-1 vote

Iran attacking Israel on the 17 ???????

let's hope there just games............... http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=42f_1208271524



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I couldn't find "ISRALE" on the map...lol

Seriously though, I think there will be an attack before this admin is gone.

*********************************************
The Second Amendment
The ORIGINAL Homeland Security

My take on it would be these "'war games"

are in response to Israel firing a test rocket and checking its radar yesterday as well as requesting to be connected to our early missle warning system (which it has only done when war ensued).

Check Oil Bourse Thread....Israel purportedly to attack Syria May/June which would illicit a response from Iran.

www.dailypaul.com/node/34133
Link

What hapened to search function on DP? I had to bookmark it!

just thinking

I wonder how bad this would on our boys in iraq if all of a sudden iran turned on our military.I hope we are watching out for this .this would be all bush needed to start war with Iran.he would do it also

My prediction is....

we will be going after Iran on the 19th of April. The Pope is safe in America, and is scheduled to be in the States until the 20th, so I do believe our government is planning some form of attack on Iran, especially since the Pope will be safe on our soil. I really hope I am wrong, but with all that has been said over the past few weeks, I am almost certain something is in the works, especially after last night's Congressional session which was broadcast on C-Span. Several of the Congressmen/women were referring to an imminent attack on Iran. I was shocked as I listen to Congresswoman Lee from Texas, and what she had to say. I will try to find a link to her speaking on C-Span, and post it here, it was frightening to say the least.

And then Iran will attack Israel

because they don't have the intestinal fortitude to attack the USA.

Libera me, let the truth break, what my fears make--Leslie Phillips

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

I watched the Petraeus hearings live

and I thought Jackson-Lee was the woman who asked Petraeus directly if he was to attack Iran/had authority to do so etc. Did anyone else see it live as it doesn't seem to be on the archive copy at C-Span. He said he'd talk with her after the session.

LINK

I would really love to see that!

here is the link

from Cspan

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congress/?q=node/77531&id=8518146

Here is the written version if the link does not work. Watching her speak was amazing to me, so please try and see the video if you can.

IRAN >
Permanent Link

Text From the Congressional Record

Jackson-Lee, Sheila [D-TX]

Begin 2008-04-15 22:17:36
End 22:24:32
Length 00:06:56

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished chairwoman, MAXINE WATERS. I would say I am delighted to be part of the Out-of-Iraq Caucus, but that is not the appropriate term. I am delighted, however, to join my colleagues, Chairwoman Waters and Congresswoman BARBARA LEE and the other members who have participated and submitted their statement.

I wanted to join my colleagues because it has been a very long journey. I remind Congresswoman Waters in the fall of 2002, we were working hard for people to study the resolution being put before them. We garnered some 133-plus votes to vote in opposition to the then-Iraq resolution.

I want to speak constitutionally and why this special order and the position that Members are taking in opposing any preemptive attack or invasion of Iran and standing solidly against the perceived authority that the President may have.

Frankly, if we look at the 2002 resolution, we will find that it can be assessed that the President's authority [Page: H2346]
has expired. Saddam Hussein is no longer there. Elements of the resolution required that. The government has changed. There has been a democratic election, and there may be some question as to whether the adherence of the U.N. Security Council resolution is still part of that 2002 war resolution. But I would argue that there have been so many
resolutions in the U.N. we could also concede the point that we have protected or adhered to those resolutions.

I truly believe that we are at such a point in history that any actions by the President would warrant extreme actions; or I should not suggest extreme, I should suggest constitutional actions by this Congress. It may warrant raising issues of impeachment. The reason I say that is to use the War Powers Act in a way that ignores the constitutional privilege and right of this Congress to declare war, I believe, is not doing well by the American people.

We already know the results of a war without end, the Iraq war, that is costing $339 million a day, that has already gone past a trillion dollars, that has seen 9,500 of our soldiers injured or maimed, sometimes injured or maimed for life, to see 4,000-plus die. It is a war without end.

Frankly, the question has to become what is the President's goal and intent if he has an idea that Iran is the next target. Has he looked to diplomacy and looked to the question of working with China or Russia to contain Iran? Has he looked at negotiation with the individuals in Iran who really may be interested in some sort of resolution? Is he buying into the constant refrain that Iran is providing the weapons in Iraq? Is he also looking to the perceived friendship between the Iraq government
and the Iran government? None of the above.

What I sense in the administration is a percolating attempt to attack Iran, and that percolating attempt based upon the representation of nuclear weapons. I don't want Iran to possess the capacity to engage and to utilize nuclear weapons, nor am I interested in protecting an Iran that has been hostile to the world. I am not interested in coddling terrorists. But we can clearly see that the policies in Iraq have not deterred the terrorists. They have only grown the terrorists. And I would question
whether the only way to create peace in the Mid East is to again attack another country in the Mid East.

It is important that we continue to engage for two distinct states, the Palestinian and Israel negotiations. I would have hoped that this administration would have spent their time following through on the road map that the President announced some few years back. I believe that we were distracted in Iraq. We were distracted in Iraq from Afghanistan and from solving the Palestinian-Israeli question.

So I rise today to join my colleagues and say not on my watch, absolutely not. The statistics of the war in Iraq are devastating. Yes, I am prepared today to declare a military success in Iraq. A military success means that our soldiers on one and two and three and four redeployments have done everything the Commander in Chief has asked them to do. Saddam Hussein is gone, there have been democratic elections, and U.N. resolutions adhered to. Bring those soldiers home, declare a military success,
and make the statement to the American people that we will never recklessly invade another country.

Iran is somewhat different from Iraq; and, therefore, may have a different story to tell. It may not be the easy route that they might have thought Iraq was. But frankly, my view is that we have crossed the constitutional bounds and that as I yield back to the distinguished chairwoman, I simply believe that we have come to a crisis point that this Congress must accept its duty and say to the President that no war can be declared without a vote of the United States Congress under the Constitution,
and I would join with my colleagues, the chairman of the Human Right Subcommittee on International Issues of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Chairman Delahunt, to suggest that the War Powers Act should be amended and should now be that it can only be utilized by a President when the Nation is under imminent attack
and when there is necessity to go forward to protect our citizens. Other than that, that War Powers Act should be amended, it should be drawn down, and we should stand with the Constitution. No invasion of Iran on my watch, and constitutional implications for the President of the United States if such attack is proposed.

I thank the distinguished gentlelady for her leadership in the Out-of-Iraq Caucus.

Congressional Chronicle software (C) National Cable Satellite Company 2008. The video and text of the congressional proceedings are in the

I sense a spine, here

Could it be that Ron Paul and his supporters are having an effect? Open eyes and erect spines - what a combination!
Thanks for posting that text, it was one of the most heartening things I have seen in a while!

Truth exists, and it deserves to be cherished.

link thanks for the link

Thanks for the link . At least someone in congerss is trying to do something to stop the Bush empire dictatorship.