[Previous entry: "Iran and US: Diplomacy or war?"] [Next entry: "Energy, Iran Spur Turkey's Revival of Nuclear Plans"]

03/08/2006:

"John Bolton Does AIPAC"

It should be obvious, considering the photo to the left, who John Bolton, the Straussian neocon “representative” to the United Nations, works for—the American-Israel Political Action Committee. “U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, speaking at a convention of Jewish-Americans, said it is too soon for the U.N. Security Council to impose sanctions on Iran but other countries are talking about doing so and Washington is ‘beefing up defensive measures to cope with the Iranian nuclear threat,’” in other words the Pentagon is preparing to shock and awe Iran, maybe later this month, but probably down the road, sooner before later.

“Bolton reaffirmed that the United States does not see the security council moving quickly to impose sanctions on Iran, but he pointedly noted that ‘many other governments have begun to include the word sanctions in their discourse on Iran,’ implying they may take action outside the security council.” As was the case with the Iraq invasion, the United Nations is considered irrelevant. “Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding or will it be irrelevant?” Bush asked the Security Council in September, 2002, a couple months before his neocon handlers invaded Iraq. Bolton is setting up a re-run.

Recall Condi’s Boy Friday, neocon national security adviser Stephen Hadley, suspected of the vicious outing of Valerie Plame, telling AIPAC last November that the “spread of democracy [i.e., invading various Arab and Muslim countries] will make the Middle East a safer neighborhood for Israel. An American retreat from Iraq, on the other hand, would only strengthen the terrorists who seek the enslavement of Iraq and the eventual destruction of Israel.” In other words, the two thousand plus (and actually closer to 10,000) Americans killed in Iraq were sacrificed to make a “safer neighborhood for Israel.”
kurtnimmo.com