Andrew Hagen

US State Department will seek “asset freezes, a Chapter 7 resolution under the U.N. charter, sanctions and travel restrictions on some members of the Iranian government.” (*)

Amir Taheri: Ahmadinejad claims he has a spiritual warrant from “the hidden imam” for a: “single task: provoking a “clash of civilisations” in which the Muslim world, led by Iran, takes on the “infidel” West, led by the United States, and defeats it in a slow but prolonged contest that, in military jargon, sounds like a low intensity, asymmetrical war.” Furthermore, it was immediately after Ahmadinejad’s announcement of uranium enrichment that Iran announced it was building 54,000 centrifuges. Iran will soon offer to suspend enrichment and sign additional protocols in an attempt to wait out Bush, and deal with the next US president, who will be weak and surrender easily to Islam and terrorism. All the while Iran will continue building the bomb. Islamic males of fighting age outnumber Western males of fighting age four to one. (*)

Blair will back a Chapter 7 resolution, but won’t contribute to a military strike. (*)

The IAEA previously found one Iranian facility described as a “250,000-acre complex containing two vast underground bomb-proof bunkers designed for enriching uranium to weapons grade. (*) Iran continues to deny that it is building a nuclear weapon.

Debka: Iran building huge “Shahid Moradian” plant with 155,000 centrifuges, operational by the end of 2007. (*)

Iranian workers striking on basis of low or no wages. “We are hungry.” (*)

Ahmadinejad: “The Zionist regime is a dried up and rotten tree which will be annihilated with one storm.” (*)

Iranian text-messages Amhadinejad, suggests he should bathe more. (*)

Shimon Peres: “The Iranian president represents Satan and not God. History has rejected these sorts of sword-brandishing lunatics.” (*)

Iranian General Yahya Rahim Safavi boasts Iran can easily defeat United States. (*)

Sunday Times: Iran will hit the US and the UK with “battalions of suicide bombers,” 40,000 in total, if it is attacked. (*)

Islamic Jihad claims it will back Iran if Iran is attacked. (*)

Richard Clarke and Steven Simon: the costs of attacking Iran would outweigh the benefits. Iranian intelligence service is too powerful. Bill Clinton took Iranian intelligence down, and easily enough, in 1996. (*) (In other words, the column is nonsensical.)

White House is committed to stopping Iran. Nevertheless, Iranian-sponsored terrorism would spike upward immediately after a strike. (*)

Rumsfeld criticized by some retired US generals in what is apparently a coordinated effort. (*) Does this somehow relate to planning on Iran?

Reuel Marc Gerecht: Iran is choosing this moment because Bush is weak and the media says the US is tied down in Iraq. Iran wants acquiescence now before the wind changes direction. Furthermore, Iran has maintained its radicalism and authoritarianism despite European free trade with Iran, tending to disprove the “free trade causes democracy” assertion. (*)

Retired US general Thomas McInerney: a feasible US military strike option exists. (*)

(Iranian nuclear crisis updates now using only asterisks for links.)

Agitator Cindy Sheehan appeared on the Donny Deutsch program on CNBC in September 2005. On the opposing side was Laura Youngblood, the widow of Casey Youngblood, a servicemember killed in the line of duty in Iraq. Apparently there is no official transcript posted online. Based on web sources, the conversation went like this.

WIDOW: My husband was hit with a IED July 15th and died July 21st. He was part of the 325 unit out of Ohio. He was a Navy corpsman. He died two weeks before 21 Marines died out of Ohio. Everyone keeps saying Al-Qaeda is not in Iraq. Al-Qaeda took responsibility for the IED that killed my husband, and –

SHEEHAN: Well, sweetie, they weren’t there before they invaded and opened the doors borders to the terrorists –

WIDOW: No, we don’t know that, though.

SHEEHAN: — that came pouring in.

WIDOW: No one knows that.

SHEEHAN: Yeah, there’s been reports –

WIDOW: I served five years and, you know what? I’m going to have our baby in 12 more days, and if I do get called I will go back, and I will serve my country the way my husband would want me to. (applause) I am proud of my husband, because, you know what? You can’t let them come back and not finish what we started.

SHEEHAN: You know what? Your baby is going to be fatherless for a lie, for two lies, weapons of mass destruction and terrorism.

WIDOW: (Holding up a photograph of her husband) My child will never be fatherless because his father is an angel and they know that, and they will know their father loved him more than anything in this world.

(*) (†) (‡)

No child is fatherless.

US General John R. Vines states that Zarqawi and Al Qaeda are leaving Iraq, conceding defeat. (*)

Apparently they will go jihad somewhere else from now on.

It’s a little early to start uncorking the champagne, but we’re getting close.

Update: This would be great opportunity for Zarqawi. He might want to contact Yale University and send in an application for enrollment.

Kenneth Timmerman, author: Former figurehead widely praised in the West as “moderate,” Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani has been at the center of Iran’s nuclear weapons program since 1985. Additionally, the US can defeat Iran with air power alone. (*)

Debka: Rafsanjani’s current mission is to subtextually threaten Israel with terrorism from Iranian-controlled Palestinian terror groups. (†)

National Review: Rafsanjani the moderate Iranian: “the Muslim world will “vomit [Israel] out from its midst,” since “a single atomic bomb has the power to completely destroy [it].”" Furthermore, the Bush Administration should support labor unions in Iran, says William F. Buckley’s magazine. (‡)

NYT author James Risen: CIA botched operations in 2000, ended up giving Iran a working nuclear weapon plan, and list of all CIA spies in Iran. CIA issued vague denial. (§)

Sidney Zion, columnist: Israeli intelligence thinks the US can destroy Iran’s nuclear arsenal using only conventional weapons. (**)

Liz Cheney heading US group to promote democracy in Iran. (††) (Nepotism?)

US military preparing contingency plans against Iran. (‡‡)

Prior to IAEA chief Elbaradei’s arrival, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: “Our answer to those who are angry about Iran obtaining the full nuclear cycle is one phrase. We say, be angry and die of this anger.” Furthermore, the Arabs are now terrified of Iran, as evidenced by Arab newspaper editorials. (§§)

AFP syndicated in the Australian: Iranian General Hassan Firouzabadi: “When a people master nuclear technology and nuclear fuel, nothing can be done against them. The West can do nothing and is obliged to extend to us the hand of friendship.” (***)

Bill Scher: The Left’s talking points on Iran are: Bush’s evil is causing Iran to seek nukes; Iran is rational; there is time to negotiate; get rid of Bush and Iran will be palsy-walsy. (†††) (Iran’s nuclear program goes back twenty years, according to the United Nations.)

Iranian figurehead Ahmadinejad on 15 March 2006: “One of the main reasons why the big powers oppose Iran on the nuclear issue is for the sake of the Zionist regime, so as to let this regime live on.” (‡‡‡)

Supreme Leader and head dictator of Iran Khamanei on 14 March 2006: no retreat on nuclear issue. (§§§)

Washington Times: China is sending an envoy to Iran and Russia on the issue. (****)

Washington Post: Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, regarding Elbaradei’s proposal to suspend enrichment: “Such proposals are not very important ones.” Elbaradei stood next to Larijani as Larijani said it. (††††)

Michael Ledeen, regarding Iran’s sub rosa war against the US in Iraq, and US proffer to Iran of negotiations on Iraq: “Iran has been at war with us for 27 years, and we have discussed every imaginable subject with them. We have gained nothing, because there is nothing to be gained by talking with an enemy who thinks he is winning. From Khamenei’s standpoint, the only thing to be negotiated is the terms of the American surrender. . . . ” (‡‡‡‡)

Breaking: US military will not attack Iran. Instead, Dick Cheney is going to Tehran with a hunting license. (§§§§)

In the New York Times, Edward Wong writes: (*)

BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 13 — Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenant [Zawahiri] has released an Internet video calling on Iraqi insurgents to remain strong in the fight against Americans and praising the leadership of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian militant who directs Al Qaeda’s operations in Iraq.

Now even the New York Times admits that Zarqawi works for the Iraqi branch of Al Qaeda, the group responsible for the criminal atrocity of 9/11.

Jerry Seper in the Washington Times writes an article based on the opinion of Michael Cuter, a retired high-ranking INS agent. (*)

Any guest-worker program approved by Congress for the nation’s 11 million illegal aliens would spawn a new wave of cheap-labor illegals that already-overwhelmed federal authorities are unprepared to handle, law-enforcement authorities and immigration officials say.

Currently in America, there are two groups of people. First, legal residents. This includes citizens and legal aliens.

Second, there are illegal aliens, many of whom want to immigrate and become naturalized US citizens.

The labor market is divided between those two groups. Citizens and legal aliens have a bundle of rights. Illegal aliens have few rights and no guarantees.

A guest worker program would give special visas to the illegal aliens. The result would be a three-tiered labor market. Citizens and legal aliens would continue to enjoy their rights. Guest workers would have most of the rights of citizenship, but could not vote and would be subject to deportation for a variety of reasons, such as unforeseen economic downturns. Third, a new group of illegal aliens would arrive to push wages down further. This new group of illegals would have few rights and would be exploited.

Let’s suppose a broad grant of amnesty is made to illegal aliens, and most become naturalized US citizens. Again, as the Washington Times article points out, we will have a new group of illegal aliens who rush in to fill jobs that now pay even less. They will form a new group of second-class citizens who have few rights and no guarantees.

Whenever you allow the labor market to become segmented by people of different status, you will have market distortions, social chaos, a slow unraveling of the middle class, and a blow to the heart of the American Dream. Of course, that is what we have today with the millions of illegal aliens that our government has invited in to effectively become indentured servants.

Furthermore, it is doubtful that creating a permanent underclass of foreign nationals in America could even be constitutional. You cannot take someone who would normally be a citizen and make him a “guest worker” solely for the purpose of depriving him of the rights of citizens. It violates the equal protection of laws.

If we want to do the best for people in Mexico and other countries, and stop tolerating the US government’s creation of huge numbers of second-class citizens, we need to do something new.

First, enforce the law and protect the borders. This will prompt illegal aliens to leave peacefully. It will also stop human smugglers, drug smugglers, terrorists, and sex slave traffickers. Strong border enforcement is money well spent.

Second, develop a thoughtful Latin America policy. Third, the US should take responsibility for the disruptive effects of NAFTA on Mexico. NAFTA forced peasants off the lands, and now many are looking for work as illegals in America, because they have been forced into that desperate route by the heartless, greedy NAFTA.

Fourth, the US should spend more time, money, and attention on eliminating corruption in Mexico, increasing Mexican transparency, and promoting business activity in Mexico.

Mexico is full of talented, hard-working people. Mexico is blessed with abundant natural resources. There is no reason why Mexico should not be one of the top-20 richest countries in the world, except the Mexican government is corrupt. That is the root cause. For example, if the Mexican government weren’t corrupt, it could renegotiate NAFTA or pay direct compensation to Mexicans who have suffered due to the trade deal.

It’s unfortunate when liberals try to create a permanent underclass in America, accuse those in favor of law enforcement of racism, and apologize for corruption in our neighbor to the south. It used to be that liberals were the leaders of society. Those days have passed.

It’s unfortunate when conservatives tolerate a permanent underclass in America, seek to enlarge it, and apologize for corruption in our neighbor to the south. It is currently the case that conservatives are the leaders of society. This too will pass.

In the wake of Iran’s announcement of enrichment of uranium:

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice: it will be “time for action” when the Security Council reconvenes on April 28. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Krivtsov: “Step in the wrong direction.” IAEA chief Mohammed Elbaradei: continue negotiations. (*)

US will seek Chapter 7 Security Council resolution (military authorization). Russia and China reject a Chapter 7 resolution. Krivtsov: “There is no evidence of noncompliance with the nonproliferation [treaty].” (†)

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan: “cool down the rhetoric.” Summary paragraph written by UN staffers: “In 2003, it was discovered that Iran had carried out secret nuclear activities for 18 years in breach of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and some countries, the United States among them, claim that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons, which Iran denies.” (‡)

Protester Cindy Sheehan: We must not believe BushCo or anything they say about Iran. . . . We must not allow him to frighten us into this one.” (§) (posted prior to enriched uranium announcement)

Nobel peace prize winner Shirin Ebadi and Muhammad Simini: “Taking Iran to the UN Security Council and imposing sanctions on it would prompt the hard-liners to leave the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and its Additional Protocol.” Instead, get Iran to improve human rights. (**) (originally published in the International Herald Tribune)

Bloomberg news: Iran could have nukes in 16 days. (††) (more likely a matter of months)

Iranfocus.com: “Iran’s radical President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a fiery sermon demanded that “Iran’s enemies”, or the West, bow down before Iran and apologize for having held back Tehran’s nuclear program for three years. He also warned the West that it would “burn” in the “fire of the nations’ fury”.” (‡‡)

Spacewar.com: Iran offering neighbors a non-aggression pact. (§§) (A fake one)

Greenpeace: “Greenpeace is opposed to any nation acquiring nuclear technology and nuclear weapons, including Iran.” Continue with what the IAEA is doing, don’t refer to Security Council. Solution is “Nuclear Free Zone in the Middle East.” (***) (Disarmament would require a basic level of trust. In the wake of 18 years of secret Iranian nuclear weapons development, and Israel’s unofficial nuclear weapons stockpile, trust and verification would be problematic or impossible. Other problems also exist. For example, Bennett Ramberg’s plan would require Israel to join NATO (†††), thereby involving every NATO member in daily cross-border raids and rocket attacks. Unworkable.)

February 2006: Iran vows to enrich uranium in response to the IAEA’s referral of Iran to the Security Council. (‡‡‡) If Iran really only wanted to generate electricity, why escalate this to an international crisis?

President Bush said:

I mentioned to you the need for international bodies to be effective. We’re working with the IAEA with Iran. And the Iranians need to feel the pressure from the world that any nuclear weapons program will be uniformly condemned. It’s essential that they hear that message. An appropriate international body to deal with them is the IAEA. They signed an additional protocol, which was a positive development. The foreign ministers of Great Britain, France and Germany have interceded on behalf of the civilized world to talk plainly to the Iranians. One of my jobs is to make sure they speak as plainly as possible to the Iranians, and make it absolutely clear that the development of a nuclear weapon in Iran is intolerable, and a program is intolerable, otherwise there would be — otherwise they will be dealt with, starting through the United Nations.

Unfortunately, that press conference was April 21, 2004. (*)

It is now two years later, and where are we? We’re still sitting on our hands, hoping the IAEA will smoke a peace pipe with Iranian spittle-flecked figurehead Ahmadinejad, and the real dictator of Iran, Supreme Leader Khamenei, no less a psychotic homicidal maniac as Ahmadinejad, only quieter and more shadowy.

So now Iran has enriched uranium. (†) Their process is not advanced enough to create a nuclear weapon, but they will gain that knowledge soon. Today, no obstacle stands in their way.

The IAEA appeaser-in-chief, Mohammed Elbaradei, waddles to Iran again. Maybe he will at last find his proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Congratulations to his cheering section at the Nobel prizes. They can be very proud as their boy kowtows before the armed terror overlords of Iran and their atomic artillery almost ready to roll off the assembly line. At this point, the IAEA is at best a distraction that speeds proliferation.

The time has now passed for polite chit-chat with rabid dictators who tomorrow will be armed with the weapons of extinction.

President Bush should summon the UN Security Council for an emergency meeting to occur in 24 hours. If the Security Council fails to act immediately and decisively against Iran, ordering sanctions backed with the threat of military force, the US and allies must act. We must rapidly prepare to fight to preserve the founding principles of both our countries and the United Nations. It may be that other countries are too afraid. They may be too scared to fight for freedom, too weak to hold aloft even a small candle of hope for humanity. Sacrifice is what grown-ups do to avert a disaster from befalling the little people sometimes called the future.

Let us turn now to a relevant document. The opening lines of the Charter of the United Nations, signed in San Francisco in 1945:

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED

to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind. . . .

(‡) Now, with Iran on the doorstep of delivering to the world an aggressive, unprovoked nuclear armageddon of Israel, is the last chance to act. There is still a chance that sanctions could shut them down before it hits critical mass.

If sanctions do not work, however, we must prepare to fight a limited war now to avoid the global nuclear catastrophe that is sure to follow the terrorist state of Iran gaining access to nuclear weapons.

I’m sure many of my readers wouldn’t shed a tear if Israel were wiped from the Earth. Nor the entire Jewish people as well. For any that think a nuclear Iran is tolerable, however, do not forget the words of Martin Niemoeller, who reminds us even today that first they come for the Jews, and then another group, then another, until finally they will come for us. Divide and conquer is the eternal way of the tyrant.

Naturally, if one country can be nuked off the map, so can any country. We human beings live interdependently in this world. We must police and protect ourselves. This is called morality.

The Doomsday Clock tells us that the world is at seven minutes until nuclear midnight. (§) With today’s knife-to-the-throat announcement by Iran’s thugocracy, we can anticipate the minute hand to move faster and faster.

Today the gravest threat to humankind is the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. A little nuclear war here and there is likely to touch off a global nuclear war. In the emerging context, it is more than morality that we stand for; it is survival.

And two years after taking a firm stand against a nuclear-armed Iran to a room full of reporters, President Bush has hardly lifted a finger to stop this ferocious menace.

It is time for action.

Assuming sanctions do not work, what would the military option look like? First, the US is not really going to use nuclear weapons on Iran first, unless Iran already has or is about to in an imminent time frame use its nuclear weapons.

Of course, since Iran has an itchy trigger finger and ruling autocrats who firmly believe Allah wants them to kickstart Islamic Armageddon by hurtling the a-bomb hither and yon, knowing just when Iran plans to use the bomb may be difficult to estimate. For that reason, it is wise to keep our nuclear arrow in the quiver.

All this only increases the importance to hit Iran now. First, with powerful sanctions, and second, with swift preparation for a military option.

If President Bush no longer has what it takes to do what is necessary, he needs to resign.

From far away, if enough have the bravery and steadfastness to stand up to Iran and their brutal words and their brutal weaponry, it will look like a showdown between nations.

The real showdown, though, will not be along the borders of the Middle East, but in the borderlands of the human heart. Do we have the courage of our convictions? Will we, in the last instance, do what is right, even when it is very hard? Are we willing to sacrifice our selfish drives for a brighter tomorrow? Will we let the light shine, or will we succumb to darkness?

Time will tell. I know we can do what is right. I know we can stop Iran. I know the human heart can triumph over despair. But will we do what we must? Will we do what is right?

To accomplish something small, little effort is needed. To accomplish something great, little effort is needed, only many times. People want to stand for what is right, but they are afraid. That is why it is important that as many of us as possible stand for what is right, so that courage spreads, little by little, until at last we accomplish that great thing, and stop cold a brutal oppressor. We cannot make the world absolutely safe, but we can absolutely remove one threat to it.

R. Lindley DeVecchio, a former senior FBI agent, has been charged with helping the Mafia commit several murders. (*)

The UK’s Secretary of State for Defence, John Reid, recently gave a speech in which he called for changing the Geneva conventions. The changes would respond to the barbaric tactics of terrorism. (*)

It cannot be denied any longer. (*)

United Nations officials investigating Iran’s nuclear programme say they have found convincing evidence that the Iranians are working on a secret uranium enrichment project that has not been officially declared.

The UN must take action.

As a space enthusiast, I was saddened along with many others when the first SpaceX rocket exploded on launch on Friday, March 31, 2006. SpaceX is a private company engaged in the business of launching vehicles into space. The March 31, 2006 launch was non-secret and government-funded.

Unfortunately, SpaceX Vice-President of Business Development Gwynne Shotwell compounded the launch disaster with a conceited, secretive approach. Interviewed on Science Friday with Ira Flatow, she flatly rejected every opportunity to make public (1) what might have caused the explosion; (2) photographs and video of the rocket coming back to Earth, or even (3) the type of vehicle the rocket carried. (* audio available) Ms. Shotwell did clearly state that this was not a secret government project. It was a launch funded by DARPA, a US government agency, and held some kind of demonstration satellite for the US Air Force Academy, but any further information was not forthcoming. There is no indication that SpaceX had any information at stake related to any comparative advantage over competitors.

The approach of SpaceX and Ms. Shotwell is totally unacceptable in a society of free government. This launch was funded by taxpayers, and to deny information at this stage is unreasonable.

The only logical inference to draw is that SpaceX is an unaccountable company that cannot be trusted with your investment dollars.

I commend Ira Flatow of Science Friday for his probing, hard-hitting interview with Ms. Shotwell, available for free on the Science Friday web site. Perhaps Ira Flatow is considering filing a FOIA request with DARPA and the US Air Force Academy to retrieve all available data regarding the crash. I hope for the prompt release of the complete data set to the public.