others to behave.
We never had the moral high ground in these wars, they were pure revenge for one act. The really sad thing about our behaviour, is that we can never claim the moral high ground again in any situation.
We have no right to point at other people and call them "evil", because "evil" is what our leaders and all the people who argued for these wars, see in the mirror each morning.
I am sorry but I believe that you are mistaken in your characterization around the word "we". Through out your post you claim we do... we behave... etc.
There are many many of us that did not vote for the people who did do this. Nor do we support it. Some of us refuse to pay taxes that support the military and the US foreign policy. Some of us have done everything we could to prevent and stop this.
If you mean by "we" yourself please say so.
We are aware of who has actually done this. One bitch is Hillary Clinton who has done this. We also know who the other parties involved were. Two administrations, joint chief of staff, generals talking head military, the media corporations all way down to Grainer's photos.
The average numb nuts American who can hardly write his or her own name let us leave out of the acts of criminality and accountability. It is quite clear who is responsible. The question is if there is accountability. Feel free to blame the "we" when there is no accountability for these horrific acts against humanity. The cat is clearly out of the bag now.
"One bitch is Hillary Clinton who has done this."
Another bitch is Obama.
Unless you are using the word "bitch" in it's sexist connotation...
In the vernacular, however, every person planning and fighting the war is a bitch of the plutocracy. Gender has nothing to do with it in that usage.
Does anyone here really think anyone is going to remember this story after the World Series? The election? Thanksgiving holiday? I doubt it.
what story?.............
I disagree. Your assumption says that the American people are too hard hearted or self involved to care about the atrocities disclosed by Wikileaks. Perhaps the reality is that the secrecy surrounding our horrible actions abroad coupled with the complicity of our "free press" has kept us in the dark.
I will not adopt your pessimistic attitude towards my fellow Americans, one perhaps created by the media's coverage of the extreme right and their ridiculous attitudes and even more ridiculous ignorance. They are a small minority with a big outlet for their words, leading to a generalization that all of us are like them. We ain't. Have you been taken in by the self indulgent words of our resident rightie, Jake Newton? His "anger" directed at Wikileaks rather than at the truths they disclose represents a small minority of our people I offer.
Your words lead, perhaps unconsciously,to an attitude that says "why bother". Is that what you meant?
"Your assumption says that the American people are too hard hearted or self involved to care about the atrocities disclosed by Wikileaks. "
Precisely.
"Your words lead, perhaps unconsciously,to an attitude that says "why bother". Is that what you meant?"
Yes.
It is more complex than you are writing, but yes. I believe from my experience that Americans really do not care. The bulk of what is revealed is that more Iraqis died than we claimed before, most of them at the hands of other Iraqis. Well that number is still barely 1/10th of what the Lancet reported. Now if no one here in the US cared or did anything when that larger number was reported, do you think that they will do something now?
Nope.
Everyone here blames the MSM for not covering stories, but you know that I think they cover the stories that Americans really want to hear.
Lindsay Lohan is back in detox. The Giants are going to the World Series. There are midterm elections that focus exclusively on local issues. When it come to Wikileaks, more people will be interested in Assange's sex life in Sweden than the content of his leaks. In fact he walked out on a CNN interview where that is what they kept asking.
The thought that the media leads the people is not correct, the people lead the media. They show what we want to see and ignore what we do not want to see and we really do not want to see this.
But you care. And there is your own incontestable proof to the lie that no one cares.
John
"we really do not want to see this" Then shut off you stupid tv and do not buy that paper. It is you who have read and now written about detox and world series. ( world my ass) You are the one that corporations pay to advertise to. You watch and read. You are the one that is supporting them.
A few years ago I kept on seeing a box to click on that said "watch a video of Paris Hilton". I never bothered cause I don't give a shit what a hotel in Paris looks like.
Who is the fool?
Then the obvious question arises, why on earth do you come here? To spread ennui and hopelessness? I prefer to believe otherwise but your posts leave no alternative while most come here seeking answers and possibly ways to begin to make changes. This nation grants power to the people, power that most fail to understand that they have.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, its the only thing that ever has."
Margaret Mead
Granted, we have been brainwashed by a slanted and manipulated news media, conceded, that we are become fat and lazy by usurious credit and cheap plastic toys become essential and time wasting nonsense. Does that mean we throw up our hands and run to Aruba? No, emphatically no, though I suggest you might consider such rather than spread your pessimism further.
"I do not believe in a fate that falls on men, however the act. But I do believe in a fate that falls on men unless they act." GK Chesterton
There is a difference between pessimism and realism.
In my wage slavery, I am forced to listen to the conversations indulged in by a wide sampling of the US populace in order to keep a roof over my head and food in my stomach. Unfortunately I am prevented from injecting ANYTHING into any of these conversations.
The sad fact is, what happens on "Dancing with the Stars" is more of a topic of conversation between Americans than the fact that we are involved in two (or more) wars at the moment.
I do not see this as pessimistic so much as a simple acknowledgment of the fact that there is a huge obstacle to be overcome here.
We have been conditioned for generations now to believe that to discuss Religion or Politics is "rude" - this has led to extreme degradation of both of these subjects. It also has led so that the majority of people will immediately turn off all thought at any mention of those topics.
This is not to say we should "give up" but to say that we need to work on strategies to take this into account. Hakim Bey gives some suggestions to this with his concept of "ontological terrorism", Neurolinguistic Programming gives us a starting point (one that the Right has highly investigated and implemented already - we have some catching up to do)
To not acknowledge the situation we face, and to think that "if we just get the information out there, people will wake up" is as naive as to think that "we will be welcomed as liberators and they will throw us flowers and candy" - and we know where that got us.
Most of this nation still celebrates Columbus Day (the only exception I know of is South Dakota, which has renamed it Native American Day) Think on that for a bit, and you will realize that we have a LONG hard road ahead of us.
It is pessimism vs. optimism, not realism. The difference , I again state, is that those like Me. Shade, and I do not wish to single him out, who post only pessimism sans solution or hope are really a part of the problem. Of course the task we face is daunting, difficult and will be a long time coming.That is why it is important to start now.
Assange is devastatingly articulate and courageous.
with the truth on his side.
but i've heard abd read much worse crimes committed by the US and its allies in other parts of the world throughout history.
it's just been the standard procedure.
Even if it was necessary to get Saddam Hussein, why must we destroy their infrastructure and kill innocent men, women, and children?
Civilian deaths and Iraqis dying as they defend their country be damned, we need more oil.
This is what we do when we need more oil!!!
The US with 4% of world population consumes over 24% of all world resources. Do we really need to steal more from the world's poor.
Because orders for bombs and weaponry profit military defense contractors, that's why. They don't give a shit who dies, along as a buck is made. That much is obvious.
I am wondering if the Iranian connection is going to give a green light for invading Iran?
So, Justice_Arcs, do you think Wikileaks is working with the u.s. intentionally, or they are getting disinformation, or getting what the u.s. wants them to get?
You have a logical argument. Never bet the farm on any information you read these days. Any and everyone is suspect. I'm still glad to see it nonetheless.
This seems like a flimsy attempt to discredit the site. You give government too much power, and too much credit. I'm sure there are attacks launched against Wikileaks everyday, but then there are attacks launched against every major website everyday. Obviously they have good security practices for their site. This isn't anything new.
The firing of people has nothing to do with the content being released, and is a red herring. The journalist from CNN also tried barking up this tree, and she was shot down by the brilliant Mr. Assange.
I for one reserve judement on wiki-leaks and acknowledge they might well be a tool of the propaganda machine.
As in "If the Military does not want any of this released it must all be tru therefore Iran is funding and supplying the resistance".
This is not to state that all of what is wiki-leaks is false. The truth that is released simply acts as a sort of Carrier for the un-truths.
another shill. ignore the worm.
No. I just think for myself. The US Government have used such methods in the past. Indeed they used it in the leadup to the Iraq war.
This does not mean Assange in on it. Indeed I think one reason why he takes so long to release information is he is going through it with a fine tooth comb to ensure he is not releasing Propaganda on the behalf of the Pentagon.
The British also used such methods. They would identify a German agent during WW11 and then leak to him a mix of truths and falshehoods which he would carry back to German High Command. (This program helped convince the DDAY inavsions would happen at Calais)
Its a tactic as old as the hills. Wikileaks is getting stuff leaked to them. The Pentagon can not prevent all leaks. They mix IN to those leaks stuff they want the Public to believe (Ie Iran supplies the resistance). Without knowing it Assange plays their game.
I think it idiotic that anyone believes this could never happen when it has happened over and over again.
I also think Assange a bright guy and knows this too.
You are a right wing shill, an obsessive conspiracy theorist, or someone with an over active imagination. I think that you miss the nature of the Wikileaks documents. Wikileaks is not suggesting that Iran is involved in aiding and abetting the insurgency. These are US reports. They may in fact be lying to their own internal info consumers.
richsmith2, although i don't affirm insulting posters, i think your last two sentences add something important to many of the threads here. Not that i would blame Iran if it were true.
And you are uninformed and know nothing of History.
I suggest you get out a few books and read. As to being a "Conspiracy Theorist" what exactly IS that? Are you denying conspiracies exist?
It one of the poorest of rebuttals to any point being made and favored dare I say by "Right Wing Shills".
To "Conspire" means, according to the dictionary, "to breathe the same air." Also, "to plan together in secret to commit a wrongful act" and simply, "to act or work together."
Shades of meaning. Take your pick. The second definition seems to be the hallmark of the criminal "leadership" of the United States of America, whether elected officials, high-rolling greedheads, corporate swine [sorry, piggies], the usual wheelers and dealers.
Certainly the above does not mean other nations, cultures, religions don't have their wicked conspirators bent on harming others and grabbing everything that isn't nailed down for themselves [Hello, Zionist Israel]. And all nations, cultures, religions have the well-intentioned conspirators who do want the best for all humankind. Obviously, they are in the minority.
We Truthers [among my and your other labels and roles] are just collecting and parsing evidence and "breathing the same air" filled with dust and super nanothermite particles. In other words, we are on the same page as others who buy into the official U.S. government versions of 9-11 truth are on the same page and "breathe the same air."
Personally, I think the human species is doomed. I don't see the various "leaderships" doing an about-face and realizing the wicked folly of their ways and, with remorseful and enlightened hearts, spending the rest of their lives doing good for others as old Ebenezer Scrooge did in Dickens' "Christmas Carol."
It's a matter of evolvement, and it seems for millennia, the nasty victors over others passed on their seed as they raped women by the hundreds of thousands, and the species became "infected" with the lousier genes, including the psychopathic/sociopathic anomolous gene that produces a physiological "split" brain. It would have been and are the common, ordinary foot soldier with the mentality to follow and follow orders who did and do most of the raping. Cruel leaders rape[d] too, but there weren't/aren't as many of them. In other words, few genius-level intelligentsia in the field, just ordinary, unquestioning followers for the most part.
It's taken a while through all the invasions and battles and "fighting for the right," -- Pharaoh, King, Queen, Emperor, God/Jesus/Allah/Jehovah, or whatever other causes, to reach this point when time is just about up. Clearly, if the old, insane playbook, isn't traded in very, very soon for clean pages ready to receive rational approaches to insure the common good across the planet, we are cooked. Common sense tells me that choosing the rational over the insane is not going to happen anytime soon, ... not with all those remote-controlled flying machines that destroy at the push of a button and no one has to even see the carnage up front or get their hands dirty and bloody.
What we have become and what we do and what we go along with breaks the heart.
When we are gone, I wonder if the remaining animals, having sensed our absence, will rejoice in their own ways. "Come out; come out, wherever you are. "Ding-Dong, the wicked Predators are Dead!"
... and the chimpanzees somersault from the trees and across the forest floor, and the fishes rise to the surface and slap their finned tails on the oil-slicked water before diving down deep again, and the wild mustangs whinny in their mountain strongholds, carefully pick their way down, and then at full gallop head for the plains, and the lions roar from deep, deep in their bellies, ... DING-DONG! INDEED!
/cm
is that an admission?
Obviously you are not talking about GWNorth here, judging from the many posts of his/hers I have seen in my time here on CD.
Per-say, the Iranian connection is true, how can you blame them after the US supported Saddam during the Iraq/Iran war in the 80s. Not exactly moral high ground there either. Irans not being a member of the US/EU banking industry is more of an issue than our leaders want to admit. We Americans are the terrorists fighting terrorism. We could call it quits, bring our troops home and try to regain the moral highground. But don't expect our leaders to do (the right thing).
Surely Assange merits a Nobel Peace Prize.. but then again that would be going against the trend..
Agreed. Those are your true winners right there.
I was going to say IF Bradley Manning did it...
But taking the fall for it is heroic enough, even if he was not the source of any leaks.
Sad to say, Justice Arcs, I don't think the rulers, at this stage of the game, need to resort to conspiracy to manufacture consent. They have crossed so many lines with relative minimal resistance, they don't much care what the population thinks.
No WMDs; no connection with 9/11 attacks; no liberation of grateful Iraqis; no democracy; no Osama; no protections for civilization's artifacts or library documents; no consistent electricity; no pure water or sewer; no adequate hospitals, no gasoline. Consider the murdered, the mangled, the maimed, the tortured. Consider the minds of their loved ones. Consider the costs of the war in battered U.S. honor and commitments, a broken Western alliance, a shredded United Nations and a scarred Bill of Rights. Think of the acid now seething in the souls of America's warniks. Think of the attacks against our freedoms wrought by Patriot I & II. Think of the government's control of our formerly free press. Think of how Saddham told the truth: there never were any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Julian Assange is a hero far more courageous than any fireman, any of the other network-pushed heroes!
We got another Bush presidency in 2008.
So your theory seems to be the Pentagon leaked this to Assange so that the USA would attack Iran.
Of course Iran's little war with US troops had already been reported and so was the USA support of anti Iran Terrorists and our National policy of Regime change.
And in spite of all this our military has said a big war with Iran would be a disaster not good, not good.
I guess it is possible, but it sounds overly conspiratorial.
But why rap up what the public already knows in a package that makes the war not worth fighting in the first place?
Your theory lacks any logic that I can see but I don't suppose you are claiming logic as a base here.
Oh yeah, Assange is not a 9/11 Truther either so that makes him really suspect.
Assange has to stay clear of the 9-11 movement or he will lose credibility and be open to ridicule. I am a truther myself but I want Assange to not be mixed in with this. He can and should only do one thing at a time. What he is doing is too important to screw up. let others carry the 9-11 ball.
Perhaps for now this is correct. But eventually someone (or some group) who has true 'credibility' will have to risk their credibility and reputation for the sake of getting out the truth. When will this be?
Sadly I doubt soon.
–SS
I part agree with you and part disagree.
Yes, it would be important in some ways as it would show the still blind how deep it goes.
However.
Even without this, there is enough evidence to show that 9-11 was hijacked by PNAC.
And if everyone gets banned from any form of being able to reach the general public, as we have been shown is the result of questioning the official conspiracy theory of 9-11, then everything else they have to say would get banned too.
this good knight Assange is just as real as the super villains Adam Gadahn and Yousef al-Khattab.
they are running this thing called reality as one of their crappy movies. a bad one at that, even for the low hollywood standards. these same “We’re an empire now and we create our own reality” sociopaths that brought us 9/11 are still fully in control.
if Assange isn’t an agent then he must be the most dimwitted dud on the planet. he is whitewashing war crimes and reinforcing propaganda regarding Pakistan and Iran we already know is false. Not one true damming fact he has ever leaked. all ambiguous bs.
So your theory seems to be the Pentagon leaked this to Assange so that the USA would attack Iran.
do they need a reason?..............
"Personally I do feel Obysmal is much worse, because he defeats our spirits AND sabotages our liberties whilst transferring even more jobs overseas, along with increasing growth and profits to fraudulent banksters and heinous corporapists."
And you are correct. He not only takes the bodies for war, he takes the souls of the opposition at home.
Only the evil of evils does that.
Not that I'm a believer in such things, but the man may be the Devil himself.
I fail to see your transition from torture and killings in Iraq to President Obama.
There are just a few people in between: George W. and "Tricky Dick" Cheney. Obviously, you are willing to comment on news events, but, since the the truth in media
policy no longer exists, I would think you could, at least. have given research a try.
As Obama has, after all, condemned torture; how sure are you of Obama's complicity? We may find it is true, but try to control your eagerness to take the blame off of George W., Dick, and the CIA until we learn the facts. The dates given in the article go from 2003 to 2009. George W. was President up to January 20, 2009.
By the way, start with PolitiFacts (unbiased) and verify what you want to know. There are still some journalists and media people who still value truth in media, in spite of Reagan's destruction of truth in media all those years ago.
Obama also stated he would close Guantanamo.
Obviously there is a disconnect between what he says and does.
If he condemned torture in any way other than rhetoric, he would have begun the impeachment process by February, 2009.
To fail to do so is proof of complicity.
I fail to see your transition from torture and killings in Iraq to President Obama.
There are just a few people in between: George W. and "Tricky Dick" Cheney. Obviously, you are willing to comment on news events, but, since the the truth in media
policy no longer exists, I would think you could, at least. have given research a try.
As Obama has, after all, condemned torture; how sure are you of Obama's complicity? We may find it is true, but try to control your eagerness to take the blame off of George W., Dick, and the CIA until we learn the facts. The dates given in the article go from 2003 to 2009. George W. was President up to January 20, 2009.
By the way, start with PolitiFacts (unbiased) and verify what you want to know. There are still some journalists and media people who still value truth in media, in spite of Reagan's destruction of truth in media all those years ago.
Hi Justice Arcs,
There certainly seems to be ample reason maintain a skeptical disposition towards the entire Wikileaks phenomenon. I also agree that were Wikileaks to pose a true threat to the power-structure, there are means available to shut them down, regardless of their location, or their supposed protection by 'neutral' governments only interested in the free flow of information. I'm skeptical that there is such a thing on Earth these days.
I am also concerned about the sum total of these leaks supplying the needed incentives to get our war on with Iran... In total, I have been amazed at the double-standard consistently taken with them and their nascent nuclear program. The fact that they have followed IAEA protocols far more stringently than our 'allies' Pakistan, India and of course Israel, and yet are still labeled as a rouge nation definitely makes me scratch my head. This being said, I do want to bring up a few of your statements that I think deserve further clarification:
"The evidence is clear that the CIA and official USA policies have been playing Iraq against Iran... *dismantling Iranian democracy and fomenting revolution* for more than 5 decades."
I'm not sure I follow the reasoning of this. It appears that you are saying the revolution that produced the current regime was actually intentionally orchestrated by the US? Surely we have been meddling there for decades, but with mixed success, most of it less to our favor than for, I would say. Is your point not that we control political events in Iran, so much as we frustrate the democratic movements and encourage chaos?
"The only reason for attacking Iran ( besides profits ), is that it is not part of the central banking nightmare that props up the machinery of EMPIRE that is behind everything. The are a only framed as a "rogue state," because they are completely like we are supposed to be ( and what most American's still desperately want to believe to be true about the USA ), but clearly are not."
I'm sorry, but this isn't making much sense to me... which is strange, because most everything else you write here makes perfect sense. "They are completely like we are supposed to be"? Huh?
"Like being against the "War against Communism" but being one with the people of the USSR, Americans need to consider being one with the people of Iran and come out completely against the "War against { whatever shit they say }"
I completely agree. That being said, I'm not going to go to the UN any time soon and cheer on Ahmadinejad. I think its a bit disingenuous to look at the government in Iran and assume they are completely above the immorality of war and the power struggles that define our species. I don't claim they are the rouge state threatening the rest of the 'peaceful' countries of the world, but I certainly don't think they are what 'we are supposed to be' (a Theocratic Autocracy) or that anyone should believe they did not get involved with the US/Iraq war, or that there is no veracity to their involvement as shown by the Wikileaks record.
My final note here: My opinion on Julian Assange has all along be one of admiration and gratitude for what he ostensibly represents, but in regards to one issue, I have been extremely concerned...
"he is clearly not [a courageous seeker of truth] when it come to towing the official line about _ 9 _ ! _ ! _ ."
YES. I absolutely agree. If J.A. upholds the flaccid 'official' version of the events of that day, he is certainly a plant, and not to be trusted. I am waiting for further information here though. Perhaps he may surprise us. But I don't surprise that easily anymore. Obama was the last nail for my sense of any real hope or believe that truth and justice will ever make a surprise visit upon the scene.
Cheers, and Namaste
–SS