Hi Brad,

Next time ask him about why the Brits brought up then dropped this accusation back in October last year after it emerged that British intelligence were responsible for the IED design, having given it to the IRA years ago. The IRA promptly gave it to all their terrorist friends worldwide. Any terror group could be bringing the damn things over the porous borders and centuries old smuggling routes of the region, even all the way from Pakistan.

http://cernigsnewshog.bl...iran-that-were-made.html

Regards, Cernig @ Newshog

This time, I don't think the public is going to buy it.

I think he is going to try and start another war anyways... and I wish we could prevent it... but I don't think the people in charge care about anything, even their own sinking approval ratings. And I don't think you make a mad dash towards unpopularity like this unless you have a really dastardly plan that will be unavoidably tragic anyway. They have stopped trying to dress things up anymore.

More drumbeats to war. Right now, somewhere, there is a DSM being written for this venture, and when the Iran insurgency starts killing Americnan by the 1,000's, it will come out in some foreign press and immediately be dismissed by the MSM.

Same damned drumbeat! Mushroom clouds over Seattle or Newark, IED's to spread terrorism to Iraq- and I wouldn't doubt that he'll use the Afghan Resolution to invade Iran- and this Congress won't do a damn thing.

Be afraid, be very afraid! :O

syQodem #3 said

"Be afraid, be very afraid! :O"

So what's this about?

GOP blocks nuke screening

I'm sure you have good content here, but man is that yellow font hard to read. There is a reason why most text has dark print on light pages.

I hate McClellan, and I agree that the drumbeat to war over Iran is same ole same ole. I hate Bush and all he has done to our nation and the world. But Scotty did box you in. He whittled you down to "He said he could not blame the Iranian government on these components coming in."

And then you said, but "[t]he President quoted Negroponte as saying that Tehran had provided the capability for building those IEDs. "

Those two statements are not mutually exclusive. Tehran could have "provided the capability" and still not "brought [the weapons] in."

Scotty is a lying, sinning, scum. But he is not dumb. That's why he got you to reduce to not being able to "blame the Iranian Goverment on these components coming in." Because your original statement would have forced your point.

#6
You're right, but are we worried about debating points? The Pubs only use them when they have an angle that wins by debate rules; they will quickly change the way they argue to stupid,
non-reasoning rhetoric when they think that wins...
They speak in legalese only when they wanna. Like Clinton's "it depends on what the definition of is is..."
Which, for a Clinton fan like me, was his lowest point...
Screw 'em. We know they're making up stupid stuff to beat the drums for another insane war (nuke?) with Iran...

Bayou

akhenaten,

The weakness in the Bush regime's argument has to do with the fact that Negroponte said that Iran is "providing Shia militia with the capability to build improvised explosive devices."

There is, however, a small problem with that statement: It is mostly Sunnis that are using IEDs against coalition (ie. American) forces. The Sunnis and the Iranians hate one another. It is improbable they are working together. In order to get around this difficulty, the Bush regime appears to be inserting the Iran-friendly word, "Shia," in the place of the Iran-unfriendly word, "Sunni," in order to justify invading Iran. Brewer was trying to make that point. However, he made the same fatal mistake that most journalists make (a mistake drives me up a tree every time I see them do it on TV): He asked two different questions at the same time, thus allowing the spokesperson a way to attack the easier question and completely avoid the harder question.

JLR #5
I never thought of this before, but if a person is colorblind, don't they have trouble with distinguishing reds and greens? maybe
Brad gets a few people that complain every once in a while, but for me its easier to read than black on white
hmm...

Good job Eric, hit em below the belt, Snotty deserves it

Welfl, I agree with what you wrote. And I also think that when you let someone reframe a question for you, you are in trouble, as demonstrated above.

I've been saying this for months and months. Nice job of bringing it to the fore, Brad!!

As I see it:

The US tried to put a CIA plant/Shia exile/Iranian spy Ahmed Chalabi into power. They quickly realized that this wasn't going to work, but they had no other plan. So, they asked their man in Baghdad, Paul Bremer, to come up with a plan.

After a couple of weeks he announced that if would be two years before a government could begin to be formed. He knew that Iraq was essentially a 'gerrymandered' country that would need a large dose of affirmative action' (in the form of granting the minority Sunnis a fair stake in the government), but the Shias weren't having it. Instead that put 500, 000 Shias on the ground (with only 48 hours notice) demanding quick, and directly democratic elections. The Shia clerics knew that if they have elections quickly they could control Iraq and all it's oil (which they do now, btw.). So they marched and fought the Americans to a deadlock in Sadr City and in other Shia strongholds and the US acquiesced.

The Shia clerics then reached out to their base, preaching from their pulpits around the country, literally, 'Vote for the Shia religious candidates or go to hell'.

The Sunnis, the suicide bombers, snipers and the people in all the prisons, quickly realized they were being completely screwed. So, they joined forced with Al Queda in Mesopotamia to try and destabilize Iraq long enough so that when the US left, they could launch another coup, promising AQ that they would put hard line Wahabbists in power.

Now remember this, all of the people in power in Iraq, except for the Kurds and the 10 or so Sunnis still alive and in the government, are from political parties that either are from Iran (SCIRI or the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq is a prime example) or are funded by Iran. So, The government in Iraq, is for the most part beholden to Iran, in one way or the other.

People like myself have long been saying that you can't prop up a militant Shia theocracy in Iraq and claim the one in Iran is evil, at the same time. But the US is relying on no one over here to learning enough to see the contradictions. Brad is now publicizing these contradictions. Thanks Brad.

Anyway.

The US has recently (and out of the blue) decided to persue a dual and contradictory strategy. They've started dumping money on the Sunnis to help try and restore the balance of power (i.e. acting against a democracy it's trying to create) and at the same time trying to blame Iran for IEDs that are killing Shias (Iran's spiritual and political allies).

This can really only be fore one reason, war in Iran.

People. Get read to do everything possible to stop this next war. Now would be the time to do anything neccessary to stop this war.

If the US engages in War with Iran, we will lose. And it could easily destroy our economy.

Resist!!!

Chris Matthews on Hardball (conservative program) was chatting with a reporter assigned to Iraq.

The reporter indicated that much of the Shia thinking is aligned with Iran.

It so happens, he indicated, that we are training military forces that would align against us if we get into a scrap with Iran.

They went on to point out that anything revealed to these forces worked its way directly to Tehran.

We have to keep talking about Bush striking Iran, and keep it in our topics.

I'm beginning to think elections will be stolen in 2006...again...on electronic voting machines and optical scanners. Can someone recap what's been done on this front since 2004? Bev Harris?

The Bush administration is using our taxes and our military against our wishes. They would be powerless without those 2 things. Soldiers have to refuse to fight, and we should divert our taxes to anti-war organizations that hold your taxes as protest. They exist. No one talks about them. This is the only recourse, since I believe they will again steal elections on the machines in 2006.

Can Bev or Brad recap all of us, what's changed since 2004?

Thanks, Dems, for being silent on the voting machines.

Where's Ken Timmerman? During CNN's Iran drumbeat I a couple months ago, CNN was parading this guy named Ken Timmerman all over their shows, proposing that we should attack Iran...and CNN portrayed him as some kind of expert we should all listen to.

CNN: When are you going to roll out Ken Timmerman for Iran drumbeat II??? Which is occurring right now.

Timmerman - an "American expert on Iran". Timmerman will be more widely known to many Americans than to Brits as "a neo-conservative Republican activist from Maryland, and a former nominee for a US Senate seat". He it was who alleged that Jesse Jackson associated with known criminals and that Rev. Jackson practised extortion of businesses. He is also, according to Wikipedia, "executive director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, an organization that works to instigate an armed conflict between the US and Iran" and was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize alongside John Bolton " "for their repeated warnings and documentation of Iran's secret nuclear buildup and revealing Iran's "repeated lying" and false reports to the International Atomic Energy Agency." Timmerman's Foundation was co-founded by PNAC founding member Peter Rodman, who is currently United States Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. Timmerman claims that the Iranian regime is planning a nuclear weapons test before the Iranian New Year on March 20, 2006 - if so he will have been right when every single Western intelligence agency has been wrong. In short, he is an expert - an expert with an axe to grind and a neocon dog in the fight.

Regards, Cernig @ Newshog

I am sure that there has been plenty of marijuana grown in Canada that has made it across the border into the U.S. Can we then safely infer that the Canadian Government had a hand in either teaching marijuana growers how to grow it or grow it better, or assisting them in getting the drug across the border?

# 1 You said: "British intelligence were responsible for the IED design, having given it to the IRA years ago."

Where's your reference for that statement? If true, the IRA would have used the IEDs to blow up British Intelligence. I doubt BI was conspiring in its own demise.

#14 and #15 Re: voting machines which WILL steal the 2006 election (fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, fool me three times and you don't ever have to go through the charade of fooling me again - just dictate the outcome and I'll foolishly concede)

Black Box Voting has a wealth of information for people who will DO SOMETHING. I'm just one little voter in Clackamas County Oregon, but I'm torturing my Elections Director with a series of questions and public records requests. She tried to shoo me away like a fly, but I am annoyingly persistent. I cc my correspondence to the local papers, the elected officials, the SOS. And, I encourage people in other Oregon counties to replicate my efforts.

I can use a computer but I know nothing about its inner workings. BBV provides the questions and the technical help. Maybe they'll even send a Harry Hurtsi to your state capitol or county elections office for a hacking demonstration. I'm working on that.

On a personal level - now something that can directly affect me - I am really worried about this impending conflict with Iran. I am moving to Cairo in August on a 2-yr contract. The Egyptian govt, although a US ally, has indicated it will not assist with troops or security in Iraq unless there is a UN resolution, and it is part of a multilateral force. Currently Egypt is not an unsafe place for Westerners, although I think it is clear that the Muslim world in general does not support US actions in the Middle East in terms of the military aggression. This could easily change if these fuckwits invade Iran...or Syria. Bastards, I feel it coming.

I'd be willing to bet a bunch of the insurgents are using AK-47s manufactured in Russia. Does that mean Moscow is helping them? What the hell? Let's invade Russia and see if we can get bogged down around Stalingrad --- er St. Petersburg --- in time for winter.

cernig: Nice of CNN to disclose all of this, when they were parading Ken Timmerman on their airwaves 24×7 a couple of months ago, with no one on to rebuttle him, and portraying him as some kind of expert analyst on Iran/U.S. relations. Thanks for the info.

I wonder when CNN is going to start putting him on TV again? Or will it be another "expert" CNN won't tell us their ties to the neo-cons, like Timmerman.

When is our military going to mutiny the Bush administration?

They are powerless without our taxes and our military.

When you asked the question, "Okay. So, first, isn't it true that the vast majority of attacks on coalition forces are by Sunni insurgents who have no connection to Shiite Iran? And two, will the President retract his claim that apparently was not based on accurate intelligence?" and Scott started answering with "No, that's false. That's just --- I don't accept the premise of your question." you should have stopped him right there. Then you should have told him that it is WE THE PEOPLE asking these questions and it is our SERVANT governments job to answer them.

...GrouchoMarxist said on 3/17/2006 @ 11:04am PT...

Let's invade Russia and see if we can get bogged down around Stalingrad --- er St. Petersburg --- in time for winter.

Err, history/geography lesson Groucho:

Stalingrad = Volgagrad, in central Russia roughly on a line between the Black & Caspian Seas.

Leningrad = St. Petersburg, on the Baltic Sea near Finland.

Not to say that the US would get any further than St. Petersburg before the Russians nuked us.

What would happen if the Bushies manage to instigate another national security disaster with several thousand citizens dead, declares a "state of emergency" and "martial law", suspends the Constitution and elections, and keeps on in power. I believe there are people in the White House who are capable of this sort of conniving and probably a lot of people stupid and greed enough to go along with it.

So.. which is better for Iran to hear, Mr. Frist.. That the American people want to make sure their President is abiding by the LAW, or that we call them liars outright?

I think it's amazing that right-wing idiots talk about how bad "we are" for discussing the truth, and demanding accountability, and wanting to make sure we and the world aren't being LIED TO AGAIN from our leaders.. but it's ok to tell the people we're lying about that "we don't trust you will be honest and fair in our talks". Na, intentionally inflaming a situation is MUCH better than demanding accountablility at home.

ask Mclellean about those 'Wristwatches' that HE 'says' are IED parts...

Let see now.
The Bush administration morphed their failure to protect Americans on 9-11 into an excuse to invade 2 nations, one of them absolutely unrelated to the attacks.
Now they are morphing their failure to rebuild the country they destroy and the civil war they created by exploiting ethnic differences into a war against Iran?
That is taking unaccountability to a cosmic level.

Sandy D, follow the link I gave. (What, too lazy to follow links? pshaw...ok, here's my original post on the subject from back then. This was all over the UK media at the time and the British Govt later formally withdrew their blaming of the Iraqi Govt for these IEDs.)

http://cernigsnewshog.bl...-iranumm-made-in-uk.html

Direct quote from Independent article:

"Eight British soldiers killed during ambushes in Iraq were the victims of a highly sophisticated bomb first used by the IRA, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.

The soldiers, who were targeted by insurgents as they travelled through the country, died after being attacked with bombs triggered by infra-red beams. The bombs were developed by the IRA using technology passed on by the security services in a botched "sting" operation more than a decade ago.

This contradicts the British government's claims that Iran's Revolutionary Guard is helping Shia insurgents to make the devices.

The Independent on Sunday can also reveal that the bombs and the firing devices used to kill the soldiers, as well as two private security guards, were initially created by the UK security services as part of a counter-terrorism strategy at the height of the troubles in the early 1990s."

It seems that, according to an ex-agent, back in the early '90's the IRA were working on infra-red detonation for their bombs. Hearing this, members of the shadowy army undercover outfit, the Force Research Unit, and officers from MI5 decided, amazingly, that "if they were intimate with the technology, then they could develop counter-measures, thereby staying one step ahead of the IRA". They promptly gave the IRA the technology they needed - and they promptly shared it with Farc guerrillas in Colombia, the Basque separatists, ETA and Palestinian groups - and thus to Iraq.

Regards, Cernig @ Newshog

They have now also been exposed for physical searches without a warrant (Raw Story).

Eric Brewer should have been fully prepared to defend his statement by having the entire quotes from both men, & Bush's entire quote also--& promptly reading them aloud to McClellan.

Eric is the big leagues & a chance to prove his point was bungled by not preparing fully.

Democracy lost.

Here's a suggestion for next time Brewer gets to ask a question:

Mr. McClellan, now that we all know for a fact you lied for the President (research how many times it was said & insert same)_____times over the course of ____months & said "No." to the White House press corp, when asked whether anyone on the President's staff leaked Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA agent---Can you explain to the American people, what reason do we now have for believing anything you have ever said or will ever say speaking for the President in the future?

Unless the few honest generals (if there are any) overthrow the Bush crime family and their warmonging, criminal, torturing gang, for giving them a bad name in the world, due to corporate profits and greed. Or a large majority of armed american people storm the white house (one million would do)while all of them are there, either an inside job orchestrated by the clean secret service agents, or any clean agents. They will bomb Iran before the end of the summer. You know what will follow (russia, and china will not sit idly by) the world will end up with potentially millions dead all over, and the aftermath destroying the environment for decades.. The american citizens must vote them all out and in with the green or libertarian candidates (ron paul, or michael bednarik) this will continue..the reps and dems are becoming one big party..get them out for the sake of Miss liberty..and any fututre family you may want...

Brad,

You missed the simplest of nuances.

It would be exciting for anti-Iraq war ideologues to try to trip the White House up in order to keep them from starting yet another war, this time against Iran.

Exciting, yes, and blinding as well to some of the simplest of geopolitical norms.

Let's break your concerns down to method, motive and opportunity. The core of any criminal action.

Method - Easy - IED's.

Opportunity - Bordering Iraq, Iran would have the ability to deliver these devices.

Motive - The Heart of What Your Blog is About -

Motive. Not very hard to think of Iran's motive to supply Shi'ite and Sunni forces in Iraq with the capability to attack U.S. forces.

Really Brad, stop with the hystrionics already.

Iran supplying Sunni militants with the ability to cause dissension and death for U.S. foreign policy at a time when if Iraq calmed down the U.S. would be free to then take on Iran, is not such a reach only Einstein could conjure it up.

If you can't see it Brad, then you really should start practicing the words "would you like fries with that?"

Brad, I left this out to emphasize it:

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

There's an Empty Cell at the Hague . . . . . Hummm . . .

Jeff Barea said:

Brad,

You missed the simplest of nuances.

And then went on to tell me to "stop the hystrionics".

For a start, Jeff Barea, you "missed the simplest of nuances" yourself. That being the first line of the story reading: "Special to BRAD BLOG by BTC News White House Correspondent Eric Brewer"

It's Eric's report, not mine.

That said, his story, is about his question concerning the Bush Admin claim that Iran is behind the IED's.

A charge made, as Gen. Pace agreed, without any proof whatsoever.

The Bush Admin made similar charges to trick Congress and the American People into supporting a War in Iraq as well.

Those claims were similarly made on unevidenced claims (aluminum tubes, yellow cake, mushroom clouds, false connections between Saddam and 9/11, etc.)

"Stop the hystrionics," Jeff Barea?

I'd suggest it is your Administration that is performing the histrionics.

As to "the enemy of the enemy is my friend"...That's how we got into this mess in the first place. By arming the enemy of our enemy (Bin Laden with the Mujahadeen, and as well Saddam Hussein...for that matter, the Shah of Iran)

Your discredited knee-jerkism is a tired and dangerous one.

Jeff #36, #37

How do minor league players develop a notion that they can hit in the major league?

Brad at post #39 shows you how the kool aid parties with the tin hats on can damage accuracy and logic. Spend a little time at those places and you come out thinking hystrionics means the history of avionics.

Your post was like operation "Swarmer", which I like to call operation smarmy.

Remember all the MSM presstitutes talking about the largest air operations in Iraq since the wrongful invasion and occupation of that country?

Well that operation ended up like your post did:

"Not a shot fired or leader nabbed in what was billed as major offensive by US forces in Iraq; BBC speculates pressure on Bush led to hype" (read truth and weep here).

Gotta give you a troll stroke for your hystrionics tho

RE: Comment #39:

Any article or blog I allow in my websites or publications come with them the weight of being allowed by me. I can understand if you do things differently.

BradBLog's posted article (above) attempts to ridicule the notion that Iran's Shi'ites would give bomb supplies to Iraq's Sunni's. As you acknowledge in your response, it is reasonable to see that happening (U.S. support for Bin Laden/Saddamn Hussein).

That nuance, that I was mentioning, makes Bradblog's article (above) a display of propaganda and not an erudite exploration of political trickery. An example of the knee-jerkism against any message from the White House.

As much of a hysterical response as to claim that while I didn't vote for Bush (for Governor or for President) and actively opposed the election of his father, this is "my" administration.

I simply dislike propaganda.

RE: #40

Sometimes I forget to post at a 9th grade reading level. But, then, I would have to believe that flash and not substance is what blog readers want.

HEY KOOL-AID!!! Oh, YEAH!!!