Now, what country wants an attack on Iran again?

Israel.

It all falls into place now, doesn't it?

Anyone who is still in doubt about what's going on with the eventual attack on Iran please visit this site: http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-234685330662058240

when you realize again who is leading who--how about rendition of this whistle blower--another hand me down from shall I say Zionists--check out honey traps and who is really dangerous in the Middle East.

Some have placed the 911 fiasco at the hands of these treacherous people--I'm starting to believe it--you decide for yourselves--but what ever you do turn off the mainstream news--it's all BS

This disclosure of Graham as an aspirant war criminal did not excite any commotion when it became public.

Very different has been the reception of a new tape revealing Graham, Nixon and Haldeman palavering about Jewish domination of the media, and Graham invoking the "stranglehold" Jews have on the media. On the account of James Warren in the Chicago Tribune, who has filed excellent stories down the years on Nixon's tapes, Nixon raises a topic about which "we can't talk about...publicly," namely Jewish influence in Hollywood and the media. Nixon cites Paul Keyes, a political conservative who was executive producer of the NBC hit Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In, as telling him that "11 of the 12 writers are Jewish." "That right?" says Graham, prompting Nixon to claim that Life magazine, Newsweek, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and others are "totally dominated by the Jews." Nixon says network tv anchors Howard K. Smith, David Brinkley and Walter Cronkite are "front men who may not be of that persuasion," but that their writers are "95 percent Jewish."

Magnanimously, Nixon concedes that this does not mean "that all the Jews are bad," but that most are left-wing radicals who want "peace at any price except where support for Israel is concerned. The best Jews are actually the Israeli Jews." "That's right," agrees Graham, who later concurs with a Nixon assertion that a "powerful bloc" of Jews confronts Nixon in the media.

http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?type=ARTICLES&id=1132794762

... the Rev. Billy Graham in tapes recorded in 1972 and recently released by the National Archives, in which the evangelist urged President Nixon to fight the Jews´ alleged domination of America´s media. "This stranglehold has got to be broken or this country´s going down the drain," Graham says on the tapes.

Another troublesome element on the tapes is when Nixon apparently coaxes Graham to say things the president can´t. "You believe that?" Nixon asks Graham of his allegations of Jewish media domination. "Yes, sir," Graham says. "Oh boy, so do I," Nixon says. "I can´t ever say that, but I believe it." "No," Graham replies, "but if you get elected a second time, then we might be able to do something." Later in the conversation, Nixon brings up the subject of Jewish influence in Hollywood. "A lot of Jews are great friends of mine," Graham says. "They swarm around me and are friendly to me. Because they know that I am friendly to Israel and so forth. But they don´t know how I really feel about what they're doing to this country, and I have no power and no way to handle them." Nixon responds, "You must not let them know." The way Nixon eggs Graham on is shocking, Foxman said. Still, "we knew that Nixon was an anti-Semite," Foxman said, whereas Graham is "a guy we all felt comfortable with" as a spiritual guide to many presidents. "And he was so infected with this virulent anti-Semitism." The idea of Jewish control of the media is a "classic, anti-Semitic canard," Foxman said,

http://jta.org/news/article/1999/11/30/8621/BillyGrahamsanti

Here's an excellent article.

"Key facts to keep in mind while opposing war against Iran",

by Phil Wilayto,

(a writer and organizer based in Richmond, Va; a civilian organizer in the Vietnam-era GI Movement; and author of two books pertaining to the threats and hegemony against Iran)

AfterDowningStreet.org, Sept. 29, 2009

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15456

Juan Cole says "see below" for Israel's nuclear arsenal. The item's in neither copy, CD or Salon, but there is at his website. It's for a very short Sept. 28th article, "The Most Dangerous Nuclear Facility in the Middle East", which is for the Youtube video, "Israel's Dimona Nuclear Weapons Factory In 3D" (4:50). I viewed it last night and it's based on photographs, etc., Mordechai Vanunu provided plenty of years ago.

www.juancole.com

The neocons are in resurgent mode. After leading this country into the trillion dollar calamity that is Iraq (because apparently $10 billion a year in direct military aid to Israel is not enough) they are once again rattling their sabres and fabricating an existential threat that exists only for Israel's neighbors, not Israel itself. Quiet for some years after the public outrage over the Iraq war and the total discrediting of it's most psychotic and duplicitous "standard" bearers, and ducking for cover after the Israeli massacre in Gaza, the neocons are back on the op-ed pages of the MSM, rearing their ugly, deranged heads. Rather than giving them a platform or any claim of credibility, we should be having a good game of whack-a-mole.

Let's face it. If the Iranians have nukes - and this reporting constitutes no reason to believe that - the idea that their nukes would comprise a great threat to the United States is wildly exaggerated.

After all, it's not like the United States has no deterrent.

An option exists, if one wants security, if one would stop the proliferation of weapons, one must make peace credible.

The title of article should be right in there with does a bear do his dirty thing in the woods?

AD

uhmmm.............. what a stupid question, headline should have been "Jingoistic corporate media creating pretext for attack on Iran"

Is the Media exaggerating the Iranian nuke threat?

No they are not. They are making a whole-cloth fabrication of an Iranian nuke threat. That's a very different thing than an exaggeration!

The only nuclear threat I'm concerned about is the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power plant. It's old and leaky.

The Iranian constitution forbids military aggression.

I cannot contribute anything galen and donna and karlof haven't already said, except for one thing:

There's really a person named "General Salami?" If this were fiction, it'd be implausible. I wonder if names like that aren't planted to give the reader's sense of disbelief something to latch onto other than the LIES...

My respect for the movies of the Marx Brothers just jumped an order of magnitude.

Does the Pope shit in the woods?

Our oligarchy parasites and their useful idiots will keep bleeding the country dry until we decide to get money out of politics.

Meanwhile, the end times evangelicals are salivating like Pavlov's dogs.

This is a joke, right?

The US doubled its swabbies at the Fifth Fleet naval base in Bahrain in early December 2006, and has been just grinding the starter button ever since.

Is the media exaggerating the Iranian nuke threat? Duh.

The network teevee local news is, that's for sure.

Nothing we haven't watched, or not-watched, a million times: a perky, attractive, superficially articulate newsreader breathlessly summing up the overall Official Spin: Prez gets tough on sinister Iran after Iran is caught red-handed by US intelligence agencies operating a secret nuclear facility.

It touches one's heart to hear the earnest way she injects that practiced note of oh-my-gosh incipient anxiety into her voice when reading the story.

It's the kind of news report that one imagines multiplied a thousandfold, blaring out and half-heard in noisy bars from coast to coast, and leaving people with a foggy impression that those treacherous A-rabs are acting up again and begging for another pre-emptive smackdown.

It's pretty much a re-run of the standard trickle-down warmongery used to manipulate the clueless yahoo masses in advance of the illegal war of aggression, destruction, and occupation of Iraq.

But if you can think of a better way to manufacture consent, I'd like to hear it!

Homer Simpson isn't the only guy who still has an "Ayatollah Assahola" T-shirt in the attic.

· Yr Obd't Servant

is that a serious question?............

Israel, with its hundreds of nukes, strikes me as
super-dangerous; Iran sure doesn't. It hasn't even purified enough uranium for a single warhead. And the second potential Iranian nuclear site mentioned last week is at this point not much more than an empty cement bowl to be used should 2 hot-shot countries governed by an overload of paranoid idiots decide that the first site must be destroyed.
Talk about your contrived crisis.

another very well written article on the Iranian "nuke" threat found on counterpunch.org

http://www.counterpunch.org/dimaggio09282009.html

Is the public this stupid?

We haven't finished the first war (Iraq) we were fooled into going into. Now we are threatening another country because of insistence it is a nuclear threat. In both cases, neither country is/was a threat and we had inspectors on site that confirmed it.

The problem is the public can't draw a cause and effect line between us spending hundreds of billions on war and not spending hundreds of billions on healthcare, alternative energy, and improved public transportation to rid our need of so much oil. The latter items would truly save more lives and generate an economic boom.

The MSM is owned for the most part, by a handful (six) of corporations who also have interests in a variety of other businesses, including weapons production.

They get millions in advertising revenue directly from weapons manufacturers. As well as from the US military.

These same companies get millions in revenue from the insurance corporations. the same corporations that just had the US Congress permanently remove any possibility of a 'Public Option' for healthcare.

These corporations give millions in election campaign funds to politicians around the world, ensuring that it doesn't matter who wins the election, their man is on the inside.

So to feign astonishment that the MSM is beating the drum (again) for war is idiocy. We saw exactly the same efforts when the war with Iraq was decided long before it began. All the needed was a pretext. What the world got was the events of 9/11.

And with public outrage over the betrayal on healthcare growing by the second, you can be assured that something to touch the new war off is assured.

As they say on the net, you have been 'pwned!'

Walk in peace.

Exaggerating the Iranian nuclear threat? What Iranian nuclear threat?!

If the development of nuclear materials and facilities in accordance with the terms and conditions of the non-proliferation treaty and subject to IAEA inspection constitutes a nuclear threat, what does Israel's actual possession of hundreds of nuclear-armed weapons constitute?

The obvious lesson for the rest of the world is to avoid all international treaties and oversight like Israel has. Anyone who would trust the U.S. to abide by any of its treaty obligations (or its own constitutional "supreme law" for that matter) is insanely naive in any case.

"America is Led and Informed by Liars" is the title to Paul Craig Roberts's current item, http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23583.htm

Mad Dog Obama is barking just as loud as Cheney et al were with Iraq and the "media" is howling in unison. Looks like Joe Wilson was correct; he just had his timing off.

Not only is the mainstream media exaggerating (and lying) about Iran, but so are "progressive" radio hosts. There seems to be a "pile on Iran" trend, and of course, pro-Israel groups are in the forefront. Even with nukes, Iran would be no threat to us, given the US nuclear capability. But this is all about Israel and our Congress is once again selling out the American people. It is simply not in our interest to provoke enmity with Iran or to increase world tensions by setting up the Iranians. They are within their legal rights to develop nuclear energy, they have agreed to inspections, and all intelligence clearly states they have no bomb-making capabilities nor are they building any. But Israel is planting false intel, threatening, and provoking. Meanwhile, the Dimora plant in Israel is the most dangerous nuclear plant in the Middle East, and the Israelis are the crazies most likely to use a nuclear weapon. Obama should be calling for sanctions against Israel for violating international law, human rights, and peace.

America's AIPAC controlled media fabricates the 'news' from Israel's side.
I cancelled my paper and unpluged the TV a long time ago.

Iran: Has demonstrated no first-strike option for over 200 years.
Israel: Has demonstrated (repeatedly in recent years) first-strike option (e.g. Lebanon, Syria)
USA: Has demonstrated (repeatedly in recent years) first-strike option (e.g. AfPak, Iraq).

I am worried for the Iranians.