The New York Times reported on Friday, 2/9/07 that “The most lethal weapon directed against American troops in Iraq is an explosive-packed cylinder that United States intelligence asserts is being supplied by Iran.”
This stunning scoop was dug out by the Times by attending a presentation arranged by the Bush administration.
Absolutely certain about their evidence, the senior defense official and two experts insisted that the monumental import of their officially sanctioned briefing would be undermined if they were named or went on record.
The first source explained: [name redacted] “Oh no, no, no, D----- mustn’t say his name, mustn’t, mustn’t! Iran is bad, very, very bad. D----- came to warn you. NO! You mustn’t take photos of the shells! Can’t bring in your expert to verify the evidence! But D----- knows! D----- knows, but shouldn’t be telling you this! Not to that liberal bastion of peerless reporting, The New York Times! Oh, Bad D-----, Bad D-----!"
The second deep background source explained, “Iran is scary, bad! They is causing all sorts of evil things in Iraq. Me-sah know without Iran, Iraq be peachy-keen!”
When asked about the statistics showing that the vast majority of American deaths in Iraq are due to Sunni insurgents versus the Shiite militias the administration claims Iran is supplying, he replied, “No, no, no! Sunni insurgents our enemies. Shiite militias our enemies. Shiite government our friends. Shiite Iran our enemy. You must keep up! Hussein was new Hitler in 2002, now is Ahmadinejad!”
But is Iran really a threat, an imminent threat? Expert consensus holds that Iran is probably at least ten years away from a nuclear weapon. Our expert forcefully argued, “Me-sah hear from good friends Michael Ledeen and Bill Kristol, we must attack Iran, sooner, not later. Them two never wrong. Me-sah know, we must attack Iran before they get nuke. Ten years a long time to wait. What if we forget?”
Finally, the third source, a senior defense official, harumphed, “Of course we’re not preparing for war with Iran. But here’s something you won’t hear on those liberal weekend political talk shows. You ask me, can we afford to attack Iran? I say — can we afford not to?”
One knowing smile later, he went on: “For over twenty-five years, Iran has been a hypothetical threat. Iran has long been at the forefront, a world leader, in hypothetical weaponry. In fact, while we sit here, wasting time arguing if Iran is a threat, right this very minute they’re sitting on a huge stockpile of hypothetical weapons. Caspar Weinberger warned us all about it back in the 80s. Yes, in terms of conventional weaponry, the American and Israeli arsenals dwarf Iran’s, but when it comes to hypothetical arsenals, Iran is one of the biggest threats in the world, a far greater danger to our national security than even Japan, or Canada.”
After pausing to let this sink in, he scoffed, “Look, the peaceniks and hippies may believe in elves, faeries, and everything just magically getting better on its own, but we’re very serious in this administration. We live in the real world.”
As for allegations that the Office of the Vice President is driving Iran policy just as it did (and does) Iraq policy, an OVP spokesperson, who insisted he shall not be named, declined to comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment