White House ‘Reprimanded Swiss Ambassador’ For Delivering 2003 Iranian Offer For Negotiations
White House ‘Reprimanded Swiss Ambassador’ For Delivering 2003 Iranian Offer For Negotiations
In an interview with Democracy Now, Trita Parsi — former congressional aide to ex-Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) — disclosed more details about his recent revelation that an Iranian offer for negotiations with the Bush administration was delivered to senior political adviser Karl Rove in 2003.
According to Parsi, Rove confirmed receipt of the Iranian offer two hours after it was delivered to him, calling it “intriguing.” Subsequently, Parsi claims there was a “discussion about this at the highest level in the Bush administration.” Hard-liners, led by Dick Cheney, immediately rejected it, even going so far as to “reprimand the Swiss ambassador for having delivered it.”
Parsi echoed the allegations of former NSC official Flynt Leverett, who has said that Condoleezza Rice — then National Security Adviser — saw the offer. Rice now says, “I don’t know what Flynt Leverett’s talking about.” Weighing in on the dispute, Parsi said, “I find it highly unlikely that they did not see it. I frankly believe that it’s beyond unlikely that they didn’t see.”
Full transcript can be found HERE. Transcript of the segment below:
TRITA PARSI: So this channel has been used on numerous occasions by the United States and by Iran to be able to send messages to each other. And this time around, the Iranians gave a proposal to the Swiss ambassador that he then sent to the Swiss foreign ministry in Bern, who faxed it onto the State Department, but the Swiss ambassador also made a personal visit to Washington, D.C. to brief the State Department about the proposal, and he also made sure that he met with Congressman Ney, who has been a longtime advocate for negotiations and dialogue between the United States and Iran, and he handed him the proposal, as well.
AMY GOODMAN: Now, the Swiss ambassador was Tim Guldimann?
TRITA PARSI: Correct.
AMY GOODMAN: And he then got this proposal to the man you worked for, Congressmember Ney?
TRITA PARSI: Exactly. I was an advisor to Bob Ney at the time. And Tim met with Bob and handed over the proposal to him. And Bob afterwards sent it to be hand-delivered to the White House to Karl Rove, and Karl Rove called back within two hours, and they had a brief discussion about the proposal.
AMY GOODMAN: And what did Karl Rove say?
TRITA PARSI: Well, he basically said that it was an intriguing proposal. He first wanted to know if it authentic, and the congressman assured him that it was, according to what the Swiss ambassador had said. And we have to remember, the Swiss ambassador would not be handing over proposals to the United States unless they were authentic. The Swiss ambassador’s work has been requested by the US, not by the Iranians.
[...]
AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about this proposal that came to the US? You have Karl Rove who knew, the very close relationship between — well, it was Karl Rove and Condoleezza Rice who went with President Bush to South Korea, just them together. Do you have any awareness or knowledge of President Bush knowing about this?
TRITA PARSI: Well, according to many people that I have interviewed in the Bush administration, they did have a discussion about this at the highest level in the Bush administration, and basically the hard line of the Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld basically ensured that they would not proceed with the negotiations. In fact, they actually reprimanded the Swiss ambassador for having delivered it.
And the argument by the hardliners, the hawks in the Washington — in the White House at the time was basically that Iran is weak and it’s giving this proposal precisely because of the fact that it is fearful of the United States and that the US can achieve more by taking on the Iranian regime and just removing it than by negotiating. So we had this situation in which, back then, because of America’s strength, the Bush administration argued that it could not negotiate.
And we have the opposite situation right now. Now, the Bush administration is saying that because it’s weak, it cannot negotiate. But if you can’t negotiate when you’re strong, because you’re strong, and you can’t negotiate when you’re weak, because you’re weak, that basically means that you’re not interested in negotiations at all.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to read you a clip by Gareth Porter, “Rove Said to Have Received 2003 Iranian Proposal.” And it says that “the identification of Rove as a recipient of the secret Iranian proposal throws new light on the question of who in the Bush administration was aware of the Iranian proposal at the time. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice denied in Congressional testimony [last week] that she had seen the Iranian offer in 2003 and even chastised former State Department, National Security Council and [Central Intelligence Agency] official Flynt Leverett for having failed to bring it to her attention at the time.
“At a Capital Hill conference on U.S.-Iran relations Wednesday, sponsored by the New America Foundation and [your organization, Trita Parsi] NIAC, Leverett responded to Rice’s criticism by saying it was ‘unthinkable that it would not have been brought to her attention’ and [demanding] an apology from her.”
TRITA PARSI: Well, I would agree that it is absolutely unthinkable that a proposal of this importance would not have reached the Secretary of State or at the time the National Security Advisor, particularly mindful of the fact that Flynt Leverett, who was at the NSC at the time, did see it — his wife Hillary Mann, who was also at the NSC, did see it — who had a discussion with Colin Powell about it, according to his testimony at our conference two weeks ago. So I find it highly unlikely that they did not see it. I frankly believe that it’s beyond unlikely that they didn’t see.
But, again, I think it’s partly because of the fact that they’re fearful that if there are going to be any negotiations down the road, not negotiations that they themselves choose to have, but they’re basically forced to have, that they don’t want the result of those negotiations to be compared to what they could have achieved back in 2003.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
What do you negotiate about with someone who wants to destroy Israel and is waiting on the 12th Iman? What psych hospital he should be committed to?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:37 pmHow the f*ck do you “reprimand” the representative of one of the few neutral nations on the planet?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:42 pmWhat does that say about our so called leadershit?
Patricia, Rove just called, he tried dialing your mom’s house, but you’re clogging up the dial up! Your paycheck is in the mail. Both dimes.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:43 pmI am pretty sure we have stated clearly that we won’t talk with them until they suspend all enrichment activity. Since they hadn’t, we shouldn’t talk with them. Iran is pushing for war more and more everyday. It floors me that Iran wants to make war with us so badly. Regrettably, Iran will get its wish shortly if it doesn’t stop all enrichment.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:44 pmSame thing you do with someone who wants to destroy Iran and is waiting for the second coming of Christ.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:44 pmWhat psych hospital he should be committed to?
Comment by Patrick1
The same one you’re in?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:46 pmI want to know what Rogerx2 has to say about this. He’s all gung-ho for us to invade Iran — after diplomacy, of course.
Well…?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:47 pmreprimanding a foreign diplomat? Chimpy you’re doing a heckuva job!
February 26th, 2007 at 4:47 pmNevermind.
Rogerx2, you have not surprised any of us with your ability to carry water for BushCo.
Your kids better be the first on the ground in Iran, because it sure as hell won’t be my sons.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:48 pmWell now, we wouldn’t want to let ANYTHING get in the way of the PNAC agenda with Iran, now would we. /sarcasm
Cheney: “Get away from me boy, you’re stinking up the show”
February 26th, 2007 at 4:49 pmFunny how the people who most want to see Americans come home in flag draped caskets are the same ones who claim to support the troops.
-GSD
February 26th, 2007 at 4:50 pmSame thing you do with someone who wants to destroy Iran and is waiting for the second coming of Christ.
Who would that be?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:50 pm#9 ~ Mistress Z ~ should we rename roger Gunga_Gunga?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:51 pmWhat are we supposed to negotiate with that maniac about?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:51 pmWhat psych hospital he should be committed to?
Comment by Patrick1 — February 26, 2007 @ 4:37 pm
The same one where you sent people who believe a man had to bleed to death in order to forgive all of humanity for a snake having convinced two naked people to eat a piece of fruit…
February 26th, 2007 at 4:52 pmPatrick1
It’s refreshing to see a neocon admit his or her limits. Tell you what, since BushCo and his Republican supporters in Congress do not know how to negotiate with another country with a very different culture and perspective let’s all agree to put some progressives in the highest U.S. elected offices and they can do it. We can always resort to the conservative ‘blow it up strategy’ at any time.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:52 pmRegrettably, Iran will get its wish shortly if it doesn’t stop all enrichment.
Comment by Roger_Roger — February 26, 2007 @ 4:44 pm
By your logic, then Russia and China have a right to start a war with the US if we don’t stop all of our enrichment? Hmmm?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:53 pmAMY GOODMAN: And what did Karl Rove say?
TRITA PARSI: Well, he basically said that it was an intriguing proposal. He first wanted to know if it authentic, and the congressman assured him that it was, according to what the Swiss ambassador had said.
This shows exactly how much power Rove had — and still has in this White House. Don’t ever believe that he’s been demoted.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:53 pmMistress Z ~ should we rename roger Gunga_Gunga?
Comment by RUCerious
It seems appropriate. Make it so. :)
February 26th, 2007 at 4:54 pmshould we rename roger Gunga_Gunga?
Comment by RUCerious
How about Dung_Dung?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:55 pmMan alive, these trolls are stupid.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:55 pmWho would that be?
Comment by Patrick1 — February 26, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
I see that Patrick cannot see a reflection of himself in mirrors either. Just like Head Vampire Cheney.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:56 pmI am all for diplomacy. We have publicly told Iran to stop all enrichment and we will be happy to have open talks. Seems very cut and dry to me. Iran obviously doesn’t want to have talks. They obviously want conflict and war. I can’t say I understand why they want war with us, but war they will get if they don’t stop enrichment ASAP. It is sad that terrorists somehow take control of countries like Iran.
In the end, we still need to deal with this terrorist leader and put an end to his enrichment activity. If they won’t stop on there own, I am sure any sane person would agree we need to stop them.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:58 pmWe have publicly told Iran to stop all enrichment
Comment by Roger_Roger — February 26, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
Wedon’t have the right to tell a soveriegn nation what to do.
If China tells us to stop enrichment, then you think that we’re just supposed to listen?
February 26th, 2007 at 5:04 pmTP, we want higher quality trolls!
These have been out from under their bridges too long, and they’re dried out and flakey.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:04 pmIf they won’t stop on there own, I am sure any sane person would agree we need to stop them.
Comment by Roger_Roger — February 26, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
Au contraire… All the sane folks think we need to stop YOU and the people you support.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:05 pmPresident of the 21st Century Crusade, American President George W Bush
February 26th, 2007 at 5:06 pmRoger_Codger,
What is your mission and purpose here? You aren’t going to be able to turn anyone “around” here to your way of thinking, so what the fu*ck is your point of being here?
Go over to fu*cking Redstate. They are probably more to your “liking” over there.
Ya think?
———————–
It is sad that terrorists somehow take control of countries like Iran.
Comment by Roger_Codger
———————–
Yes Roger,
It is sad that terrorists that Iran Contra created, took control of Iran.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:09 pmWe have publicly told Iran to stop all enrichment and we will be happy to have open talks. Comment by Dung_Dung
Sounds an awful lot the logic used in “testing” for witches – if we dunk you under water for ten minutes and you live, we’ll stop labelling you a witch and let you stay in our community.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:11 pm#28 So we can both agree that Terrorist control Iran. Personally, I feel that we cannot allow them access to nuke weapons. If diplomacy faileds Rachel, what would you do then? Would you walk away and let them have access to nukes? Would you attack? just curious. Looking forward to your answer.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:19 pmA stupid man’s report of what a clever man says can never beaccurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears intosomething he can understand. – Bertrand Russell
February 26th, 2007 at 5:20 pmMistress Z~
February 26th, 2007 at 5:25 pmFycking Wal-Mart Trolls??
We have publicly told Iran to stop all enrichment and we will be happy to have open talks.
Comment by Roger_Roger
1) America helped Iran setup their nuclear program.
2) Iran signed a treaty setup by the USA called the NPT that says clearly that the nuclear technology we gave them is legal and they can use it as long as they dont make weapons with it or give that technology to others who have not signed the NPT.
3) Iran had a revolution to overthrow our puppet we put in place of their elected leader.
4) Iran continues working on their nuclear technology.
5) Now the work of America in Iran has helped it turn into a theocracy with nuclear technology and we want to call for a do-over…..
It seems like we have no right to “TELL” them anything and we should figure out how to undo OUR mistakes from the past.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:25 pmAgain I will recommend this book
“Vice: Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency” by by Lou Dubose and Jake Bernstein
http://www.amazon.com/Vice-Cheney-Hijacking-American-Presidency/dp/1400065763/sr=8-1/qid=1172527035/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-1169790-0575240?ie=UTF8&s=books
They cover this incident on page 186. When asked who made the decision to reject the Iranian request for negotiations, Larry Wilkerson (without missing a beat) said “It was the vice president of the United States”.
(My comment) What a surprise.. This is one scary book.
Zooey, I watched “The Dark Side”. It was really very good. It goes hand in hand with this book, but this book delves so much deeper and covers a lot of years.. I understand the dynamics so much better now and have such a better understanding how we got to this place. One the downside, I am so much more afraid for where we are headed..
I wish EVERY American would read it. There would be SUCH an uproar and cry for charges being filed and impeachment and hopefully worse..
Cheney makes Watergate and Iran Contra look like child’s play.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:27 pmThere is nothing to negotiate with a clown that is waiting on the 12th Iman in some well somewhere. You isolate him and support the resistance movement.
Unfortunately these days the American left calls surrender negotiation. I don’t believe the entire population of the United States can fit on Okinawa.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:28 pmPatrick: “What are we supposed to negotiate with that maniac about?”
I’m sure that the same sentiment is voiced throughout the world regarding our dear leader.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:28 pmThere isn’t much to negotiate with a clown that is trying to unleash T’armeggadahn in some ME nation.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:31 pmYou isolate him and support the resistance movement.
There is nothing to negotiate with a clown that is waiting on the 12th Iman in some well somewhere. You isolate him and support the resistance movement.
Unfortunately these days the American left calls surrender negotiation. I don’t believe the entire population of the United States can fit on Okinawa.
Comment by Patrick1
Science made the fear or other peoples fairy tales irrelevant.
Repeating the mistakes of humanity YET AGAIN after all the past history is there for anyone to read on the Internet is truelly foolish. If we are so damn afraid of nukes then we should be building an undefeatable anti ballistic missle system. Playing in the games of intrigue and war on the backs of the people is an evil that is getting REALLY old. The old thinking must DIE.
Science has shown us the way forwards and it requires alot of work and no war. This is where our energies should be going.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:33 pmNote to all pro attackers….Iran is NOT MONOLITHIC. There are forces in Iran that hate and mistrust America ( our CIA did overthrow their democratically elected govt. in 1953 afterall)…and every time Cheney opens his mouth..these folks gain power…BUT there are MODERATE forces as well..that are pro Modern, and like the American people and culture…( Ahmadinejad did poorly in the last Iranian elections ). All this killing and mayhem in Lebannon and Iraq could have been reduced or avoided if Bush would have sought PEACE and Negotiations,instead of conquest. I hope congress INVESTIGATES this lost opportunity for negotiations with IRAN.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:37 pmMistress Z~
Fycking Wal-Mart Trolls??
Comment by RUCerious
We’re entitled to Pottery Barn trolls, at the very least.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:41 pmRoger x 2,
I would walk away and let them have access to “peaceful” under IAEA supervision of course, enrichment.
Then I would “take it from there”
Not this hardline “no enrichment ever” stance and policy of this administration. Stop enrichment completely or will will take your country over.
What’s to stop India (whom we glorify as our enrichment partners),
What’s to stop them, or Pakistan, or North korea from giving Iran the technology?
We are ALL FOR those countries having enrichment capabilities,(except NK) but not Iran.
Israel doesn’t need enrichment capabilities because WE sold them the bombs they currently have in their arsenal.
No wonder the Iranian President is paranoid and feels threatened.
Pakistan, India and Israel. All of our allies. They have nuclear bombs.
Iran has none. Can a reasonable person NOT feel like they were being threatened by the US and it’s regional allies if even by proxy?
The Iranain President is right in demanding enrichment capabilities. And that is all he ever asked for. Bush says NO.
Know why? Because Iran has been on the PNAC “drawing board” for a long long time.
Iran knows this and they smell a conspiracy between the US and it’s “nuclear partners” in the region.
It is only natural.
No wonder they feel threatened by us. They believe it is some kind of conspiracy no doubt.
And all of that “talk” by the Iranian President, is just talk.
He is trying to keep us from being the “agressor” to his country.
They bel;ieve and rightfully so in my opinion, that there is an unlevel playing field between the US and Israel.
Wouldn’t you be really nervous about this kind of threat to a country you were the President of?
And SAY ANYTHING to make the agressors stand up and take notice that you were not just going to lie down and take it?
The Iranian President deserves a fu*cking medal in my book, for telling the western imperialists and Israel, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
The corporations did the same thing with Hitler in the 1930’s and 40’s. They built Hitler and the region up to the hilt, war profits of course, and then purposefully tore him down.
Then moved on to Korea. Then Viet Nam. The Iran Contra. Then Gulf War I. Now this Gulf War II.
Sadly, this is the ONLY way America knows to keep fiscally afloat.
There has to be a better way.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:43 pmI would walk away and let them have access to “peaceful” under IAEA supervision of course, enrichment.
Then I would “take it from there”
Not this hardline “no enrichment ever” stance and policy of this administration. Stop enrichment completely or will will take your country over.
What’s to stop India (whom we glorify as our enrichment partners),
What’s to stop them, or Pakistan, or North korea from giving Iran the technology?
We are ALL FOR those countries having enrichment capabilities,(except NK) but not Iran.
Israel doesn’t need enrichment capabilities because WE sold them the bombs they currently have in their arsenal.
No wonder the Iranian President is paranoid and feels threatened.
Pakistan, India and Israel. All of our allies. They have nuclear bombs.
Iran has none. Can a reasonable person NOT feel like they were being threatened by the US and it’s regional allies if even by proxy?
The Iranain President is right in demanding enrichment capabilities. And that is all he ever asked for. Bush says NO.
Know why? Because Iran has been on the PNAC “drawing board” for a long long time.
Iran knows this and they smell a conspiracy between the US and it’s “nuclear partners” in the region.
It is only natural.
No wonder they feel threatened by us. They believe it is some kind of conspiracy no doubt.
And all of that “talk” by the Iranian President, is just talk.
He is trying to keep us from being the “agressor” to his country.
They bel;ieve and rightfully so in my opinion, that there is an unlevel playing field between the US and Israel.
Wouldn’t you be really nervous about this kind of threat to a country you were the President of?
And SAY ANYTHING to make the agressors stand up and take notice that you were not just going to lie down and take it?
The Iranian President deserves a fu*cking medal in my book, for telling the western imperialists and Israel, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
The corporations did the same thing with Hitler in the 1930’s and 40’s. They built Hitler and the region up to the hilt, war profits of course, and then purposefully tore him down.
Then moved on to Korea. Then Viet Nam. The Iran Contra. Then Gulf War I. Now this Gulf War II.
Sadly, this is the ONLY way America knows to keep fiscally afloat.
There has to be a better way.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:45 pmI think rogerx2 should be: Gunga Dung
February 26th, 2007 at 5:45 pmrachel rj kinnardi,
Exactly.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:49 pm#42 Rachel,
Basically, you just agreed with me and called the Iranian leadership terrorists that want to hurt us and our allies. Then you went on to say that it is ok for terrorist leaders to have nuke weapons. I guess we can’t argue that any further as I completely disagree with you and so should every single American. You are either insane or you are one of those Hate America people.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:55 pmNope, not one person has agreed with you Roger_Roger.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:00 pmGeez, Gunga’s raising quite a Din today…
February 26th, 2007 at 6:05 pm#45..Iranian leadership has something that most terrorists like al qaeda don’t have…AN ADDRESS. The soviet union had lots of Nukes and wanted to hurt us …but they didn’t use their Nukes on us. Can you guess why??? because they also had an address. To think that Iran with a few feeble nukes will launch an nuclear attack on us or our allies is crazy…won’t happen. They want nukes to protect themselves from preemptive invaders like those next door in Iraq.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:06 pmWe’re entitled to Pottery Barn trolls, at the very least.
Comment by Zooey —
At least Cost Plus trolls, damn it!
February 26th, 2007 at 6:06 pm#43 ~ great compromise~
February 26th, 2007 at 6:07 pmshould we rename roger Gunga_Gunga?
Comment by RUCerious
Maybe if he repeats it, he’ll reach full conciousness. No wait, that’s “Goonga-Galoonga.” The Dalai Lama told me when I caddied for him.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:11 pmBasically, you just agreed with me and called the Iranian leadership terrorists that want to hurt us and our allies.
Comment by Roger_Codger
——————————————
I doubt you and I will EVER agree on anything. And that is PERFECTLY fine with me and for this reason.
You are a NeoCon.
Plain and simple.
Your “natural” priorities of being human are mixed up.
I don;t want anything to do with you. And neither does the MAJORITY of Americans.
Now, all we need is a good Democratic or Independent President in Chief, and then “we” will REALLY be able to say, ” We live in America and are American citizens” once again.
As it is now, I am ASHAMED to say I am an American with what this President has done to our country, yours and mine.
Is this any way for a *cough (Sole Remaining SuperPower) to behave in a worldwide community of “one”?
No wonder 90% of the world HATES us!
And you are a contributor!
Have a nice life.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:15 pmAt least Cost Plus trolls, damn it!
Comment by RUCerious
My expectations may have been too high.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:18 pm“…To have security against atomic bombs and against the other biological weapons, we have to prevent war, for if we cannot prevent war every nation will use every means that is at their disposal; and in spite of all promises they make, they will do it.”
…”At the same time, so long as war is not prevented, all the governments of the nations have to prepare for war, and if you have to prepare for war, then you are in a state where you cannot abolish war.”
- Albert Einstein
February 26th, 2007 at 6:19 pm…and if you have to prepare for war, then you are in a state where you cannot abolish war.†– Albert Einstein
Comment by Larry from C — February 26, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
another catch-22… poor yosarian… we are all yosarian now…
February 26th, 2007 at 6:25 pmHiya Patsy and Roger_Dung_For_Brains,
Here at TP, public display of the DSV (Dark Stain of Valor) doesn’t get much mileage any more. I recommend you grab yourself some of these new Patriot Pampies. It can only help, right?
Pissing Our Pants
(sung to the tune of “Staying Aliveâ€)
Well, you can tell by the way I stain my pants
I’m a patriot: just read my rants
Muslims make me want to hiss, when they come at me
I start to piss
And now it’s airtight, it’s inside
I have hung onto my pride
We just want to all be safe
But when I walk I tend to chafe
When you are so frightened the tension is quite heightened
You’re pissing your pants, pissing your pants
Feel the bladder leakin’, everybody freakin’
And we’re pissing our pants, pissing our pants
Ah, ha, ha, ha, pissing our pants, pissing our pants
Ah, ha, ha, ha, pissing our pants…
Well now, I get moist and I get dry
Sometimes in back I “bake a pieâ€
My body sometimes like to twist
I’m leakin’ from every orifice
And now it’s airtight, it’s inside
I have hung onto my pride
We just want to all be safe
But when I walk I tend to chafe
Saw a brown person. Somebody help me.
Somebody help me, yeah
Saw a brown person. Somebody help me.
Somebody help me, yea. Pissing my pants.
Well, you can tell by the way I stain my pants
I’m a patriot: just read my rants
Muslims make me want to hiss, when they come at me
I start to piss
And now it’s airtight, it’s inside
I have hung onto my pride
We just want to all be safe
But when I walk I tend to chafe
When you are so frightened the tension is quite heightened
You’re pissing your pants, pissing your pants
Feel the bladder leakin’, everybody freakin’
And we’re pissing our pants, pissing our pants
Ah, ha, ha, ha, pissing our pants, pissing our pants
Ah, ha, ha, ha, pissing our pants…
Saw a brown person. Somebody help me.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:30 pmSomebody help me, yeah
Saw a brown person. Somebody help me.
Somebody help me, yeah. Pissing my pants.
SO MUCH FOR THEIR FALSE PRETENSE OF DESIRING ‘DIPLOMACY’, HUH?
February 26th, 2007 at 6:30 pm“This topic brings me to that worst outcrop of the herd nature, the military system, which I abhor. That a man can take pleasure in marching in formation to the strains of a band is enough to make me despise him. He has only been given his big brain by mistake; a backbone was all he needed. This plague-spot of civilisation ought to be abolished with all possible speed.”
“…I would rather be hacked in pieces than take part in such an abominable business.”
- Albert Einstein
February 26th, 2007 at 6:34 pm56-
stonehinge,
Now THAT was funny!
LMAO ROTFL
Outta the park belly laughing here!!
hahaha!
Copy/Paste/Save I am on that one! Excellent.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:37 pmAs recently as Jan 2005 Halliburton sold key components for a nuclear reactor to an Iranian oil development company.
It was Halliburton’s secret sale of centrifuges to Iran that helped get the uranium enrichment program off the ground, according to a three-year investigation that includes interviews conducted with more than a dozen current and former Halliburton employees.
If the U.S. ends up engaged in a war with Iran in the future, Cheney and Halliburton will bear the brunt of the blame.

February 26th, 2007 at 6:41 pmThousands of pages of documents obtained by various federal agencies show how Halliburton’s business dealings in Iran helped fund terrorist activities there—including the country’s nuclear enrichment program.
stonehinge — Classic!
February 26th, 2007 at 6:42 pmThe US was fully supporting a Nuclear reactor program for Iran….when the Shah ruled the country.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:48 pmYou of course don’t know the difference between the Shah and the Mullahs? And you have proof that we were supporting nuclear reactor because the Shah never asked for one because Iran has enough oil to supply its energy needs.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:52 pmYeah, because years of facts aren’t proof. You have to shove Patrick!’s face in it like a dop nose in a pile of sh!t before he gets it, then like some dumb dogs, he still might not get it and maybe even eat it.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:56 pmYou of course don’t know the difference between the Shah and the Mullahs? And you have proof that we were supporting nuclear reactor because the Shah never asked for one because Iran has enough oil to supply its energy needs.
Comment by Patrick1
http://www.worldpoliticswatch.com/article.aspx?id=524
February 26th, 2007 at 6:59 pmComment by Spudge_Boy
Exactly
February 26th, 2007 at 6:59 pmIt doesn’t say anything about the U.S. supporting it. Nor does it say that he ever got anywhere, most likely because of Iraq he was into it. Seems he probably believed more about Saddam than Joe Wilson did.
February 26th, 2007 at 7:07 pmThe Tehran Nuclear Research Center was established in 1959.US supplied 5 megawatt nuclear research reactor. The Shah declared in 1974 ” Petroleum is a nobel material, much too valuable to burn.”
February 26th, 2007 at 7:09 pmMY point is this…where would we now be if the Shah had a bunch of working reactors dripping with plutonium…and was THEN overthrown.
And you have proof that we were supporting nuclear reactor because the Shah never asked for one because Iran has enough oil to supply its energy needs.
Comment by Patrick1 — February 26, 2007 @ 6:52 pm
Methinks our new resident troll is horribly misinformed, and not too bright to boot. Let’s take a look at history:
After balking initially, President Gerald R. Ford signed a directive in 1976 offering Tehran the chance to buy and operate a U.S.-built reprocessing facility for extracting plutonium from nuclear reactor fuel. The deal was for a complete “nuclear fuel cycle” — reactors powered by and regenerating fissile materials on a self-sustaining basis.
Past Arguments Don’t Square With Current Iran Policy
Check this other website for a timeline on Iran’s nuclear program:
March 1974 The Shah announces that Iran intends to generate 23,000MWe at nuclear power plants “as soon as possible.” The first reactor in Bushehr nearly completed by 1978.
11 April 1974 US State Department says the United States considers co-operation with Iran in the field of nuclear energy as an alternative means for energy production to be a suitable area for joint collaboration and co-operation. The majority of reactors are to be built by the United States.
Chronology of Iran’s Nuclear Programme
Keep denying reality, Patrick1…
February 26th, 2007 at 7:20 pmIt should be clear by now to all posters that no amount of facts, links or logic will even begin to penetrate the thick wall of bone protecting Patrick’s excuse for a brain. Why bother? He’s just here to vomit out Brent Bozelle’s or Matt Drudge’s latest talking points. Just pat him on his little head and move on.
February 26th, 2007 at 7:28 pmExcellent links and commentary as usual Gregor Samsa. I enjoy yours, as many other’s posts on this web log. Here’s one for you too gregor Samsa.
http://www.newsmine.org
February 26th, 2007 at 7:34 pmOver 10,000 Articles and Documents For Uncovering and Exposing.
“Yeah, because years of facts aren’t proof. You have to shove Patrick!’s face in it like a drop nose in a pile of sh!t before he gets it, then like some dumb dogs, he still might not get it and maybe even eat it.”
In Patrick1’s case, I think he might even like eating it. It takes a really special person who is willing to make a fool of himself when all the facts are against you. Over and over and over again.
February 26th, 2007 at 7:39 pmGod!!! tough critics on this site. There’s a big difference between ignorance and stupidity. Hopefully Patrick will take this opportunity to enlighten himself.
February 26th, 2007 at 7:46 pm[...] White House ‘Reprimanded Swiss Ambassador’ For Delivering 2003 Iranian Offer For Negotiations [...]
February 26th, 2007 at 7:58 pmIn the USA, approximately 70% of the cost of a nuclear facility goes to the legal profession. This makes the cost of nuclear power exceed that of conventional means where only 15% of the cost goes to legal coffers. Since lawyers do have as much sway in Arab countries, the return on petroleum is much greater than the expense for an equivalent amount of energy through nuclear means.
February 26th, 2007 at 7:58 pm“It takes a really special person who is willing to make a fool of himself when all the facts are against you. Over and over and over again.”
I think this is something similar to decompression sickness, as it occurs when you first bring these benighted fools into the light of day. Imagine what it must be like trying to make a transition from the “fact-free” realm of Limbaugh and O’Reilly to a place like TP where things like the historical record actually matter. It’s tough…and few recover. Look how long poor Exley has been around…still mewling about derogation and the glorious reign of Pinochet.
Gregor, nice post on the timeline. Here’s an interesting viewpoint on how American foreign policy mimics the practices of the mafia, and it’s Chomsky no less.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/48494/
February 26th, 2007 at 8:00 pmBluedog,
I reply -trying to stay away from flame wars- mainly for the benefit of other posters, not for the trolls. They are truly a waste of time. The newest one is no exception. He is truly dense. For example:
It doesn’t say anything about the U.S. supporting it.
Comment by Patrick1 — February 26, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
Right, the article says nothing about the US supporting Iran’s nuclear program, except for the mention of the two nuclear cooperation agreements that the US signed with that country. Other than that, no support at all. ::snark::
February 26th, 2007 at 8:03 pmStonehenge, Rachel,
Thanks for the kind words ;-)
February 26th, 2007 at 8:04 pmThe Shah wanted a nuclear power program,because he was looking into the FUTURE. Ironic, since the future is the main problem with Nuclear Power, as in … who’s gonna guard all that Waste for the next million years???
February 26th, 2007 at 8:15 pmActually, badger, it was Darth Cheney that over-ruled proposals to build nuclear power plants with on-site recycling of the “spent” fuel. With that kind of design, the waste problem is reduced by over 90%. It’s time to go back and take another look at these kinds of ideas and stop this mindless adventurism in the ME.
February 26th, 2007 at 8:50 pmDon’t anyone of you be surprised, you should know what the PNAC-AEI gang want.
February 27th, 2007 at 5:09 amThe ‘problem’ with Iran is not nuclear weapons; it’s oil trading on a petroeuro marker.
And by the way, don’t feed the trolls, it just makes them cranky.
February 27th, 2007 at 9:25 amWhy do you support a terrorist regime building nuke weapons and energy? We can argue all we want about the side points, but how can anyone in good faith say that the Terrorist leaders of Iran should be able to possess nuke weapons and energy? Honestly, I want to know.
February 27th, 2007 at 10:01 amRoger x 2,
I would walk away and let them have access to “peaceful†under IAEA supervision of course, enrichment.
Then I would “take it from thereâ€
Not this hardline “no enrichment ever†stance and policy of this administration. Stop enrichment completely or will will take your country over.
What’s to stop India (whom we glorify as our enrichment partners),
What’s to stop them, or Pakistan, or North korea from giving Iran the technology?
We are ALL FOR those countries having enrichment capabilities,(except NK) but not Iran.
Israel doesn’t need enrichment capabilities because WE sold them the bombs they currently have in their arsenal.
No wonder the Iranian President is paranoid and feels threatened.
Pakistan, India and Israel. All of our allies. They have nuclear bombs.
Iran has none. Can a reasonable person NOT feel like they were being threatened by the US and it’s regional allies if even by proxy?
The Iranain President is right in demanding enrichment capabilities. And that is all he ever asked for. Bush says NO.
Know why? Because Iran has been on the PNAC “drawing board†for a long long time.
Iran knows this and they smell a conspiracy between the US and it’s “nuclear partners†in the region.
It is only natural.
No wonder they feel threatened by us. They believe it is some kind of conspiracy no doubt.
And all of that “talk†by the Iranian President, is just talk.
He is trying to keep us from being the “agressor†to his country.
They bel;ieve and rightfully so in my opinion, that there is an unlevel playing field between the US and Israel.
Wouldn’t you be really nervous about this kind of threat to a country you were the President of?
And SAY ANYTHING to make the agressors stand up and take notice that you were not just going to lie down and take it?
The Iranian President deserves a fu*cking medal in my book, for telling the western imperialists and Israel, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
The corporations did the same thing with Hitler in the 1930’s and 40’s. They built Hitler and the region up to the hilt, war profits of course, and then purposefully tore him down.
Then moved on to Korea. Then Viet Nam. The Iran Contra. Then Gulf War I. Now this Gulf War II.
Sadly, this is the ONLY way America knows to keep fiscally afloat.
There has to be a better way.
February 27th, 2007 at 10:39 amI’m still waiting to see the entire uncropped documents that are in question. The ones that Newsweek provided do not look like a proposal from Iran, but a policy document that would have been drawn up at the State Department.
Anyone who reads the document for themselves will see that this does not look like a proposal from Iran.
February 27th, 2007 at 12:14 pmAmbassador Reprimanded For Delivering 2003 Iranian Offer…
The Swiss ambassador from the U.S. was reprimanded by Cheney for submitting a 2003 Iranian offer. Clearly Cheney and the hard liners didn’t and don’t want a peaceful settlement….
February 27th, 2007 at 3:54 pmWow… does Condi actually read anything that comes to her desk. Didn’t she forget that she read the report “Bin Laden Determine to Attack within the U.S.” and didn’t she forget that she had an urgent meeting regarding national security with Richard Clarke and George Tenet? Now she doesn’t remember seeing any proposal for Diplomatic talks with Iran? You’ve got to be kidding me. Scooter Libby doesn’t remember partaking in treason, but he does remember discussing the Miami Dolphins. How did we let our nation get this bad?
Parsi put it perfectly: By saying we are too strong of a nation to hold talks with Iran in 2003 and in 2006 we are too weak to hold talks with Iran really just states that we DON’T WANT to talk with them. It seems the administration is trying to build tensions between nations rather than relieve them. Why do these radicals all believe that they have the “right” cause to fight [die] for? Wes Clarke even said that a troop surge will help the Shia and empower Iran, and Bush is playing right into it. Hell, he’s controlling it. If he really is trying to increase tensions between the U.S. and Iran, it really makes the claim that Iraq was just a “practice run” more plausible, and puts our nation in much more of a risk, because we would be going at it alone this time.
Remember those diplomatic talks with North Korea regarding….what was it again… oh yeah the Nuclear program. Didn’t Donald Rumsfeld help with the sale of those nuclear reactors to North Korea when he worked with ABB (Here? Why is it that people still listen to neo-conservative politicians when it comes to handling foreign policy. They are going to get thousands upon thousands of more people killed.
I love to see people’s real colors shine through though. A preemptive invasion against Iraq in ‘03, a possible showdown with Iran in ‘07 all for what?
“What do you negotiate about with someone who wants to destroy Israel and is waiting on the 12th Iman? What psych hospital he should be committed to?”
Comment by Patrick1 — February 26, 2007 @ 4:37 pm
Are you serious? Didn’t you learn anything from Iraq? And what business is it of ours to attack Iran because they may or may not attack Israel? Why is that our obligation? The bottom line would be the same no matter what the reason. Thousands upon thousands of people would die. Diplomacy doesn’t hurt people, bombs do. Diplomatic talks should always be the first option. If the leaders of nations are willing to talk with the U.S. we should listen.
“I am pretty sure we have stated clearly that we won’t talk with them until they suspend all enrichment activity. Since they hadn’t, we shouldn’t talk with them. Iran is pushing for war more and more everyday. It floors me that Iran wants to make war with us so badly. Regrettably, Iran will get its wish shortly if it doesn’t stop all enrichment.”
Comment by Roger_Roger — February 26, 2007 @ 4:44 pm
Let me see if I understand your point correctly. We should not talk with Iran because they want to go to war with us. By your logic, it would make sense to not talk with them (which could avoid a war), but to ignore them and go to war. If war is what they want, then you’d be giving into them. You’d be so willing to sacrifice thousands upon thousands of more lives for this cause (”because they won’t stop enrichment”). Why not try to save more lives and promote diplomacy instead of standing by this cause. Again….Diplomacy doesn’t hurt people, bombs do.
For everybody else who is scared of nuclear enrichment and weapons development, don’t forget that the U.S. is the only nation that used nuclear weapons (2) against another nation. We hold 20,000+ nuclear weapons in our arsenal. We are the bullies. Maybe we should step back for a few minutes and talk with the leaders from around the globe. Now is the time for diplomacy, not war. We should promote peaceful talks before we all end up dead. Let’s all learn from our past mistakes. Hiroshima, Vietnam, the Cold War, oh yeah and let’s not forget 9/11, because it seems like we all forgot what happend that day. Bin Laden is still out there and to quote the president “I I I just don’t spend that much time thinkin’ ’bout him anymore.” Must be nice to not care about 3,000 murdered American’s because your cause is to liberate the Iraqi people. Thank you Mr. President.
Politics, foreign relations, diplomacy, war; these are all things that outline that macho-ist attitude that exists in our world. It is nothing more than a fight between who is right and who is wrong. Why do we [humans] do this to one another? Why do we allow these morons to run our nations? Why do we allow them to build tensions between one another instead of working with one another? Why are so many people fighting and dying for these causes? Maybe it is just human nature. Maybe we are all encoded to manipulate, hate, and destroy one another.
February 27th, 2007 at 6:04 pmI love how people like Roger always fall back to the simplistic question, “why do you hate America?” or “Why do you support the terrorists?” without trying to see why Iran might be threatened by us. They refuse to look deeper into the implications of our foreign policy and ask why people might hate us, in favor of simplistic answers given by GOP talking points from the administration that say they hate us for our freedoms.
Enrichment for peaceful purposes under the supervision of the IAEA is preferred. what part of that can’t you get?
February 27th, 2007 at 6:38 pmThere is nothing to negotiate with a clown that is waiting on the 12th Iman in some well somewhere. You isolate him and support the resistance movement.
Who exactly do you think rules Iran? Hint: It isn’t the figurehead nutball president.
February 27th, 2007 at 6:59 pmHey Patrick is waiting for the 12th Imam any crazier than waiting for some guy who supposedly rose from the dead to come back to earth?
What kind of psychosis is that? Oh, I forgot, it’s dominionist bullshit just like creationism and intelligent design.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:25 pmPee Public Pee Public Pissing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 8:53 pm