Islam: deathcult of peace.

Posted by: profitsbeard at December 5, 2007 12:00 PM

We have tratiors in our intelligence community.

Posted by: Elric66 at December 5, 2007 12:05 PM

Whether or not Iran has temporarily stopped their nuclear program, there is plenty to be done. Begin the long process of teaching the infidels what the core beliefs of Islam really are. Set up limits in immigration. Monitor whether mosques here in our country are inciting violence. Start watching the borders and ports. Increase funding and other support to infidels who are currently under attack by jihad.

The only thing changed by the latest NIE is a slight reduction in the urgency of a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Continue monitoring them, and partner with the Israeli intelligence community; if evidence of an resumption is found, then act accordingly.

Posted by: special_guest at December 5, 2007 12:12 PM

I have read that the UK and France continue to support stronger UN sanctions against Iran. The fact that Russia and China would veto the sanctions is nothing new. So much for the US being "increasingly isolated" in foreign policy. That was the press response to the recent election in Australia. The MSM in America do not like Sarkozy because he loves America.

The report does not say when the former nuclear program in Iran started. I take it that they were developing weapons (along with North Korea) during the Bill Clinton administration. They stopped in 2003, which was after the US invasion of Iraq. So much for the argument that the Iraq war has strengthened our Islamofascist enemies.

Posted by: CTYankee at December 5, 2007 12:23 PM

Elric66 said

We have tratiors in our intelligence community.

Yes, those "tratiors" in the intelligence community have proof of Iranian nuclear weapon development, but have hidden it from the President and the public because they want a nuclear attack against Washington D.C., where they and their families live.

And of course I have now been added to the list of tratiors. Sheesh.

This is the level of rational discourse these days. The slightest disagreement on any issue is a death-penalty crime.

Posted by: special_guest at December 5, 2007 12:41 PM

If anyone listened to the Michael Savage show last night you would have heard that this report came from one persons analysis ... not even a field agent. The intel came from an Iranian "defector", to some undisclosed country (not the USA). The basis for the statement is from this unvetted source. The "cherry picked" leak was from an operative with ties to the Clintons and the Democratic party. This was an irresponsibe move related to politics nothing more. Yet another "victory" handed to the jihad by the left wing.

Posted by: ethoman at December 5, 2007 12:46 PM

The Wall Street Journal has had some articles far better than anything from AP or especially Times.
The online WSJ, http://www.opinionjournal.com/ has some of it "High Confidence Games" but not the excellent piece by Max Boot "The Gulf States and Iran" (except for subscribers). Do we now have the Saudis over a barrel? Will it be the Persian Gulf or the Arabian Gulf?
It is impossible to be well informed without a subscription to the WSJ, even though they also miss some of Robert's points on Islam.

Posted by: justask at December 5, 2007 12:47 PM

NIEs have now become politicized too. Also, not terribly accurate at times. Be sceptical.

Posted by: Wellington at December 5, 2007 12:51 PM

Another interesting article from Ken Timmerman.
http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/

Posted by: justask at December 5, 2007 12:53 PM

"NIEs have now become politicized too. Also, not terribly accurate at times. Be sceptical."

Ill trust Mossad over the NIE any day of the week.

Posted by: Elric66 at December 5, 2007 12:55 PM

In the strange upside down invert logic of denial practiced by Islamics, they declare 'victory' over the US and the West, which means they do not have the 'bomb' until they have the bomb -- then they will be victorious. They lie anyway, so what's the point? Maybe when they have the bomb, their 12th hidden Imam will straighten them out in the cataclysmic aftermath of mushrooms clouds over Iran. Ahmadinejad will be 'vindicated' then, as one of the many vanquished. It's all inverted anyway: They lie.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at December 5, 2007 12:57 PM

"This is the level of rational discourse these days. The slightest disagreement on any issue is a death-penalty crime."

By special_guest

Just remember, Thomas Jefferson said "Dissent is the highest form of being patriotic"

Does all of this sound familiar? How about when President Bush sent Joseph Wilson to Africa to find that Iraq had intended to purchase yellow cake uranium from there. He came back and said that it was a wild goose chase, and there was no link whatsoever. So to show there appreciation, Dick Cheney and Libby out Wilson's wife, a CIA field agent, just to get back at Wilson. Valarie Wilson was a counter-proliferation agent, going after the "loose nukes" that Bush said he was determined to find out about. Ahmadinejad is doing at this point is just saber rattling because he knows that it stirs up President Bush and Israel. Just like when everyone got stirred up over the whole August 22nd deal. IF there is one thing you need to know, it is that whenever we say these terrorist will strike, they never will.

No country will ever be able to assemble nuclear weapons without any evidence of it, and when we actually have that evidence then that will be time to do something about it. Israel will never allow themselves to be in the position of being attacked by nuclear weapons. I've always supported Israel, but not at the cost of American troops.

Posted by: Patriot_1/17 at December 5, 2007 1:07 PM

Scientists have long acknowledged that the hardest part, by far, of making a nuke is to make the fissionable material. No one denies that Iran is doing that right now, with at least 3000 centrifuges spinning. What is to stop Iran from handing off their enriched uranium to a terror group? Can a government that celebrates martyrdom, jihad and the suicide-bomber be deterred by mere knowledge of possible retaliation?

Do many of the NIE people have some sort of political agenda so partisan that it takes precedence even over the capacity Iran is now achieving to hand off fissionable materials to terrorists?

Once sufficient quantities of fissionable materials are acquired, they can be designed relatively easily into a simple gun-type nuclear weapon of the sort that destroyed Hiroshima. Would a terror group have the capacity to make a gun-type nuclear device? Fortunately, assembling even a simple gun-type weapon would require a number of people with some technical skills. It would seem to be difficult, but far from impossible, for a group to do that and get away with it, because there is a fair chance one of the recruited technicians, or other associates, would at some point leak the plot before the bomb could be finished.

So is it worth the risk to strike Iran? Even most hawk analysts seem to think it's far more desirable at this point to increase help to the internal opposition in Iran to overthrow the regime from within. But that internal option will be disappearing, probably sooner than many people suppose.

Posted by: traeh at December 5, 2007 1:07 PM

There are way to many conflicting opinions from experts on Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. No matter what the report says, the status Quo is pretty much the same.

The US as well as other western nations have ramped up the pressure in numerous ways on Iran. They are not about to trust this intelligence report as gospel for one moment. The Pentagon has identified more than 400 targets in Iran that must be taken out if the smoking gun appears at places like Natanz. Iran has notoriously demonstrated a pension for proxy groups such as Hezbollah, and Syria that is still somwhat denying the clandestine attack on a nuclear program by the IDF. The US and other Western and EU countries will continue to work on numerous plans for dealing with Iran no matter what this report produced. The risks of ignoring this radical regime are way to great.

Posted by: Mackie at December 5, 2007 1:09 PM

They might not have the bomb yet, but why risk the chance. And they, the Iranians have stated that the destruction of Israel and the United States is their goal. Why wait for the first strike like a fool. But alas this is what will happen and the free world will once again pay a heavy price.

Posted by: AMartinez at December 5, 2007 1:10 PM

This report comes from the same community that didn't know 9/11 was coming. Need one say more?

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at December 5, 2007 1:11 PM

"This report comes from the same community that didn't know 9/11 was coming. Need one say more?"

No, thats says it all. We need to dismantle our intelligence community and rebuild it from the ground up. One criteria should be that they serve to protect the security of the US, not to serve a political party.

Posted by: Elric66 at December 5, 2007 1:23 PM

Ahmadinejad's face assaulting my fist: now, THAT would be a victory.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 5, 2007 1:23 PM

Wow! So now we (America) are practicing Taqyyia (sic)? Who woulda thunk it! Although if Michael Savage is right then we really do have a problem with what the NIE wants to believe. As the old Breck campaign said, "Does he, or doesn't he? Only his nuclear(sic) scientist knows for sure"

"Kuffirs of the world, Unite!"
"Islam, abusing women since 622AD"

Posted by: OregonJake at December 5, 2007 1:23 PM

No nuke program and no homosexuals in Iran.

Posted by: Ahmadinejew at December 5, 2007 1:30 PM

Elric66: I have a lot of trust in Mossad too. By the way, if I'm not mistaken I think Mossad has never gone back on its contention that Saddam Hussein ferreted out WMDs to Syria (perhaps with Russian help) shortly before America and its allies invaded in March of 2003.

Posted by: Wellington at December 5, 2007 1:33 PM

I have no trust in the Mossad--any more than I trust the CIA.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 5, 2007 1:35 PM

Wellington,

Actually our 1st inspectors that went in said that was possible as well when they didnt find any.

Posted by: Elric66 at December 5, 2007 1:35 PM

RoobartSbunsar,

So who DO you trust in the intel community?

Posted by: Elric66 at December 5, 2007 1:39 PM

Well seems the liberals will stop at nothing. Not even national security to get elected. Check the latest stunt by Hillary ... it is on the same level as this latest one by thier opperatives in the CIA.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=2amonw8qmws&feature=related

Posted by: ethoman at December 5, 2007 1:43 PM

Without revealing its sources, those who compiled the NIE have to be taken on faith. Should we? Is their record one of such amazing accuracy, displaying such an uncanny understanding of, inter alios, Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and General Musharraf, not to mention what it ha shown it comprehends about the Ikhwan in Egypt, or why Libya "gave up" its nuclear project, or what Bashir in Khartoum plans to do to keep holding off any effective intervention in Darfur.

Do you have confidence that those in our intelligence services comprehend the meaning, and menace, of Islam, as fifty years ago Western intelligence services understood the meaning, and menace, of the Soviet state, and Soviet Communism? But then a better class of agent, one well-versed in Communism and in the history of the Soviet Union, aided by many refugees from the Soviet Union and Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe, as well as former Communists in the West (see "The God That Failed"), and defectors from the Soviet security services, whether those services were called the Cheka, or the NKVD, or the KGB. Do you have the impression that the American and other Western governments have been listening to, de-briefing, the equivalent -- that is, such defectors from the Army of Islam as Wafa Sultan (why not find out what she thinks might be possible in Syria, with an Alawite-controlled army but a Sunni-controlled government) and Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Ibn Warraq and so many others, being joined every day by the intellectually and morally most advanced people -- their numbers are few, but truth is on their side -- who through no fault of their own, were born into Islam, and then made the slow mental journey, with a long stopover at the waystation called "Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only" Muslim, until they made it the wide uplands of complete, and unapologetic, apostasy.

The fact that not only Israel, but many European governments, are now reported to have raised a skeptical eyebrow about the NIE report, that even the operation of Al-Baradei seems surprised, should make us hesitant about adding our voices too quickly to all those screaming with what they presume is delighted vindication, or vindicated delight, as they assume we are all merely going to accept, without the slightest doubt or questioning or skepticism, this most unlikely, un-verisimilar news, the conclusions hedged in with qualifying words that seem not to have been noticed, or if noticed, to have been paid no heed.

The Bush Administration, however, has created the conditions where such things are accepted. Its lunatic policy, both naive and sentimental, of keeping American forces in Iraq once the regime had fallen and the entire country scoured for weapons of mass destruction -- that is, by February 2004, the month after David Kay made his final report, and two months after Saddam Hussein had been captured -- in order to bring "democracy" to "ordinary moms and dads in the Middle East," which policy of the Bush Administration is based on wilful ignorance of Islam, and fear of learning about, recognizing, and figuring out how best to deal with the meaning, and full menace, of Islam.

Posted by: Hugh at December 5, 2007 1:49 PM

NOW the drivebys believe the intelligence community.
Savage is right the guy who was on ABC last night was obviously Persian.
I think there is a lot more to this than meets the eye. For one thing, the President made some kind of remark yesterday at his news conference like "it's news to me". Sure, they released a real NIH report before it went to him. Yeah that and a quarter....

This reminds me of a dinner party in Frankfurt about a year before the wall went down. An "Oil engineer" who worked on the Iran-Iraq border and was there on R&R made a joke. "What did Ronnie (Reagan) say to Gorby over drinks? There NEVER WAS any star wars.

I didn't get the joke right then, but it popped in my mind when the Berlin wall went down and later when the USSR underwent such dramatic changes.

Posted by: Aunt Bea at December 5, 2007 1:59 PM

Speculation on my part:

I believe that the President has not been honest on the border, on Islam, on entitlements, and on the imprisoned border guards. I believe that his policy positions are often based upon self-serving reasons.

That being said, Bush is in a lose-lose position on Iran. If he strikes and Iran’s surrogates engage stateside, he’ll be blamed. If he doesn’t strike and Iran nukes Israel, his legacy is gone.

Enter Thomas Fingar. State Department career government worker. Stanford grad. Torpedoed the Bolton nomination.

Finger is selected as the man to give the President his daily intelligence briefings a year or so ago. Finger is put in charge of the latest NIE. The NIE reflects Finger’s policy preference to engage Iran diplomatically.

Bush gets to talk tough in the face of the NIE, which says take no action. Bush takes no action, and passes the problem on to his successor in interest. Iran lights off nuclear bomb, and Bush has plausible deniability.

Here’s Fingar:

http://www.state.gov/cms_images/tompic_asst-sec_fingar_150.gif

Posted by: pez at December 5, 2007 2:04 PM

Hugh said

Do you have confidence that those in our intelligence services comprehend the meaning, and menace, of Islam, as fifty years ago Western intelligence services understood the meaning, and menace, of the Soviet state, and Soviet Communism?

Of course not. But the NIE didn't report that Islam is a Religion of Peace, and it didn't report that Iran now shares Western values. It also didn't report that Iran has permanently abandoned its program, nor did it report that it had absolute proof that they have abandoned it even temporarily. It did report that it could find no evidence that Iran is currently pursuing its nuclear weapon program.

Honestly, I don't see why either side is making such a big deal over such a limited conclusion.

I could imagine a President saying that the risk was too great, and going in militarily to verify that there is no active program. But it would have to debated in those terms; it is not acceptable to simply manufacture intelligence to justify the short-term goal.

Posted by: special_guest at December 5, 2007 2:10 PM

Move along, now. Nothing to see here.
I can so vividly picture Barbrady from South Park standing in front of a production facility uttering these words.:)

The biggest problem is that Bush unfortunately didn't move to clean house in the intelligence communities. But since the CIA was castrated by Clinton it would have further castrated an already enfeebled agency. We are paying the price now for the "Peace Dividend." And Bush is not free from responsibility on this. We haven't had a strong willed CIA director since Casey, someone who could have cleaned house. So now we have an unreliable intelligence apparatus, especially involving intel about other nations.
The State Dept.'s issue with Bolton is simple, he wasn't willing to compromise on core issues.(if different is known, please educate me) From what I have heard from him, he was definitely not a "blame America" sort. From his time at the UN he definitely wasn't afraid to vocalize his convictions and concerns. This made him outspoken, a no-no in the State Department unless one is speaking out against the US. Now for the largest problem; with Civil Service, how easy/hard would it be to clear out the bureaucracy?

Posted by: Kevin at December 5, 2007 2:37 PM

We have tratiors in our intelligence community.

Posted by: Elric66 at December 5, 2007 12:05 PM

Odd timing on this so-called "secret" report that is just now coming to light.

Traitors? Well, put in the context of the subsequent recent headlines -- perhaps more than mere traitors. Which ruling families in the US government are heavily invested in Saudi Arabia?

Will OPEC Dump the Dollar?
The fall of the U.S. dollar—and the domestic unhappiness this creates—is causing oil-producing nations to reassess links to the greenback

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/nov2007/gb20071120_087338.htm?chan=globalbiz_europe+index+page_top+stories

"We have common viewpoints and we will stand by each other until we capture the high peaks. God is with us and victory is awaiting us," added Ahmadinejad, vowing to defeat US imperialism together and pointing to the fall of the US Dollar as the prelude to the end of America's global dominance

http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/index.php?mod=article&cat=Stock&article=5497

Iran leader dismisses US currency

The value of the US dollar has fallen steadily in recent times
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has suggested an end to the trading of oil in US dollars, calling the currency "a worthless piece of paper".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7101050.stm

Posted by: witness at December 5, 2007 2:38 PM

...Russia would veto the sanctions...

Why, oh why would anyone want to listen to a country, ruled by organized criminals? This is ridiculous!

Posted by: Charles Martel at December 5, 2007 2:43 PM

Did anyone ever wonder why Iran had a nuclear weapon program till 2003? If it was not discovered wouldn't have been completed and the Mullah's might have had their "Divine" answer to facing their self instilled enemies?
Good for the world that iran stopped in 2003 and no thanks to the spineless it did stop.
The Iranian theocracy remains on an ideological collision course with every freedom loving soul on this earth and has to be confronted for the sake of the iranian people and peace and stability in the ME and the world.

Posted by: Ali moughanni at December 5, 2007 2:51 PM

Did anyone ever wonder why Iran had a nuclear weapon program till 2003? If it was not discovered wouldn't have been completed and the Mullah's might have had their "Divine" answer to facing their self instilled enemies?
Good for the world that iran stopped in 2003 and no thanks to the spineless it did stop.
The Iranian theocracy remains on an ideological collision course with every freedom loving soul on this earth and has to be confronted for the sake of the iranian people and peace and stability in the ME and the world.

Posted by: Ali moughanni at December 5, 2007 2:51 PM

"The U.S. intelligence report released Monday concluded that Iran had stopped its weapons program..."

...is this report coming from those agencies who employ undocumented personell?....Is Howard Dean or John Murtha on the panel?.....

...is this report a type of American styled tiqqiyyah?....meant to lull the Muslims into a false hope that we are really stupid enough to believe it...

....I prefer to believe Ahmadinejad when he says he plans to annihilate Israel and other NonMuslims with nuclear bombs...you know, the bombs everyone is now saying Amadinejad is no longer pursuing...

....American Intelligence seems to be an oxymoron these days....

Senate Intelligence committee:
2007-2008

Democrats
Republicans

John D. Rockefeller IV, West Virginia
Chairman Christopher S. Bond, Missouri
Vice Chairman
Dianne Feinstein, California John Warner, Virginia
Ron Wyden, Oregon Chuck Hagel, Nebraska
Evan Bayh, Indiana Saxby Chambliss, Georgia
Barbara A. Mikulski, Maryland Orrin Hatch, Utah
Russell D. Feingold, Wisconsin Olympia J. Snowe, Maine
Bill Nelson, Florida Richard Burr, North Carolina
Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island



Harry Reid, Nevada, Ex Officio
Mitch McConnell, Kentucky, Ex Officio
Carl Levin, Michigan, Ex Officio
John McCain, Arizona, Ex Officio

.......ugghhh...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at December 5, 2007 2:57 PM

The Report is a victory for Iran. The truth is really not in the report, it is all just a best guess, from some think tank that may have a agenda.

Truth is, Israel says Syria had a nuclear bomb facility, and IF they have (had) that, one could figure Iran has the bomb NOW, not five years down the road.

Error on the side of caution, keep the pressure up, to the end of this threat.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at December 5, 2007 2:57 PM

We have tratiors in our intelligence community.

Posted by: Elric66 at December 5, 2007 12:05 PM

...and outside the "intellignce community" as well.

Posted by: Alert at December 5, 2007 3:00 PM

I highly doubt the accuracy of this NIE report. Why has Iran not allowed complete transparency in inspections if they do not have a weapons program? Why was Iran hiding its nuclear sites at Arak and Natanz? (and who knows, poss other "unknown unknowns?") These are not the actions of a legitimate, transparent power seeking simply peaceful, civilian nuclear energy.

I fret to think it, but it seems the higher-ups in the Intelligence Community are politicizing this Intel. That is a disgrace! I hope this does not mean Bush is washing his hands of the Iran nuclear issue, (which should be the number one National Security issue for the United States!), and is going to let Iran get the bomb! I can't believe it...

Bush what happened to your promise????

"States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.

We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.

We'll be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons."

Posted by: Peaceful_Muslims? at December 5, 2007 3:09 PM

The silver lining:

"This forces the Israelis to make a decision instead of being able to take some comfort that the U.S. would take action at some point," said Wayne White, former deputy director of the State Department's Middle East Intelligence Office.

"With Israel, you can be sure they will be unwilling to tolerate as much risk as the U.S. ... because they can get hit," he said."

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=3958596

Now that Israel knows they are on an island on this one, perhaps a basic survival instinct will overwhelm their pathological compulsion to be loved by everyone, even by those who clearly hate them.

Posted by: Infidel33 at December 5, 2007 3:52 PM

If we are just being told now, Four years after the fact, that Iran's program was stopped. Can we assume that 4 Years from now, they actually re-started their program, 3 Years and 11 Months ago from today's date?

There is a very strong odor coming from this report and it reeks like Dead Fish and Rotten Eggs.

Are we really expected to give Iran another 28 Years of Yaking until we turn Demoncraticy Blue in the Face, in hopes the Iranian people overthrow their Government?

Only Donkeys follow Carrots dangled in front of them. Even Sheep are not that stupid.

My Head wants to IED.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at December 5, 2007 5:03 PM

Fingar, 11JUL07:

“Iran is continuing to pursue uranium enrichment and has shown more interest in protracting negotiations and working to delay and diminish the impact of UNSC sanctions than in reaching an acceptable diplomatic solution. We assess that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons--despite its international obligations and international pressure.”

Reportedly the ‘change’ is due to a single-source Iranian ‘diplomat’ in Europe.

Stinky Stinky.

And again the picture:

http://www.state.gov/cms_images/tompic_asst-sec_fingar_150.gif

Posted by: pez at December 5, 2007 5:43 PM

Not that it matters really, what I personally think about all this, but I believe the following:

1. Iran already has nukes.
a. perhaps already home-grown
b. purchased on the black-market
c. perhaps delivered by N. Korea

2. Iran fully intends to use said nukes to:
a. destroy Israel as promised
b. destroy the US as promised

3. This so-called "secret document" smells
a. the timing is "odd" because
i. its on the heels of Anapolis
ii. lots of stated threats to US economy
iii. the ape and the saudis hand-holding
1. a threat to the personal fortunes
of certain high-level politicians?
b. the intellegence agencies are riddled
with hamas agents these days
c. since when is policy based on the
dubious assesment of spooks who could
jolly well be double agents?
4. The US won't win militarily because it
refuses to win at all -- evenpolitically.

Bottom line: Irael is abandoned and will have to act militarily at some point if it wants to survive.

This will lose-lose situation for them because the game is over. It is only a question of "sooner" or "later."

Caulk a big one up for the Iranian ape -- this is a well played victory. Unfortuantely, the ape will be back for more and will eventually bite off more than he can swallow.

In the meantime -- a lot of damage will be forthcoming.

Posted by: witness at December 5, 2007 6:10 PM

"RoobartSbunsar,

So who DO you trust in the intel community?"

Nobody.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 5, 2007 6:34 PM

witness: Assuming you're correct in your delineation of circumstances to date, then we're even closer to Armageddon than most think. And again assuming you're correct, I agree Iran will probably make a huge error to its great detriment, though I'm sure by now some intermediate party, say the Swiss, have conveyed to the powers that be in Iran that Israel and America can take only so much and no more. (As for Western Europe, it is looking a bit better with Sarkozy at the French helm but it is still woefully short of being considered reliable and tough.)

The future, therefore, calls for the most delicate judgment on everyone's part, including the nutjobs running Persia and the duplicitous Saudis running their "family" (i.e., country). Hmmm. Doesn't look too good, does it? And what's at the bottom of all this rot? Why it's Islam once again.

Posted by: Wellington at December 5, 2007 6:36 PM

Here is my view (and I could be wrong):

Bush does not have the guts to go after Iran. He never did and never will. I said this over a year ago. He also has been sending out messages to the Iranians that if they knock off some of their involvement in Iraq we will help them out. Bush is the one who has made a big deal about this report. He could ignore it and give reasons for ignoring it however he is not. Bush will sell out everything for success in Iraq even if it means sweeping the Iranian nuclear problem under the rug.

He has decided to let the next president deal with it. Bush is the president after all...he is the boss.

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 5, 2007 6:51 PM

It is foolisn to let the israelis go this alone. Embarassing really.

Posted by: ethoman at December 5, 2007 7:03 PM

To support my contention a deal was done under the table:

"[Government spokesman Ali al-]Dabbagh said that the turning point came when Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki of Iraq visited Iran in August and met with that country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in the Shiite shrine city of Mashad. Mr. Maliki told the Iranian leader that “Iran had to choose whether to support the government or any other party, and Iraq will decide according to which they choose,” Mr. Dabbagh said. The Iranians promised to help and have done so, he said."

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/18/iraqi-government-to-iran-hey-thanks-for-getting-the-militias-to-stop-killing-people/

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 5, 2007 7:05 PM

In July, the Deputy Director for Analysis, Thomas Fingar, the same person behind the current NIE report stated the exact opposite of his current NIE report in testimony under oath. He made it clear in July that Iran was still proceeding in its quest to develop nuclear weapons. What new has he learned since then? Should we believe him now if by his own admission he was completely wrong in July? Perhaps yes, perhaps no.

Posted by: patagonianplato at December 5, 2007 7:24 PM

Does Syria ever make a move on defense issues such as nuclear weapons without conferring or coordinating with Iran? I think not.

How does Syria then, build, or start to build nuclear weapons to the point where Israel felt a need to destroy whatever facilities were involved, and if we are to believe the reports about what was actually destroyed on Sept 6.

I will not believe that Syria was close to having nuclear weapons and that Iran is not just as close. Whatever Syria had, Iran has. Period.

Posted by: USorThem at December 5, 2007 7:57 PM

On account of the Kuranic doctrine known as 'taqiyya,' for non-Muslims to take ANYTHING a Muslim communicates to them as truth is VERY DANGEROUS (except if it is a threat that he will commit an act of violence, in which case the Muslim(s) is probably telling the truth and at that point it is best to take any such statement issued by a Muslim as a PROMISE, and not merely a THREAT).

Iran's mighty nut job is probably throwing taqiyya at the west and it would be prudent for the United States and other western democratic governments to take it as such and act accordingly.

Posted by: pythagoras at December 5, 2007 8:25 PM

There's one sure way to beat Nutjob and that is regime change.

Why sit on a powder keg continuously when the better course is just to get rid of the mullahs ?

Just as good is to defeat islam, a vile ideology of hate and aggression.

Posted by: dgene at December 5, 2007 8:28 PM

I don't believe it.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at December 5, 2007 8:50 PM

These are the kinds of criminals we have in the CIA, DIA and the rest of the US "intelligence community": nukes in Iraq are "slam dunk", and Iran "ain't got any". They should be all put before a military tribunal for treason. Instead, we give $40,000,000,000 of our tax dollars to these vermin every year, more than all other contries in the world combined spend on their intelligence.

Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.

Posted by: Enragedsince1999 at December 5, 2007 9:18 PM

From Patriot above...
"...
Does all of this sound familiar? How about when President Bush sent Joseph Wilson to Africa to find that Iraq had intended to purchase yellow cake uranium from there. He came back and said that it was a wild goose chase, and there was no link whatsoever. So to show there appreciation, Dick Cheney and Libby out Wilson's wife, a CIA field agent, just to get back at Wilson. Valarie Wilson was a counter-proliferation agent, going after the "loose nukes" that Bush said he was determined to find out about. ..."

Cheney and Libby did not out Valerie, Dick Armitage did. You must be reading old NYT propaganda.

But I agree with you on Jefferson and debate!

------
On Iraqi WMD, Bodansky - in "Secret History of the Iraq War" describes transportation of WMD to Syria immediately prior to and just after the American attack. This was confirmed in another book by the ex-chief of the Iraqi Air Force, who described the further transport of these materials to Sudan in Iraqi aircraft.
------
On Iranian nukes, former Congressman Curt Weldon's book (2005 Countdown to Terror) details his liaison with an Iranian dissident with a fake of name of Ali. Ali described Iranian nuclear efforts, and had very high-level contacts in Iran, and he presents results of top level government meetings. He used his own funds till they ran out, and then hoped to get CIA help.

According to Weldon, the CIA rejected Ali and chastised him for even talking to Weldon. The book presents a series of reports by Ali from April 2003 through September 2004. These reports included info on overall Iranian strategies as well as the nuclear bomb program. The June-August 2004 report- Chapter 15 of the book - is titled "Crash Effort to Develop Atomic Bomb, Ali pleads for CIA Assistance".

Ali had gotten no aid from the CIA. Significantly the date of his report June-August 2004, was well after the date (2003) that the NIE report claims the Iranians closed down the Nuclear bomb project.

Weldon describes CIA indifference even hostility to Ali, and even Porter Goss could not overcome CIA resistance to Ali. Ali's information indicated that the nuclear bomb program was in full swing in 2004. The last report in the book was dated September 23, 2004. Here is a quote:

"1. Khameni has congratulated the group working on the atomic bomb, telling them 2 bombs should be made the first of January of 2005, otherwise they couldn't be considered as true Muslims".

So was it stopped in 2003, according to NIE, yet still going on in September 2004, with planned bomb production in January 2005? Was it restarted in 2004? According to Ali, it was going on well after 2003 with plans out to January 2005. That is where the book stops.

Apparently, the NIE report (which included the CIA) never considered Ali or his high-level sources. The NIE report states that it knows about events after 2003. Why would they refuse to collaborate with a dissident with high-level contacts in Iran?

People who want to believe the NIE report should check out Bolton's "Surrender is not an Option", which documents the massive incompetence and America-hate that envelops foggy bottom. Bolton, Curt Weldon, and Scarborough all describe the CIA and Foggy Bottom as centers of incompetence. The Peter Principle: all bureaucrats rise to their level of incompetency.

If the Defense Department operated like State Department and CIA are, the troops would be using muskets and cavalry.

Here is an idea: privatize the State Dept and the CIA. It could not be any worse and the chances are 99:1 that it would be infinitely better.

Posted by: Jimmy Bones at December 5, 2007 10:40 PM

Low to moderate "confidence" (lexicon words) in the report by its own people isn't good intel at all, and it's not a secret.

Besides, this is all part of the big pre-game show started by Annapolis.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=7B0F17D9-02C7-47B8-93B3-64E4CDB0FA7D
And with a low-to-moderate confidence report, which is de facto toilet paper for all the good it does,
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=7B0F17D9-02C7-47B8-93B3-64E4CDB0FA7D
all the more case-in-point for a stratagem, an artifice instead...with Israel protesting like 1981
"Israel publicly challenges US intelligence report that Iran’s nuclear weapons program is on hold
December 4, 2007, 11:32 AM (GMT+02:00)
Defense minister Ehud Barak won't be led
Defense minister Ehud Barak argued that Iran had in fact restarted its program.
“It’s apparently true that in 2003 Iran stopped its military nuclear program for a time. But in our opinion, since then, it has apparently continued that program,” Barak told Israel army radio. “We cannot afford to rest just because of an intelligence report from the other side of the globe, even if it is from our greatest friend,” said the defense minister.
Israel’s foreign missions were instructed to step up the international campaign for tough sanctions against Iran to repair the impression created by the US intelligence reassessment that Iran is off the hook on its military nuclear program."

It brings to mind the osirak event...
US "officially" washes its hand of the affair,
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1320
giving a green light for Israel to hit the place,
US "officially" condemns, but only officially to soothe the islamists.
(backdoor channels say we'll be thanking God for them within the next few years on this, too, jus like we did in 1981)

This way, if iran hits us because Israel kicks their @$$, we can go right for the iranians throats, since we had nothing to do with it...and there's not a damned thing the islamist world, in fact, the entire world, could do about it.

One big chess game, extremely high stakes.
One big brilliant maneuver.
The pro-islamist MSM is reveling in it, their islamist masters are reveling in it even more, drunk with power, ego, and overconfidence now, just as planned,
the MSMs captive fans think they're the know-all, see-alls, becoming understandably upset, just like they're supposed to-feeding the islamists concerns as to the "autheticity" of the report, since they all know little to none of the back channel dealings going on behind the scenes...because the public STILL take MSM at face value...
...all the while, the show hasn't even started yet.

Patience...
Sun Tzu at work

Posted by: jcom972 at December 6, 2007 12:18 PM

jcom972

Two questions.

1. Do you think that the current Israeli Prime minister has the will to strike Iran if he has no green light from the U.S., or even worse was specifically told not to do so?

2. There are not many routes that Israeli could follow for such a strike. Obviously the best route would be through Syria and then Iraq. If President Bush said no to a strike, I find it unthinkable that the Israeli Air Force would chance an encounter with the U.S.A.F. The Northern Route around Turkey seems unlikely as does the Southern route through portions of Saudi Arabia. Both would risk encounters with hostile aircraft long before reaching the target. (It is hard to believe that the Osirisk ruse would work a second time.) This only leaves a very long route around Saudi Arabia. I admit for the record that I know nothing about the operational capabilities of the Israeli Air Force. However, I do know that this is outside the operational range of a bomb laden F16-I, which I am assuming (perhaps incorrectly) would be the bird of choice for such a mission. Without in-flight refueling capability, this would be a one-way mission. Do you know if the Israeli Air Force has in-flight refueling capability?

Posted by: patagonianplato at December 6, 2007 1:04 PM

1. not "think"...I KNOW it. They didn't over osirak, either, or lebanon, or syria, or anyone else. They will however work in conjunction with us if they see a positive possibility/probability outcome from it, for Israel's benefit...and I certainly don't blame them for it.

2. discussing operational details is not gonna happen here...wished we could, but I'm not gonna give the enemy anything they could use (and they certainly DO read this site). It's possible, without our help...if it goes down, we're both going to be laughing our @$$es off at how brilliantly executed and amazingly simple it was.

After all (historical quote): "Boys will be boys".
;-)

Posted by: jcom972 at December 7, 2007 12:24 PM

jcom972

Thanks for your reply. It gives me some comfort. And I understand and respect your reluctance to not discuss question two.

It never occurred to me that people positing scenarios at a website could possibly come up with something that the experts in the affected countries militaries had not already considered. But I am beginning to have a lot of confidence in you, so I will accept what you have said.

At the very least, you give me hope and I need that just now.

Cheers

Posted by: patagonianplato at December 7, 2007 6:51 PM