Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
March 29, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

Truthdig Bazaar
The Fall

The Fall

Ryan Quinn

more items

Arts and Culture
Email this item Print this item

‘The Iran Agenda’

Posted on Dec 3, 2007
oil fire
AP photo / Sasa Kralj

By Reese Erlich

(Page 4)

The IAEA report was hardly a smoking gun. But the Bush administration huffed and puffed that Iran’s failure to uphold the Security Council resolution meant the world should impose more sanctions. On March 24, 2007, the UN Security Council voted to impose another round of sanctions, prohibiting the sale of Iranian weapons to other countries and freezing the overseas assets of more Iranian individuals and organizations.

The United States failed to get any backing for military attacks on Iran to enforce the sanctions. The March resolution even restated the UN position that the Middle East region should be nuclear free, a criticism of Israel’s large nuclear arsenal.

U.S. officials told the New York Times that the new sanctions went beyond the nuclear issue. “The new language was written to rein in what [U.S. officials] see as Tehran’s ambitions to become the dominant military power in the Persian Gulf and across the Middle East.”38

Apparently, no one can hold that job except the United States.

No Nukes? Not Enough

The real dispute between the United States and Iran has little to do with Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons. The Bush administration declared Iran to be part of the “axis of evil” and has been pursuing a policy of “regime change,” a euphemism for the U.S. overthrow of an internationally recognized government. The United States has adopted different tactical positions, sometimes calling for a tightening of sanctions, other times threatening military strikes. But the long-term goal is installation of a friendly regime.

The American people now know that the Bush administration lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in 2003. But back then, the threat of WMDs served as a powerful argument to convince Americans of the need for regime change. The phony nuclear weapons issue plays precisely the same role in U.S. plans for Iran.


book cover


The Iran Agenda: The Real Story of U.S. Policy and the Middle East Crisis


By Reese W. Erlich


Polipoint Press, 192 pages


Buy the book

Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei said the United States “has used nuclear energy as an excuse. If Iran quits now, the case will not be over. The Americans will find another excuse.”39

Let’s say Iran stopped all nuclear programs tomorrow and that was verified by international inspectors. The United States could start a new campaign based on its current claim that Iran is “the most active sponsor of state terrorism” in the world.40 Iran could give terrorist groups chemical weapons. Iran has missiles capable of hitting Tel Aviv and U.S. military bases in the Middle East. Iran presents an immediate danger because of its support for terrorism. Time for regime change.

Is Iran currently developing nuclear weapons? No. Could it do so sometime in the future? Sure. According to ElBaradei, some forty-nine countries “now know how to make nuclear arms,” including Japan, South Korea, and other U.S. allies. Neither the United States nor the UN Security Council can militarily prevent each of those countries from making a Bomb, said ElBaradei. “We are relying primarily on the continued good intentions of these countries, intentions which are in turn based on their sense of security.”41

The only way to ensure Iran doesn’t make nuclear weapons is to devise a political, not a military, solution. If the people of Iran have a government that truly represents them, and the United States ceases its hostility and negotiates in good faith, Iran won’t see a need to develop nuclear weapons.

So What Would You Do?

When I speak at college campuses and before community groups, someone inevitably asks me a legitimate question: “OK, U.S. policy toward Iran’s nuclear program is wrong. If you were president, what would you do?” Glad you asked.

First, no more demonizing Iran. I would apologize for years of U.S. aggression against Iran. I would offer to return the billions of dollars in illegally frozen Iranian assets now held by the United States, lift all existing sanctions against Iran, and offer to restore full diplomatic relations.42 That would get Iran’s attention. More important, it would set the basis for easing tensions on issues such as nuclear weapons.

I would announce plans to reduce the unconscionable number of nuclear weapons maintained by the United States in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Most Americans have no idea that the Non-Proliferation Treaty not only limits other states from obtaining nuclear weapons but also requires disarmament by the existing nuclear states, including the United States.43

Then I would do something neither side expects. I would tell them we will phase out our nuclear power reactors for safety reasons and because we can’t safely store nuclear waste. Nuclear power plants in the United States aren’t even hardened against an airplane crash, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission refuses to require it.

Then I would suggest that Iran not develop nuclear power. Nuclear reactors and their tons of radioactive waste are disasters waiting to happen. Iran is already planning to have 20 percent of its electricity supplied by hydropower by 2021. Iran has the potential to develop a lot more wind and geothermal power as well.44 In the meantime Iran could harness its tremendous natural gas resources as a relatively efficient source of electricity generation.

I don’t know how Iranian leaders would react. These suggestions would certainly spark a lot of discussion among Iranians, a debate now largely nonexistent.45 Journalist and opposition leader Akbar Ganji is one of the few Iranians I met concerned about the safety of nuclear plants. “I am very worried that something like Chernobyl will happen to Iran,” he told me. “If that happens, the Iranian people will pay the heaviest price.”46

I would like to see Ganji’s views prevail. But if, after a genuine debate, Iranians decided they wanted nuclear power, so be it.

The IAEA has procedures that allow countries to develop nuclear power, subject to strict international inspection. On March 23, 2005, Iran offered a plan to Britain, France, and Germany that would have allowed Iran to develop nuclear power and engage in uranium enrichment. Iran agreed not to reprocess nuclear fuel, to produce only low-enriched uranium, to limit the number of centrifuges, and to guarantee on-site inspections by the IAEA.47 That proposal could serve as the basis for honest negotiations.

Should the world simply trust Iran’s leaders? No. We don’t have to assume good faith. The IAEA is quite capable of detecting NPT violations, because radioactive particles inevitably show up in water and soil. Over a period of time, and allowed full access, the IAEA can detect illegal nuclear activity. Since even U.S. intelligence agencies agree Iran is many years from building a Bomb, why not allow the IAEA to do its job?

In the long run, the people of Iran must change their government and revisit the nuclear power issue. I hope they choose to develop safer forms of energy. But that’s a decision to be made by the people of Iran, not rulers in Washington.

Reese Erlich is a foreign correspondent who writes regularly for the Dallas Morning News, CBC Radio, and ABC Radio (Australia). This chapter is excerpted from his book The Iran Agenda: the Real Story of U.S. Policy and the Middle East Crisis, Polipoint Press, 2007.

Taboola Below Article

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every day.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By Douglas Chalmers, December 13, 2007 at 3:57 pm Link to this comment

Think about Life, the meaning of Christmas, and the Caucasus as the cradle of European civilization. This clip is from Norther Iran - but the story is a warning…...

Report this

By Jkoch, December 13, 2007 at 1:27 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Aman asks: “What about when Iran declares to upcoming anihilation of Israel? Should we take that litteraly as well?”

Answer: Not a day goes by without half the Muslim world making some sort of grumble or fulmination against Israel.  Little will ever come of it.  Iran would be crazy to launch a first strike against Israel.  However, until Iran is convinced that the US or Israel is not about to attack it, it will crave a definitive deterrent.  Israelis know full well the implicit target of any Iranian counter-threat to US action, so one can understand their concern.  However, it is futile to think that Iran’s regime will cease to seek the one thing that would rid it of all the saber rattling.  Remember, the technology is over 60 years old, not all that hard to replicate, and virtually impossible to extricate from a regime that is smart enough to spread out the targets.  Finally, China and Russia will veto our actions if we swagger too much.  Obviously, China is too smart to meddle in Mideast occupations and focused more on buying oil wherever it can.

Report this

By karim29007, December 11, 2007 at 2:35 pm Link to this comment


“Personally, I’m glad the recent NIE indicated that Israel suspended its nuke program in 2003 because it may mean we have more time to settle the issue diplomatically.”

Well I am very glad that you are glad that “Israel” has suspended its NUKE PROGRAM IN 2003!!!


Report this

By karim29007, December 11, 2007 at 1:23 pm Link to this comment

“In an op-ed commentary, former secretary of state Henry Kissinger wrote, “For a major oil producer such as Iran, nuclear energy is a wasteful use of resources,” a position later cited approvingly by the Bush administration.”

Is this the same Kissinger that during the IRAN-IRAQ war stated that “ THE only regrettable thing about this war is that one day it will stop”!

Is this the same Kissinger that during SHAH’S REGIME was the main “pusher” to sell the GE & WESTING-HOUSE nuclear power plants products to Iran?

Is this the same Kissinger that provided the Shah with all the necessary fusion materials?

Is this the same Kissinger that supplied SADDAM with CHEMICAL WEAPONS to be used against the Iraqis and Iranians?

Is this the same Kissinger that supplied SADDAM with every feasible military hardware and equipment to prolong the said imposed war on IRAN?

Is the same Kissinger and Associates, as one of the most ardent Zionist, still carries out the wishes of consolidated Zionost consortium with AIPAC as their CEO? 

Some people use the excuse of amnesia as a substitute for their evil deeds.

Report this

By cyrena, December 5, 2007 at 10:32 pm Link to this comment

#117899 by 1drees

My pleasure. I’m not always useful, but when I can be, that’s what these forums are supposed to be about. Thing is, we’re living in some really hostile times these days. And, since we probably both remember earlier bad times, we also know this is about as bad as it’s EVER been.

And then, there’s the internet. Which exposes us all, to people that we wouldn’t necessarily have been previously exposed, and because things are so bad, people get pissed when they hear stuff they don’t really wanna hear.

So they either paranoid, (which is semi understandable, since there’s been nothing but lies, lies, and more lies for so long now, and they aren’t exactly ‘little ones’) or they blame the messenger. I’ve gotten used to it now.

But, I’m like you, in that I’ll remember stuff from reading long ago, (since I’ve always done that) but I certainly don’t have anything close to ‘total recall’. So, the ONLY reason that I know at least some of this stuff now, is only because of returning to academia after a long career in something entirely different. (and now, I probably wouldn’t remember half of THAT stuff). Still, since returning, I’ve been studying all of this stuff again, so I have a more ‘refreshed’ knowledge of it. And, it helps that we can save the articles and journals and research work so easily now. I can’t imagine having to dig through the stacks the way I would have done in the old days, in order to verify something half-remembered. If that were the case, it would just have to stay ‘half-remembered’. wink

Still, after a certain period of time on these posts, you get to figure out that most folks are reasonally pissed of in general, for the same reasons we all are. And others…well, what can I say?

So, don’t sweat the small stuff. As long as YOU know what you’re talking about, that’s all that matters. smile

Report this

By Marshall, December 5, 2007 at 1:26 am Link to this comment

#117917 by Non Credo on 12/04 at 9:55 am

I don’t think it’s a secret that Israel is more concerned about Iranian nukes than even the US.  Focus groups are used by organizations across the political spectrum to test market their arguments.  It doesn’t mean they don’t genuinely believe in their cause.

I don’t support immediate military action against Iran, but I’m not the least bit surprised that those who do would try and refine their arguments for it.  Just because I disagree doesn’t mean they don’t have that right.

Personally, I’m glad the recent NIE indicated that Israel suspended its nuke program in 2003 because it may mean we have more time to settle the issue diplomatically.

Report this
lastdaywatchers's avatar

By lastdaywatchers, December 4, 2007 at 9:58 am Link to this comment

Marshall, DSmith, Cyrena, Sophrosyne, Douglas Chalmers, Ender and 1Drees if you guys (and gals) want to really “truthdig” with 100% accuracy on what really happening with Iran who will get the BOMB (but don’t worry they want use it)

With Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey and the greater Middle East

Then let me suggest that you all come up to speed on the May 15th Prophecy

Do a Google search of the May 15th Prophecy and you will see for yourself (that is if you have eye to see)

Or go to

Report this

By 1drees, December 4, 2007 at 8:48 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)


THANX, I know things through years of reading regularly BUT NEVER THOUGHT that i’d have to provide references from the daily newpapers and journals i read everyday for ages.
Especially chemical names and then company names are specific data which are quiet hard to remember over long term.
THANX for everything

Report this

By ender, December 4, 2007 at 7:28 am Link to this comment

Analysts recognized that “civilian” helicopters can be weaponized in a matter of hours and selling a civilian kit can be a way of giving military aid under the guise of civilian assistance.[8] Shortly after removing Iraq from the terrorism sponsorship list, the Reagan administration approved the sale of 60 Hughes helicopters.[9] Later, and despite some objections from the National Security Council (NSC), the Secretaries of Commerce and State (George Baldridge and George Shultz) lobbied the NSC advisor into agreeing to the sale to Iraq of 10 Bell helicopters,[10] officially for crop spraying. See “1988” for note on Iraq using U.S. Helicopters to spray Kurds with chemical weapons.

Woodwards novel also had a picture of Americans that definately did not look like farm equiptment salesmen training Iraqi miliary in the use of the Bell choppers.  Does anyone believe that the Iraqi military sprayed crops for catapillars?

Rumsfeld worked for Reagan.  He knew Saddam had WMD back then…he sold them to him.

Report this

By cyrena, December 4, 2007 at 4:55 am Link to this comment

#117700 by Marshall on 12/03 at 10:35 am
(150 comments total)

#117670 by 1drees on 12/03 at 8:40 am

“IRAQ used American supplied chemical weapons quiet frequently as per American provided directions.”

The US did not supply chemical weapons to Iraq.  Early on, the US did supply materials, called “precursors”, which could be used in the production of chemical weapons as well as non-military applications.  But no evidence exists that Iran actually weaponized any of these precursors.  Iraq built its own chemical weapons program from the ground up.

There were actually a few of them Marshall, but one of the ones that Saddam used most lavishly on the Kurds was plain old MUSTARD gas…provided by Donny Rumsfeld himself. That I remember from documents. I’ll see if I can find out the others for you.

Report this

By 1drees, December 4, 2007 at 4:00 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

As you might know that the present American Regime is NOT-AT-ALL-INNOCENT BUT TRUST me once their tenure is through this very same guy will be DECORATED for his initiatives in Peace making and who knows he might even be nominated for the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE atleast ( as was Bill Clinton after he had been calmed down into a better pro-Israel stance via the Monica Lewinsky affair, monica’s handler was linda tripp)

And also NOTE , MANY Americans are talking of Convictions and such but I CAN GUARANTEE YOU that none of these “World Proven War Criminals ” will ever be prosecuted or convicted , as all of their crimes are very much “legitimised” through various channels.

My sources of information are what I have been reading over the last atleast 20 years ( being an avid reader of World affairs since a very long time and used to read atleast 2 newspapers a day plus the weeklies and etc)

So Comming to what I was trying to say was that the Reagan Administration ( who also introduced the concept of the NEW-WORLD-ORDER, if you might recollect) was, like I said before, DYING to damage IRAN at all costs and in that project which was being followed with MADDENING DEDICATION ( you might even find photos of Rumsfeld with Saddam during many of his special visits to IRAQ as another indicator, if you can accept indicators and understand the then mad rush to destroy IRAN then), they simply bent a lot of rules LEGALLY , like i said, known and proven weapons utilities were given false certifications to get the stuff past the DOPES/STOOGES in congress and other relative offices. IRAQ was provided the DEADLIEST TECHNOLOGY available and then the best chemical weapons were US and they were supplied other wise how did your govt in 2003 know the exact quantities to look for? nope it was not the UN weapons inspectors that were sources. (Although most of the UN weapons Inspectors were actually covertly on the US payroll. smile )

OK maybe today you cant find any exact proof to satisfy your curiosity Mr Marshall BUT these are well known facts that USA used to sent EVERYTHING ASAP and in that era they were shipping everything and IRAQ was being helped to the MAXIMUM, anything it would ask for it would get really soon, no matter what papers had to be prepared and no matter how the papers had to be prepared. USA armed that soviet block country to the hilt in its madness to damage IRAN, I mean the SCUD carrying extra heavy duty trucks (which were known weapons capabililty and were not usually offered to many other allies) were papered as “agricultural equipment” and passed on.
If you were not reading then what was going on, then what can I say, other than that if you still believe certain concepts such as “how can our governement be involved in the murder of so many of us? its impossible!” then maybe you will never ever be able to see the truth, till you let the truth seep in.
UPTO YOU, read around on the web and you will see what “the good ol’ USA” been upto for ages.
Its just that none of the American Journals ever covered anything that was damaging to any regime in power.
About anthrax used after 9/11, guess where it came from? and the Chemical weapons US forces were looking for? guess how US govt knew that they existed? coz they supplied them, and they forgot to mention that those components supplied were expired and had no chemical weapons value any longer BUT telling the people that there was a “GRAVE DANGER” served the purpose so it was said so.
I cant argue or convince you but you might find better details from the videos of EX-CIA operatives etc on the I seen alot of them maybe you should try to find them too.
Like they say in the X-files, the truth is out there.
If you want to argue with me all your life , that is your choice but I dont have the time or the will.

Ciao. smile

Report this

By Marshall, December 4, 2007 at 12:05 am Link to this comment

#117737 by 1drees on 12/03 at 1:06 pm

I don’t deny that Iraq was an ally of the US until the Kuwait invasion, and that the US supplied intelligence during the Iran/Iraq war.  But there’s no evidence, unless you’d like to cite some, that Iraq weaponized any of the pesticides or other chemicals it bought from the US.

Report this

By 1drees, December 3, 2007 at 2:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Sir, Sorry to inform you but you are certainly NOT SO INFORMED ABOUT THE RECENT WARS and certainly not about the IRAN-IRAQ war.
I certainly do not mean to offend you or Argue with any one, BUT MY FACTS & UNDERSTANDING (based on NON-USA MSM, And you know what US MSM reports otherwise you’d never be on these pages at all) is way way different than yours maybe due to different sources of information.


and that might shed some light to clarify your concepts.


#117700 by Marshall on 12/03 at 10:35 am

#117670 by 1drees on 12/03 at 8:40 am

“IRAQ used American supplied chemical weapons quiet frequently as per American provided directions.”

The US did not supply chemical weapons to Iraq.  Early on, the US did supply materials, called “precursors”, which could be used in the production of chemical weapons as well as non-military applications.

Report this

By sophrosyne, December 3, 2007 at 2:02 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Good article.  It is so difficult to be an intelligent voter in America when so much is hidden from us by our own government.  One has to assume Bush lies at every opportunity and the lack of trust is erroding our democracy.

USA slavery to israel’s interests is extemely damaging to us and we continue to let it happen.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 3, 2007 at 12:16 pm Link to this comment

Quote: “Top Democratic and Republican leaders absolutely believe that Iran is planning to develop nuclear weapons. And one of their seemingly strongest arguments involves a process of deduction. Since Iran has so much oil, they argue, why develop nuclear power…”

That Democrats and Republicans are in on this game, as we know, points top the fact that they are all still being used and manipulated as mere mouthpieces by the military-industrial complex as well as a wider agenda of financial interests globally.

Even Obama was on about this in the past couple of days with misleading remarks about “countries with extractive industries”....... But, the article is now almost out of date:-

Intel: Iran Halted Nuke Program in 2003 -  (WASHINGTON) — “Iran halted its nuclear weapons development program in the fall of 2003 under international pressure but is continuing to enrich uranium, which means it may still be able to develop a weapon between 2010 and 2015, senior intelligence officials said Monday…. That finding, in a new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, is a change from two years ago…”,8599,1690189,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

Report this

By dsmith, December 3, 2007 at 11:38 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

If Israel is pushing for the bombing of Iran, let them do it!

Let Israeli mothers and fathers do the weeping for a while as the dead bodies of their sons come home in body bags.

Let their hospitals become loaded with men whose facial features have been burned off.

Let them become the hated war mongers around the world. (Neocon Norman Podhoretz, adviser to Rudy, says he is praying, that’s right praying for the US to attack Iran so that the US will be hated as much as Israel.) What an ally these Israeli/Americans are.

But of course, Zionist fanatics like Kissinger, Podhoretz, Goldberg, Krauthammer, Kristol would rather fight against defenseless people like the Palestinians. In the case of Iran they definately want the goys to do it. You see…Jews are the chosen poeple.

What a crock!

Report this

By Marshall, December 3, 2007 at 11:35 am Link to this comment

#117670 by 1drees on 12/03 at 8:40 am

“IRAQ used American supplied chemical weapons quiet frequently as per American provided directions.”

The US did not supply chemical weapons to Iraq.  Early on, the US did supply materials, called “precursors”, which could be used in the production of chemical weapons as well as non-military applications.  But no evidence exists that Iran actually weaponized any of these precursors.  Iraq built its own chemical weapons program from the ground up.

Report this
lastdaywatchers's avatar

By lastdaywatchers, December 3, 2007 at 10:57 am Link to this comment

When decussing the subject of Iran, you would be wise to know the times we are living in and the time that is yet to come!

The May 15th Prophecy is the only source that has given with 100% accuracy the information and detail with regard to Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey and the greater Middle East.

And here are a few excerpts of what the May 15th Prophecy has to say about IRAN

Posted on 06/13/07 - “Ahmadinejad says destruction of Israel is close”
By The Associated Press

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday the world would witness the destruction of Israel soon, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

Ahmadinejad said last summer’s war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon showed for the first time hegemony of the occupier regime [Israel] collapsed and that pushed the button counting the days until the destruction of Zionist regime, IRNA quoted him as saying.

uproot #1 Iraq

Iraq’s al-Sadr harbors ambitious plans
By HAMZA HENDAWI and QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writers Tue May 22, 2:59 PM ET

“Much of the Sadrists’ resolve to create an Islamic society, according to the lawmakers and aides, has to do with the movement’s strong messianic convictions. In Shiite terms, this translates into making society sufficiently pure for the return of the so-called Hidden Imam, a descendant of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad who disappeared as a child in the 9th century. Shiites believe he will return one day to bring justice to Earth.”

“The hidden imam is our savior,” said Amer al-Husseini, a cleric and a senior aide to al-Sadr in Baghdad. “We need to prepare for his return, both ideologically and practically.”

More from the May 15th Prophecy posted on 07/03/07

“Therefore Iran is not part of the 10 horn that were in the head of the dreadful beast(Rome)

But Iran is “up among them” horn

Iran is “The other which came up, and before whom three fell”
Chapter 7 verse 20

Iran is the bear with “three rib in it month between the teeth of it”

Iran is “behold there shall stand up yet three king in Persia” chapter 11 verse 2

Iran is the “Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the
glory of the kingdom” chapter 11 verse 20

That a description of the monarchy rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Shah of Iran

“He shall be destroyed, neither in anger nor in battle” verse 20

That a description of his fall to the revolution led by Ayatollah Khomeini to replace the monarchy with a Islamic Republic controled by the mallahs.

It is that religious mallah government rule that Daniel is refering to when he says

“And in his estate shall stand up a vile person”

That vile person is the Anti-Christ

And just like he did with Alexander the Great he will do with Anti-Christ by starting off in one place before moving his capital and headquarters to Iraq.

He will do this through the “estate” of the religious Iranian mullah government position (now occupied by Ayatollah Khamenei) when he comes as the Hidden Imam.”

and posted on 07/12/07

“The May 15th Prophecy also pointed you to the fact in Iran who was once ruled by Kingly Monarchy and that was replaced by a religious mullah Islamic republic and it is from that “estate” the Anti-Christ will “rise” from to assume power from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, not the exile Monarchy rule of the kingly line of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, to fulfill the scripture of Daniel chapter 11 verse 21

“And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give honour of the kingdom”

The Septuagint (Charles Thomson) translate the verse even more precisely

“A contemptible creature will succeed but will not be given recognition as king”

The Anti-Christ will immediately step into the power seat of Iraq created by the Ummah and then will be given power and authority in Lebanon and Syria who will cry “ Mahdi, Mahdi, Mahdi”.

Report this

By 1drees, December 3, 2007 at 9:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It might a few people if they knew a couple of International facts that the US MSM press maybe “forgets” to mention and that is When the Iranian revolutions was still red hot and the grand Ayatollah ( who I am sure has always been labelled as the raving madman by the MSM )was leading the REVOLUTION, he had decided & DECLARED ( yes he was the decider) that IRAN or any shiite will never use NUCLEAR weapons as that weapon kept on killing long after it was discharged. and hence similarly chemical weapons were also despised nd it ws sworn tht they will be enver used and then during the IRAN-IRAQ war IRAN never used the weapons even when IRAQ used American supplied chemical weapons quiet frequently as per American provided directions.
Also you will note tht th current IRANIAN presidents most statements are interrupted by the MSM reporters and then his statements are often ignored and interrupted so that he is unable to convey his sttements over the MSM because that would hamper the ZIONIST pplans for the next few WARS that are required for the NEW WORLD ORDER.

Report this

By aman, December 3, 2007 at 9:31 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Today when Iran demands that it be able to enrich uranium for nuclear power purposes, under strict international supervision, the United States says that’s proof Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons.” - What about when Iran declares to upcoming anihilation of Israel? Should we take that litteraly as well?

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right 3, Site wide - Exposure Dynamics
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide