Anyone else notice the MSM hype over Iranian Nuclear Weapons these

[NoFederales]

past three days? In spite of the international atomic inspectors suggestions, as well as others, that Iran is far from weapons grade uranium capability over the weekend, our MSM is hammering out the immediate threat of nuclear holocaust with Iran.

Is this not reminiscent of the Iraq run-up? What do our Dem leaders say? Is a goddamn vacation recess head-in-the-sand time? I deplore the reactionary grief, but who will crow in hindsight this time?

NoFederales

[Fire Walk With Me]

1. Witch doctor shakes that medicine stick. Tribe gathers around, in fear.

[NoFederales]

6. Well, hell,

:nuke:
us then, the gov'ment broke all the medicine sticks that I know about.

NoFederales

[Fire Walk With Me]

8. They're using cheap medicine sticks from Canada.

Tribe gather around in fear, regardless.

[McCamy Taylor]

2. NPR had a lead feature on it. I think * is grooming NPR to be State Radio

[NoFederales]

4. Yes, Indeed

I would rather see NPR fold up entirely than continue on this path. Additionally, is PBS going to suffer the same fate?

The intrusiveness of this government into our lives is way out of control.

NoFederales

[EVDebs]

3. Bolton to the rescue ! The fear campaign was supposed to start in June

[NoFederales]

7. Bolton Peanut Tactics Disables the UN

NoFederales

[wli]

5. yep, Cheney's laying it on thick before nuking Iran

[dalloway]

9. you are right on target. Those BOMBS they are saying are coming from Iran

[Fire Walk With Me]

11. But didn't Rumsfeld and the CIA arm both Iran and Iraq so they'd war?

One million dead in that one, IIRC. Weaken the region, install a puppet government in Iran, a dictator in Iraq, arm them, and pick up the pieces when the smoke clears.

By pieces, I mean oil.

The US armed and trained Bin Laden to fight Russians in Afghanistan. Odd how sometimes they're allies, sometimes they're enemies. They all use US ordinance, so someone, somewhere, gets rich from this at several levels.

[NoFederales]

13. Goes back even further, the Shah of Iran

As an installed puppet we encouraged modern nuclear technology and the US was host to thousands of engineering and science university students for many years. American foreign policy is the root of evildoing in the mideast, has been, continues to be. . . .

NoFederales

[Enraged_Ape]

10. I've heard it, but believe it's going over like a fart in church

I don't think anybody's really taking it seriously. Even the hard-core Bushies know it's a bunch of trumped-up baloney. (Though, maybe 50% of them are actually convincing themselves it doesn't matter.)

[Nothing Without Hope]

12. Please read through this thread - there are a number of significant links

- and it will give you a fuller picture:

Remember that all this is IN SPITE OF the fact that the best available intelligence - in the leaked NIE report - are that Iran is a decade away from being able to make a nuclear bomb. Here's the thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4252778
thread title: Three extremely important threads on Iran nukes & the Bush agenda

This isn't new. Swift Boat Liars book author and full-time bottom feeder Jerome Corsi has been braying about "Nuclear Iran" bombing New York any day now for some time:
This thread is from May 7:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1768708
Thread title: Is anyone watching Jerome Corsi saying Iran planning to nuclear-bomb

Here's his latest article:

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45567

Iran has nukes now – Let's quit fooling ourselves

Jerome Corsi
WorldNetDaily Exclusive Commentary
Posted: August 2, 2005
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
The Washington Post is running today an "undisclosed sources" article designed to surface a supposedly new "National Intelligence Estimate" that says Iran is 10 years away from having an atomic bomb. Here we go again. The leftist mainstream media has launched its own pre-emptive attack against the Bush administration, hot on the case of making sure we don't get tough with Iran.

Last month, I traveled to Israel where I addressed the Knesset about the nuclear weapons threat represented by Iran. I told the Knesset that Iran's nuclear program was a "clear and present danger," and I stressed that the time was short. Iran has everything it needs right now to build an atomic bomb.

While in Israel, I had discussions with intelligence officials in the Israeli Defense Forces and with the Ministry of Defense. These discussions confirmed my worst fears.

Israeli intelligence estimates are that once Iran begins enriching uranium again, the red flashing light should go off. Once the mullahs reach the "point of no return," they can produce bombs on a constant basis – not just one or two, but a steady stream of atomic weapons.

(snip)

This is what Cheney and the Israeli faction he chums with has been wanting - war with Iran. So far, the media have been pretty tamely going along with it. Here's an article on that sorry sight:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/080305E.shtml

Media Flagstones along a Path to War on Iran

By Norman Solomon
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Wednesday 03 August 2005

On Tuesday, big alarm bells went off in the national media echo chamber, and major US news outlets showed that they knew the drill. Iran's nuclear activities were pernicious, most of all, because people in high places in Washington said so.

It didn't seem to matter much that just that morning the Washington Post reported: "A major US intelligence review has projected that Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years, according to government sources with firsthand knowledge of the new analysis. The carefully hedged assessments, which represent consensus among US intelligence agencies, contrast with forceful public statements by the White House."

By evening - hours after the Iranian government said it would no longer suspend activities related to enriching uranium - American news outlets were making grave pronouncements, amplifying the statements from French, British and German officials closing ranks with the Bush administration. On television in the United States, a narrow range of talking heads detoured around the USA's profuse nuclear hypocrisies.

(snip)

"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous," President Bush told a news conference in late February. He added in the same breath: "and having said that, all options are on the table." Assembled journalists laughed.

[NoFederales]

14. Thanks for the links

With so many things going on we have an ever increasing jugglers act to perform; ignore those clowns in the background, stay focused on the jugglers and what they are doing.

NoFederales

[Nothing Without Hope]

15. Here's the perfect CARTOON showing how hard it is to cover everything:

Jen Sorensen does it again. (Image may take a few extra seconds to load)

Found here:http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=18944

http://workingforchange.speedera.net.nyud.net:8090/

[ngGale]

16. Iran - a plan right out of the old ...

Iraq play book.:scared:

[GreenPartyVoter]

17. Question is, will the sheeple fall for it? Will the Congress?

[Emit]

18. Halliburton Secretly Doing Business with Key Member of Iran’s Nuclear Team

Yes, this is all very reminiscent of the Iraq run-up, including the history of these fucking neo-con/Iran-contra leftovers who've infiltrated our government, AGAIN, and who've had their hands in the Middle East for so long. Who sold Saddam the biological, chemical, and nuclear materials way back when? Ah, yes, the War Profiteers:

The solution? Americans must stop electing ruthless criminals to rule this nation. We must convince fellow citizens that villains like Saddam Hussein are made in the U.S. as rationale for endless corporate war profits. Saddam was placed in power by the CIA.(52) For years U.S. government agencies, under auspices of George Bush Sr., supplied him with chemical and biological weapons.(53) Our national nuclear laboratories, along with Unisys, Dupont and Hewlett-Packard, sold Saddam materials for his nuclear program.(54) Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton in the late 90s when its subsidiaries signed $73 million in new contracts to further supply Saddam.(55) The wicked villain of Iraq was nurtured for decades as a cash-cow by U.S. military-industrial piranhas.

http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Death_by_slow_burn_050302.htm

List of US businesses that sold weapons to Saddam Hussein

1) Honeywell (R,K)
2) Spektra Physics (K)
3) Semetex (R)
4) TI Coating (A,K)
5) UNISYS (A,K)
6) Sperry Corp. (R,K)
7) Tektronix (R,A)
8) Rockwell (K)
9) Leybold Vacuum Systems (A)
10) Finnigan-MAT-US (A)
11) Hewlett Packard (A.R,K)
12) Dupont (A)
13) Eastman Kodak (R)
14) American Type Culture Collection (B)
15) Alcolac International (C)
16) Consarc (A)
17) Carl Zeis -U.Ss (K)
18) Cerberus (LTD) (A)
19) Electronic Assiciates (R)
20) International Computer Systems
21) Bechtel (K)
22) EZ Logic Data Systems,Inc. (R)
23) Canberra Industries Inc. (A)
24) Axel Electronics Inc. (A)

http://www.lizmichael.com/weapons.htm



And, NOW, how easily they forget, with Iran:

Stephen Zunes writes: Amid the blare of the Bush Administration's alarms about Iran's alleged nuclear weapons capabilities, few remember that the United States, from the Eisenhower through the Carter presidencies, played a major role in the development of Iran's nuclear program. In 1957 the United States and Iran signed their first civil nuclear cooperation agreement. Over the next two decades, the United States not only provided Iran with technical assistance but supplied the country with its first experimental nuclear reactor, complete with enriched uranium and plutonium with fissile isotopes. Despite the refusal of the Shah to rule out the possibility of Iran's developing nuclear weapons, the Ford Administration in 1975 approved the sale of up to eight nuclear reactors with fuel to Iran and, in 1976, approved the sale of lasers believed to be capable of enriching uranium. The Washington Post reported that an initially hesitant President Ford was assured by his advisers that Iran was interested only in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Ford's Defense Secretary was Donald Rumsfeld, his Chief of Staff was Dick Cheney and his man in charge of nonproliferation efforts at the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency was Paul Wolfowitz.

This article requires a subscription: http://www.thenation.com/docprem.mhtml?i=20050516&s=infact


AND TODAY, I just came across this article.

Halliburton Secretly Doing Business with Key Member of Iran’s Nuclear Team

by Jason Leopold

August 5, 2005
GlobalResearch.ca

Scandal-plagued Halliburton, the oil services company once headed by Vice President Dick was secretly working with one of Iran’s top nuclear scientists on natural gas related projects and, allegedly, selling the scientists’ oil company key components for a nuclear reactor, according to Halliburton sources with intimate knowledge of both companies’ business dealings.

Just last week a National Security Council report said Iran was a decade away from acquiring a nuclear bomb. That time frame could arguably have been significantly longer if Halliburton, which just reported a 284 percent increase in its fourth quarter profits due to its Iraq reconstruction contracts, was not actively providing the Iranian government with the financial means to build a nuclear weapon.

Now comes word that Halliburton, which has a long history of flouting U.S. law by conducting business with countries the Bush administration said has ties to terrorism, was working with Cyrus Nasseri, the vice chairman of Oriental Oil Kish, one of Iran’s largest private oil companies, on oil development projects in Tehran. Nasseri is also a key member of Iran’s nuclear development team.

<<snip>>

Halliburton first started doing business in Iran as early as 1995, while Vice President Cheney was chief executive of the company and in possible violation of U.S. sanctions. According to a February 2001 report in the Wall Street Journal, "Halliburton Products & Services Ltd. works behind an unmarked door on the ninth floor of a new north Tehran tower block. A brochure declares that the company was registered in 1975 in the Cayman Islands, is based in the Persian Gulf sheikdom of Dubai and is "non-American." But, like the sign over the receptionist's head, the brochure bears the company's name and red emblem, and offers services from Halliburton units around the world." Moreover, mail sent to the company’s offices in Tehran and the Cayman Islands is forwarded to the company’s Dallas headquarters.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=LEO20050805&articleId=806

Fuckers.

[converted_democrat]

19. Yep, I've noticed it.......

If we get into it with Iran we are in a whole new world of shit. China will not just let us go in there like we did Iraq. China will most likely defend Iran, putting us in a whole new world of shit.
Also, there is alot of speculation to the motivation behind going after Iran. Iran is setting up an oil market and there is speculation that they are planning on selling in Euros. Saddam was getting ready to announce that Iraqi oil was to be sold in Euros, right before we attacked him.

[Emit]

20. Yes, I had read that re: Iran

Here:

The Iranians are about to commit an "offense" far greater than Saddam Hussein's conversion to the euro of Iraq’s oil exports in the fall of 2000. Numerous articles have revealed Pentagon planning for operations against Iran as early as 2005. While the publicly stated reasons will be over Iran's nuclear ambitions, there are unspoken macroeconomic drivers explaining the Real Reasons regarding the 2nd stage of petrodollar warfare - Iran's upcoming euro-based oil Bourse.

...The Tehran government has a developed a plan to begin competing with New York's NYMEX and London's IPE with respect to international oil trades - using a euro-denominated international oil-trading mechanism. This means that without some form of US intervention, the euro is going to establish a firm foothold in the international oil trade. Given U.S. debt levels and the stated neoconservative project for U.S. global domination, Tehran's objective constitutes an obvious encroachment on U.S. dollar supremacy in the international oil market...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CLA410A.html

[NoFederales]

21. What would the oil-for-euros mean for the American economy?

NoFederales

[converted_democrat]

22. Disaster. n/t

[NoFederales]

23. But how does it work?

Does engaging in the "new" process make us devalue our own currency?
Are there other bogeys?

NoFederales

[converted_democrat]

24. It's tricky.......

About 80% of foreign exchange and half of world exchange is done in dollars. If one country came out and traded oil in euro with no ill effect, there really would be little to stop the rest of the world from the transition to the euro. If the other countries switched, especially during a time of huge deficits and an already weak dollar, it would completely wreck the dollar.

[Emit]

25. Here's an old discussion

that does well to explain it:

Excellent article by Cóilín Nunan: "Oil, Currency and the War on Iraq". Fascinating explanation of some major economic mechanisms involving dollars and euros and oil. A very big reason that the United States is such an economically and militarily dominating country is apparently that U.S. dollar is the de facto world reserve currency. Lots of things are counted in dollars and some goods are only sold for dolars. That means that foreign governments and corporations and banks are keeping large dollar reserves. That essentially amounts to a huge loan the rest of the world is giving to the United States, which will subsidize the U.S. economy. In order to acquire those dollars, the rest of the world has to provide goods and services for those dollars. That allows the U.S. to have a huge import/export imbalance. Last November, 48% more imports than exports. It would be untennable for any other country to run such a deficit.

Next major point is that one of the reasons everybody has to have dollars is that the OPEC oil producting countries only accept dollars for oil. Well, not all of them. The only one that does something different is Iraq, which only accepts Euros for their oil, since 2000. And Iran is considering it as well. And the thing is that it might just as well be Euros that everybody used as a reserve currency. It would apparently be a better choice in many ways, because the European economies are more balanced, and the OPEC countries would end up getting more value for their oil. So, now, what would happen if Euros became the only choice for buying oil? Most likely the U.S. economy would plunge, because it would no longer be subsidized in that manner. And EU would probably be quite happy being subsidized in its place. Anybody thinks all this might have something to do with the great urgency to take over Iraq? And why would Britain support it?

http://ming.tv/flemming2.php/__show_article/_a000010-000538/

And here's the article that he's talking about in the above discussion:

Energy

Cóilín Nunan: Oil, Currency and the War on Iraq

It will not come as news to anyone that the US dominates the world economically and militarily. But the exact mechanisms by which American hegemony has been established and maintained are perhaps less well understood than they might be. One tool used to great effect has been the dollar, but its efficacy has recently been under threat since Europe introduced the euro.

<<snip>>

One of the stated economic objectives, and perhaps the primary objective, when setting up the euro was to turn it into a reserve currency to challenge the dollar so that Europe too could get something for nothing.

This however would be a disaster for the US. Not only would they lose a large part of their annual subsidy of effectively free goods and services, but countries switching to euro reserves from dollar reserves would bring down the value of the US currency. Imports would start to cost Americans a lot more and as increasing numbers of those holding dollars began to spend them, the US would have to start paying its debts by supplying in goods and services to foreign countries, thus reducing American living standards. As countries and businesses converted their dollar assets into euro assets, the US property and stock market bubbles would, without doubt, burst. The Federal Reserve would no longer be able to print more money to reflate the bubble, as it is currently openly considering doing, because, without lots of eager foreigners prepared to mop them up, a serious inflation would result which, in turn, would make foreigners even more reluctant to hold the US currency and thus heighten the crisis.

There is though one major obstacle to this happening: oil. Oil is not just by far the most important commodity traded internationally, it is the lifeblood of all modern industrialised economies. If you don't have oil, you have to buy it. And if you want to buy oil on the international markets, you usually have to have dollars. Until recently all OPEC countries agreed to sell their oil for dollars only. So long as this remained the case, the euro was unlikely to become the major reserve currency: there is not a lot of point in stockpiling euros if every time you need to buy oil you have to change them into dollars. This arrangement also meant that the US effectively part-controlled the entire world oil market: you could only buy oil if you had dollars, and only one country had the right to print dollars - the US.

http://www.feasta.org/documents/papers/oil1.htm



I had read about this last year, thru an email from this e-magazine:

Venezuelan move to replace US$ with the €uro upsetting Washington more than Saddam's €uro conversion last November

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=8613