6/13 IN CONTEXT: Defeated Designs USraeli Ops. and "The Race for Iran", part 1

Capitalist China & Russia's unstoppable advances 'threaten' U.S. global supremacy, once again making them the major U.S. enemies they were as revolutionary socialist nations. U.S. world domination bloodlust drives and connects its barbaric aggression, now in the name of 'national security' from "islamic terrorism", etc. in place of 'communism'

27 May 2010 President Obama released the 2010 U.S. National Security Strategy... persists since September 11, 2001 its main enemy is Al Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates... reserves the right to intervene anywhere in the world where a group claims to belong to Al-Qaeda - on that pretext troops are engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq. Yet no hard evidence has been presented of any complicity on the part of the Taliban Emirate or the government of Saddam Hussein in the 11 September attacks attributed to Al Qaeda. Lies die hard.

U.S. $13 Trillion Debt to Overtake GDP
President Barack Obama increase of U.S. debt to a level that will exceed the value of the nation’s annual economic output
Obama is borrowing record amounts to fund spending programs to help the economy recover from its longest recession since the 1930s.

China's Exports Surge 48.5% as Demand Withstands European Debt Crisis China’s exports jumped 48.5 percent in May from a year earlier, the biggest gain in more than six years, indicating that Europe’s sovereign-debt crisis has yet to pose a restraint on the world’s fastest-growing major economy.

u.s #1
World Military Equipment Spending Reached Record High In 2009
June 8, 201
Military Expenditure Project at [the Swedish Think Tank] SIPRI... bases its calculations on yearly national allocations for military equipment purchases only...The United States retained its position as the world's biggest spender, investing $661 billion on military equipment in 2009 represented 43 percent of the total global spend, $47 billion higher than the 2008 U.S. expenditure, according to SIPRI. China spent $100 billion on military equipment in 2009, followed by France, Britain and Russia, which spent, respectively, $63.9 billion, $58.3 billion and $53.3 billion, SIPRI states Japan ($51.8 billion), Germany ($45.6 billion), Saudi Arabia ($41.3 billion), India ($36.3 billion) and Italy ($35.8 billion)...

U.S. Concern Over China Military Spending Grows, Obama Adviser Mullen Says U.S. President Barack Obama’s top military adviser said he has grown “genuinely concerned” over China’s motives for building up its armed forces.

Beijing does not wish to receive Robert Gates given the support Washington extends to Tibetan separatists and the Taiwan independence movement.

think-tank propaganda spin...
China's Got a Secret
Why the Chinese military doesn't want to talk to Bob Gates.
by John Lee, is a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington.
Unlike Soviet Moscow, Beijing is apparently not trying to create a new world order. Instead, it is relentlessly promoting its "peaceful development" within the international system, sticking to the rhetoric of "win-win" relationships that deny any suggestion of Washington as its "strategic competitor" in the region. These themes were reiterated by Ma over the weekend at the dialogue when he called for "mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality, and coordination" in matters of international security...But there's a danger in projecting too much friendliness and underplaying its capabilities. The PLA must assure Washington that it is not seeking to match America in terms of military strength (for the moment), while demonstrating that the cost of any military action against China would be prohibitively high... PLA strategists reason that a lack of solid information will make it impossible for Washington to accurately ascertain the military costs of intervention in any number of scenarios (such as a war in the Taiwan Strait). And the PLA is betting that the resulting uncertainty will in turn make Washington more reluctant to use force in the region. In other words, the ideal outcome is for China to win a war without actually fighting.

Pentagon's Plan: 'Prevent the Re-Emergence of a New Rival'
Defense Planning Guidance for the Fiscal Years 1994-1999:
DFG addresses the fundamentally new situation created by the collapse of the Soviet Union, the disintegration of the internal as well as the external empire, and the discrediting of Communism as an ideology with global pretensions and influence. The new international environment has also been shaped by the victory of the United States and its coalition allies over Iraqi aggression -- the first post-cold-war conflict and a defining event in U.S. global leadership. In addition to these two victories, there has been a less visible one, the integration of Germany and Japan into a U.S.-led system of collective security and the creation of a democratic "zone of peace."...
the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. These regions include Western Europe, East Asia, the territory of the former Soviet Union, and Southwest Asia.
There are three additional aspects to this objective: First, the U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. Second, in the non-defense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. Finally, we must maintain the mechanisms for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role. An effective reconstitution capability is important here, since it implies that a potential rival could not hope to quickly or easily gain a predominant military position in the world....
we will retain the pre-eminent responsibility for addressing selectively those wrongs which threaten not only our interests, but those of our allies or friends, or which could seriously unsettle international relations. Various types of U.S. interests may be involved in such instances: access to vital raw materials, primarily Persian Gulf oil; proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, threats to U.S. citizens from terrorism or regional or local conflict, and threats to U.S. society from narcotics trafficking. . . .
It is improbable that a global conventional challenge to U.S. and Western security will re-emerge from the Eurasian heartland for many years to come.
There are other potential nations or coalitions that could, in the further future, develop strategic aims and a defense posture of region-wide or global domination. Our strategy must now refocus on precluding the emergence of any potential future global competitor...
These threats are likely to arise in regions critical to the security of the U.S. and its allies, including Europe, East Asia, the Middle East and Southwest Asia, and the territory of the former Soviet Union. We also have important interests at stake in Latin America, Oceania, and Sub-Saharan Africa...
NATO continues to provide the indispensable foundation for a stable security environment in Europe. Therefore, it is of fundamental importance to preserve NATO as the primary instrument of Western defense and security, as well as the channel for U.S. influence and participation in European security affairs. ...
Defense of Korea will remain one of the most demanding major regional contingencies. . . . Asia is home to the world's greatest concentration of traditional Communist states, with fundamental values, governance, and policies decidedly at variance with our own and those of our friends and allies.To buttress the vital political and economic relationships we have along the Pacific rim, we must maintain our status as a military power of the first magnitude in the area...
In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region's oil...
We will seek to prevent the further development of a nuclear arms race on the Indian subcontinent. In this regard, we should work to have both countries, India and Pakistan, adhere to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to place their nuclear energy facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. We should discourage Indian hegemonic aspirations over the other states in South Asia and on the Indian Ocean. With regard to Pakistan, a constructive U.S.-Pakistani military relationship will be an important element in our strategy to promote stable security conditions in Southwest Asia and Central Asia...
Latin America...Cuba's growing domestic crisis holds out the prospect for positive change, but over the near term, Cuba's tenuous internal situation is likely to generate new challenges to U.S. policy. Consequently, our programs must provide capabilities to meet a variety of Cuban contingencies [...]

U.S. 'secret war' expands globally as Special Operations forces take larger role
By Karen DeYoung and Greg Jaffe, Washington Post
June 4, 2010 - Beneath its commitment to soft-spoken diplomacy and beyond the combat zones of Afghanistan and Iraq, the Obama administration has significantly expanded a largely secret U.S. war against al-Qaeda and other radical groups, according to senior military and administration officials. Special Operations forces have grown both in number and budget, and are deployed in 75 countries, compared with about 60 at the beginning of last year. In addition to units that have spent years in the Philippines and Colombia, teams are operating in Yemen and elsewhere in the Middle East, Africa and Central Asia. Commanders are developing plans for increasing the use of such forces in Somalia, where a Special Operations raid last year killed the alleged head of al-Qaeda in East Africa. Plans exist for preemptive or retaliatory strikes in numerous places around the world, meant to be put into action when a plot has been identified, or after an attack linked to a specific group.
The surge in Special Operations deployments, along with intensified CIA drone attacks in western Pakistan, is the other side of the national security doctrine of global engagement and domestic values President Obama released last week. One advantage of using "secret" forces for such missions is that they rarely discuss their operations in public. For a Democratic president such as Obama, who is criticized from either side of the political spectrum for too much or too little aggression, the unacknowledged CIA drone attacks in Pakistan, along with unilateral U.S. raids in Somalia and joint operations in Yemen, provide politically useful tools. Obama, one senior military official said, has allowed "things that the previous administration did not."...
The clearest public description of the secret-war aspects of the doctrine came from White House counterterrorism director John O. Brennan. He said last week that the United States "will not merely respond after the fact" of a terrorist attack but will "take the fight to al-Qaeda and its extremist affiliates whether they plot and train in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and beyond." That rhetoric is not much different than Bush's [ed: 'preemptive strikes] pledge to "take the battle to the enemy . . . and confront the worst threats before they emerge." The elite Special Operations units, drawn from all four branches of the armed forces, became a frontline counterterrorism weapon for the United States after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. But Obama has made such forces a far more integrated part of his global security strategy. He has asked for a 5.7 percent increase in the Special Operations budget for fiscal 2011, for a total of $6.3 billion, plus an additional $3.5 billion in 2010 contingency funding.
Bush-era clashes between the Defense and State departments over Special Operations deployments have all but ceased. Former defense secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld saw them as an independent force, approving in some countries Special Operations intelligence-gathering missions that were so secret that the U.S. ambassador was not told they were underway. But the close relationship between Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is said to have smoothed out the process."In some places, we are quite obvious in our presence," Adm. Eric T. Olson, head of the Special Operations Command, said in a speech. "In some places, in deference to host-country sensitivities, we are lower in profile. In every place, Special Operations forces activities are coordinated with the U.S. ambassador and are under the operational control of the four-star regional commander." ...

During planning for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the CIA's Iraq Operations Group kicked around a number of ideas for discrediting Saddam Hussein in the eyes of his people. One was to create a video purporting to show the Iraqi dictator having sex with a teenage boy, according to two former CIA officials familiar with the project.“It would look like it was taken by a hidden camera,” said one of the former officials. “Very grainy, like it was a secret videotaping of a sex session.”...then “flood Iraq with the videos,” the former official said. Another was to interrupt Iraqi television programming with a fake special news bulletin. An actor playing Hussein would announce that he was stepping down in favor of his (much-reviled) son Uday.“I’m sure you will throw your support behind His Excellency Uday,” the fake Hussein would intone. The spy agency’s Office of Technical Services collaborated on the ideas, which included inserting fake “crawls” -- messages at the bottom of the screen -- into Iraqi newscasts.The reality, the former officials said, was...“The military took them over,” said one. “They had assets in psy-war down at Ft. Bragg,” at the army’s special warfare center. According to histories of the 2003 invasion, the single most effective “information warfare” project, which originated in the Pentagon, was to send faxes and e-mails to Iraqi unit commanders as the fighting began, telling them their situation was hopeless, to round up their tanks, artillery and men, and go home. Many did.

"...God damn America..."
Rev. Jeremiah Wright denounced America's racist treatment of African Americans from the pulpit, and shortly after the 9/11 attack was quoted as saying, "We have supported state terrorism against Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost...". In a 2003 sermon denouncing U.S. Black national quotes oppression he said, "The government gives them drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people..."

Pro-Israel Dems Defend Raid
... comments expose a bit of daylight between the White House and some staunch defenders of Israel in Congress...Pro-Israel Democrats aren’t being so nuanced.

Vice President Joe Biden offered the White House's strongest defense yet of Israeli's actions off the coast of Gaza this week in an interview with Charlie Rose airing tonight on PBS. "I think Israel has an absolute right to deal with its security interest. I put all this back on two things: one, Hamas, and, two, Israel's need to be more generous relative to the Palestinian people who are in trouble in Gaza," Biden said ... "you can argue whether Israel should have dropped people onto that ship or not -- but the truth of the matter is, Israel has a right to know -- they're at war with Hamas -- whether or not arms are being smuggled in." Biden blamed Hamas for the crisis that has wracked the coastal territory and for the ongoing state of conflict with Israel...."So the problem is this would end tomorrow if Hamas agreed to form a government with the Palestinian Authority on the conditions the international community has set up," Biden told Rose...
Biden concluded by calling for an investigation "run by the Israelis." Congressional Democrats, meanwhile, have begun to defend Israel more vocally, and the number two Democrat in the House, Steny Hoyer, said today that Israel had "rightfully" defended itself, and offered some details on the White House's posture. "The Administration and Congress are determined to prevent condemnation of Israel at the UN Security Council. In times of increased tension such as now, it is imperative that we not allow these events to distract from our main goals of achieving peace in the region and preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons".
www.uruknet.info?p=66583 www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/Biden_solidifies_defense_of_Israel_... http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/biden-israel-right-to-stop...

Obama: Let Israel probe Gaza flotilla raid, with U.S. observer

Advocate of war crimes to head IDF enquiry
Moshe Machover
June 10, 2010 - According to a YNET report 7 June, 2010, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi appointed Maj-Gen (ret.) Giora Eiland to head "external inquest into deadly raid of Gaza flotilla". Gen. Eiland is the main author of the Dahiya Doctrine of "disproportionate response", which calls for "the wholesale destruction of the military, government and civilian infrastructure of the enemy entity"... http://www.uruknet.de/?p=66892 www.israeli-occupation.org/2010-06-10/advocate-of-war-crimes-to-head-idf...

"recent": raises new questions about the planning behind flotilla raid
" The American move has a dual purpose: bringing military equipment closer to areas in which Americans might need to fight, and assisting the U.S. ally should the need arise."
Israel asked U.S. to increase weapons supply seeking more JDAM bombs, and larger emergency stores held by American army.
By Amos Harel, Published 01:53 08.06.10Latest update 01:53 08.06.10
Israel recently approached the United States with new requests for security-related purchases, Haaretz has learned. The requests included Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM ) bombs for the Israel Air Force, as well as a significant expansion of the emergency stores held by the U.S. army in Israel. The Israeli requests were brought up during recent visits to Washington by Defense Minister Ehud Barak and director-general of the Defense Ministry, Udi Shani, and in conversations with senior administration and Congress officials.
The priority list reflects the security threats the defense establishment believes Israel will face in the next few years, i.e. the eventuality of a prolonged war, which would necessitate using the IAF widely to attack many targets, along with ensuring enough spare parts and supplies.
Israel also requested JDAM bombs, seeking to significantly increase the number of such munitions already in its arsenal. The JDAM bombs have been used increasingly in recent operations, including in the Second Lebanon War in 2006 and Operation Cast Lead in 2008.
Israel is also seeking to increase the amount of gear held by the American army in their emergency stores in Israel by 50% - from $800 million to $1.2 billion. The Obama administration placed the stores in Israel in December, as part of a number of steps to improve U.S. assistance to Israeli security. To date, $600 million worth of American emergency equipment has been placed in Israel. The American stores hold rockets, bombs, aircraft ammunition and armored vehicles, along with other weapons. The gear fully matches equipment already used by the Israel Defense Forces and is cataloged upon arrival to ensure quick and easy access at a time of need, pending permission from the United States. The American move has a dual purpose: bringing military equipment closer to areas in which Americans might need to fight, and assisting the U.S. ally should the need arise.

Days of Planning Led to Flotilla’s Hour of Chaos
The Obama administration has watched as the ties between its two closest regional allies have unraveled. Meanwhile, the Palestinians of Gaza, often neglected in Middle East peace talks, have taken on new importance...[ed: U.S."PEACE PROCESS" cover]
A Turkish official said a discussion of the issue with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was expected in Washington this week, but the raid occurred before the meeting could take place.[ed:did Biden visit seal the deal?} ...A week earlier, assuming everything was under control in stopping the flotilla heading to Gaza, Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel left for what he expected to be a very satisfying overseas trip. He started in Paris to take part in celebrations of Israel’s acceptance to the club of rich countries, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a significant triumph for Israel. From Paris, Mr. Netanyahu was off to Canada and ultimately to Washington for a meeting with President Obama that a top Israeli official said was expected to be a “hug fest.” Mr. Netanyahu was sleeping in the government guesthouse in Ottawa early Monday when he was awakened with news of the raid...
In Israel, ideas on how to halt the boats — sabotage of propellers or engines, the use of ropes or chains — were examined, military officials say, but all were rejected as dangerous or impractical. Disabling a huge boat like the Mavi Marmara could lead to its sinking or to days of towing it to shore. The best option, they asserted, was a takeover of the command of the boats, something Israel had done a year ago during an attempt by a smaller vessel. This time, though, because the lead boat was so large, the Israelis would have to descend by helicopter rather than approaching only by sea, costing them the element of surprise. Some American naval experts interviewed agreed that as long as Israel insisted on stopping the Mavi Marmara, its best option was a takeover.

SCAD aka False Flag & "Black" Ops
"They are gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran."
By Paul Craig Roberts, March 18, 2010
According to news reports, the U.S. military is shipping "bunker-buster" bombs to the U.S. Air Force base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The Herald Scotland reports that experts say the bombs are being assembled for an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. The newspaper quotes Dan Plesch, director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the University of London: "They are gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran." [Final destination Iran?, March 14, 2010] The next step will be a staged "terrorist attack," a "false flag" operation as per Operation Northwoods, for which Iran will be blamed. As Iran and its leadership have already been demonized, the "false flag" attack will suffice to obtain U.S. and European public support for bombing Iran. The bombing will include more than the nuclear facilities and will continue until the Iranians agree to regime change and the installation of a puppet government. The corrupt American media will present the new puppet as "freedom and democracy."...All that is necessary for success of "false flag" or "black ops" events is for the government to have its story ready and to have a reliable and compliant media. Once an official story is in place, thought and investigation are precluded. Any formal inquiry that is convened serves to buttress the already provided explanation.An explanation ready-at-hand is almost a give-away that an incident is a "black ops" event.

P20G: Into the Dark: The Pentagon Plan to Foment Terrorism
Darkness Visible: The Pentagon Plan to Foment Terrorism is Now in Operation (2005)
From the Moscow Times, Jan. 25, 2005. This is the follow-up to "Into the Dark."

no U.S. comments...
IDF Retracts Claims About Flotilla’s Al Qaeda Links
Max Blumenthal
June 3, 2010 - IDF is being forced to admit that its claims about the flotilla’s links to international terror are based on innuendo, not facts. On June 2, the IDF blasted out a press release with headline: "Attackers of the IDF soldiers found to be Al Qaeda mercenaries." http://www.uruknet.de/?p=66626

IDF Admits It Doctored the Audio Tapes
June 6, 2010 - The IDF admitted in a press release that it doctored audio footage from its exchanges with the Gaza flotilla in order to paint the flotilla passengers as anti-Semites. However, their comments made no more sense with this explanation: "This transmission had originally cited the Mavi Marmara ship as being the source of these remarks, however, due to an open channel, the specific ship or ships in the "Freedom Flotilla" responding to the Israeli Navy could not be identified...http://www.uruknet.de/?p=66723
Clarification/Correction Regarding Audio Transmission Between Israeli Navy and Flotilla on 31 May 2010, Posted on 5 June 2010

U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba
May 1, 2001
In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods... approved in writing by the top US military chiefs, the plans, revealed in declassified US government documents, proposed the US military secretly blow up an American ship and hijack US planes as a false pretext for war... the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas and orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities...America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."The plans were developed to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

Israelis should "get the hell out of Palestine...remember, these people are occupied. And it's their land"
Retract your apology, most of the world salutes you Helen! don't let the bloodsuckers silence you & all you inspire to speak the truth and challenge unjust power... retire with integrity and courage!

dog demands obedient tail
Washington Asks: What to Do About Israel?
WASHINGTON — Some topics are so inflammatory that they are never discussed without first inserting a number of caveats. And so, when Anthony Cordesman, a foreign policy dignitary in this town’s think tank circuit, dropped an article on Wednesday headlined “Israel as a Strategic Liability,” he made sure to open with a plethora of qualifications.
AT STAKE In Afghanistan, Muslim feelings about America’s allies affect the war.
First, he noted, America’s commitment to Israel is motivated by morality and ethics — a reaction to the Holocaust, to Western anti-Semitism and to American foot-dragging before and during World War II that left European Jews slaughtered by the Nazis. Second, Israel is a democracy with the same values as the United States. Third, the United States will never abandon Israel, and will help it keep its military edge over its neighbors. And America will guard Israel against an Iranian nuclear threat.
But once Mr. Cordesman had dispensed with what in the newspaper world is called the “to-be-sure” paragraphs, he laid out a dispassionate argument that has gained increased traction in Washington — both inside the Obama administration (including the Pentagon, White House and State Department) and outside, during forums, policy breakfasts, even a seder in Bethesda. Recent Israeli governments, particularly the one led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Mr. Cordesman argued, have ignored the national security concerns of its biggest benefactor, the United States, and instead have taken steps that damage American interests abroad. “The depth of America’s moral commitment does not justify or excuse actions by an Israeli government that unnecessarily make Israel a strategic liability when it should remain an asset,” Mr. Cordesman wrote, in commentary for the centrist Center for Strategic and International Studies, where he is the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in strategy. “It is time Israel realized that it has obligations to the United States, as well as the United States to Israel, and that it become far more careful about the extent to which it tests the limits of U.S. patience and exploits the support of American Jews.”...recent moves by the Netanyahu government potentially threaten American interests has grown steadily, many foreign policy experts argue. The violence that broke out when Israeli commandos stormed aboard a Gaza flotilla last week chilled American relations with a key Muslim ally, Turkey. The Gaza fight also makes it more difficult for America to rally a coalition that includes Arab and Muslim states against Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Mr. Netanyahu’s refusal to stop Jewish housing construction in Arab East Jerusalem also strains American ties with Arab allies. It also makes reaching an eventual peace deal, which many administration officials believe is critical to America’s broader interests in the Muslim world, even more difficult....

usraeli's man performs well
Abbas: "I would never deny Jewish right to the land of Israel"
Palestinian president meets with leaders of the American Jewish community in Washington, interviews with Charlie Rose.
Abbas also lauded Barack Obama's administration and its efforts to bring forth a two-state solution.

Obama offers Abbas $400m extra aid for Gaza in flotilla aftermath:
"There should be means by which we will be able to stop flow of arms that endanger Israel’s security," Obama said.

what u.s. 'national security' is all about preventing: #1 war-making world 'destabilizer' for global domination now getting destabilized
Gates: Turkey-Israel relations a concern
US cites Turkey's strategic shift away from Europe as "destabilizing."
06/09/2010Turkey's apparent shift in orientation away from Europe and its values towards greater cooperation with Islamist leaders and countries in the Middle East is being cautiously watched by the US, Defense Secretary Robert Gates stated Wednesday.

Oren: 'Turkey has embraced Iran, Hamas'
“Turkey has embraced the leaders of Iran and Hamas, all of whom called for Israel’s destruction,” declared Israeli ambassador to the US Michael Oren speaking on a conference call organized by The Israel Project,..“Our policy has not changed but Turkey’s policy has changed, very much, over the last few years,” he said. “Under a different government with an Islamic orientation, Turkey has turned away from the West.”...Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying “I do not think that Hamas is a terrorist organization...They are Palestinians in resistance, fighting for their own land." The Turkish leader went on to echo the Tuesday speech in which he called Israel's boarding of the Gaza flotilla "a massacre."

Hamas leader says group has no problem with US
AFP May 29, 2010 — Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal said his Palestinian group had no problem with the United States, but called Israel "the obstacle" to peace in the Middle East. "We don't have a problem whatsoever with the United States or with American interests," Khaled Meshaal told PBS television in an interview. "America is a great state, a superpower ...But its interests should not be at the expense of the interests of others and the peoples of in the region." Israel was "the obstacle on the face of peace in the region," he said, urging the administration of Barack Obama to "deal with this reality" rather than pressuring the Palestinians. US support for Israel "complicates matters," the Hamas leader added...Hamas seized power in Gaza in June 2007, driving out Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas's secular Fatah movement. But it remains blacklisted as a terrorist organisation by the European Union and the United States.
Israel and Egypt have sealed the Gaza Strip off from all but basic humanitarian aid since Hamas -- which is sworn to the destruction of the Jewish state and blacklisted as a terrorist group by the West -- seized power in June 2007. http://www.uruknet.de/?p=66470

"What the Security Council did today, under the shadow of a US veto, pressure and bias, is a betrayal for humanity and not just for the people of Gaza and the supporters," Reuters quoted Head of Hamas Political Bureau Khaled Meshaal as saying on Tuesday. Israel must be punished "... and we call for the trial of (Israeli Defense Minister Ehud) Barak, (Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu and all Zionist leaders as war criminals,"...The senior Hamas leader also called on all states to cut "all their relations and contacts in all shapes and levels with the Zionist entity," warning that "contacts and relations with Israel is a reward for their crimes." Meshaal called on US President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to "take the bold initiative of a historic decision to break the blockade on Gaza and force Israel to do that." http://presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=128739&sectionid=351020202

U.S. sources to Haaretz: Turkey vote against Iran sanctions - a slap in the face
State Department spokesman: It will be up to Turkey and Brazil to explain rationale for voting against Security Council resolution 1929

u.s. strategists...
October 1st, 2009
Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
Over the last decade, the Islamic Republic of Iran has emerged as a key player in the most consequential political and strategic dramas unfolding across the Middle East.
These include the potential spread of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, post-conflict stabilization in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the fight against Islamist extremism, and assuring the adequacy of oil and gas supplies from the Persian Gulf for international energy markets. In the process, the Islamic Republic has consolidated a role as de facto leader of resistance to America’s hegemonic posture and aspirations across the broader Middle East—in the Persian Gulf, the Arab-Israeli arena, Afghanistan, and Central Asia. Today, the ongoing competition for regional influence between the United States and Iran is the Middle East’s most strategically significant fault line....
As the hegemonial struggle between the United States and Iran plays out, both established and rising powers—China, Europe, India, Russia—are seeking to influence this competition in ways that will promote their economic and strategic interests. Likewise, major Middle Eastern states—Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey—must deal with the impact of Iran’s rise and the evolving dynamics of U.S.-Iranian relations on their own places in the regional balance of power.
Taken together, we call these two interlocking geopolitical contests—one between Washington and Tehran over strategic dominance in the broader Middle East, and the other among major international and regional players for influence over the Islamic Republic’s strategic orientation—the “race for Iran”... the “race for Iran” will have determinative influence over the structure of international relations—and, in particular, for America’s longstanding hegemonic position in the Middle East—throughout the first half of the 21st century. We are launching this blog to track and understand the “race for Iran”, in all of its myriad dimensions.

Flynt Leverett directs the Iran Project at the New America Foundation, where he is also a Senior Research Fellow. Additionally, he teaches at Pennsylvania State University’s School of International Affairs.Dr. Leverett is a leading authority on the Middle East and Persian Gulf, U.S. foreign policy, and global energy affairs. From 1992 to 2003, he had a distinguished career in the U.S. government, serving as Senior Director for Middle East Affairs at the National Security Council, on the Secretary of State’s Policy Planning Staff, and as a CIA Senior Analyst. He left the George W. Bush Administration and government service in 2003 because of disagreements about Middle East policy and the conduct of the war on terror... Dr. Leverett has spoken about U.S.-Iranian relations at foreign ministries and strategic research centers in Canada, China, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. During 2006-2007, he was a visiting professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. Leverett holds a Ph.D. in politics from Princeton University, is a life member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the International Institute for Strategic Studies....

Hillary Mann Leverett is CEO of Strategic Energy and Global Analysis (STRATEGA), a political risk consultancy. In September 2010, she will also take up an appointment as Senior Lecturer and Senior Research Fellow at Yale University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. Ms. Leverett has more than 20 years of academic, legal, business, diplomatic, and policy experience working on Middle Eastern issues. In the George W. Bush Administration, she worked as Director for Iran, Afghanistan and Persian Gulf Affairs at the National Security Council, Middle East expert on the Secretary of State’s Policy Planning Staff, and Political Advisor for Middle East, Central Asian and African issues at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations. From 2001-2003, she was one of a small number of U.S. diplomats authorized to negotiate with the Iranians over Afghanistan, al-Qa’ida and Iraq. In the Clinton Administration, Leverett also served as Political Advisor for Middle East, Central Asian and African issues for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, Associate Director for Near Eastern Affairs at the National Security Council, and Special Assistant to the Ambassador at the U.S. embassy in Cairo. She was awarded a Fulbright Scholarship and a Watson Fellowship, and in 1990-1991 worked in the U.S. embassies in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Egypt and Israel, and was part of the team that reopened the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait after the first Gulf War. Ms. Leverett has published extensively on Iran as well as on other Middle Eastern, Central and South Asian, and Russian issues...

Sanctions will not halt Iran's enrichment:
Iran's Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Ali-Asghar Soltanieh expressed regret about the persisting trend of misleading assessments made by the West regarding Iran's nuclear policy. Describing the new sanctions as a new failure for the US, Soltanieh said, "Iran will never put a halt to its enrichment program and will continue these activities under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency." Soltanieh went on to criticize the UNSC resolution, saying it is of little value as a recent "statement by over 100 member states of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) … shows that Iran enjoys the support of the majority of countries in the world." http://presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=129839&sectionid=351020104

U.S. Navy Doubles Size Of 5th. Fleet Persian Gulf Base
MANAMA, Bahrain: The U.S. Navy is doubling the size of its Persian Gulf naval base at Manama, which officials say will greatly enhance the capabilities of the U.S. 5th Fleet, which has headquarters in the island state.It will allow the Bahrain facility to handle up to 30 percent more ships than the 300 vessels a year it currently deals with as U.S. naval operations are ramped up....
CNN reported in April that the Pentagon and the U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East and South Asia, was updating plans for military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities. The Pentagon further ratcheted up pressure for military action a few days later when U.S. Navy Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said for the first time that an attack on Iran's nuclear infrastructure would "go a long way" toward delaying Tehran's uranium enrichment program. Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" Jun 9, 2010

USraeli Failed Green Regime Change Attempt
Henry Kissinger calls Iran upheaval a 'color revolution' in BBC interview.

* "I take my daily orders from Dr. Kissinger " National Security Advisor Gen. James Jones

New sanctions passed after being watered down during negotiations with Russia and China: no crippling economic sanctions, no oil embargo.

Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
Today, the United Nations Security Council will adopt a new resolution (see, here) imposing sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran over its nuclear activities. Predictably, the Obama Administration is working to spin its “victory” in New York as both a great diplomatic achievement and a serious intensification of international pressure on Iran over the nuclear issue. It is neither. The resolution will be adopted by a Security Council that is more deeply divided overthis resolution than over the three sanctions resolutions against Iran adopted by the Council while George W. Bush was in the White House. It is particularly significant that Brazil, Turkey and Lebanon are refusing to support the resolution. In international political terms, this will very likely turn out to be a pyrrhic victory for the Obama Administration–the Administration will win a narrow, tactical battle today, but at great cost to America’s long term strategic position, in the Middle East and globally. As we predicted in a May 2009 Op Ed in The New York Times—before the Islamic Republic’s controversial presidential election—the Obama Administration has already “checked the box” to show that engaging Iran doesn’t work. Now it has started the process of “checking the box” to show that the “broadest and toughest” sanctions ever imposed on the Islamic Republic don’t work. And that will leave the Obama Administration with no other options except formal adoption of regime change as the explicit goal of its Iran policy—and/or military strikes against the Islamic Republic.

The U.S. military is shipping "bunker-buster" bombs to the U.S. Air Force base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The Herald Scotland reports experts say the bombs are being assembled for an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. The newspaper quotes Dan Plesch, director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the University of London: "They are gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran." [Final destination Iran?, March 14, 2010] The next step will be a staged "terrorist attack," a "false flag" operation for which Iran will be blamed. As Iran and its leadership have already been demonized, the "false flag" attack will suffice to obtain U.S. and European public support for bombing Iran. The bombing will include more than the nuclear facilities and will continue until the Iranians agree to regime change and the installation of a puppet government. The corrupt American media will present the new puppet as "freedom and democracy."

March 17th, 2010
also published on www.ForeignPolicy.com
...We have argued since last June that the Green Movement is not the ascendant political force its Western champions would have us believe...if the Green Movement is not what many Iran analysts and other... pundits have cracked it up to be, adopting such a policy course with regard to Iran would be, to recall Talleyrand’s memorable observation, “worse than a crime”; it would be a “mistake”—a mistake with potentially devastating consequences for the United States and its interests in one of the most strategically vital parts of the world. Recent events in Iran provide further evidence for the proposition that the movement, in fact, is fading fast into strategic irrelevance...The record of most Western analysts in interpreting and predicting the course of Iranian politics since the Islamic Republic’s June 12, 2009 presidential election has been, to put it gently, disappointing. It is also altogether too reminiscent of the analytic failures, wishful thinking, and determination to find a “smoking gun” when one did not exist that fed the U.S. decision to invade Iraq... The United States cannot afford more “mistakes” in the Middle East.

Iran opposition leaders cancel one year anniversary protests
Opposition leaders in Iran have canceled protests planned for June 12, the one-year anniversary of controversial elections that helped spawn the dissident movement... In a joint statement Thursday, opposition leaders Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi said they called off rallies planned for Saturday in part "to protect the lives and properties of the people." In Washington, the news was received with considerable disappointment....
Iran’s opposition has been struggling for more than year to stay afloat Today, the size and strength of the movement remains unclear, reports CNN...the canceled demonstrations throws into fresh doubt the opposition’s capacity to continue mounting protests. And it raises an important question that many observers continue to debate: Can the Internet and electronic media alone sustain this movement? US President Barack Obama made a point of highlighting their efforts, calling upon the world to support those in Iran “who seek freedom, justice and dignity.nThe administration has also started shipping anti-filtering software to undisclosed dissidents inside Iran. The software, called HayStack, would allow them to continue broadcasting their messages via internet, radio and satellite, as The Christian Science Monitor recently reported. Opinion remains divided over whether Iran’s opposition can really have an impact.

...Even before the fiercely contested June 12 vote, in which Ahmadinejad was officially declared the winner by a large margin amid charges of massive fraud, Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps warned that Mousavi supporters banding together on the streets were part of a "velvet revolution" that would "not be successful in Iran."

Human Rights First is a non-profit, nonpartisan international human rights organization based in New York and Washington D.C.
We utilize creative coalition-building, insider advocacy, litigation, research and reporting, and public advocacy. We approach tough challenges in pragmatic, focused, and integrated ways. We draw on a range of powerful communications tools to expand our reach and increase our impact. These core methods are the signature of our success and the basis of our credibility.

Human Rights Defenders in Iran

Our Work with Retired Military Leaders

Board of Directors
Chair William D. Zabel Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
Vice-Chairs Tom A. Bernstein President, Chelsea Piers Management, Inc. Kenneth R. Feinberg Feinberg Rozen, LLP
TreasurerLynda Clarizio CEO INVISION, Inc.
M. Bernard Aidinoff Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
Mark Angelson Chairman and Chief Executive Officer World Color Press
Raymond M. Brown Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis LLP
Craig Cogut Pegasus Capital Advisors, L.P.
Dan Doctoroff Bloomberg LP
Leslie Gimbel Bernard F. and Alva B. Gimbel Foundation
Lewis B. Kaden Vice Chairman & Chief Administrative Officer,Citigroup, Inc
Westley Moore Citigroup Global Markets
Michael K. Rozen Feinberg Rozen, LLP
Barbara A. Schatz Columbia University School of Law
Lev A. Sviridov The City College of New York-CUNY
Elisa Massimino Chief Executive Officer and President
Michael Posner Founding Executive Director 1978-2006, President 2006-2009
Marvin E. Frankel Chairman Emeritus (1920 – 2002)