Time Predicts and Justifies War On Iran Comment by Larry Ross, August 22, 2007
This story predicts a US military strike on Iran. But as expected, it implies it is a conventional strike. It omits to mention the nuclear preparations that may be used in such a strike - either in the initial strike, or later after Iran retaliates. It also fails to mention that the US and UK have infiltrated covert forces into Iran to assassinate selected targets and blow up installations. Iran has lots of excuses to strike back at the US, but is probably afraid of being 'wiped off the map' by mass US bombing. Naturally it does not mention that Iran is Iraq's neighbour, with a visit planned by Iran's President to Iraq, much to the displeasure of Washington. As the CIA are notorious for their lies, covert secret activities, planted phoney 'evidence' and other tricks, why should Time now trust alleged CIA explosive experts to give us accurate information that Iran is behind sophisticated explosive devices blowing up US tanks. Of course Time does not mention that the US is making illegal war on Iraq based on lies with out a shred of real justification. Also, that the US has been demonising Iran and making a number of false accusations about Iran and its nuclear energy programme for several years. Time is presenting its story as if the US owns the Middle East, is entirely justified in it's wars and more war plans, and that only the US can dictate what are appropriate relations between Middle East states and what the US forbids. Above all it presents the US case as if the Iraqis have no right of self-defence and no rights to get aid from others to repel the illegal US invader. Any opposition at all is defined by the US and "terrorism" or "aiding the terrorists". Amazing as it seems, this kind of pro-war propaganda persuades many people to support the US position - no matter how many times they have been fooled and lied to by Time and other US mass media. It's sad that such an intelligent gifted and privileged people have been dumbed down to a state of smug and apathetic zombiehood, that can be activated like Pavlov's dogs. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Prelude to an Attack on Iran by Robert Baer, Time Magazine, August 18, 2007 As with Saddam and his imagined WMD, the Administration's case against the IRGC is circumstantial. The U.S. military suspects but cannot prove that the IRGC is the main supplier of sophisticated improvised explosive devices to insurgents killing our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. The most sophisticated version, explosive formed projectiles or shape charges, are capable of penetrating the armor of an Abrams tank, disabling the tank and killing the crew. A former CIA explosives expert who still works in Iraq told me: "The Iranians are making them. End of story." His argument is only a state is capable of manufacturing the EFP's, which involves a complicated annealing process. Incidentally, he also is convinced the IRGC is helping Iraqi Shia militias sight in their mortars on the Green Zone. "The way they're dropping them in, in neat grids, tells me all I need to know that the Shia are getting help. And there's no doubt it's Iranian, the IRGC's," he said. A second part of the Administration's case against the IRGC is that the IRGC has had a long, established history of killing Americans, starting with the attack on the Marines in Beirut in 1983. And that's not to mention it was the IRGC that backed Hizballah in its thirty-four day war against Israel last year. The feeling in the Administration is that we should have taken care of the IRGC a long, long time ago. |
