The Iranians certainly know how to play the EU right to the max. They "negotiate" on their weapons program with the EU, promise essentially nothing except a possibility that maybe they might stop their activities for a short time and the EU is practically glowing about it. Oh, and the US has to promise not to attack Iran, removing the only credible threat the negotiators have.
On Sunday, Iran said it was ready to consider complying — at least temporarily — with a U.N. Security Council demand that it freeze uranium enrichment.
Expanding on terms of such a possible Iranian compromise, a diplomat familiar with the issue said Tehran was seeking assurances it would not be attacked by the United States during any negotiations with six world powers on enrichment and other nuclear issues.
"They are essentially seeking assurances that they would not be bombed while they are talking," said the diplomat, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity in exchange for discussing confidential information.
Speaking just minutes before the start of his organization's 35-nation board meeting, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said that "the window of opportunity is not very long" — an implicit warning that the standoff was on the brink of escalating, with the U.N. Security Council close to considering sanctions.
Later in the week, the board will review an IAEA report received late last month documenting dozens of cases in which Iran has delayed or hampered attempts by his agency to probe Tehran's nuclear activities. The report also formally establishes that Iran ignored an Aug. 31 U.N. Security Council demand to suspend enrichment or face possible sanctions.
Touching on that report, Elbaradei said he would tell the board "that Iran has not come into full compliance with the (Security Council) request … to suspend its enrichment … and also to work with the agency to clarify important outstanding issues."
He said Iranian cooperation was "much overdue."
I'd love it for this situation to be resolved without war. What the self-indulgent fools performing this little diplomatic dance fail to understand is that eventually, the piper must be paid. If they stand united against Iran, the situation might be defused. If they continue on the path they appear to be headed down, it is unlikely to have a good outcome. For anyone.
A videotape shown by al Jazeera today has Ayman al-Zawahri issuing more threats, this time against the Persian Gulf area and Israel. There are vague references to more terrorist attacks. Zawahri continues to echo Western leftist talking points, knowing they will resonate with certain useful people.
Addressing the West, the al-Qaida No. 2 said, "You should not waste your time in reinforcing your troops in Iraq and Afghanistan because their fate is doomed … Instead, you have to reinforce your troops in two regions. First is the Gulf, where you would be thrown out … and second is Israel."
In other portions of the tape aired by CNN earlier Monday, al-Zawahri urged Muslims to intensify their resistance against the United States and warned in general terms of new terror strikes.
The video was not on any of the militant Web sites that usually carry messages and videos from al-Zawahri and other al-Qaida figures. As-Sahab, the terror network's media arm, had posted notices late Sunday that the video would be available.
It was the latest in a flurry of al-Qaida videos released ahead of the anniversary. But unlike the others, it appeared to be new with references to Israel's bombardment of Lebanon this summer and the capture of Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah and Palestinian militants in Gaza.
"You gave us every legitimacy and every opportunity to continue fighting you," said al-Zawahri, addressing the United States. "You should worry about your presence in the (Persian) Gulf, and the second place you should worry about is Israel."
The video shows the Egyptian-born al-Zawahri dressed in white and seated in front of a wall of bookshelves.
"Your leaders are hiding from you the true extent of the disaster," he said. "And the days are pregnant and giving birth to new events, with Allah's permission and guidance."
The article also goes on to detail another videotape just released where Osama bin Laden is shown planning the 9/11 attacks. That video includes footage of Cheney discussing Haliburton. Gee, you think they may be playing to certain elements in the West?
This is, I think, a bad move by Democrats. Getting lots of stories in the press about what they plan to do if they take over one or both houses of Congress. A while back I criticized Nancy Pelosi for what has come to be known as her "victory lap". The same reasoning applies here. Crowing too soon may actually work against them in the fall. Laying out detailed agendas is doubly stupid, I think.
If Democrats win one or both houses of Congress in November's elections, as polls suggest is increasingly likely, President Bush's Washington will change dramatically.
Democrats will press to get out of Iraq. They'll mount investigations into the Bush administration's record that could rival those of Presidents Nixon in Watergate and Clinton in the Monica Lewinsky affair.
They'll push a boatload of social-welfare legislation, such as raising the minimum wage, that reflects their pent-up priorities, while blocking the Republican agenda on social issues such as gay marriage, abortion and religion.
Those are some of the top plans that Democrats would pursue if they won power, according to interviews with Democratic lawmakers, strategists, staff aides and lobbyists.
The tone and temper of the Democrats were reflected well by Rep. Henry Waxman of Los Angeles, the ranking Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee, in a conference call in late August. He'll become the panel's chairman if Democrats take the House.
"The Republican-controlled Congress has worked with the White House to shield them and the government from any scrutiny of corruption and abuse," Waxman said. Democrats "plan to expose the truth about billions of taxpayers' dollars."
The problem with crowing too soon is that it may backfire and energize the opposition. If Speaker Pelosi isn't scary enough.
Today will be full of people writing about the anniversary of the murderous attack on this country five years ago. That is fitting, of course. It is a day that should not be forgotten. It also is a day I will have no patience whatsoever with denialists and conspiracy theorists. Some of us remember what that terrible day really meant. Michael Ledeen does.
There are many who are saying that we have lost that anger, that we have reverted to a 9/10 state of mind. I have my doubts.
Certainly nobody in my house has reverted, and my sense of the American people is that they have not either. But many of our opposition leaders, journalists, broadcasters, and editors, and, apparently, the overwhelming majority of the professoriate, clearly have. Otherwise it would not be possible for them to actively undermine the war. It is wrong to say they have forgotten the significance of 9/11, because they never grasped it. For them, patriotism has always been unworthy of sophisticates like themselves, and fighting enemies on foreign battlefields is something that rubes and rednecks do. They understand neither the world nor their fellow countrymen. They think we can achieve peace by being nice–did you hear Senator Biden prattling on and on about the need to talk to our Iranian enemies?—and they don’t know that our commissioned officers are college graduates, many of them from the best universities. I doubt more than a small fraction of leading journalists know that you need a college degree to get a Marine commission. Their ignorance about, and contempt for our military, fester beneath the surface of their reportage.
Many of the above groups Ledeen mentions are stupidly, myopically partisan, others openly hope for America to lose stature in the world. None of them seem to care what damage they do to America or to the world itself in the long run.
Trent Telenko at Winds of Change notes something that bears repeating. There is an international effort underway to provide nuclear weapons to dictatorships. North Korea and Iran are cooperating. These are things I have been saying all along, incidentally.
Given the the joint international nature of North Korea's nuclear program, Iran will have an arsenal of tested nuclear missile warheads for its ballistic missile arsenal of Chinese design and North Korean construction in 30-90 days after that test.
President Bush's rhetorical gauntlet, thrown down in recent speeches, for taking military action to prevent Iran's acquisition of a nuclear arsenal has just gotten a very short time limit. Assuming Iran doesn't already have operational nukes, as some Israeli intelligence officials believe.
This is about far more than Iran. I said this previously here on Winds about the international nature of Iran's nuclear program:
The government’s assumption that an American bombing campaign, no matter how successful, will slow down Iran’s nuclear program enough to buy time for a nonsensical regime change by revolution concept (no one outside the desperate-to-believe in fairy-tales idiots in D.C. believes the U.S. intelligence community can foment a successful revolution in Iran) would be laughable if so many lives were not at stake. Iran’s nuclear program is not a NATIONAL PROGRAM. It is an INTERNATIONAL ONE. As long as North Korea serves as an invulnerable sanctuary supplying ballistic missiles and nuclear fissile material to Iran in exchange for oil, Iran will get nukes
The people who are intent on damaging the president of the United States for internal partisan purposes are being profoundly myopic. They fail to see that the are damaging the US itself when they continue this relentless barrage of hatred toward the sitting president. Perhaps it would be a good thing for the Democrats to consider exactly what world situation they would inherit if they continue in the manner they are. Then act to disassociate from the fringe elements rather than rushing to embrace them.
We have an international problem. It is not George Bush, folks.
Jeff Jacoby, writing in the Boston Globe, call the British made-for-television movie about the "assassination" of George W. Bush as a snuff film. Pornography for the truly deranged. He's pretty harsh on the intended audience for the film as well, those people who hate Bush.
George W. Bush has been smeared by the left with every insult imaginable. He has been called a segregationist who yearns to revive Jim Crow and compared ad nauseam to Adolf Hitler. His detractors have accused him of being financially entwined with Osama bin Laden. Of presiding over an American gulag. Of being a latter-day Mussolini. Howard Dean has proffered the “interesting theory" that the Saudis tipped off Bush in advance about 9/11. One US senator (Ted Kennedy) has called the war in Iraq a “fraud" that Bush “cooked up in Texas" for political gain; another ( Vermont independent James Jeffords) has charged him with planning a war in Iran as a strategy to put his brother in the White House. Cindy Sheehan has called him a “lying bastard," a “filth spewer," an “evil maniac," a “fuehrer," and a “terrorist" guilty of “blatant genocide" — and been rewarded for her invective with oceans of media attention.
What else can they say about Bush? That they want him killed?
They already say it.
The left (and Democrats) got themselves worked up into an absolute frenzy over The Path to 9/11. They don't appear to be generating any outrage whatsoever over this monstrosity. Adding to the level of obscenity, the film premiered at the Toronto Film Festival on the eve of the anniversary of 9/11. Snuff porn for the deranged, indeed.
Iran | Gaius Monday, 11 September , 2006 | 
Comments (2) 
