Rice determined not to give ground over incentives to Iran
02-May-2008 (4 comments)

LONDON, May 2 (AFP) May 02, 2008 -- US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Thursday she was determined not to give ground over a package of "incentives" that the West has offered up to convince Iran to give up its nuclear programme. The top US diplomat, who arrived in London for talks on Friday on Iran, the Middle East peace process and Kosovo, insisted on the need to "fully" implement United Nations sanctions levied on Tehran. "We will take a look again at what we have offered the Iranians," she told journalists on the plane en route to Britain.

recommended by almo5000



As usual they don't want to give but only receive!!

by Anonymous-2 (not verified) on

The U.S. has no interest in giving Iran anything. All this talk is b.s. The U.S. and Israel follow the same pattern.

Has Israel given anything to the Palestinians during the past 60 years with all of these peace talks? No!! And they have no intention of giving anything.

In fact the other day, there was an interview with one of the top Israeli IDF officers about the Golan Heights and Syria. Israel demands recognition from Syria and then they will think about giving back the Golan Heights!! Thinking, maybe yes, and most probably no...... U.S. is the same. And Iran is no fool, they have read their hands by now.

Bush-Cheney Israel Disinformation Campaign to Justify an Attack on Iran


Read the full article - this is just an excerpt:

The Bush administration and Israeli government appear to be operating a joint disinformation campaign, whose objective is to establish a media based alternative reality from which to accuse Syria/Iran of developing nuclear weapons with help from North Korea, by using a real event combined with planted stories establishing a defining narrative. This accusation in turn is augmented with stories about Iranian sponsored "Special Groups killing US troops in Iraq" and purported naval incidents the Persian Gulf, creating self-reinforcing, media based crisis.

The immediate purpose of this disinformation campaign is apparently to help justify the planned US attack on a wide range of Iranian industrial and military targets. And, as in the Israeli attacks on Lebanon, the objective is to swiftly inflict substantial damage to the national infrastructure of Iran, followed by an abrupt cessation of attacks and a call for a cease-fire to prevent substantial Iranian retaliation. Again, as in the Israeli attacks on Lebanon, the US likely will resist calls for a cessation of the attacks until a significant portion of the Iranian target set has been addressed, then it will accept calls for a cease-fire and demand Iran do the same.

Any subsequent attacks by Iran would probably be characterized by the US as Iranian aggression, further justifying US follow-up attacks on remaining Iranian assets as defensive measures. The transparent duplicity of such US actions and claims is not a problem because US corporate media is prepared to report repeatedly the administration's claims with little or no criticism or mention of alternative assessments. In other words, subjecting its audience to blatant propaganda masquerading as journalism, which is effective as it is because of US corporate media's quantitative monopoly on information provided the public.

As far as can be determined, no credible or even plausible evidence for any of these claims has been presented by the Bush administration, let alone by any independent verification of such claims. Instead, in the pattern similar to the disinformation campaign before the invasion of Iraq, questions about these claims, when raised at all, are ignored or "answered" with repeated or additional claims. Essentially this disinformation campaign, as all such campaigns, is an elaborate set of lies to deceive an enemy, in this case the Unites States Congress and the American people, in pursuit of Bush administration secret policy objectives for the benefit of a foreign government.

Campaign's Origin

The origins of this disinformation campaign was the the Bush administration's appreciation in the late summer of 2007 that the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) subsequently released in November 2007 would undermine its attempts to claim Iran was developing nuclear weapons, the then primary justification for an attack on Iran. When it became clear to the Bush administration that the intelligence community would issue the 11/7/07 NIE, completely undermining the administration's claims of Iranian nuclear weapons development, they apparently decided, instead of accepting this judgment or objecting to it within official channels, that an alternative foundation needed to be established for its planned attack on Iran. This alternative would bypass not only the US intelligence community's collective assessments, but also the judgments of the United States' Joint Chiefs of Staff military command.............................................................................


Re: Rice and carrot-and-stick approach

by // (not verified) on

I think the carrot is stick are not thick enough for her to work!!!! They can just massage her "choochools"!!!


Rice and carrot-and-stick approach

by Mehdi on

The problem Rice is running into is that she is trying to use the carrot-and-stick approach the same way she herself uses carrot-and-stick. That doesn't work for everyone:-))


Realy, why don't they ask blood sucker to .....

by . (not verified) on

Why the so called P5+1 does not ask blood suckers from Tel Aviv to negotiate directly rather than the blood suckers ordering the so called P5+1 to make offers to Iran?