Well this is what has come by our way. Very topical.

-Ed

==========================================

What follows is pure theory.

Earlier this year George Bush decided that Iran's Nuclear Facilities must be removed by force.

So to "clear the diplomatic front" a bit he pressured Tony Blair into "shunting" Jack Straw, and replacing him with his "poodle" Margaret Beckett.

Meantime agreement was reached with Israel, that given a suitable "causus belli", they would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities.

Knowing that Hisbollah had ammassed a lot of rockets, and knowing that they would react to provocation, the Israeli's "trailed their coat" on the Lebanese border, got eight soldiers killed, and two captured, demanded their release and when [as they knew would happen] this was refused , set about pounding Lebanon with the specious excuse that they were going to deal with Hisbollah once and for all.

In so doing they hoped to get Syria and then Iran involved - the Israeli army seems pretty bad at hitting Hisbollah rocket sites - by encouraging increased salvoes of rockets onto Israel, culmination in the "causus belli" the big rocket strike on Tel Aviv.

As two senior Israeli politicians have said within the past few days, "Iran is the problem, If Tel Aviv is hit they will be behind it/be responsible" One specifically mentioned the nuclear issue.

George Bush has "held off" to enable the "causus belli" to develop, and has blackmailed Tony Blair by flying the bombs required for the Iran strike through UK airports.

It is just conceivable that if Hisbollah does not fire/has not go the "Tel Aviv rocket", that a substitute explosion might be created and blamed on Hisbollah/Iran ?

If Hisbollah stop rocket attacks NOW Israel and Bush will be left looking rather foolish ?

By Anon

======================================