Iranian officials said Sunday that the United States has cut off discussions with the Tehran government that encompassed a range of issues, levying what the Iranians called false accusations that Iran provided a haven for al Qaeda members.
Last week, a Bush administration official told CNN that Lakhdar Brahimi, the U.N. special envoy to Afghanistan, met with Iranian officials Thursday in Geneva, Switzerland. During the meeting, the official said, the Iranians said they had several al Qaeda operatives in custody, including one who might have coordinated the recent terrorist bombings in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
The United States had planned to send its own representative to the meeting, but canceled "because of concerns of an al Qaeda link," the U.S. official said.
What, that they have al Queda people in custody and are trying to press trials against them? What kind of link is that? This is a safe haven? What does that say about our own Guantanamo Bay?
Well, actually, if imprisonment is a safe haven, then I guess we're not breaking the Geneva Convention! They aren't prisoners of war, they're under protection in safe houses! *ahem*
So, what worries me is this paragraph:
A senior defense official told CNN on Sunday that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld believes Iran's Islamic regime shows "great potential for the government to crumble from within" and that others in the administration might advocate undertaking an effort to encourage internal upheaval.
Couple that with Rumsfeld's speech to the Naval graduates this week (I'm sorry I don't have a link, I saw that one on TV news at my mom's house) wherein he told them they're the "next line of defense in our war on terrorism" .... well, we're going in. This makes me sad. Very sad. My heart lies heavy for the Danai/Famili family, the family of my friends in high school.
Oh, wow. Look at this link I just found. So I was looking up the Hezbollah for more information than just the "alleged terrorism" cited in CNN, and found Terrorism: Questions and Answers. It's from the "Council on Foreign Relations". Now, here's the interesting part... plastered across the front page, "In cooperation with the Markle Foundation". So, I looked them up. They're a telecommunications and "better health" organization. So what has this to do with terrorism? Interesting, and more interesting in how this all seems as tied together as Bush's policies on the same.
Interesting article in Reuters: Democrats Question Whether Bush 'Hyped' Iraq Threat. Now, the question is will they be able to push this strongly enough for people to finally think about whether Bush is doing the same with Iran. Actually, they might, considering the voices questioning him now are the likes of Jay Rockefeller, Pat Roberts, and Orrin Hatch.
Actually, on that note, why on earth am I agreeing more and more with Orrin Hatch? I don't think it's that he's gotten any more liberal, it's just that the sway of conservative has gone past EVEN HIM. Good lord.
Whoa!!! So, while I am not really in the set of people who think that IndyMedia's removal from Google's news system is unwarranted (it's an open forum, not a news site, people).... why is Slashdot currently on the main page of links given that? Oops.
Someone asked me at the club last night what I thought now that the war was over. I told him, in about an hour's worth of rantings, that all of my worst fears have come true. This article from the SF Gate details them very succinctly. In fact, I'll end with the very moving words of an Iraqi quoted there:
"This is not freedom," he said. "This is chaos."