JPost: US Airstrike on Iran Likely "Within Weeks"

According to this post, there's an actual airstrike against Iran in the works, probably something like W's Last Stand. Now, when everyone's all in a tizzy over Palindrome and the election. It may be just a well-placed rumor, and it doesn't make any sense, but knowing the recklessness of Bush/Cheney, it might just be true, and it might just help to blow this thing wide open before it hits the world:

From the Jerusalem Post:

The Dutch intelligence service, the AIVD, has called off an operation aimed at infiltrating and sabotaging Iran's weapons industry due to an assessment that a US attack on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program is imminent, according to a report in the country's De Telegraaf newspaper on Friday.

The report claimed that the Dutch operation had been "extremely successful," and had been stopped because the US military was planning to hit targets that were "connected with the Dutch espionage action."

The impending air-strike on Iran was to be carried out by unmanned aircraft "within weeks," the report claimed, quoting "well placed" sources.

According to the report, information gleaned from the AIVD's operation in Iran has provided several of the targets that are to be attacked in the strike, including "parts for missiles and launching equipment."

"Information from the AIVD operation has been shared in recent years with the CIA," the report said.

On Friday, Ma'ariv reported that Israel had made a strategic decision to deny Iran military nuclear capability and would not hesitate "to take whatever means necessary" to prevent Teheran from achieving its nuclear goals.

According to the report, whether the United States and Western countries succeed in thwarting the Islamic Republic's nuclear ambitions diplomatically, through sanctions, or whether a US strike on Iran is eventually decided upon, Jerusalem has begun preparing for a separate, independent military strike.

Are they playing the old "Israel, Bully to the World" bit? Is it telling that the Jerusalem Post is the one to "break" this "story" about something as impossible to verify as the Dutch intelligence service?

McCain's Preacher Says America's Mission is to "Destroy" Islam

Here's a Warning - Non-Armageddonists Beware the McCain Thing:

During a 2005 sermon, a fundamentalist pastor whom Senator John McCain has
praised and campaigned with called Islam "the greatest religious enemy of our
civilization and the world," claiming that the historic mission of America is to
see "this false religion destroyed." In this taped sermon, currently sold by his
megachurch, the Reverend Rod Parsley reiterates and amplifies harsh and
derogatory comments about Islam he made in his book, Silent No More, published
the same year he delivered these remarks. Meanwhile, McCain has stuck to his
stance of not criticizing Parsley, an important political ally in a crucial
swing state.

If this is not right in line with the Armageddonists' Principles of shaking up the mideast with war and then "fighting the good fight" against the "false religion" of Islam, and all those sick religious self-proclaimed Doomsday Generators ... then what is? McCain himself is probably more about political expedience. He coddles religious extremists because that's what he needs, as he sees it, to win the nomination and later, the election. That "later" clause may prove to be his undoing, though.

Public Opinion Polls show:

"...evangelicals remain just 7% of the adult population. That number has
not changed since the Barna Group began measuring the size of the evangelical
public in 1994....less than one out of five born again adults (18%) meet the
evangelical criteria."

"...the number of Protestants soon will slip below 50 percent of the
nation's population." National Opinion Research Center's General Social Survey,
2004.

Of those who claim to be Protestant, most presumably are not Armageddonists.
Actually, he might do well to give a nod to less traditional religion.

The fastest growing religion (in terms of percentage) is Wicca -- a Neopagan religion that is sometimes referred to as Witchcraft. Numbers of adherents went from 8,000 in 1990 to 134,000 in 2001. Their numbers of adherents are doubling about every 30 months.

OK, so you need millions. Ok, so Muslims in America number about 1,558,068, as "estimated" in 2004. But in the world, their numbers get a bit larger: 1.61 Billion, as estimated for 2007. Does that give them the right to protest in the world court? Well, there's no Muslim nation that can veto the United States in the U.N. But even so, isn't it extremely irresponsible for a nominee for President of the United States to endorse and praise a guy who calls on America itself to destroy Islam? Say, why didn't we hear about this, but Wright/Obama was bleeding all over the media?

In March 2008—two weeks after McCain appeared with Parsley at a Cincinnati
campaign rally, hailing him as "one of the truly great leaders in America, a
moral compass, a spiritual guide"—Mother Jones reported that Parsley had urged Christians to wage a "war" to
eradicate Islam in his 2005 book. McCain's campaign refused to respond to
questions about Parsley, and the presumptive Republican presidential nominee
declined to denounce Parsley's anti-Islam remarks or renounce his
endorsement.

At a time when Barack Obama was mired in a searing controversy involving
Reverend Jeremiah Wright, McCain escaped any trouble for his political alliance
with Parsley, who leads the World Harvest Church, a supersized Pentecostal
institution in Columbus, Ohio. Parsley, whose sermons are broadcast around the
world, has been credited with helping George W. Bush win Ohio in 2004 by
registering social conservatives and encouraging them to vote. McCain certainly
would like to see Parsley do the same for him—which could explain his reluctance
to do any harm to his relationship with this anti-Islam extremist.

It may also have something to do with this:

If Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright were white, he'd probably have his own church
show on television.
Maybe even his own network.
...
If he were white, Rev. Wright could stand up before the cameras and make
his nuttiest statements -- that the U.S. government deliberately spread AIDS in
the inner cities, for example -- and most white Americans wouldn't be so
shocked.

So is it all about racism? Not exactly. But after his singing debut in "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran", you'd think McCain would be a little more careful. Maybe he thinks Karl Rove's got his back. Ahhh, McCain... For those who love More of the Same.

Would You Buy a Nuclear War from This Man?

I want to nuke 'em, I want to nuke 'em NOW!

No? Well, congratulations! You already have! He's convinced Sweet Oxy-Condi to tag along on the nuke bandwagon, and pretty soon you, O Taxpayer of Little Faith, will be the proud owner of your Very Own Nuclear War! With that country about which I'm sure you know a whole hell of a lot, and for whom you feel the utmost ire & enmity, Iran!

Here's a slightly edited and worth-perusing excerpt from the "DownsizeDC" group, normally a libertarian group that endorses Ron Paul, is not so hot about socialized medicine, but really has it on the money on a number of issues, including the Department of Homeland Security and Patriot Act, two "Essentially Cheney" creations that really express his line of thinking ... and the American taxpayers are the catwalk!

Here's an area where both left, right, and middle may agree: duh... going to Armageddon and killing civilians unnecessarily is NOT a good policy.

"URGENT ACTION REQUIRED!

Subject: The immediate mortal danger of attacking Iran

There is increasing evidence that President Bush intends to bomb Iran. This would . . .

• Reverse the progress we have made with Iranian public opinion

• Further entrench the "hardliners" in the Iranian regime

• Further radicalize the Muslim population across the Middle East

• Recruit countless numbers of new terrorists
• Place us in a state of irreversible war with Iran and its people
• Threaten oil shipments from the Persian gulf

(Why would a Big Oil Administration want to threaten oil shipments?? Must be something even Bigger than Big Oil!)

(Regarding "radicalizing" - unlike the writer, I believe this is really alienating Muslims from a sense of free participation in world events, the response to which is to take action to "participate" from the "outside" - which is where they have been pushed. It becomes a case of Us vs. Them - and guess who started this? Us, of course! it's not "blowback" - it's just participation by those who are denied participation - by force, on both sides...)

The combined impact would be to destabilize the entire region, fostering bin Laden's goal of creating radical Islamist regimes throughout the area. Most chilling is the potential impact on Pakistan. If Pakistan's population becomes further radicalized because of U.S. attacks against Muslims the result could be the creation of an Islamist regime. Pakistan already has nuclear weapons, and elements of Pakistan's security service has close ties to the Taliban and Al Qaeda, dating back to the war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

If President Bush bombs Iran the result could be exactly what he thinks he's trying to prevent -- nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists. In addition, bombing Iran could slow that country's nuclear program, but it would not stop it. The Iranians could just begin again, with more secure underground sites, just like the Nazis did in response to allied bombing during World War II.

What would we do then? Use nuclear weapons? Vice President Cheney is said to already favor this!


There is nothing to be gained by bombing Iran, and everything to be lost. And yet, there are more and more reports that President Bush plans to attack Iran before he leaves office.


Worse yet, he already has Congressional authorization to do so because of the loose wording of previous war authorizations resolutions.


The whole world is at the mercy of President Bush's notoriously bad judgment, unless ALL OF US take action to constrain him. There is something we can do, in the short term, to stop an attack, and many things we can do in the long term to stabilize the situation and bring lasting security.In the short term . . .

• We must demand that Congress pass a resolution prohibiting an attack


• We must demand this of the Democrats even if the Republicans would resist


• We must focus extreme pressure on Congressional leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid


• We must work to turn key Republicans in the House, and especially the Senate


• We must recruit more people to apply more pressure
  

Even if all we got was a majority vote in the House, because the Republicans blocked action in the Senate, that might be enough to stay the President's hand.

For the long term . . .We must compel Congress to recognize the truth of what Congressman Ron Paul and official reports of the C.I.A. and the Pentagon assert. Blowback against U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East is the main problem, which means pullback is the answer.


We must eliminate our footprint in Islamic countries. When we do that the process of radicalization will recede. This is the best path to peace and security for the American people. Specifically . . .

• We should exit Iraq, leaving the surrounding Islamic countries to create a settlement there


• We should renounce pre-emptive war and regime change, and adopt a policy of retaliatory deterrence
  
• We should recognize the government of Iran and establish formal relations with it


• We should apologize directly to the Iranian people for the 1953 C.I.A. coup and our support of the Shah


• We should lift trade sanctions on Iran to foster civil society there as a balance against extremism
  

Many facts form the basis of our proposals . . .We have a history of regime change in the Middle East, and especially Iran. We overthrew a democratic and secular Iranian government in 1953, and established the tyrannical Shah. The Iranians remember this. We have also just changed the regime in Iraq and placed Iran on the same target list.

Given these facts . . .You would want a nuclear weapon too, if you were part of the Iranian government!

We must take every possible step to make the Iranian regime feel secure, no matter how much we may dislike their form of government. It is possible . . .

• The Iranian government has repeatedly said that the main thing it wants from the U.S. is respect


• The Iranians have offered to defund Hezbollah as part of a broader settlement with the U.S.


• The Iranians have offered to help us against the Taliban in Afghanistan, which they also dislike


• The Afghanistan government favors Iranian aid against the Taliban, but we have blocked it.


• Our government has repeatedly snubbed Iranian overtures. We must stop doing this.

We recognized and negotiated with the Communists in China and the Soviet Union to good result, and we can do the same with the Iranians. We must remove the MOTIVATION for the Iranian government to develop nuclear weapons, and give them strong incentives for peaceful relations!

We must also bolster our relationship with the Iranian people. They have come to dislike their own government and are tending to have a neutral or even positive opinion of the U.S. After the 9-11 attack Iranians flooded the streets, demonstrating in support of America.

Bombing Iran would once again make us the enemy in the eyes of the Iranian people, when instead we could restore and foster their good opinion of us. It is important to repeat that we can do this by . . .

• Taking Iran off our enemies list
  
• Apologizing loudly and publicly for the 1953 coup and our support of the Shah


• Lifting trade sanctions!

Trade sanctions do not work. They cripple civil society and permit oppressive regimes to blame their own failings on foreign powers. They are counterproductive. We should end the sanctions unilaterally and bring Iran into the world community.
We have it in our power to enhance the peace and security of the whole world. All we have to do is stop provoking people. This does not mean that the radicals will stand down, but it does mean that the process of radicalization will slow, and perhaps even stop. But first . . .We must prevent an attack on Iran. Here's what we need to do . . .

• Send a message to Congress demanding a resolution prohibiting an attack


• Call the offices of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and demand a vote on this issue


• Call Nancy Pelosi at this number: 202-225-4965


• Call Harry Reid at this number: 202-224-3542
  
• If one or more of your Senators are Republicans, call them too

Pelosi and Reid are blocking a vote on this issue because they're afraid of appearing soft. We must give them the courage to do the right thing. Republicans in the Senate are the key to getting a vote in that chamber. We must make them fear public opinion. * Send your message to Congress*

Note: There are many movements against bombing Iran, notably also Gen. Wes Clark's. Why don't these all join together in one big anti-bombing bloc??????