At least 100 nukes, by all accounts - all in secret, all without inspection by the international bodies that oversee nuclear power, and the issue is taboo in the U.S. - and this article by Glenn Greenwald seems to follow the pattern. Neither the NYT nor any other U.S. press outlet will run a side-by-side comparison of the Israeli, Iranian, Pakistani and Indian nuclear programs (let alone the Egyptian and Saudi nuclear programs).

Don't expect Obama to do this - his major backer was always Exelon, one of the largest coal-and-nuclear electricity outfits in the nation. General Electric wants to sell reactors to India, so India's refusal to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (signed by Iran) is not an issue - the Senate vote was something like 90-10 on the Indian trade deal (Obama voted for it).

Iran has chosen to contract with Russia, and the Russians are building Iranian nuclear power plants. Israel is upset about Iranian support for Hezbollah, but they quietly ignore Saudi support for Hamas... interesting, that, especially as it turns out that Saudi oil money was heavily invested in Clinton's Foundation - blah.

Israel's real agenda is territorial expansion in the West Bank and expulsion of Arabs from Israeli territory - what a bunch of psychopaths, on both sides. The Israelis only differ from Hamas in that they have more firepower - both Israeli and Palestinian governments are democratically elected, right? Therefore, they need to paint the domestic resistance to their atrocious rule as "inspired by foreign elements." The neocons all seem to have moved to Israel, haven't they? Israel still spouts the neocon propaganda that we're all so familiar with, right?

It's also interesting to note that all of Exelon's future plans are based on the expansion of coal and nuclear power - and Obama has been an outspoken proponent of "clean coal" and more nukes - and neither Exelon nor Obama like to mention the words "wind" or "solar."

As far as the G.S. interview, the one you want to look at is Kucinich's last one on the campaign trail - as soon as Kucinich mentioned the words "oil" and "Iraq" in the same breath, G.S. cut him off and changed the subject.

That makes one wonder, doesn't it? For all of Glenn Greenwald's attacks on the un-inaugurated president-elect, we don't see many attacks on the corporate press, do we? However, it is the press that sets the stage - it was the dishonest press that got us into Iraq, isn't it? Think back - remember the wild-eyed, frothing cheerleading for the invasion, all across the media board?

That's OK. We all know it's tough to bite the hand that feeds you, even if that hand is the source of most of the propaganda that clouds the American consciousness... with some exceptions, now and again. So here's a challenge: write an article with a side-by-side comparison of the Israeli and Iranian nuclear weapons programs. This would have to include the role of Britain, France and the United States in shipping heavy water and enriched uranium to Israel - and the U.S. doesn't want to admit it.

I'm guessing that this is a major leverage that Israel has over the U.S. - because they've probably got a lot of proof of U.S. involvement in moving nuclear weapons into the Middle East.

Everything GG has been writing about is connected:

June 1984- THE JONATHAN INSTITUTE, a private research institute based in Jerusalem and concentrating, among other things, on terrorism, sponsored a conference in Washington…(NYT: “Rolling Back the Barbarians”, a book review of “TERRORISM How the West Can Win” edited by Benjamin Netanyahu, which is a compilation of writings regarding this meeting) One of their ideas is that: “behind these terrorist states is the Soviet Union - training and manipulating the terrorists and sustaining the terrorist states.”

July 10, 1996-Benjamin Netanyahu-(Israel’s PM), addresses joint session of Congress. Borrowing from “A Clean Break”, he calls for “democratization" of terrorist states in the Middle East and warned that peaceful means might not be sufficient. War might be unavoidable.” He adds Iran to the mix. (U)

Late 2005- “Raymond Tanter, of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, recommended that the Bush administration use the MEK and its political arm, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (N.C.R.I.), as an insurgent militia against Iran…they” are not only the best source for intelligence on Iran's potential violations of the nonproliferation regime…are also a possible ally of the West in bringing about regime change in Tehran.” (U) He suggested using tactical nuclear weapons-“bunker busting bombs” against Iran (even though it is illegal to do so against a non-nuclear state); and that we could get around this by using the fact that "the United States has sold Israel bunker-busting bombs, which keeps the military option on the table." In other words, the U.S. can't nuke Iran, but Israel, which never signed the treaty and maintains an unacknowledged nuclear arsenal, can.” (U)

NOTE: [This is exactly how the US got around the laws against providing arms to Iran [through Israel] during Iran-Contra.]

July 2005-House intelligence committee chairman Peter Hoekstra (Republican, Michigan) and committee member Curt Weldon (Republican, Pennsylvania) met secretly in Paris with an Iranian exile known as "Ali." Weldon had just published a book called Countdown to Terror, alleging that the C.I.A. was ignoring intelligence about Iranian-sponsored terror plots against the U.S., and Ali had been one of his main sources…But according to the C.I.A.'s former Paris station chief Bill Murray, Ali, whose real name is Fereidoun Mahdavi, fabricated much of the information. "Mahdavi works for Ghorbanifar," Murray told Laura Rozen of The American Prospect. "The two are inseparable. Ghorbanifar put Mahdavi out to meet with Weldon." (U) [See August 2006]

August 2006-Peter Hoekstra released a House-intelligence-committee report titled "Recognizing Iran as a Strategic Threat: An Intelligence Challenge for the United States." Written by Frederick Fleitz, former special assistant to John Bolton, the report asserted that the C.I.A. lacked "the ability to acquire essential information necessary to make judgments" on Tehran's nuclear program…"This is like pre-war Iraq all over again," David Albright said in The Washington Post. "You have an Iranian nuclear threat that is spun up, using bad information that's cherry-picked and a report that trashes the inspectors." [See July 2005] (U)

November 2006-"Iran is Germany, and it's 1938, except that this Nazi regime that is in Iran … wants to dominate the world, annihilate the Jews, but also annihilate America."-Netanyahu (on CNN) (U)

November 27, 2006- Seymour Hersh reports in The New Yorker that a classified assessment by the C.I.A. had found no conclusive evidence as yet that Iran had a secret nuclear-weapons program. (U) (See [11/27/06-THE NEXT ACT] http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/061127fa_fact ]

Date? US deploys “Navy ships to Persian Gulf…high level personnel shifts signaling new focus on naval and air operations…patriot missiles to ME to defend US allies (presumably from Iran). (U)

January 10, 2007-Bush gives speech on Iraq war…mentions IRAN six times. “Bush vowed to "seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies”. [Iran is] “providing material support for attacks on American troops.” (U) At about the same time his speech was taking place, U.S. troops stormed an Iranian liaison office in Erbil, a Kurdish-controlled city in northern Iraq, and arrested and detained five Iranians working there.” (U)

Spring 2007-"Everything the advocates of war said would happen hasn't happened, and all the things the critics said would happen have happened. [The president's neoconservative advisers] are effectively saying, 'Invade Iran. Then everyone will see how smart we are.' But after you've lost x number of times at the roulette wheel, do you double-down?"- Grover Norquist (who backed the Iraq invasion) (U)

***********

(U) “From the Wonderful Folks Who Brought You Iraq”, by Craig Unger, March 2007

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/ [...]

Isn't Netanyahu trying to win an election in Israel "as we speak"?

Our congress "supports" Israel, and Israel says Iran is a threat...one more turn around the sun...