The Drudge Report is including a link to an Israel National News story quoting an Iranian press report in which the widow of an Iranian nuclear scientist acknowledged that her husband sought “Israel’s annihilation.” Even before Drudge amplified it into headline news, this was a story that the keen eye of Jonathan Tobin had earlier picked up. But, it’s hardly the first time that Iranian officials intimately involved in their covert nuclear and ballistic missile programs have made this admission. In November 2011, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gen. Hassan Tehrani-Moghadam died in a mysterious explosion that flattened the missile facility in which he worked. The Iranian press subsequently published his last will and testament, a document in which he requested the epitaph, “This is the grave of someone who wanted to destroy Israel.”
There’s a school of foreign policy thought predominant in the United States which teaches officials to ignore rhetoric. This would be a mistake, one which should have been corrected after the George H.W. Bush administration and the State Department largely ignored Saddam Hussein’s threats against Kuwait, only to learn that the dictator actually meant what he said.
In government and intelligence circles, there is a persistent problem in which people cleared to read high level intelligence spend disproportionate time leafing through intercepts to the exclusion of the open-source material—newspapers and television transcripts—for which everyone is cleared. Intelligence is 90 percent open source, so to focus on the ten percent to the exclusion of the rest gives a skewed perspective. It is time the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency realize that when the Iranian regime says something in Persian, it might mean it, even if no one is around to translate it into English and even if it was only said in a national newspaper rather than a hurried cell phone call.
Ignoring rhetoric because they come through unclassified media is intelligence incompetence, but dismissing what the Iranians say becomes policy malpractice of the highest order.
Michael Rubin's mendacious, anti-American rhetoric in the buildup to the catastrophic, blood-drenched invasion of Iraq should have put him in the electric chair. But, here, the chickenhawk is still shrieking for more blood to be spilled because it would make him feel ferklempt.
Ease up on the gas, hater. You are off topic. Iraq was a long time ago. We are talking now about shining the spotlight on the supposedly innocent scientists working on the Iranian nuclear project out of a love of science when in reality they are foot soldiers of another kind for the would-be genocidal regime.
guys, this "Israeli100" tried to pretend he/she was a former IDF officer the first time I noticed her here. n nthere's no need to respond. she doesn't want facts, she's so drenched in Jew hatred she just wants to rant and see how many of us she can annoy. n nI advise paying no attention to the trolls. nothing they say is ever new. in fact, at this point, I bet any of us could write their comments for them! n
There were mistakes in Iraq, but not of the kind which this idiot liar "Israel100" (no Jewish Israeli, you can bet) mentions. The first was Reagan's and subsequent president's ignoring the disaster that Iran would threaten to be and is right now. Other errors were invading Iraq and Afghanistan and leaving the primary culprit alone. I originally thought that we had Iran surrounded with our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead Iran surrounded us with Syria and Pakistan. Was it our military leaders that failed us? At least in part, I am sure. We have allowed Iran most of all, but North Korea to threaten world peace as well. I attribute that enormous error to Carter and Clinton mostly. Similarly, we now coddle the Turks which will soon become the next world threatening monstrosity. As if we need more. But we do have China lurking very closely. And, of course, Russia has remained the same virtuous monster it always has been. As Robert Preston sang in the Music Man 'There's trouble ahead in River City…".
electric chair. n noh my. n nanti-American. blood drenched. n nchickenhawk. n nThe Iranians of course are only going after nukes for medical purposes. Nice touch with the ferklempt. On with learning the aleph bet, aleph, bet, gimmel,, before long we'll be doing verbs. Mr. Israeli100 n
Well it's hard to control the world. That's why there's so much suffering. We really don't get along. War is ever present. SOP. And sadly the war to end all wars never comes along. n nAnd to play devils advocate the problem with these press reports is that they may not actually reflect the views of the scientists involved–this could be ex post facto regime-buttressing belligerence. Yes yes this does tell you the character of the regime but going down the chain from Iranian Guards commanders the widow of the (and yes executive level administrator) nuke guy is said to have proclaimed that her husband was out to annihilate the Zionist entity. but she would have been reported to say that even if his slaying was, for whatever reason, ordered by his own government.
You call that mere "rhetoric"? Isn't there something the courts acknowledge about "dying declaration" that makes it credible? Israel's annihilation was the dying declaration of two Iranian nuclear scientists. What more do we need? To the appeasers I guess they need for it to happen to be convinced, in which case they can just say, "Oops. Oh well, it was only Israel."
yes. I often think that after the Iranian nuke turns Tel Aviv into a smoking hole in the ground, all the liberal appeasers will say "oh my GOSH! we didn't think they meant it! we'd like to apologize to the 50 or or 75 Jews still alive (so far) in what is now going to be called Arab Palestine. we are like sooooo so sorry."
What makes you believe the Iranian news media is telling the truth about what the widow of one of these scientists said, or that these dead scientists made "dying declarations"? After all, the purpose of that media is to report what the government tells them to.
Not exactly sure what is your point. if the Iranian news agency is reporting for the government and just using this woman as a shill, then it all the more shows the intent behind this program.
If Israel and Iran destroyed each other, it would be unfortunate, but it would not significantly affect the national interest of the United States. We should take our war toys, go home, and let the locals fight it out or settle it as they choose. If they choose to kill one another, not our problem.
If the Iranians and Israelis wipe each other out, it would be a human tragedy, but would have very little effect on the national interest of the United States. We could take our war toys home, and let the locals fight it out or settle it, as they choose, and be none the worse for it, no matter what the outcome.