Example: From the wingnuts at News Blaze:

It was only a matter of time before Tehran had the Islamic units supplied with chemical weapons.
...
Iran has all this and more in its inventory and it is at the Jihad's disposal. This may be the reason the Shi'ite Mahdi Army, under Cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, has been told to lay low for a while. Perhaps Tehran had them lay low while they were being supplied with these chemical weapons.

U.N. calls U.S. data on Iran's nuclear aims unreliable
Tips about supposed secret weapons sites and documents with missile designs haven't panned out, diplomats say.
[...]
"Since 2002, pretty much all the intelligence that's come to us has proved to be wrong," a senior diplomat at the IAEA said.

...what's worse, sounding like you know what you're talking about or sounding like you're pulling the same shell game with Iran that you pulled with Iraq?

Mr. Bush also said "The idea that somehow we're manufacturing the idea that the Iranians are providing IEDs [improvised explosive devices] is preposterous."

Yet that idea is no more preposterous than anything else we've seen the Bush administration manufacture.

Mr. Bush said he still refuses to have direct talks with Iran because "I believe that's a more effective way of convincing the Iranians to give up their nuclear weapons ambitions."

Iran has consistently avowed that it has no interest in developing nuclear weapons. The Bush administration has offered no proof that the Iranians are lying on that score. Iran also vehemently denies that it is providing weapons to militants in Iraq.

The really preposterous aspects of this situation are that we have less reason to believe Bush than we have to believe the Iranians, and that Mr. Bush would assert that the best way to pursuade someone to do something is to not talk to them.

--Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy (Retired), Pen and Sword

The motivations for an Iran strike were laid out as far back as 1992. In classified defense planning guidance - written for then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney by then-Pentagon staffers I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, World Bank Chief Paul Wolfowitz, and ambassador-nominee to the United Nations Zalmay Khalilzad - Cheney's aides called for the United States to assume the position of lone superpower and act preemptively to prevent the emergence of even regional competitors. The draft document was leaked to the New York Times and the Washington Post and caused an uproar among Democrats and many in George H. W. Bush's Administration.

In September 2000, the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) issued a report titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses," which espoused similar positions to the 1992 draft and became the basis for the Bush-Cheney Administration's foreign policy. Libby and Wolfowitz were among the participants in this new report; Cheney, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other prominent figures in the Bush administration were PNAC members.

all is "unidentified sources", and "might be from iran", "with or without the iranian govt's knowledge".

in other words, they have nothing of substance, so they just throw a bunch of stuff out, and see if anyone bites. this worked in 2002/2003, because the bulk of the country supported bush, even though his "facts" were mighty implausible.

now, having been exposed as both a consumate liar and incompetent, his support is reduced to the true believers.

"The real agenda in all of this of course, was to redraw the political map of the Middle East. Now that is code, whether you like it or not, but it is code for putting into place the strategy memorandum that was done by Richard Perle and his study group in the mid-90's which was called, "A Clean Break - A New Strategy for the Realm." And what it is, cut to the quick, is if you take out some of these countries, some of these governments that are antagonistic to Israel then you provide the Israeli government with greater wherewithal to impose its terms and conditions upon the Palestinian people, whatever those terms and conditions might be. In other words, the road to peace in the Middle East goes through Baghdad and Damascus. Maybe Tehran. And maybe Cairo and maybe Tripoli if these guys actually have their way. Rather than going through Jerusalem."

19:46: http://next.epic-usa.org/epicdev2/_media/2003forumaudio/28-lecture-wilson-32.mp3

"On the other ones, the geopolitical situation, I think there are a number of issues at play; there's a number of competing agendas. One is the remaking of the map of the Middle East for Israeli security, and my fear is that when it becomes increasingly apparent that this was all done to make Sharon's life easier and that American soldiers are dying in order to enable Sharon to impose his terms upon the Palestinians that people will wonder why it is American boys and girls are dying for Israel and that will undercut a strategic relationship and a moral obligation that we've had towards Israel for 55 years. I think it's a terribly flawed strategy."

"Pre-emptive war was invented by Adolf Hitler. To be perfectly
honest, I wouldn't take anyone who came up with such a thing
seriously".
--Dwight David Eisenhower in 1953

Congressman Abraham Lincoln on President James K. Polk and his Mexican War:

"Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose -- and you allow him to make war at pleasure.

Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after you have given him so much.

If, today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him?

You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us' but he will say to you, 'Be silent; I see it, if you don't.'"

(Lincoln: Speeches and Writings 1832-1858, The Library of America)

In other words, the road to peace in the Middle East goes through Baghdad and Damascus. Maybe Tehran. And maybe Cairo and maybe Tripoli if these guys actually have their way. Rather than going through Jerusalem."

Iran-Contra was the subject of an informal "lessons learned" discussion two years ago among veterans of the scandal. Abrams led the discussion. One conclusion was that even though the program was eventually exposed, it had been possible to execute it without telling Congress. As to what the experience taught them, in terms of future covert operations, the participants found: "One, you can't trust our friends. Two, the C.I.A. has got to be totally out of it. Three, you can't trust the uniformed military, and four, it's got to be run out of the Vice-President's office"--a reference to Cheney's role, the former senior intelligence official said.

Jeff, further perhaps to your post, my thinking is that the Neocon Masters will direct the current president to order airstrikes on Iran on the new moon nights of either 12 August or (propitiously) 11 September. Why? Because the media will be all wrapped up in the tenth anniversary of the Death of Princess Diana and will pay scant attention to the opening of a third front.
My two cynical cents.
Mike
# posted by Mike : 1:10 PM

And full moon is a good time to strike.
# posted by Jeff Huber : 1:12 PM

Now, this link will show you that a "new moon" is no moon, sometimes referred to the dark of the moon.