Bit behind with the truth here, unfortunately; your best approach is to assume that they are all liars, always have been, always will be - makes life a lot simpler, and more predictable.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/whitesupremicistisisraelishill.php

It is truly interesting to watch the Neoconites at places such as Little Green Footballs claim that NO ONE has called on the USA to bomb Iran.  Below we can see just one comment from a Neocon mafia Godfather published in the Wall Street Journal calling on Bush to bomb Iran. 

Not only do the Neoconites demand that we expend our blood and treasure on their wars, but they also demand that we not mention that they make such demands in the first place.  Its heads they win, tails we lose. 

The Case for Bombing Iran
I hope and pray that President Bush will do it.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110010139
BY NORMAN PODHORETZ

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Much of the world has greeted Ahmadinejad’s promise to wipe Israel off the map with something close to insouciance. In fact, it could almost be said of the Europeans that they have been more upset by Ahmadinejad’s denial that a Holocaust took place 60 years ago than by his determination to set off one of his own as soon as he acquires the means to do so. In some of European countries, Holocaust denial is a crime, and the European Union only recently endorsed that position. Yet for all their retrospective remorse over the wholesale slaughter of Jews back then, the Europeans seem no readier to lift a finger to prevent a second Holocaust than they were the first time around.

Not so George W. Bush, a man who knows evil when he sees it and who has demonstrated an unfailingly courageous willingness to endure vilification and contumely in setting his face against it. It now remains to be seen whether this president, battered more mercilessly and with less justification than any other in living memory, and weakened politically by the enemies of his policy in the Middle East in general and Iraq in particular, will find it possible to take the only action that can stop Iran from following through on its evil intentions both toward us and toward Israel. As an American and as a Jew, I pray with all my heart that he will.

Mr. Podhoretz is editor-at-large of Commentary. His new book, “World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism,” will be released by Doubleday on Sept. 11. This essay, in somewhat different form, was delivered as an address at a conference, “Is It 1938 Again?,” held by the Center for Jewish Studies at Queens College, City University of New York, in April.

We don’t want to leave out the Weekly Standard, the little magazine that was given to another Neocon Mafia Godfather’s son, namely William Kristol.  Way back in April of 2006 the Weekly Standard had a cover story entitled “To Bomb or Not to Bomb: That is the Iran Question.” As you can see below from the conclusion, the Neocons at the Weekly Standard thought that fighting a war against Iran was just the ticket. 

To Bomb, or Not to Bomb
That is the Iran question.
by Reuel Marc Gerecht
04/24/2006, Volume 011, Issue 30
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/100mmysk.asp

So we will all have to wait for President Bush to decide whether nuclear weapons in the hands of Khamenei, Rafsanjani, Ahmadinejad, and the Revolutionary Guards Corps are something we can live with. Given the Islamic Republic’s dark history, the burden of proof ought to be on those who favor accommodating a nuclear Iran. Those who are unwilling to accommodate it, however, need to be honest and admit that diplomacy and sanctions and covert operations probably won’t succeed, and that we may have to fight a war--perhaps sooner rather than later--to stop such evil men from obtaining the worst weapons we know.

Reuel Marc Gerecht is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard.

My favorite part of Heffernan’s piece was in the fourth paragraph:

“Little Green Footballs, the hawkish and rigidly empiricist blog that first furnished evidence of memo-forging in the Rathergate case, has started due diligence, discovering that Paul has indeed dropped some cash at the theme-restaurant Tara Thai (“the first time I went here I didn’t like my dish that much, but the second time I ate here the food was better,” according to Yelp).”

The name of the restaurant, Tara Thai, hyperlinks to a “disbursements by payee” report for the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee, apparently filed December 15, 2007.  http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q3/C00432914/B_PAYEE_C00432914.html

The campaign apparently spent $314.59 at Tara Thai at some point.  Id.  Not clear to me from the report if Dr. Paul “dropped” the cash himself.

But you might think the quote cinches it.  You might think that the quote in the parentheses is a quote of Ron Paul, as quoted by Yelp, whomever they are.  You’d be wrong.  At least, probably wrong. 

In the Times piece, the word Yelp hyperlinks to a social networking site.  “Yelp; Real People.  Real Reviews.” TM.  “Yelp is the fun and easy way to find, review and talk about what’s great (and not so great) in your world....” Id.

If you click on the link in the NY Times story, you’d get Yelp’s page for that restaurant.  http://www.yelp.com/biz/tara-thai-arlington.  It looks like the first review is where Miss Heffernan got the quote.  From one Brent S. of Arlington, Virginia.  Clicking through Brent S.’s hyperlink, it appears he is a frequent reviewer, originally from Red Lion, Pennsyvlania, now living in Arlington, VA.  I daresay he’s not Ron Paul posting under a pseudonym but rather a regular guy posting on that particular social networking website, somewhat anonomously. 

So why would an anonyomous regular guy’s review be quoted so prominently and, let’s face it, suggestively, in Miss Heffernan’s piece? 

Perhaps because the author intended the implication that Ron Paul said it, and that the truth of the quote itself, if attributed to Paul, would constitute an admission by Paul that he was there; that the author of the piece, or rather the piece cited, did the due diligence of an honest reporter and asked Ron Paul about the restaurant and his alleged connection to the disreputable persons and that, in response, all Ron Paul had to say in his defense was that the food was dissappointing at first but better the second time.  If all true, that would reflect rather badly on Mr. Paul.

But it appears to be mere innnuendo.  Clever, but empty; a quote about the restaurant, but not from Ron Paul.  Reflecting on the placement of the quote suggests --if we may be permitted to do some suggesting of our own, that the Times was trying to mislead the reader; that they never bothered to check with Paul or the campaign before publishing this piece but merely wanted to imply such diligence and attribution.

Or, another alternative: The Times, in a story about how a rising presidential candidate is secretly dining with neo-nazi’s, thinks it of prime importance that the reader should know something about the establishment’s food, and that the best way to pass along that information is through the suggestive placement of an anonymous third-party amateur’s culinary report. 

Or, yet another alternative: the editors cut out early today.

So, in sum, we were not mislead.  But was there an attempt to mislead?  Awfully sad to have to parse the Grey Lady like this.

Let us not leave out the Jerusalem Post.  Here is a modest essay by Caroline Glick, in the wake of the NIE report on Iran and nukes.

THE ABANDONMENT OF THE JEWS

CAROLINE CLICK, JERUSALEM POST DECEMBER 6, 2007

The US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran’s nuclear intentions is the political version of a tactical nuclear strike on efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear bombs.

There are two possible explanations for why President George W. Bush permitted this strange report to be published. Either he doesn’t wish to attack Iran, or he was compelled by the intelligence bureaucracy to accept that he can’t attack Iran.

Arguing the former in Time magazine, former CIA agent Robert Baer explained, “While the 16 agencies that make up the ‘intelligence community’ contribute to each National Intelligence Estimate, you can bet that an explosive 180-degree turn on Iran like this one was greenlighted by the president.”

The alternative view - that Bush was forced to accept the report against his will - is also possible. The report’s primary authors, Thomas Fingar, Vann Van Diepen and Kenneth Brill are all State Department officials on loan to the office of the Director of National Intelligence. According to the Wall Street Journal, all three are reputed to be deeply partisan and hostile to Bush’s foreign policy goals. Furthermore, for the past four years the three have reportedly worked studiously to downplay the danger of Iran’s nuclear weapons program and to discredit their opponents within the administration.

Thursday The New York Times ran a story detailing the process in which the NIE was collated that lends credence to the view that Bush was compelled to accept it. According to the Times, in the months preceding the NIE’s publication, Mike McConnell, the Director of National Intelligence, purposely prevented the White House from seeing any of the raw intelligence data on which the NIE’s radical conclusion on Iran was drawn. This alone indicates that the intelligence community may well have presented Bush with a fait accompli.

But it really doesn’t make a difference one way or another. Whether the president agrees or disagrees with the NIE, he is boxed in just the same. The NIE denies him the option of taking military action against Iran’s nuclear program for the duration of his tenure in office. So for at least 14 months, Iran has nothing to worry about from Washington.

And the NIE’s political repercussions extend well beyond the current administration. Today, no Democratic presidential candidate will dare to question the opening line of the report. The Democratic Congressional leaders are demanding that the administration immediately open bilateral talks with Iran. And Senator Hillary Clinton is being pilloried by her party rivals for her Senate vote in favor of classifying the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps as a terrorist organization.

The situation among Republicans is not much more encouraging. Although Republicans have greeted the NIE with grumbling rather than glee, it is hard to imagine any of the Republican presidential candidates taking issue with its opening line. Doing so entails the risk of being accused of alarmism and warmongering.

Finally the US intelligence community’s pathetic track record must be taken into account. American intelligence agencies failed to take note of the al-Qaida threat to US security before September 11. It misjudged Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction capabilities and intentions. And most recently, it failed to take notice of Syria’s nuclear program even though the North Korean nuclear facility which Israel reportedly destroyed on September 6 was built above ground.

As for that, the Israeli strike showed clearly that there is no reason to assume that Iran’s nuclear program is located only in Iran. It is reasonable to assume that some of its components are located in Syria, North Korea and Pakistan and perhaps in China and Russia as well.

The Israeli strike in Syria also demonstrated the superiority of Israel’s intelligence on weapons of mass destruction programs over America’s. And the NIE takes revenge on Israel for its comparative advantage.

Given the NIE’s assertion that Iran is not a threat, the report is a direct assault on the credibility of Israel’s intelligence services. Moreover, since Israel’s intelligence services insist that Iran’s nuclear program is the greatest threat to global security, the NIE serves to paint Israel’s intelligence community not merely as unreliable, but as hostile to American interests.

So not only does the NIE make it impossible for the US to take action against Iran, it also sets a dangerous trap for Israel. If Israel doesn’t take action against Iran’s nuclear installations it risks annihilation. And if it does take action, it can expect to be subject to international and American condemnation far worse than what it suffered after bombing Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981.

The US has not limited its entrapment of Israel to the political realm. As The Jerusalem Post reported on Tuesday, due to massive US pressure, Israel and India were compelled to cancel the planned launch of an Israeli satellite on an Indian missile. The launch was scheduled to take place in September. It has yet to be rescheduled. Apparently, the US response to Israel’s discovery of Syria’s nuclear program was to undercut Israel’s ability to enhance its intelligence capabilities.

The Israeli response so far to the NIE creates the impression that Israel’s leaders are in a state of denial over what has just happened. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert reacted with empty bromides about his close relationship with Bush.

By mindlessly agreeing that Iran did in fact halt its nuclear weapons program in 2003, Defense Minister Ehud Barak accepted the most ridiculous aspect of the report - namely that there is a distinction between Iran’s “civilian” and “military” nuclear programs. In so doing, Barak effectively prevented Israel from attacking the report for its basic mendacity.

As for Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, well, she doesn’t seem to understand that anything has happened. In a message to Israeli ambassadors, Livni urged Israel’s emissaries to continue their efforts to promote sanctions claiming that, “All are in agreement that the world cannot accept a nuclear Iran.”

And this is the final aspect of the NIE that bears mention. Both in its content and in the timing of its release the week after the Annapolis conference, the NIE shows clearly that in sharp contrast to optimistic statements by Olmert, Barak and Livni about Israel’s wonderful relations with the Bush administration, the fact is that Israel’s relations with the US are in a state of crisis.

The NIE’s message to Israel and world Jewry is clear. Again we are alone in our moment of peril. It is high time that our political and military leaders acknowledge this fact, stop hoping that someone else will save us, and get to work on defending us.
http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1196847275020&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
[ Back to the Article ]

Thanks for keeping us posted, Mr. Raimondo.  The liars never rest, but thank God neither do you.  It is those who favor life, peace and freedom who are smeared as Nazis.

And let us not forget about the New York Sun, a Neocon newspaper.  In this article, the NY Sun reports that Israel was lobbying the Bush administration to end the diplomatic approach to Iran by the end of 2007. 

Israel Seeking New Deadline on Iran Bomb
Wants Tehran To Change Behavior by Year’s End or Risk ‘Next Level’
BY ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
June 8, 2007
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/56126

WASHINGTON — A senior Israeli delegation, here for strategic talks with top American government officials, is calling for an expiration date on the diplomatic approach to Iran of the end of the year.

Speaking to the Israeli press on Wednesday evening after meeting Secretary of State Rice, Israel’s deputy prime minister, Shaul Mofaz, said, “Sanctions must be strong enough to bring about change in the Iranians by the end of 2007.” According to a source familiar with discussions yesterday with the undersecretary of state, Nicholas Burns, Mr. Mofaz said, “Technical developments for the Iranian nuclear program will not follow a linear progression,” a clear warning that America’s official estimate that Iran will not attain an atomic bomb for at least five years could be dangerously optimistic.

The delegation headed by Mr. Mofaz also pressed in side talks for America to halt a proposed sale to Saudi Arabia of precision Joint Direct Attack Munitions. Already the proposed sale, which was announced in April by Secretary of Defense Gates, has caught the attention of a handful of lawmakers in the House, who on May 24 threatened to block any such sale once Congress was formally notified.

The combination of Israeli jitters on Iran’s continued effort to pack its Natanz facility with more centrifuge reactors with its jitters about providing precision munitions to the Saudis presents America with a dilemma. Since last fall, Ms. Rice has tried to forge a new alliance among Israel, Turkey, and Sunni monarchies in the Gulf to oppose what she sees as rising Iranian influence throughout the Middle East.

The prospect, however, of all these parties cooperating diplomatically was tested in March, when the Saudis brokered a unity government deal between the Palestinian Arab president, Mahmoud Abbas, and the Iranian-backed Hamas Party in the Palestinian territories, which controls the legislature and Palestinian Authority.
Channel 2 News in Israel reported that Mr. Mofaz said Israel would take military action if Iran did not cease its uranium enrichment by year’s end. However, a source familiar with yesterday’s discussions disputed the Channel 2 report. Mr. Mofaz only alluded to such action in the meeting, the source said, saying, “All options are on the table” if the diplomacy with Iran does not work.
“The Israelis are talking about taking it to the next level with a targeted and focused security coalition,” he said. “The other measures include working with Europeans and getting more action on the European side with specific sanctions. There has been some of this, but there has not been enough.”
The issue of Iranian nuclear enrichment was also broached yesterday in icy talks between President Bush and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. The Russians have supported the two U.N. Security Council resolutions sanctioning Iranian banks and entities, but also have helped rebuild an Iranian nuclear facility in Bushehr.
The source familiar with the American-Israeli talks also said the Israelis raised the prospect of focusing sanctions on Iran’s energy sector, noting that the Iranians import more than half of their refined gasoline despite having the world’s third largest known reserves of oil and natural gas.
Publicly at least, Prime Minister Olmert has not said he would unilaterally bomb Iran. Last year he appointed one of Israel’s most hawkish politicians, Avigdor Lieberman, as a deputy prime minister and announced that Mr. Lieberman would oversee Iran policy. Other Israeli politicians such as a former premier, Benjamin Netanyahu, have openly called for Israel to take out the known Iranian nuclear facilities.
Within the American intelligence community, there is some debate about Israel’s capabilities in this regard.
Some argue that the Israelis still lack the midair refueling capacity they would need to conduct a bombing mission over Iran as a unilateral move.
Other analysts, however, point out that Israel’s fleet of American made F-15s has such refueling capacity, not to mention the capability of Israeli nuclear submarines. On background, Israeli former military officials have told The New York Sun that the option of a unilateral strike is there for Israel should Israel choose to take it.
In addition to discussing Iran, Mr. Mofaz shared new intelligence he said proved that missiles being shipped by land and air through Syria to Hezbollah positions in Lebanon could strike even at Tel Aviv and points south. One transshipment point for Syria, Mr. Mofaz said, was Turkey — an American ally and ally of Israel.
In last summer’s war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, the terror group’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, threatened to send rockets to Tel Aviv but never fulfilled his promise.
June 8, 2007 Edition > Section: Foreign > Printer-Friendly Version

According the Drudgereport, the New York Times for weeks has been withholding a potentially damaging story on John McCain’s special favors on behalf of a female lobbyist due to the story’s potential to hurt McCain’s chances in the upcoming primaries. Yet, based solely on the word of “Commander” White and the “reporting” of that bastion of good journalism, the hate blog Little Green Footballs, the Times basically sees fit to smear the foremost advocate of liberty and peace in the country as a crypto-Nazi. This is nothing more than a textbook example of slander. Virginia Heffernan should be fired immediately. Like the military-industrial complex, the MSM is just another quasi-statist institution that needs to be taken down proto! Long live the Revolution!

I hope Mr. Spade has given generously to the Ron Paul campaign, especially since Dr. Paul promised on Meet the Press to stop interfering in Israeli affairs, and to stop supplying arms and cash to Israel’s enemies.

Dr. Paul stated that he would absolutly cut all aid to Israel and the Arabs and let them settle their own afairs. this goes for Iraq, Iran,and the gulf states as well.this has been his position all along.We withdraw aid and forces and let Israel sink or swim on its own.For thinking of America first, he is being attacked as the next Adolf Hitler.That a peace loving, prolife, libertarian is being so attacked shows the anger of the zionist press in this country.They don’t want Americans to treat Israel as just another country with no special relationship with Israel.I have and will send Dr. Paul money as long as he keeps putting America first.

The Times has a credibility problem, as in they don’t have any.  Isn’t it obvious to these fools that everybody is on to them?

Justin,
Might it be worthwhile to emphasize a key point in defending Paul against accusations of fascism:  Ron Paul cannot possibly be a fascist, because he tries to reduce the power of centralized government.  When applied in practise, Paul’s political ideas create a state where the government is so weak that it is impossible for a leader to excert fascist control over the population.

Paul’s thinking is diametrically opposed to the reasoning of totalitarians, both left and right, who try to build up the state, which they absolutely need to excert their authority.  This connection was noted already in the 1870s by the Swiss historian, Jakob Burckhardt.  He observed with great concern the growth of German state bureaucracy and warned that this organization will yet be captured by an unscrupulous political leader, who will use it to build a horrendously effective dictatorship—precisely what Hitler did sixty years later. 

Pushing the argument further, one wonders whether the reason for the wide-ranging front now forming against Paul is precisely this:  Paul’s ideology undermines the sate’s importance and thus politicians’ power, income and status.  As a result, politicians from left to right are joining forces to defend their livelihoods.  The old idea that Americans are capable of rational thinking and taking care of themselves leaves little need for politicians, and that could be why today’s political elite reacts so ferociously to Paul’s traditional American views.

Sam Spade concludes:

“The NIE’s message to Israel and world Jewry is clear. Again we are alone in our moment of peril. It is high time that our political and military leaders acknowledge this fact, stop hoping that someone else will save us, and get to work on defending us”.

Well, Sam, this begs some questions.
1. Who put the Jews in the position of pariah Country if not the Jews themselves?
2.Your ‘moment’ of peril, Sam, has been lasting since exactly sixty years ago, when you chose to violate all the international rules, by your ethnic cleansing and murders of Palestinians.
3. Your “defending yourself” means more of your agressions, but do you really believe that they would save you? You had so many victories in the past and where did they leave you ? -you are more fearful than ever before.
You sense correctly your trouble- nobody is scared of you any longer-except some women and children whom you love so much to torture- and that is an awful prospect for those who believe in Violence.
Why don’t you try to be decent to Palestinians, instead? I know you don’t believe in Christ, but believe me, you need Him at this moment, much more than your empty victories.
Find out something about Him before it’s too late.

To Peter RV:

Those are not my comments.  They are from an article by one Caroline Click in the Jerusalem Post.  I posted them because Mr. Potato Head Tim Russert claimed that he was shocked to discover that Congressman Paul noticed the push by some within Israel’s government who want the US to attack Iran, and that the Neocons in particular were pushing for just such a policy. 

Now, I think the policies that some in Israel, perhaps influenced by American Neocons are pushing for would be a disaster for Israel and the USA.  But my main point in the above posts was to note the dishonesty of Buffalo’s own Tim Russert.

To Sam Spade
So, I misread. Sorry

To Kari: 

As an academic I should think you would know the distinction between a “government”, which is a temporary administration and a “state” which is a territory over which a political entity has sovereignty.  Going further, a “nation” is a group of people who are related by history, ethnicity, race, language and culture.  I note these differences in an attempt to clarify what I think is an error in your thinking, namely placing the blame for totalitarianism on the “state.” It was after all the wish of the Marxists that the “state” would wither away and now it is more than the wish among globalists.  The globalists are bringing an end to at least the Western nation-states. And they are doing this at the same time they are increasing the totalitarian control over both atomized individuals as well as what remains of civil society. 

Note also that historically, the totalitarian systems of the 20th century were not rooted in the historical practices of the states they took over, namely Germany and Russia.  Rather, it was Party factions that took over the state apparatus and in fact increased parts of the state beyond anything that had existed before, while at the same time reducing other parts of the state and of course subjecting civil society to as complete control as the technology of that time permitted. 

Thus it isn’t the state that is the enemy, it is certain party factions, fueled by ideology or some form of identity politics that poses the danger of using parts of the state or as in the European Union, a supra-state system to impose a left wing cultural Marxist totalitarianism on what remains of Western peoples. 

The best and perhaps only way to resist this is to strengthen the traditional state system which is rooted in a limited government under the rule of law and ultimately subject to control from cohesive natural populations of citizens forming a homogenous group, related by blood, history, language and custom.

“All the news that’s fit to print”....along with some that aint quite fit , as circumstances dictate. Nobody should be a tad surprised that the Times backed a bit of a shiny-nosed journalist’s foray into sensationalism and half-truth....it is the national modus operandi now....the old Imperial Standard.

In Amateur Hour We Trust. You lie, I’ll swear by it.

We have a chairman of the Fed, during a period of nascent escalating inflation and a debt debacle aided and abetted by Wall Street announce that the printing press is one of the Feds valuable tools of stabilization.

We have a media constantly spreading the cant that they are mystified why the majority of the population is “way ahead of the politicians “ on most issues while knowing full well that the politicians aint behind the people because the powerful interests who are really behind the politicians don’t care what the people think....in fact, “the people” are the enemy, or at the very least a complication they would rather avoid.

We have one and all gibbering on endlessly about how we need “leadership” and are waiting for “leaders” to “save us” as though we are a nation of children awaiting a colorful excursion bus to an immortal amusement park. We do not need “leaders” nor “leadership” , we need the public to pull their rectally implanted head out , wipe away the eviscera of their snug ass hat and recall that our politicians are our “duly elected representatives who pledge to defend and protect the Constitution”, not some group of entitled operators who feel it within their powers and responsibilities to reduce the Congress to a shirts and skins game and the office of the Executive to a signing statement based on whim. We do not need someone to “save the country”, we need to save our own asses while freeing the nation from a government that is , once and for all, beyond redemption. Every citizen of this country, whether they like it or not are sending in their tax money to support what is essentially an armed and dangerous protection racket. We have Racketeering laws to combat this in private industry....laws that the government knows do not apply to itself. Big Government Conservatives vs. Big Government Liberals, a spending free-for-all made in hell.

It is so bad that an impoverished tribe of Lakota have decided it is in their best interests to abandon all treaties with the Great White Father and go it alone.....and who can blame them....and it is a minor news note. Maybe then they’ll at least be able to grow and sell industrial hemp without the DEA trashing their fields because, after all, at the rate things are going, the NeoJacobins and Corporatists will be needing a lot of rope to stage enough executions to keep the public properly diverted.

Maybe the survivors of this wonderful production of our long-running reality television show American Clusterboink will have the memory and instincts to read the Foundational Documents and know that it is not leaders they require but personal initiative based upon independence of thought and action .....and a government of the type we have mollycoddled to tyrannize us with serial amateurism is to be avoided like the plague.

The New York Times is simply printing the news fit for this culture....a culture that equates liberty and small government with Nazism. With an incurious people like this, who needs a Democratic Republic, let alone, “news”?