Scott Ritter: Bush OKs June Iran Air Attack Date, Iraq Elections Rigged

[leveymg]

Looks like it's going to be a long, hot summer.

http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/2295/2/
<SNIP>

The principal theme of Scott Ritter's talk was Americans’ duty to protect the U.S. Constitution by taking action to bring an end to the illegal war in Iraq. But in passing, the former UNSCOM weapons inspector stunned his listeners with two pronouncements. Ritter said plans for a June attack on Iran have been submitted to President George W. Bush, and that the president has approved them. He also asserted that knowledgeable sources say U.S. officials "cooked" the results of the Jan. 30 elections in Iraq.

On Iran, Ritter said that President George W. Bush has received and signed off on orders for an aerial attack on Iran planned for June 2005. Its purported goal is the destruction of Iran’s alleged program to develop nuclear weapons, but Ritter said neoconservatives in the administration also expected that the attack would set in motion a chain of events leading to regime change in the oil-rich nation of 70 million -- a possibility Ritter regards with the greatest skepticism.

The former Marine also said that the Jan. 30 elections, which George W. Bush has called "a turning point in the history of Iraq, a milestone in the advance of freedom," were not so free after all. Ritter said that U.S. authorities in Iraq had manipulated the results in order to reduce the percentage of the vote received by the United Iraqi Alliance from 56% to 48%.

Asked by UFPPC's Ted Nation about this shocker, Ritter said an official involved in the manipulation was the source, and that this would soon be reported by a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist in a major metropolitan magazine -- an obvious allusion to New Yorker reporter Seymour M. Hersh.

<SNIP>

[shoelace414]

1. ..

Asked by UFPPC's Ted Nation about this shocker, Ritter said an official involved in the manipulation was the source, and that this would soon be reported by a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist in a major metropolitan magazine -- an obvious allusion to New Yorker reporter Seymour M. Hersh.

hold up those purple fingers again..

[Justyce]

2. I sure hope Hersh is watching his back. Scary.

[Maestro]

3. You know when Ritter started

the anti-war campaign against Iraq, I will admit that I didn't like it. Or rather I just didn't like the tone with which he pounded his chest against the war even though I too had serious doubts about it and ultimately decided against it. However, Ritter's claims now have all come true as far as I can tell so I am prone to believe him now. This admin is crazy.

[cthrumatrix]

23. the reality is that Ritter has more credibility than bush

[Maestro]

24. Quite true

Can't argue that but I wouldn't believe * if God were standing right next time and * was swearing on the Bible.

[McCamy Taylor]

4. We are gonna get our butts kicked in Iran...

:nuke:

[rkc3]

6. Iraq's army was fueled by fear of Hussein - the Iranians will gather to

protect their country and we'll have more to worry about than just their military.

It will be interesting if these allegations are true.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Hmm the iraqis are still fightng and they do seem

to be stickign to their war plan...

Tariq Aziz even told it to the CBC, new urban vietnam

[rkc3]

8. I was referring to a well-formed military in Iran rather than the rag-tag

"insurgents" we currently face in Iraq. One or two deaths a day appears to be palatable here in the states. Fighting a well-armed, well-trained, and properly motivated force might cause a few more deaths than an IED in Fallujah.

Iraq was "successful" because the military fell back at our approach then disappeared. They may have become the insurgents, but it would appear the Iranian army might have more resolve than the Iraqis.

Add to that the fact that we've become the bad guys in the Middle East and the Iranians would like to show a better face than the hated Iraqis and they've got many more reasons for standing up to the US.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. The only reason why two deaths are palatable

is because most people are not seeing the caskets come home... they are not feelign the pain...

Iran will mean an assured Draft... and maybe, just maybe, the lapdog press will finally show the caskets coming home, regardless of orders.

Remember, this war has cost most Amerians precious little... but the Iraqis are counting on wearing us down... the last power they did that to was the Brits and it took all the way to 1955... time is on their side, not ours

[rkc3]

10. They are palatable for a number of reasons... you've mentioned two

already - no caskets, not affecting them directly. I also believe most Americans think the working poor are the only ones in the military - so there's a bit of racism in the mix as well.

bush is in a bit of trouble if he expects to move forward with Iran. He'll need another reason aside from WMDs or an attack on the US to enter the country. Maybe if an attack in Israel occurs and the US backs Israel in their war, we'll enter the country. Otherwise, he'll have some problems convincing the American people (and maybe even the press) and Congress as to why we need this war.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Ye of little faith in the bush boys and their

hate of actual procedure...

If they got an attack on Israel many Muricans believe that Israel is behind our policies in the ME. (Granted they do have lots in common but behind not quite), so that will not be good enough

Give the propaganda and psy ops boys credit, they will ahve us fearing model airplanes soon enough... AGAIN.

[rkc3]

12. Fearing SUV's would be nice too - they can hold a lot of explosives.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. There you go, getting into the spirit

by the way what is the naitonal mood ring color today? Need to get dress and ALWAYS try to coordinate with it.. that way I am reminded to be afraid of SOMETHING!

:-)

[rkc3]

14. I think it's brown today - markets are selling off because of a big drop

in the dollar and a jump in oil prices.

Sounds like bush's plan to destroy America and rebuild it in his image is going smoothly. We'll soon all be in the shitter (that's why it's brown today).

[leveymg]

17. This isn't going to be another Iraq - not a ground war

I'm still hoping the June attack date is part of a psywar campaign, hardball deception to get the Iranians to give up their nuclear program and to pressure the European into backing the Bush Administration at the IAEC and the UN. It could also be a dirty-trick effort to provoke the Iranians into striking first.

But, if it comes to war, this is what one can expect:

The US/Israeli side and Iranians will quickly trade their primary assets -the US/Israelis will launch decapitation strikes against Iranian leadership, technology and scientific targets along with air strikes on missile launchers, air fields and CBW storage sites.

The Iranians will target Israeli and US troop concentrations in the region with whatever chemical and biological weapons they can launch. Expect some quick cross-border raids by both sides.

But, no one expects the US and its allies to attempt a full-scale Desert Storm type invasion, at least not immediately. The Iranians can field 17 million men under arms, according to the CIA. The US/Israelis simply can't put enough boots on the ground without America reviving the draft, unless there's a much bigger allied contingent this time.

If the Iranians can resist the temptation to attack the mainland US, there would probably be a great deal of domestic resistance to a full-scale war against Iran. If there's some kind of mass casualty event event stateside -- either before military hostilities commences or afterwards -- we're all going to be wearing camouflage fatigues or in jail.

The big question is how are the Pakistanis going to react? There have been scenarios that foresee the overthrow of Musharraf, and a launch of some of the Pakistani nuclear missiles at Israel. Israel would likely retaliate in kind.

For more details read:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0410/S00146.htm

http://www.williambowles.info/iran/osp_aipac.html

Any way you look at it, World War III is the right term for it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Follow the PNAC plan

heck even Clark has the stories in Waging Modern War, what his friends told him about many wars coming down the pike

Bush's legacy will be the destruction of THIS country

[cthrumatrix]

21. the corporate media cartel refuses to "expose" the PNAC doctrine

of preemption BEFORE all this crap started

[Just Me]

15. Nothing's stopping the neoCONspirators from going all the way.

I just am verily concerned about whether or not a worse terrorist attack will take place on our soil in order to generate public support. :scared:

The next 4 - 6 months are going to be dreadful.

[Vinca]

16. Well, that explains the extra days taken for "recounting" votes. nt

[Goose3five]

18. Thanks for the tip...

I referenced this here.

[leveymg]

19. Welcome to DU, Goose3five.

What kinda a plane is that behind your head?

[Goose3five]

22. That was the Kerry campaign jet...

...prior to Edwards coming on-board. The full photo can be found here in the June 13 archive. By the way, I have been here for a while just have not posted in quite some time.

[KamaAina]

20. But, but, but the exit polls showed the UIA at 56% (or higher!)

And President Kerry and I know full well how accurate THOSE are, when the deal's going down... :tinfoilhat: