So what's the plan for Iran?

[benevolance]

Shooter

I should have stated that they were at the top of the list for violations of human rights... according to international law... I went back and re-read articles I had read in years past...

A quick search brought up report after report by amnesty international and the Red Cross listing a plethora of perpetual abuses of human rights by Israel I will include links to various articles from various years for you to read

http://heathlander.wordpress.com/2008/05/28/amnesty-international-accuses-israel-of-grave-human-rights-abuses/

Cluster bombs have long been considered inhumane and a weapon of mass destruction...Israel is the number one user of the cluster bomb...And their use of the device is well noted and listed Another of Israels follies.

This story from 2006 by amnesty international details acts by israel and then explains why they are violations of international law and clearly war crimes against humanity..Here is some of it:
The blockade by Israel on Lebanese airspace and territorial waters has caused shortages of fuel, medicines and other essential goods. Daily bombardments of residential areas, roads and other infrastructure continue to hamper the distribution of urgently needed humanitarian assistance.

Israel's claim that attacks by it forces are directed exclusively against legitimate targets is not borne out by the evidence gathered by Amnesty International's field research in Lebanon. The organisation's on-site investigations reveal that in the conduct of their military operations, Israeli forces have routinely violated both the principle of distinction between civilians and military targets and the principle of proportionality, in disregard of international humanitarian law. They have also unlawfully targeted civilian objects. Prima facie these violations amount to war crimes.

http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE020122006?open&of=ENG-ISR

Here is a document from 2004.... lists numerous violations.. executions, kidnapping, death penalty without trial, illegal deportation, tortue... this document lists countries in alphabetical order...but Isreal is guilty of every single violation listed...
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/2ee9468747556b2d85256cf60060d2a6/4440633426888f5d85256ea000630554!OpenDocument

How about the illegal fences put up in the occupied territories by isreal to protect illegal isreali settlements: 2000-2003

More detailed information on the legality of Israel's actions in accordance to international law:
http://archive.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR410122004?open&of=ENG-ISR
http://archive.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR410122004?open&of=ENG-ISR

Here is a list of Israel and their violations in 2003:
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/eed216406b50bf6485256ce10072f637/ddbcc0a854abdfb085256ea000685e96!OpenDocument


Remember that according to Jewish Law torture of a palestinian was legal up to a few years ago! ...a nice article from 2000
http://www.derechos.org/human-rights/mena/iot.html

I could link hundreds of articles explaining in detail annual perpetual violations of international law... war crimes and crimes against humanity by Israel

If you want more articles to read I will gladly provide some more for you

[glenn kangiser]

Haven't you noticed a HUGE downturn in the amount of terrorist attacks around the globe while we are engaged in Afghanistan / Iraq?  We couldn't go 6 months before that without a ship, embassy, trade center, railroad or something getting bombed.

Not really, in fact some of these appear to possibly be CIA sponsored operations per other research- Or did the CIA quit?

The war was planned before 9/11/2001 so lets start from there.  MNBC - Mainstream enough I hope?

MSNBC - Afghanistan war plans were on Bush's desk on 9/9/2001

President Bush was expected to sign detailed plans for a worldwide war against al-Qaida two days before Sept. 11 but did not have the chance before the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, U.S. and foreign sources told NBC News. ... The plan dealt with all aspects of a war against al-Qaida, ranging from diplomatic initiatives to military operations in Afghanistan, the sources said on condition of anonymity. [MSNBC]

The oil pipeline was also planned before (much earlier) than that but a stable gov. was needed there.

Terrorist attacks in Iraq -- where we are - nearly daily.

Since then 7/7 Brit - false flag op.
http://www.rinf.com/columnists/news/london-77-bombings-false-flag-evidence-goes-mainstream

Spain - Bali -

Terror incident world wide {reported and recorded in Wikipedia}- list incomplete .
Note that I only counted the car bomb group listing once each year-- Many multiple incidents there.  Note that car bombings barely existed before we went over there and greatly increased in about 2002 to unprecedented amounts.

Various - 2008 so far this year 59 but many were multiple. (at this rate this is an increase over last year)
about 110 in 2007 
about 51 in 2006
about 39 in 2005
about 31 in 2004
about 33 in 2003
about 82 in 2002
about 24 in 2001
Interesting -- this one was later traced to our own military  anthrax stock.

United States: Anthrax attacks on the offices the United States Congress and New York State Government offices, and on employees of television networks and tabloids.

about 13 in 2000
about 14 in 1999
about 11 in 1998
about 9 in 1997
about 16 in 1996
about 14 in 1995
about 14 in 1994
about 24 in 1993
about 12 in 1992
about 8 in 1991

Looks like a steady increase since we started the "war of terror", in fact almost 15 times more since 1991.

Nope -- not totally scientific but your argument of making the world safer won't cut it with me-- The media just doesn't report it because Washington says it doesn't look good.  It doesn't agree with their agenda.  The people who only watch the mainstream media, which is the majority, may think their war money is getting pilfered.

I don't have the answer to the plan for Iran -- we can't tell what will happen until it does.

[NM_Shooter]

Okay... last one for me and you can have the last word. 

If you yourself actually fully read any of the sites that you provide links to, you will see that Palestine and Israel are in a tit for tat situation.  Claiming that Israel is worse is a hypocritical view.  Read the two top paragraphs for Lebanon and Israel in your link:
http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE020122006?open&of=ENG-ISR

You realize that their crap goes way back to the late 1800s with the dissolution of the Otoman Empire?

Personally, if I was in Israel, and someone from Palestine was lofting 100 rockets a day at me from civilian locations, I would endorse carpet bombing. 

I never said Israel was innocent of humanitarian violations.  I asked to see the list of nations that Benevolence said he had that indicated that Israel  "annually topped" for human rights violations.  Are you incapable of actually reading for comprehension?  Don't call me close minded if you are not capable of understanding my initial challenge to the argument.  And don't get pissed when I challenge BS postings that are fabricated, and apparently stem from anti-Semitic / anti Christian emotion.

Did I ever say I did not accept your "mainstream media" links?  Nope.  But I do challenge your conspiracy theory, US hating, Bush loathing liberal URLs. 

You tell me that I can't take mainstream media as proof, then you provide me with both mainstream and other sites as your proof.  How do you expect to be taken seriously being hypocritical?  If you tell me that they are not valid, then don't send them out yourself.

Anthrax attacks via the mail, I have a hard time taking as a real threat.  Don't forget name calling and spitwads if you are going to use that sort of resolution.

I'm dismayed at how a few of you turn every political argument into an opportunity to bash the US or the current administration. 

My argument was that Iran having nukes will lend to further danger and instability.  This was answered by:

(paraphrasing) "Well, the US has nukes, and Israel has nukes, so every body should have them.  Even insane radicals."  Huh?

and,  "Israel bombed our ship eons ago, and it is now candidate McCain's fault for the cover up"  Huh^2?

and  "The conflict we are in is only because of oil, and Halliburton, Bush and Cheney are getting rich"

and  "Bush was going to go to war with Afghanistan before 9/11"  (sounds to me like he was right, huh?)

For my final statement on this out of control thread... I repeat... Iran can not aquire nukes. 

[MountainDon]

Israel's ............... They have also unlawfully targeted civilian objects. Prima facie these violations amount to war crimes.

As Frank pointed out, don't cherry pick from an article to make a point. The very next paragraph, the one about what damages Israel has suffered through, ends with the same sentiment...

Civilians in Northern Israel have been subjected to continuous rocket attacks from Hizbullah who have fired an average of one hundred (100) rockets each day ..................Tens of thousands of residents have already fled from the north and most of those who are left are forced to spend much of their time in shelters.

This deliberate targeting of rockets on civilian areas constitutes a direct attack on the civilian population that is unlawful and amounts to a prima facie war crime.

Cherry picking like that would seem to indicate that some folks just don't like Israel.

[glenn kangiser]

Please don't confuse my replies as getting mad -- I don't.  I view it as recreational and educational - no matter what we learn.

I'll try to take this one thing at a time.

Okay... last one for me and you can have the last word.

If you yourself actually fully read any of the sites that you provide links to, you will see that Palestine and Israel are in a tit for tat situation.  Claiming that Israel is worse is a hypocritical view.  Read the two top paragraphs for Lebanon and Israel in your link:
http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE020122006?open&of=ENG-ISR

You realize that their crap goes way back to the late 1800s with the dissolution of the Otoman Empire?

Yup, they have been fighting for years but in 1947-48 the UN created the state of Israel in Palestinian land.  The religious right has sworn and reaffirms unswerving support for Israel in the hopes that they have created an act of god and will be rewarded for it.  Condoleeza recently reaffirmed all of this.

Personally, if I was in Israel, and someone from Palestine was lofting 100 rockets a day at me from civilian locations, I would endorse carpet bombing.

I'm not saying I support any of them but I do not believe it is our problem to support Israel with American lives and money.

I never said Israel was innocent of humanitarian violations.  I asked to see the list of nations that Benevolence said he had that indicated that Israel  "annually topped" for human rights violations.  Are you incapable of actually reading for comprehension?  Don't call me close minded if you are not capable of understanding my initial challenge to the argument.  And don't get pissed when I challenge BS postings that are fabricated, and apparently stem from anti-Semitic / anti Christian emotion.

I am not against peace loving Jews as opposed to Zionist, and in fact spent a long time talking to a Jewish lady who was in Germany in WWII and was in great fear that the Homeland Security department would turn out the same as in Nazi Germany which it is patterned after.  She said it sent chills up and down her spine every time she heard the word.  I am not in agreement with what commercial Christian religion is doing in the name of God, but still consider myself Christian. 

Note that I have many Jewish relatives buried in the Jewish cemetery's in Lithuania.  Search it if you want.


Did I ever say I did not accept your "mainstream media" links?  Nope.  But I do challenge your conspiracy theory, US hating, Bush loathing liberal URLs.

Sorry, but you can not buy the official story if you will look at any of the facts surrounding the 9/11 attacks.  I am not encouraging the research on the official story because of conspiracy theories.  These attacks are the start of this whole latest rounds of attacks on our freedom and the war of terror.  I am encouraging everyone to check out the questions surrounding the attacks because I am a pilot and knew this could not happen without assistance from the inside.  A plane cannot get this far off course without being intercepted.  Even my Cessna 205 was intercepted when off course about a mile in Nevada once.  These guys wrote the book on the need for a New Pearl Harbor and they helped create it to control the people and steer emotions to support their war plans and desires.  That is what the evidence points to.  The evidence does not agree with the official story.

I'm sorry you cannot see that the people in control of our government are the ones taking away the freedoms our founding fathers created.  Carpet bombing the Christians in Iraq because they are in the same country with the Muslims in Iraq cannot be condoned by the true God.  Do true Christians believe this is OK as long as we get a few Muslims?



You tell me that I can't take mainstream media as proof, then you provide me with both mainstream and other sites as your proof.  How do you expect to be taken seriously being hypocritical?  If you tell me that they are not valid, then don't send them out yourself.

I supplied mainstream media also in hopes you would believe them including Bush saying Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks.   I hoped that then you could see that most of the justification for this war of terror was fabricated so therefore likely the desire to obliterate Iraq and the evidence by our own agencies saying on MSNBC, that Iran had no nuke program would convince you of what you don't want to hear -- That Iran has NO nuke program other than for power.

Anthrax attacks via the mail, I have a hard time taking as a real threat.  Don't forget name calling and spitwads if you are going to use that sort of resolution.

The anthrax attacks were plainly an attempt by the ones in control our government (Not our great country) to heighten the fear of the people and to get them to agree to release more of their freedoms freely without protest.  Remember Bush running around on stage making the stupid little jokes about not finding the WMD's - I know they have to be here somewhere.  Not funny.
continued - next post

[glenn kangiser]

continued from above

I'm dismayed at how a few of you turn every political argument into an opportunity to bash the US or the current administration.

I am dismayed that so many agree to give up all of their freedom to the ones destroying our economy and country for the sake of corporate profits and the loss of our jobs to other countries and illegal aliens for corporate profit, without at least protest.  I can understand that it is hard to do something about it but if awareness is raised I think eventually things may eventually change.

My argument was that Iran having nukes will lend to further danger and instability.  This was answered by:

(paraphrasing) "Well, the US has nukes, and Israel has nukes, so every body should have them.  Even insane radicals."  Huh?

My point was that it is only natural to try to protect your home.  Put yourself in their place and see if you feel different.

and,  "Israel bombed our ship eons ago, and it is now candidate McCain's fault for the cover up"  Huh^2?

My point is that using false flag operations is standard operating procedures to get the people to agree with things they would not normally agree to.  This is particularly applicable since it is once again, Israel is again pushing us to attack or jump in after they attack Iran.  That seems to be a major motive force here.

and  "The conflict we are in is only because of oil, and Halliburton, Bush and Cheney are getting rich"

No -- tons of war machine corporate interest here -- They are just examples.  There are many forces directing events here.

and  "Bush was going to go to war with Afghanistan before 9/11"  (sounds to me like he was right, huh?)

No -- it is likely to destroy our country just a it did Russia after we and our CIA asset, Osama Bin Laden set them up.  I don't see allowing the destruction of our country for some exaggerated threat --remember the WMD's?

For my final statement on this out of control thread... I repeat... Iran can not acquire nukes.

There are water pistols and guns.  There are nuclear plants and nuclear bombs.  We have already sent people and agencies in there to insure it is the former and not the latter.  We have their reports.  We cannot kill everyone in the world who may have or acquire nukes.  We are not attacking the threats in countries who already have nukes --  most of them do not have oil.

I am not bashing our country.  It is the best in the world.  I am against what our current administration is doing to it in the name of profit and total control of it's population as well as the destruction of the freedoms our founding fathers intended for us to have.

Sorry - my cherry picking may result from trying to cover too much information and missing or forgetting important points.

Please continue to bring them to my attention.  Thanks.

[Sassy]

Here's a link to a video of a talk by Lindsay Williams awhile back before the big increase in oil prices - he's written several books - he was a chaplain up in Alaska when the pipeline was being built.  He was told by the big oil men that he had saved them so much money in psychiatry & social worker's costs that they invited him to sit on the executive board.  (he was not paid a salary by them)  In this speech he is predicting an increase in gas prices to $4-5/gal.  He explains how Kissinger made deals with Saudi Arabia & other oil producing countries to buy our national debt in trade for us buying their oil with promises to make them very wealthy nations.  The countries that refused to deal were Iraq & Iran.  Alaska is putting back into the ground billions & billions of gallons of natural gas on a regular basis to keep the prices up.  Who is making the BIG bucks?  Why did we go to war with Iraq?  Saddam was too independent to bow the knee...  Why do we need to go to war with Iran?  Iran has threatened to unleash immense amounts of oil on the market & to sell it in Euros, not US $$$; this would totally de-stabalise the US & the International Monetary Fund (IMF) & World Bank cannot allow this to happen as they would lose $$$$.  In the meantime, they are funding the national debt on the backs of US citizens by increased gas prices, bringing us down, as planned, to the level of a 3rd world nation. 

This is a long video, but it would be well-spent time to listen - miss a couple shows on TV or something...     BTW, this person is putting his life on the line but feels this info needs to get out if we want to save our country... 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147&hl=en-CA

There's a lot of confictng info out there - who is spinning who? 

[glenn kangiser]

Dan Rather on control of the mainstream media.

http://www.truthout.org/article/dan-rather-slams-corporate-news-conference

[glenn kangiser]

Sent by a friend -- This group says it is working on alternatives to war in Iran -- I haven't read it -- Let's have a look.

http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/work/middle_east/iran.php

particularly http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/publications/briefing_papers/pdf/IranConsequences.pdf  Note PDF

additional links

http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/iran-and-the-american-election

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/05/31/iran_cool_to_suspending_nuclear_agenda/?page=full

http://www.cfr.org/publication/14976/joe_bidens_speech_on_iran.html

Note that I haven't read these except to skim a couple and they were sent by a trusted friend of the forum who thought they would help to understand the Iran situation.

[ScottA]

I fail to see how anyone could support an Iran war given the current fiasco in Iraq. Attacking Iran will only make things worse and us less safe.

Iranian 1: What shall we do with our first nuke?
Iranian 2: Lets blow up Los Angeles.
Iranian 1: If we do that we won't get to make nuke #2 since we'll be vaporized.
Iranian 2: Maybe we should hide it and hope for the best.

They won't use a nuke on us unless we leave them no choice. Bomb them and they'll have no choice.

[glenn kangiser]

I agree with you, Scott.  If we run around the world forcing people to defend themselves, that is what they will do, just as we would if we were attacked.

If we had to pay cash for this war we would be bankrupt.  Things are getting paid for with credit and billed to our account.  We can't afford the one we are fighting now and the payments are going to the war machine manufacturers on our kids credit and blood, not to mention the hundreds of thousand of innocents killed in Iraq.  Don't forget -- somewhere in the past this was named Operation Iraqi Freedom.  Not operation Iraqi hamburger.

We would be much better off building our military and training them to protect us in case of a threat than squandering them all over the world to the breaking point for corporate profit and whatever else is driving this thing.

[Sassy]

Dick Cheney had it right when he spoke about Iraq after Gulf War I - amazing that he changed his tune so completely with Gulf War II... 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=csKkdKlLUTc&feature=related

[muldoon]

This article came out yesterday and paints a picture of why it is not politically or economically feasible for a US invasion of Iran right now.  http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1813706,00.html

I dont know anything about this really, although I did comment in the thread above that I thought it was not possible as well.  I am curious if anyone sees any obvious holes in the line of thinking in the article.

[ScottA]

We can't afford a war in Iran but air strikes are possible. Irans missle batteries would likely be among the first waves of attacks as well as their forward troop positions near Iraq. As for the price of oil going to $300 a barrel who knows...would depend on how the first round of attacks go. After the performance in Iraq I don't have much faith in their ability to shut down Iran with air strikes. The biggest problem Bush has other than the price of fuel is the armed forces themselves. Things are so streached already it would take a year or more after a draft was reinstated just get the forces in place to attack them. We are atleast 100,000 troops short of a land war in Iran.  I've always feared that if we do attack Iran Bush will have no choice but to use tactical nukes to end it fast.

[benevolance]

The usa cannot invade another country and use Nukes... If they are the aggressor and they use WMD specifically nukes they lose credability with the rest of the world...We would have no right to speak out against any other country from acquiring or using Nukes in the future.

Having nukes as a deterrant is bad enough... but to use them when attacking a country that poses no direct threat to the USA.... Well that opens up another can of worms...

If you think anti US sentiment is bad now...Wait until the USA bombs another country with nukes that did not attack soil in the USA...Contrary to what people think...If the EU boycotted the USA and placed trade sanctions against the USA they could collectively cause what is left of our economy to collapse and send this country into a out of control spiral

[glenn kangiser]

Request -- if you do nothing else, will you please continue reading this and my next posting in their entirety without stopping.  I would like to get your thoughts and advice on this.  Then feel free to tear into me if you want.




Cowardly air strikes on Iran would mean War with Iran and we would deserve the total destruction of our economy if we are stupid enough to do it.  No way we would get them all, and our interests over there are already targeted. 

As soon as the first bomb is dropped...as soon as the first blood starts running out of the massacred women and babies, they will launch their missiles.  Before the small children's arms and legs are plastered onto the wall by the blast, the war with Iran will be on.  Before the flesh is charred down to their tiny bones their military leaders will begin pushing the buttons.  Before the brains run out of the little broken skulls Israel will have bombs headed their way and be crying for us to save them.  Another feather in the cap of the Bush cabal.  Wake up.

They have done nothing to assault us except to return the rhetoric coming from the idiot occupying the position of president.

Iraq was defenseless -- Iran is not....maybe the increased deaths of our servicemen will be enough to end our reign of terror.  Maybe the fall of the stock market will raise the awareness of the public.  Maybe $10 a gallon gas will cause the removal of the Bush crime family.  It's obvious that not many over here give a rats S about the innocent people over there dying, even if they are of the same religion and do not want to be involved in the war.

I would love to gather the world leaders together, put them in a big arena with all the weapons they wanted and let them fight to the death - then exterminate the survivors. 

The people of any country are for the most part good people just like you or I.  It is the elite of the country who strive for wealth and power at the expense of the working class -- the breeders of cannon fodder. 

What ever happened to just protecting our country without assaulting the world?  hmm

We could have an even stronger military than we have now by not destroying it for wars for profit  of the investor in oil and the military complex. 

[glenn kangiser]

I'm curious.  Not against anyone specifically -- just a general question.  If you agree to attacking Iran...agree to let Bush and Cheney do whatever they want, if you think an airstrike is OK (it is after all a nice sanitary sounding word -- you don't have to look at the dismembered mutilated bodies), and someone of the same religion as you in Iran is murdered by a bomb, is that OK? 

You are both of the same religion...you obviously both have the same true God...you both obviously have only one God.  There are "Christains" over there just like here- maybe a minority but they are there.  Does being an accessory to murder by airstrike relieve you of the blood guilt of killing your brother over there?  Does your God forgive you because they said they wanted to build a nuke at one time.

Does the fact that some don't know for sure leave enough doubt that the murder of innocents is OK?  Does your god just go ahead and forgive you anyway? 

The God I picture for me wouldn't.  Maybe my true God would be considered a sissy by you for not allowing a clean surgical airstrike to murder women and children.

My God wouldn't mind being called a sissy.  He's been called names before.  I guess he isn't going to answer directly.  He'll just judge when he's ready.  Wake up.

Is agreeing with wanton murder by bomb what he talked about when he said wide is the path to everlasting destruction? Or...possibly there is no God and he's not a threat?  What do you think? hmm 

Seems he's not gonna tell us, eh?

Sorry to bring religion into this but it is pretty well being pushed by religious ideologies.  I am of no commercial or organized religion any more.  I can't find one I agree with, so just wondering how you feel about these thoughts.  The God I picture won't go along with the crap modern religion is condoning.

If I was to not talk about it, would the ideas I am asking about go away?  Would it not need to be considered because I refused to think about it?  Would it not be there if I don't look at pictures of dead babies?

[ScottA]

Glen I think you exceeded the limit on question marks in that last post. More people have been murdered in the name of God than any other reason. All I can offer in the way of an answer is the suposed word of God himself/herself???

Thou shalt not kill.

[benevolance]

fact of the matter is that war means big bucks for the elite and wealthy...and it is good for big business... Steel, coal, aerospace industries make a decade worth of profits in a year of war...

Since WWII America has gone to war for money and power instead of morals, justice or democracy. Vietnam was a lie, Iraq was a lie, Iran would be another lie


Our soldiers would die for nothing other than increased profits for lockheed martin and  Exxon

I am getting sick of this....I just wish that America as a whole would stand up and say no to our government when a few crooked leaders at the top send us to war for increased profits and more money

[glenn kangiser]

Sorry Scott -- probably bad composition on my part.  Thanks for the reply.  I all of the sudden couldn't stop writing.   The voices in my head told me to type.

If we actually took action they would invoke martial law.  The illegal presidential signing orders are already in place, but you are right, Peter.

[glenn kangiser]

We are heroes.  We have freed Iraq.  Possibly we can do the same for Iran.

Report from my friend, Dahr Jamail.

http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m44850&hd=&size=1&l=e

[glenn kangiser]

Capt. Ward Boston, USN (Ret) (RIP --Ward Boston passed away yesterday. -info courtesy WRH -no mention in MSM)

Thoughts on Iran and The USS Liberty

As far as the future goes, Capt. Boston is not hopeful. 'If either they (the Israelis) or the US launches a war against Iran, it will be the beginning of the end' he said. 'Armageddon...You'll have Muslims pouring into the area from all over the world and no army will be able to stop them. They will tear Israel and the Americans to pieces.'

http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2007/06/09/insider-tells-the-truth-about-the-cover-up-of-the-attack-on-the-uss-liberty/

[glenn kangiser]

Speech at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem

"There is only one country that is putting pressure on the US to attack Iran, and that is Israel," Mearsheimer said. "AIPAC is pushing hard for an attack on Iran, and no other lobby in America is," he said, referring to the pro-Israeli lobby group the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

That the two men were invited to speak at all was the subject of some controversy, with several Israeli professors questioning whether the invitation was appropriate. The university did not widely advertise the lecture, which was held in a moderate-sized lecture hall unable to contain the number of students and faculty who had arrived. But most seemed to agree that, especially at the school that is viewed as Israel's leading university, diverse views should be aired.

"There is more criticism being heard here in Israel of the lobby," says Moshe Fox, a doctoral student, referring to AIPAC, "and of the US-Israel relationship in general than there is in the US."

Indeed, in recent weeks, Israeli politicians and pundits have been speaking more critically about the state of relations between the United States and the Jewish state.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0614/p07s01-wome.html

[Sassy]

Bolton: Israel Will Attack Iran After U.S. Election But Before Inauguration, Arab States Will Be 'Delighted'»

This morning on Fox News, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton continued his drumbeat for war against Iran. Adopting Bill Kristol's argument, Bolton suggested that an attack on Iran depends on who Americans elect as the next President:

    I think if they [Israel] are to do anything, the most likely period is after our elections and before the inauguration of the next President. I don't think they will do anything before our election because they don't want to affect it. And they'd have to make a judgment whether to go during the remainder of President Bush's term in office or wait for his successor.

Bolton gamed out the fallout from an attack on Iran. He claimed that Iran's options to retaliate after being attacked are actually "less broad than people think." He suggested that Iran would not want to escalate a conflict because 1) it still needs to export oil, 2) it would worry about "an even greater response" from Israel, 3) and it would worry about the U.S.'s response.

Bolton then concluded that Arab states would be excited if the U.S. or Israel attacked Iran:

    I don't think you'd hear the Arab states say this publicly, but they would be delighted if the United States or Israel destroyed the Iranian nuclear weapons capability.

Watch it:  vidoe of Bolton's news cast at link
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/22/bolton-arabs-delighted/

[ScottA]

Here's one who won't be going to Iran.

Cannon Fodder- http://www.newsweek.com/id/142640