Nutter Email and Response

Occasionally I'm copied on an email from a lefy nutter that is gold. Pure gold! I absolutely love to respond to these.

Here's the original wacko alarmist at work followed by my response:

To: Subject: The Gulf of Tonkin Has Moved --- URGENT & SERIOUS

I have learned this morning from a most reliable source, Retired Col. Ann Wright, that the US/Israel will attack or provoke Iran, before the Nov. Elections -- for the elections!

The US Navy is now getting ready to deploy and will do so probably between Oct. 5 and 21, 2006.

I promise to check on this information for changes or retrations or inaccuracies --even though this information verifies my sources and my prediction of such an attack this fall, back in April, 2006.

Here is the scenario already in place:

1) Raise the level of false* fear.
2) Force UN sanctions against Iran.
3) Demand that the sanctions be immediately enforced by the UN.
4) When that fails, demand that NATO enforce sanctions.
5) When that fails demand the the "coalition" enforce sanctions.
6) Deploy US Navy to supposedly "protect our interests", to "enforce UN sanctions" off shore of two or more Iranian oil ports.
7) To never call this a "blockade" -- even though that will be its purpose.
NOTE: Any blockade is an "act of war" according to international law.
8) Sooner or later through blockade or air space violations Iran will respond (as is their international right).
7) GWB will then declare WE have been attacked.
8) War in Middle east will expand HORRIBLY!

*FALSE Fear. IAEA has verified that Iran is producing only enriched uranium for nulcear energy - 3% enriched versus 90%? enriched for weapon grade.

CIA has confirmed that Iran would be 5-10 years from producing nuclear weapon - IF that's what they were doing.

NOTE this also fits all previous GWB policy:
Mislead public.
Respond only with force.
Escalate as needed.
Win (whatever that means) at ANY costs.

I doubt it, but we might be able to stop this eventuality if we call our congressmen/women and candidates NOW and say "do not approve or fund any such action without full, independent, public, investigation.

If this action proceeds . . . the chaos and terror has only just begun . . . .

PLEASE pass this information on . . .

PS Why has price of gasoline decreased, now? Anybody note a big decrease in demand

.

---

Love ya Terry but this just won't stand... Please be serious and cite actual evidence (my response below):

"most reliable source"

Colonel Ann Wright is a self-declared peace activist who works closely with Cindy Sheehan. Wright has been arrested on multiple occasions, interrupted a Senate hearing with chants of "Stop the killing" and was one of the 5 judges on a panel of "International Commission of Inquiry On Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration." At best she is a biased source.

"US/Israel will attack or provoke Iran, before the Nov. Elections -- for the elections!"

I'm sure that the evidence that Wright has in her pocket not only indicates the movements of Naval vessels but also documents the assumed conspiracy doing this "for the elections".

"my prediction of such an attack this fall, back in April, 2006."

Yes, we know, people on the Left have been predicting this for the last 2 years. A simple Google search of "Iran, attack, April 2006" is convincing evidence that these talking points are old.

Next, how about a little running commentary on your war plan:

1) Raise the level of false* fear.
I suppose a thwarted attack against American airlines over the Atlantic is nothing to fear. I suppose 17 suspects arrested in Canada who planned to behead the Prime Minister and blow up Toronto buildings was no threat. I suppose the arrest and conviction of Hemant Lakhani who attempted to sell an anti-aircraft missile to a terrorist is no big deal. Or the unfortunate attacks we weren't able to stop like the July bombing in Mumbai Shall I go on? It isn't GWB raising the threat, it's the terrorists.

2) Force UN sanctions against Iran.
Of course you are referring to resolution 1696 passed by a vote of 14 to 1 on the UN Security Council.

3) Demand that the sanctions be immediately enforced by the UN.

I believe the exact words (from the 14 members who voted for it) were: "demanded that Iran suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, and gave it one month to do so or face the possibility of economic and diplomatic sanctions to give effect to its decision." Let's be accurate. No sanctions have been put in place, yet.

4) When that fails, demand that NATO enforce sanctions.

Well, if the UN can't follow up on it's threats...

5) When that fails demand the the "coalition" enforce sanctions.
You're losing me now.

6) Deploy US Navy to supposedly "protect our interests", to "enforce UN sanctions" off shore of two or more Iranian oil ports.

Are you kidding me... there is no way we would do this before the elections.

7 through 8 -

Of course you have nothing to back this up.

*FALSE Fear. IAEA has verified...

Once again, go read the text of the UNSC resolution and then go read what the IAEA has acutually said:

"Expresses serious concern that the Agency is not yet in a position to clarify some important issues relating to Iran's nuclear programme..."
"Deeply regrets that, despite repeated calls from the Board for the maintaining of the suspension of all enrichment related and reprocessing activities... Iran resumed uranium conversion activities"
"Calls on Iran to understand that there is a lack of confidence in Iran’s intentions..."
"Requests Iran to extend full and prompt cooperation to the Agency..."

I'm not making this stuff up.

"CIA has confirmed that Iran would be 5-10 years from producing nuclear weapon"

How far is a plane ride from North Korea to Iran.? Iran could get a nuclear weapon in 10 hours if North Korea decides to give them one. Farfetched? The State Department confirmed that members of an Iranian delegation were present when North Korea launched a series of medium and long ranged missiles in a direct provocation against the United States on our 4th of July.

"Why has price of gasoline decreased, now? Anybody note a big decrease in demand."

Always a conspiracy with you? Everyone blamed GWB when prices went up doesn't he deserve credit when it goes down? The reasons are easy if you understand how capitalism works.

In short, is war imminent? No. Is war with Iran still on the table? Yes. Is Iran a threat? Absolutely yes. Here's a quote:

"O, Almighty God, all men and women are your creatures and you have ordained their guidance and salvation. Bestow upon humanity that thirsts for justice, the perfect human being promised to all by you, and make us among his followers and among those who strive for his return and his cause. "

That was the President of Iran in front of the UN Council (on Tuesday!) praying openly God to fulfill the dark vision of his benighted and strange wing of Islam awaiting the Twelve Imam.

For a man who denies the holocaust, denies nuclear build-up, denies any involvement with Hezbollah, and denies any ambitions -- the message for us is indeed URGENT & SERIOUS.

Your implication that Bush will use war as a political weapon is deeply offensive and unfounded. In my mind there is only one political ploy involved in this discussion.

With respect,

Justin