PETRAEUS BLAMES IRAN FOR ROCKET ATTACKS ON GREEN ZONE

The BBC reports that Gen. David Petraeus is accusing Iran of supplying the rockets and training the militants who attacked the Green Zone yesterday, the home of all the U.S. diplomats and big-shot military attaches.


Writes the BBC:


"The most senior US general in Iraq has said he has evidence that Iran was behind Sunday's bombardment of Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone.


"Gen David Petraeus told the BBC he thought Tehran had trained, equipped and funded insurgents who fired the barrage of mortars and rockets."

Where and when have we heard accusations of this nature before? Think of Iraq having WMD. Yet the U.S. and these generals never produce any credible evidence of Iran's involvement. They say they have the "evidence," but nobody ever gets to examine it. They expect the world to believe them just because they say it. Just like Bush expected the world to go along with his "evidence" that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and was an imminent "threat."


I don't believe anything Bush says, or anything that his hand-picked generals, such as David Petraeus, say. I want to see the "evidence" that they say they have. I want to know how they know that Iran "provided" the rockets and "trained" the insurgents. Until they provide credible evidence, I refuse to believe them and doubt that Iranian government is involved.

BUSH THREATENS IRAN YET PREACHES FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY

George Bush constantly threatens the government of Iran with military force and says it should be confronted "before it's too late." He did it again today in a speech in Abu Dhabi. The BBC reports:

"US President George W Bush has warned of the dangers he says are posed by Iran, in a speech in its Gulf neighbour, the United Arab Emirates.

"Mr Bush said Iran threatened the security of all nations and should be confronted "before it's too late".

"In a speech in Abu Dhabi on the latest leg of a Middle Eastern tour, he also urged the region to embrace democracy. "

We all know Bush is a war monger. The chances are good that Bush will attack Iran before he leaves office. Bush engages in reckless threats and charges against Iran. For example, Bush long claimed that Iran was building nuclear weapons until the National Intelligence Estimate disabused him of that baseless claim. WMD as we all remember was the faulty casus belli for the U.S. attack and invasion of Iraq.

The BBC reports on other facets of Bush's speech:

"Mr Bush said spreading freedom and democracy was the best way to defeat radicalism.
America and its democratic allies would prevail over extremists like al-Qaeda, he said, because they have "freedom and justice written into our hearts by Almighty God . . . no terrorists can take that away". "

Bush always wants to "spread freedom and democracy" except when free elections turn out in a way different from how he wants it. Take the Palestinians voting for Hamas in January 2007. That was a free and fair election, but after the results came in, Bush said he would not recognize Hamas as the governing body because it is a "terrorist" organization that fails to recognize Israel. The result is Bush accepts democracy only when it suits his purposes and aims. The same goes for Venezuela where Hugo Chavez was elected president by an overwhelming majority. Bush claims Chavez is as dictator who abuses human rights. But that is because Chavez called Bush "Satan." Furthermore, Chavez has no affinity with Bush's proclivity to solve all problems in foreign diplomacy with bombs and missiles, and has been outspoken in his criticism of Bush and Bush's foreign policy.

We still have more than a full year till Bush leaves office. With all his rhetoric about freedom and democracy, the world has still much to fear from Bush's military push to re-make the world in his small image.

NEO-CONS LOOK TO DEMONIZE AND ATTACK IRAN

Sometimes articles appear that cause me the reader astonishment. Such is the article by Richard Cohen in today's The Washington Post. Called "Bush's Legacy of Cynicism," it starts out bemoaning Bush's policies which have cause the lack of credence put in government many of us share.

So far so good. But then Cohen goes on to say how real the "threat" is from Iran and from the Revolutionary Guard. So Cohen's article is not about the duplicity of George Bush and Dick Cheney and their minions. It is really a call to arms against Iran. Here's Cohen:

"But the true realism is that Iran is a menace -- potentially a great one -- and that its Revolutionary Guard is engaged in the dirty business of killing Americans and others. The fact that the Bush administration says so does not make it otherwise."

Cohen apparently was gung-ho for the war against Iraq. Now he is breathless for a war against Iran. He says we have "evidence."

"As the resolution states, the American military has "evidence" -- the word is Gen. David Petraeus's -- of Iranian activity. "This is not intelligence," the general told Congress. "This is evidence, off computers that we captured, documents and so forth." Petraeus didn't get his stars for nothing. He knows the level of well-earned cynicism that the word "intelligence" now engenders in Congress. Evidence! He's talking evidence."

Mr. Cohen, you talk about "the true realism . . . that Iran is a menace." And then you talk about "evidence." If Bush, Cheney or Petraeus had hard evidence, they would be besieging the news media morning, noon and night with it. There is no "evidence" that Iran is supplying IEDS or EFPs. Any garage in Baghdad is capable of fashioning these explosives, and probably do. Just because Petraeus says we have "evidence" does not make it so, any more than Bush, Cheney and Rice claiming Saddam had WMD.

You would take us to war with Iran over non-existent evidence? You would have the U.S. Senate endorse a resolution saying that Iran is killing American soldiers solely on the basis of what some Bush loyalist says or claims?

No thanks, Mr. Cohen. This time, I for one am not buying into your pie-in-the-sky demonization of Iran and Iranians. Instead of attacking or bombing Iran, let's sit down and begin to talk with them. I remind you, this is the year 2007, not 1007.

GEORGE BUSH CALLS IRANIANS "MURDEROUS" - PRELUDE TO A WAR AGAINST IRAN?

Today George Bush has ratcheted up his war-mongering rhetoric against Iran. He called the Iranians murderers of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians in Iraq. Furthermore, he said Iran would be the cause of a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East if allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.

George Bush seems intent on military action against Iran. Just like his reckless words prior to the invasion of Iraq, where he said there were WMD and that Saddam Hussein was intent on developing nuclear and biological weapons, and that Iraq was an imminent threat to the entire region, so now Bush is up to his old tricks, this time substituting Iran for Iraq with words designed to inflame and demonize.

George Bush is dangerous to world peace. Under no circumstances should the United States be dragged into military conflict against Iran. It would be unjustified and baseless. The repercussions would be enormously dangerous to world peace.