Iran - This is What George W. Bush Would Bomb (VIDEO)

Never has a more irresponsible idea been debated, but sources believe Bush might want to do it. This video show the beautiful country called Iran, that the U.S. threatens.

(SALEM, Ore.) - Don't put it past George W. Bush to do a quick lateral move and set our country up for an attack on Iran. There is no way he would betray the truth of what they are actually considering at this point; that would not be a good surprise maneuver if they gave it away now.

The Jerusalem Post broke the news Tuesday morning that an Army Radio report exposed George W. Bush's intention to attack Iran in his final months in office, something the White House later denied. (see: Jerusalem Post: White House denies Iran attack report)

The Jerusalem Post quoted the Army Radio report, "according to assessments in Israel, the recent turmoil in Lebanon, where Hizbullah has established de facto control of the country, was advancing an American attack."

The official is reported as saying that Bush considered Hizbullah's show of strength evidence of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's growing influence. In Bush's view, the official said, "the disease must be treated - not its symptoms."

I looked into it, and learned that there is no disease; there are just people, opposing politics, and a lame duck U.S. President who we can not trust to remain cool headed during his remaining term as our national leader.

He has had little to no regard so far for our Americans forces deployed to war for tour after tour. There are by some estimates, 300,000 U.S. veterans who suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and last week a VA administrator told her staff to "stop diagnosing PTSD" cases because the patients were costing the federal government too much money. (see: VA Busted Again Over Poor Diagnosis and Mistreatment of PTSD Vets)

How could our military endure another war? The struggle to bring any kind of solution to the war in Afghanistan is compromised by our huge presence in Iraq, a country that Bush is still implying had something to do with the attacks on September 11th 2001, another complete fabrication but he'll keep repeating it and suggesting it as he did in a recent interview with NBC Bureau Chief Richard Engel, one of the most distinguished and knowledgeable reporters in the world, particularly with regard to Middle East affairs. (see: White House complains about Bush interview)

The people of Iran are very westernized in many ways, as I have learned through conversations with MySpace friends, which is an option for anyone who wants to take the time to do the same thing. I have found women in Iran in particular, to be very receptive toward providing information about what it is like to live there, and how they feel about the United States.

Not one of the people in Iran that I have discussed the situation with, dislike Americans. To the contrary, there are many similarities in style and music and many Americans are of Iranian descent. Over the years a large number of students from Iran have come to the U.S. to go to college and many stay here.

I asked one young professional woman in Tehran, the MySpace pen pal who provided the photos for the video below, what her view of the U.S. was. I also asked what goes through her mind when she considers that a war could actually take place between our countries if certain American "chickenhawk" politicians have their way. My friend who goes by the name of Roya, had this to say:

"I hope problems will be solve(d) by discussing too but the world leaders sound more crazy than I expect to me. I grew up in war since age 4, 5 for 8 years and all the air attack sirens and chemical bomb threats and southern immigrants moving to Tehran who had lost everything in life was scary! Can't imagine a new one again."

The White House on Tuesday afternoon dismissed the Army Radio story, but they took the time to say they remain opposed to Iran's ambitions to obtain "a nuclear weapon."

"To that end, we are working to bring tough diplomatic and economic pressure on the Iranians to get them to change their behavior and to halt their uranium enrichment program," the White House statement read.

Over and over again, Iran has stated that it is not pursuing a nuclear weapons program. But the American politicians like Bush, echoed by the parroting FOX News network and the other far-right mouthpieces on AM radio, keep repeating that Iran does want a nuclear weapon. It is amazing how far Bush is able to pull the wool over people's eyes and misdirect our fellow countrymen into believing fabrications that are hatched in the Oval Office.

"Congress has the power to stop him," the group True Majority stated Tuesday. There is a resolution already in the Senate called S. Res. 356. They call it a straightforward and simple resolution, "A resolution affirming that any offensive military action taken against Iran must be explicitly approved by Congress before such action may be initiated."

The group is urging people to tell their Senator to support and fight for S. Res 356: (see: TrueMajority.org)

They say today's story is just the latest to discuss the increasingly belligerent rhetoric of the Bush administration towards Iran.

Just last week, President Bush compared anyone who seeks to negotiate with Iran to those who appeased the Nazis prior to World War II.

Senator Prescott Bush

That is crazy talk in the opinion of many; and ironic considering the number of adaptations of Bush with Hitler's mustache that are available in places like Google Images. They are sad and they are rampant and while Bush is obviously not a Nazi, he does share a great many characteristics with Adolph Hitler when you get right down to it, starting with removing the rights of his countrymen and injecting the federal government into our schools for the first time in U.S. history.

It seems like a highly hypocritical statement for any member of the Bush family to call someone else out for having "appeased the Nazis," considering that the President's own grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany,the Guardian UK reported September 25th 2004. (see: How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power)

"The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism." Many other sources have reported the same information.

I could go on, but perhaps these points of the story can better be addressed and discussed in the comment section below.

Iran's President Ahmadinejad

The point is that Iran's President tried to communicate to Americans while he was here several months ago, that he does not deny the plight of the Jewish people under the Third Reich, but he recognizes the tragedy of Nazi Germany for all the millions of civilians killed who were and were not Jewish. He does not or at least did not, claim that the Holocaust never happened, as so many agencies like FOX and Rush Limbaugh repeat over and over, that he did.

It seems some recent developments could absolutely be the sign of an upcoming surprise from the Bush Administration over their policy toward Iran. The Navy's 4th Fleet was reactivated in April, (see:U.S. Navy Announces Re-Establishment of U.S. Fourth Fleet) there has been constant posturing over Iran and accusations lobbed on the country which it denies; Iran has stated repeatedly that their only nuclear ambitions are to help supply power for their own nation.

Ilya Sheyman, Online Organizer with TrueMajority.org, said, "We only have a few months until our long national nightmare of the Bush Administration comes to an end. But, it is abundantly clear that they intend on going out with a bang. It's time for the Congress to embrace its role as a co-equal branch of government and stop them before it is too late."

The images in the video below were made available to me by the MySpace friend in Tehran, Iran that I mentioned earlier in the story, who spent a great deal of time assembling this breathtaking collection of photos of Iran that range from sparkling blue tropical water, to arid desert, to brilliant landscapes and dramatic mountains and winter wonderlands.

I must admit that I had no idea what this place looked like, and I also did not know until recently, the history that has led our nations to this point of having such bitter feeling s with Iran. What I learned is that in short; the United States and Great Britain overthrew Iran's government in the early 50's, specifically because Iran wanted to be paid the price for their oil that the U.K. and the U.S. agreed to, but would not pay despite all political and diplomatic protests from Iran's government. (see: Warmongers, Chickenhawks, FOX News and Iran

Our then-government under Eisenhower, teamed up with the British SAS and overthrew Iran's first Democratically elected President not because he was a bad guy, but because he stood up to the British Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, trying to block them from taking Iran's oil at a rate of profit that was never agreed upon. That's it, just straight and pure greed, once again, based over oil, once again.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

rewilding LA: Matilija Dam History and Ecosystems

One Killed and Two Injured in Shooting Near South Salem High School

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Gary December 5, 2008 1:24 am (Pacific time)

American can build a better bomb. We've always been very creative at weaponry.

Erin July 10, 2008 6:57 pm (Pacific time)

I am only newly informed on what is going on with Iran. My comments are purely based on how I feel, not some statistic, or recently read internet article. I beleive that war is completely wrong, I beleive citing in any way war and God in the same sentence is a horrible hypocricy. It reminds me of Le Deus Volt, and the times of the Crusades when people used God as a means to justify ivasion, and senseless murder. I feel like we go there to "reclaim what is ours". Our politicians are seemingly driven by many opinions of the few, which may be driven by their own agendas. I love this country, and I am an Army brat, and the grand daughter of two very honorable comabat vets of WWII. I very much appreciate what those men and all vets have done for this country since it's birth. But to yet again, invade another country when we are still are trying to figure out how to get out of Iraq is huge folly. Regardless of the situation in Iran, we are invading these people's homes. We are killing innocent people... We are setting an example of what we believe is "democracy" These people can not obtain opinions on our culture, they do not live here. They do not see we are a proud, commpassionate people. They only see men and women in uniform invading their country, bombing their homes and businesses, killing their loved ones, destroying their country... We as American's can not assume that what our goverment and media tells us is absolute truth, I feel thatas humans we need to recognize the reasoning for countries in the Middle East supporting terrorism. Are they doing it because they hate Americans? Or because we decide who get's to retain national soverignity of these countries and how their government is layed out? Is it because they disagree with western ideals and lifestyles, or is it because we impose ourselves on these people? How would we feel if the same was done to us?

preacher May 24, 2008 8:26 pm (Pacific time)

Sounds like we have some tree huggers. We need to let the goverment drop a nuke and Iran and Iraq will be O.K. War, lives will be lost but the tree huggers scream when we are attacked but we are not to fight back. Cowards, who cares about beauty when the people would stab you in the back. Matt J. WMD's were found, but the media said none so the people believe that there were none. Steve S. get real you are the traitor as most of our movie actors are. full of krap and do not need to breath our air because you and the like will destory this great country from within. Lord, forgive them for they no not what they do.

Bullfrog May 24, 2008 6:01 pm (Pacific time)

Vic I carry 24/7 and "not" because of people like you. Henry Ruark thank you for your kind words. Have a grand Memorial Day, even you Vic. Hopefully in time you will come to appreciate your freedom and how you got it and how it is maintained. How much longer we will have it is anyone's guess, but when you hear those talk about creating more gun laws, then be skeptical.

Scott Mills May 24, 2008 8:14 am (Pacific time)

When (not "if", unfortunately) Iran is attacked by Israel, and if our military gets involved it will be done like we did in Bosnia, just via air attacks on specific infrastructure and military installations. I really doubt troops, other than special tactical units, would be used. I hope this does not take place, but it sure seems we are sliding towards that scenario. I also don't think our troops would be out rallying for us to attack Iran either, but I also would find it difficult to believe that they don't want Iran to stop providing arms and supplies to kill them either. No brainer?

Henry Ruark May 23, 2008 3:58 pm (Pacific time)

Bullfrog et al: Your calm and informative response really appreciated, since it honors dialog here as it should. Re your preparation and esp. your life experience,including family background, that for me qualifies you to speak as you do --and helps explain very well why, too. That's reality here for all of us, I believe. Happens I was on way to War II with combat-headed outfit when snatched from train and resent to hq, where captured as photo specialist since technically/physically not qualified overseas...and I honestly thank the Lord I never got there. Sincerely-meant, as solid appreciation for your combat time and what it must mean to you. Still disagree re Iran-hit, and believe others informing on good reasons-why --but for us, thanks for your insights and your kind response, too.

Vic May 23, 2008 10:00 am (Pacific time)

Bullfrog...I am not anti-veteran, I am against THIS war and the fact that we were lied into it..remember the WMDs ? And yes, invading someones country to get mythical weapons that didnt exist and then killing the people who resist, is MURDER...I dont care what kind of uniform or cheap assed excuse you have. If an Iraqi kicks in YOUR door and terrifies your kids and rough up and arrest your family and then you kill them, that is not murder, is it? That is self defense. Only a racist sociopath would say that Iraqis do not have that right.Iraqis who kill invaders and occupiers and MURDERERS have a right to do so. Good luck justifying your bloodlust and your genocidal tendencies. People like you are the reason I carry a gun.

Sgt Steve Slaughter May 23, 2008 9:37 am (Pacific time)

There are really no combat vets to speak of who are rallying for a war in Iran. I would question them and be skeptical if they even fought in Iraq. If they did, and they think we need to go after Iran when they have already been through this, they they are twisted and without credibility

Bullfrog May 23, 2008 8:33 am (Pacific time)

My below comment to Vic was based on my observations of his earlier postings (other articles) that I found to be incredibly anti-veteran, and also that he had stated previously that he was not a veteran. I am a recently returned combat veteran (there is a big difference between being in a combat zone and being involved in combat, by the way) and I find that generally the most misinformed people are usually the most passionate in their comments about things they know nothing of. My experience, practical and academic, are not only comprehensive, but also involve evaluating over time. When you put close friends in body bags, many who were killed by munitions made by a belligerant country, be aware that we combat veterans have very little sympathy for that country. In addition when someone addresses us combat veterans as murderers, well, we don't appreciate that much either. To ask him to provide some sources is a very reasonable request, but I assure you I know what the real truth is, I have lived it. In addition you made some statement that I asked whether he killed as a soldier. Re-read what I posted and you will see that that was not written. Thank you. P.S. I grew up in a family that included several military historians that at an earlier age helped "lead me to the light" on an "idealistic level." My first degree was in Philosophy, so I am quite familiar with your reference to Plato on both an academic as well as a practical level, metaphysically speaking.

Henry Ruark May 22, 2008 3:16 pm (Pacific time)

Bull: This one to you personally, between you-and-: Your last to Vic redolent of precisely the kind of personal attack and denigrating words to which neocon denial nearly always forced, when all else fails... Yours re Vic-as-vet is dead proof (NO PUN !) of precisely that approach; it has no fair reference here, except to raise irrelevant issue entirely intended to make him seem unpatriotic via simple manipulation of our mutual English-language background. His military record (read: whether or not he killed as soldier) surely uncalled for here as part of right to speak, which you directly challenge. Dialog is devoted to the most diverse of views, for the values one can derive --if willing to learn/and/change, and when distorted/perverted, as here, that, too is direct proof of manipulation intended to avoid facing/facts head-on. For Vic's statement re force and how used by this nation over past two centuries, any casual reference to most main histories is easy access to realities you deny. For specifics on his major numbers, if you ID self to Editor Tim, will select some few of PDFs here for other assignments and send, always open to yours, which you are invited to cite here in public now. Mine come from necessities of other assignments, and are cited as available here simply to reinforce their value and accuracy for Vic. From that ongoing study I know his to be accurate, transparent, responsible and accountable. SO where are yours ? From which sources ? How did you validate the sources ? If you wish to cite-such, surely it is fair to expect you to put their value right out there for "see with own eyes" and others to check and then evaluate, too. I await your ID to Tim, with pleasure, and will ready a packet for use with you when you accept invitation.

Henry Ruark May 22, 2008 3:00 pm (Pacific time)

Bull, Vic, et al: Yours ongoing called to mind this one, which may fit, one way or another: "We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light." - Plato Somehow I cannot recall any great illumination arising from the Bush et al approach, but there's been plenty flash and impact consequences, now obvious to almost anyone.

Bullfrog May 22, 2008 1:13 pm (Pacific time)

Vic could you provide me some primary sources for those "numbers" you provided? Emphasis on "primary." Thanks. Vic you might also want to look at Iran's history of human rights abuses. Unfortunately things have been put into motion that it will be real difficult to stop, unless Iran does a 180 immediately. Your story on that childhood bully that tormented your childhood and also it appears your current state of mind has no reasonable comparison for America. If it did we would be bleeding people, but still people risk life and limb to get here. Maybe your unhappiness could be resolved by you taking some concrete action on your own. My guess is you are not a veteran, and you also seem to have no problem with our men and women (both military and civilian) getting killed by those who have sworn to wipe us out, no matter where we are on this planet. Maybe your the one who never got invited to interact socially with your classmates?

Vic May 22, 2008 9:24 am (Pacific time)

You know, when I read some of the comments on this and other articles, I am reminded of a guy I went to school with. He was stronger and bigger than most all of us, but not very sharp academically. He was the consummate bully..he picked on everyone. Even looking at him could get him in your face. He especially liked sucker punching other kids in the stomach when they werent looking. He must have enjoyed the feeling of power it gave him to have everyone afraid of him. However, by fourth grade, he was hated, shunned and left out of birthday parties, sleepovers, etc. He was never included or invited to anything. He had bullied the rest of us so much for so long that we were unforgiving and wanted nothing to do with him. In high school, I think he tried to reach out and socialize, but it was too late. He became a drunk, then a meth head and died several years ago at the age of 50. I think he had a crappy life and paid dearly for being the tough guy. Americans are just 5 percent of the worlds population. If we think we can threaten, bomb, bully, occupy and terrorize the other 95 percent and not suffer serious,long lasting repercussions...we are delusional.

Vic May 22, 2008 9:05 am (Pacific time)

Bullfrog...if it wasnt for the war crimes and flat out lies of the Bush administration, we would not be in Iraq to begin with. How would the Iranians kill Americans then? Your assertation that Iran is a leading exporter of terror sounds hollow when there are over a million new graves in Iraq..men, women and children, thanks to the war crimes of OUR government. We have bombed more countries than any other country and hold the record right now for numbers of non-combatants killed at the hands of our military. Hypocricy is a cheap suit that looks good on no one. (emphasis on hypocricy)

Anonymous May 22, 2008 8:38 am (Pacific time)

great propaganda. how about the truth about iran? but the liberals don't want to hear the truth. how about weapons send to iraq to kill our soldiers, suicide bombers, honor killings, woman's rights. oh well, keep living in la la world.

Henry Ruark May 22, 2008 8:30 am (Pacific time)

B-Frog et al: Unfortunately, friend Bull, yours-here reads far too close to what was current "public opinion" in Britain, when our Founders were hard at work readying us for our own Revolution. There, then, too, final resort to force was the advocacy --and it cost that nation its world leadership. But NOW the force of this dictatorial power, put into place in large part by our own actions, makes any democracy the Devil Incarnate they will suppress no matter what it may take in mayhem, murder, and mass manipulation. The ineffectiveness of any pressures we or the world can bring to bear is already well and truly obvious, and no matter what else is ever put underway, our flourishing our own overwhelming stock of Big Ones, and the tools with which to put them right where they can be most painful, is now only the very same as holding a gun to our own head...with the obvious same result, if by inadvertence or intent it is ever fired. We have no possible weapon left to us but "dialog" and decency in helping those still "inside" to move towards a peaceful and the only-possible solution --their own democracy reached by their own efforts, aided, assisted, supported, even initiated and motivated by what we CAN do, if indeed we return as the world leader we once were.

Bullfrog May 22, 2008 7:28 am (Pacific time)

Vic my remedy would begin with sanctions that would increase until American military personnel stopped becoming victims of Iran's war crimes (emphasis on "war crimes"). Is that something that you can grasp, or should we just let them continue to get away with being one of the worlds largest exporter of terror? I realize that some find it difficult to appreciate just what the Iranian government is capable of, but it is not the people, they like us Americans simply want peace. Regarding Iraqi people, my hope is that the 28 million or so people hurry up and take full advantage of the shot at freedom they have been provided.

Vic May 21, 2008 1:57 pm (Pacific time)

Editor to Vic: We had two more comments come through that are copies of the one already listed, not sure if there was anything you were trying to communicate the we are missing, if the comment section gives you trouble you can always email us at newsroom@salem-news.com and we will post it for you, thanks.

Vic May 21, 2008 1:56 pm (Pacific time)

Bullfrog.....what is your position on US military personnel killing Iraqis so that a handful of people can make big bucks? Do YOU have a realistic remedy????? (emphasis on "realistic")

Bullfrog May 21, 2008 10:24 am (Pacific time)

Actually Mr. Slaughter I want to see American lives saved, especially our soldiers in Iraq (and other places also) where Iran is supplying material and training that is killing our men and women. I certainly do not want any hostilities between us and Iran, and constantly pray that it can be avoided. So what is your position on Iran helping to kill our military personnel? Do you have a realistic remedy (emphasis on "realistic")?

Steve Slaughter- Vet May 21, 2008 9:43 am (Pacific time)

So you people all think that we should send our military in there to fight this war in Iran for Israel. I have an idea, why don't you move to Israel and take your hateful politics and GET THE HELL OUT OF MY COUNTRY. This article clearly lays out the stress our military is under, any plan to attack Iran is a plan to destroy the U.S. from inside and Ameshi and Bullfrog, you have no right to occupy U.S. soil and air if all you want to do is get more Americans killed, which you obviously do. Traitors, that is what anyone who calls for an attack on Iran- we can't do it, we have damaged enough already, get the chicken hawks out of power.

Bullfrog May 21, 2008 9:20 am (Pacific time)

That settles it then, the IAEA has spoken. Get real, this is a very explosive situation than needs to be handled realistically. First we know beyond any reasonable doubt that Iran is furnishing weapons, bomb making materials and training that has directly killed hundreds if not thousands of Americans. We also know that they have a well-lubed propaganda machine. If this was not such a PC era, as soon as we discovered their involvement in killing Americans we would have provided a stern warning, if that was ignored there would have been increased military orchestrated sanctions until they ceased their operations. Now we find ourselves in-fighting over information that is quite limited and at odds. If Isreal attacks, which I imagine, if it looks like Obama might win in November they will do just that, then we will start by blockading, maybe bombing their seaports and known military missle locations. All this could have been avoided long ago if they received notification that any future involvement in helping kill Americans would have been sanctioned. I would bet the family farm that before October 15th there will be some fireworks and that the senate and house will okay it on a committee level. The Iranians are very wonderful decent people, but they are under the thumb of a malevolent leadership, and will pay a heavy price I am afraid.

Today's Tehran Times May 21, 2008 8:54 am (Pacific time)

"The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has no evidence that Iran is seeking to develop anatomic bomb, IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei said on Monday."

Matt Johnson May 21, 2008 8:45 am (Pacific time)

Hey, let's play that game where you repeat an untruth so often that people just simply buy in. It is a proven program in recent years under Bush and Rove. In this case it is the U.S. government suggesting over and over again that Iran is enriching uranium for "nuclear weapons." Man what a vain country we are; we are the unpredictable "Oh- sorry we bombed your country, we THOUGHT you had weapons of mass destruction" crowd and we are still listening to the propaganda being spun into news stories for the American media. Nobody including the author of this report has mentioned why we really want to attack Iran, it is for the Israeli cause. Anyone who supports a unilateral attack on Iran surely values Israel on a much higher level than the United States, that is clearly obvious.

Vic May 21, 2008 8:39 am (Pacific time)

The Secret Service should refuse to protect Bush, Cheney et al if they dont want to aid and abet criminals.

Mideast Analyst May 21, 2008 8:24 am (Pacific time)

So maybe you think the news about Iran making nuclear weapons is just a neocon lie. Do you think that’s also true of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and nearly a dozen other nations in the region ready to spin up centrifuges of their own? Are they also all as well-intended as we are assuming that Iran is? (And even ignoring the possibility of bad intentions: Will they all be sufficiently careful with these things? These are nuclear weapons we’re talking about. In Al Qaeda country.) Anyway, all these nations–Islamic nations, most of them, and not those neocon Islamophobe warmongers–are signalling their own willingness to go nuclear to deter what they believe to be Iran’s nascent nuclear arsenal. This means we’ve hit a situation where Iran’s desire to make itself more secure (or, since we are assuming the best about them here–to make themselves less reliant on fossil fuels and more reliant on nuclear power)–actually makes the region less secure. There’s a name for this effect among the international-relations set: it’s called the security dilemma: A frequently cited example of the security dilemma is the beginning of World War I. Supporters of this viewpoint argue that the major European powers felt forced to go to war by feelings of insecurity over the alliances of their neighbors, despite not actually desiring the war. Furthermore, the time necessary to mobilize large amounts of troops for defense led some Great Powers (such as Russia) to adopt a particularly accelerated mobilization timetable, which in turn put pressure on other states to mobilize early as well. Iran knows this, of course, and they know what their neighbors are up to. If Iran wanted to stop this effect, they would comply with international law. They aren’t doing so. It’s a risky game, but if you think the Mahdi’s return is just around the corner and he’s on your side, why should you care? Especially if Al Qaeda (or Hezbollah) detonates a Saudi nuclear device in Riyadh or Long Beach. Of course, once the Obamessiah sits down and explains all this to them, they’ll just slap their foreheads and say “Oh, we’re such ninnies! We’ll dismantle the whole nuclear program tomorrow. Sorry for the confusion.” __________

Bullfrog May 21, 2008 8:15 am (Pacific time)

We certainly need to get our leaders on the same page when it comes to what is what? Obama told a Portland crowd over last weekend that Iran doesn’t “pose a serious threat to us”- stating that “tiny countries” with small defense budgets can’t do us harm– and then promptly flip-flopped the next day, claiming, “I’ve made it clear for years that the threat from Iran is grave.”

Ameshi May 21, 2008 7:48 am (Pacific time)

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's address to the United Nations. As if the fact that permitting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to enter the United States weren't enough, the U.S. Secret Service was charged with protecting him ("U.N. Power Play," John Podhoretz, Post- Opinion, Sept. 20). Our Secret Service personnel should have refused the detail on the grounds that it is aiding and abetting a criminal, or they should have arrested him to ensure enforcement of the $6 billion in civil rulings against Iran for terrorist acts. Ameshi Adaljab Butler, Pa.

[Return to Top]

Iran - This is What George W. Bush Would Bomb (VIDEO)

Quick Links

DINING

MUST SEE SALEM

AUCTIONS - APPRAISALS

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

ONLINE SHOPPING

Advertise with Salem-News