» CNN: Iran fires on US drone. Drone unscathed, US banging war drums.

Barbara Starr, CNN’s Pentagon reporter (more accurately known as: the Pentagon’s reporter at CNN), has an exciting exclusive today. Exclusively relying upon “three senior officials” in the Obama administration (all anonymous, needless to say), she claims that “two Iranian Su-25 fighter jets fired on an unarmed US Air Force Predator drone in the Persian Gulf last week,” while “the drone was in international airspace east of Kuwait … engaged in routine maritime surveillance.” The drone was not hit, but, says CNN, “the incident raises fresh concerns within the Obama administration about Iranian military aggression in crucial Gulf oil shipping lanes.”

First things first: let us pause for a moment to extend our thoughts and prayers to this US drone. Although it was not physically injured, being shot at by the Iranians - while it was doing nothing other than peacefully minding its own business - must have been a very traumatic experience. I think I speak on behalf of everyone, regardless of political views, when I say that we all wish this brave hero a speedy recovery and hope it is back in full health soon, protecting our freedom.

The CNN report on this incident is revealing indeed. Every paragraph - literally - contains nothing but mindless summaries of the claims of US government officials. There is not an iota of skepticism about any of the assertions, including how this incident happened, what the drone was doing at the time, or where it took place. It is pure US government press release - literally; I defy anyone to identify any differences if the US government had issued its own press release directly rather than issuing it masquerading as a leaked CNN report.

I have traveled this world much more extensively than either Obama or Romney, and I still do. I find everywhere, even in areas of conflict and economic difficulty, the vast majority of people are friendly, even kind, and have very similar aspirations, across cultures, to personal development and emotional [fulfillment].

The striking thing about [the] US Presidential “foreign policy” debate, is when it did occasionally discuss foreign policy, the world out there was discussed not as a place of vast potential, but as a deeply disturbing place full of foreigners who are, apparently, all evil except the Israelis, who are perfect. …

The correct attitude to all these foreigners that God so unfortunately and inexplicably placed on this planet, is apparently to maintain incredibly large armed forces, murder people with drones (they were both very enthusiastic on this one), place sanctions on them and declare them “currency manipulators”. The only surprising note was that both agreed that they could not kill everyone in Iran.

But “We can’t just kill our way out of this mess” was spoken with regret, rather than as an affirmation of the possibilities of cooperation instead. What a grim and joyless world view.

» Senate Overwhelmingly Backs New Anti-Iran Resolution

disobey:

Early Saturday morning the US Senate passed a non-binding resolution 90 to 1 expressing the sentiment that the US must “do everything possible” to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, and openly spurning a “containment” policy.

The resolution came out of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s demands for a “red line” by the US on military action, and while the resolution is not in and of itself an authorization for military action it continues to express the sentiment that an offensive war against Iran is a viable option.

The sole “no” vote was cast by Sen. Rand Paul (R – KY), who argued that the resolution would inevitably be used as an excuse for the use of military force against Iran. Sen. Paul did, however, go on to say he is opposed to containment as well.

On the surface the resolution is similar to countless others, urging diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions against Iran to force compliance, but the explicit rejection of “containment” suggests they are uncomfortable with allowing Iran to maintain a civilian nuclear program without a specific imprimatur from the UN Security Council to do so, and the resolution also demands Iran forever abandon its right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes.

(Source: theamericanbear)

HD
b a d c
HD
b a d c

If you are truly opposed to war with Iran, and you vote for Obama in November, that would be as stupid as being against war with Iran and voting for Barack Obama in November.

freedomwithoutexception:

I couldn’t even finish that analogy, because nothing really compares to how STUPID you’d have to be to continue believing that Obama is any different than his neo-conservative warmonger contemporaries.

brittanysaysrelax:

crankyanarchist:

this is epic. the guy who spearheaded this billboard campaign is awesome (and no, it’s not me). that is all.

#win
HD
b a d c
HD
b a d c
HD
b a d c

“Want to tick off a Conservative? Pee on a flag. Want to tick off a Liberal? Pee on a dead terrorist.”

-

Neo-Conservative Tweeter, from my timeline.

Wow.

—Shared by Elle.

(via citizens-concerned)

Enhanced by Zemanta
:facepalm:

» Israeli spy chief downplays Iranian nuke threat

misesman:

Don’t tell FOX News and the warmongering “Israel-first” Neo-Cons that maybe even Israel isn’t as crazy as they are about the threat Iran poses.

Back to top