New Yorker October 8, 2007

In a series of public statements in recent months, President Bush and members of his Administration have redefined the war in Iraq, to an increasing degree, as a strategic battle between the United States and Iran. “Shia extremists, backed by Iran, are training Iraqis to carry out attacks on our forces and the Iraqi people,” Bush told the national convention of the American Legion in August. “The attacks on our bases and our troops by Iranian-supplied munitions have increased. . . . The Iranian regime must halt these actions. And, until it does, I will take actions necessary to protect our troops.” He then concluded, to applause, “I have authorized our military commanders in Iraq to confront Tehran’s murderous activities.” (Keep reading…)

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/II26Ak01.html

The roving eye September 27, 2007

CBS reporter: But the American people, sir, believe that your country [Iran] is a terrorist nation, exporting terrorism in the world. You must have known that visiting the World Trade Center site would infuriate many Americans. (Keep reading…)

Special to Canadian Dimension August 15, 2007

In recent months Iran has made large strides toward mastering nuclear technology. Alarmed by these advances, the Bush administration and its European allies have stepped up their hostile actions and threats, specifically: • Attempting to prevent the entry into service of Iran’s first nuclear power plant at Bushehr. The Bushehr reactor will use nuclear fuel imported from Russia. • Attempting to prevent Iran from developing the capacity to produce its own nuclear fuel. • Preparing to impose harsh new economic sanctions on the country. • Threatening to attack Iran militarily if other means fail to achieve their aims. (Keep reading…)

Monthly Review June 2007

Regrettably, there are all too many candidates that qualify as imminent and very serious crises. Several should be high on everyone’s agenda of concern, because they pose literal threats to human survival: the increasing likelihood of a terminal nuclear war, and environmental disaster, which may not be too far removed. However, I would like to focus on narrower issues, those that are of greatest concern in the West right now. I will be speaking primarily of the United States, which I know best, and it is the most important case because of its enormous power. But as far as I can ascertain, Europe is not very different. (Keep reading…)

Dissent Magazine Winter 2007

For a quarter of a century, Iran has been ruled by a militant theocracy. After the shah’s regime–authoritarian, brutal, and backed by the United States–was overthrown, the new regime quickly proved itself to be authoritarian, cruel, and self-warranted by Islamic fundamentalism. Reform efforts have proved chimerical, and Tehran has pursued nuclear capabilities with vigor, long deceiving the International Atomic Energy Agency and Western interlocutors about its efforts. To what extent should the character of the Iranian regime govern Western responses to its ambitions? Should Iran be considered just one state among others, seeking its legitimate self-interests? What “threat” does the current Iranian regime pose in today’s world? –Eds. (Keep reading…)

Online Journal March 26, 2007

Washington DC — The long awaited US military attack on Iran is now on track for the first week of April, specifically for 4 am on April 6, the Good Friday opening of Easter weekend, writes the well-known Russian journalist Andrei Uglanov in the Moscow weekly “Argumenty Nedeli.” Uglanov cites Russian military experts close to the Russian General Staff for his account. (Keep reading…)

The Guardian,March 10,2007

In the energy-rich Middle East, only two countries have failed to subordinate themselves to Washington’s basic demands: Iran and Syria. Accordingly both are enemies, Iran by far the more important. As was the norm during the cold war, resort to violence is regularly justified as a reaction to the malign influence of the main enemy, often on the flimsiest of pretexts. Unsurprisingly, as Bush sends more troops to Iraq, tales surface of Iranian interference in the internal affairs of Iraq - a country otherwise free from any foreign interference - on the tacit assumption that Washington rules the world. (Keep reading…)

Daily Star Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Seymour Hersh, investigative journalist for The New Yorker magazine, has sparked fresh debate with his latest article alleging that the Bush administration’s new policy to confront Iran has led it to send American money and other forms of assistance to extremist Sunni groups, sometimes via the Lebanese and Saudi governments, in order to confront and weaken Hizbullah, Syria and Iran. (Keep reading…)

The New Yorker, Saturday 03 March 2007 Issue

Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?### (Keep reading…)

Vancouver Sun Thursday, February 22, 2007

Almost drowned in the torrents of speculation in the past few days about Washington’s intentions towards Iran and its nuclear development program was a brief story about an agreement between Moscow and Saudi Arabia. (Keep reading…)