Robert Dreyfuss, contributing editor at The Nation magazine, senior correspondent at American Prospect and contributing writer for Mother Jones, in an article for TomPaine.com, has some interesting perspectives on Iran:

It is impossible to deny that Iran is a dangerous, out-of-control regime—yes, a “rogue” regime.

This is how the "left" in America has been co-opted. Liberal cheerleaders for American exceptionalism and empire that replicate the sentiments of the neo-cons in a soft-cop kind of way with nonsensical suggestions like Dreyfuss' assertion that the problem here is that the United States now "lacks crediblity" in it's international security dealings with Iran.

That is a thought trap. Which is why we must keep our eye on the ball.

US imperialism didn't begin under George Bush Jr. Nor did US credibility tank from some illusory high standard under George Bush Jr. Every time the neo-cons in progressive drag come out to play, it must be stated that Clinton's almost decade long economic stranglehold over a very weak Iraq caused between 500,00 to 1 million Iraqi deaths. All the while, the US along with France and the UK were conducting an illegal decade long bombing campaign in what they designated 'No Fly Zones' which were never sanctioned by the United Nations. US 'credibility' in the realm of international affairs has long been nonexistent. Whenever the US executive branch decides breaches int'l law, there is a chorus of fake left commentators harkening back to the good ole days that ended the day before said legal breach. The pattern is easy to see. But NPR, The Nation, Mother Jones and other fake left organizations never fail to validate the pretense, perpetuating myths and lies.

On the subject of Iran's possible nuclear arsenal, what can one say that hasn't been said so many times before? The US possesses the largest nuclear arsenal. The US is the only country that has purposely used nuclear weapons on a civilian population etc.. The hypocrisy of the entire Iran nuclear discussion couldn't be more obvious. But again, you have so many on the fake left, validating the pretense by taking the discussion seriously and not mentioning obvious historical or present fact regarding the United States and nuclear weapons.

Global security will remain an elusive abstraction until Americans, starting with the American Left, acknowledge obvious truths regarding the US' existing arsenal and how it encourages global nuclear proliferation. When it comes to nuclear weapons the US gov't hasn't the moral authority to demand anything of any nation. Nothing could be more obvious. However, in America, the obvious can't be taken for granted as being such. That's obvious.

This is what Chavez said,

El mundo tiene para todos, pues, pero resulta que unas minorías, los descendientes de los mismos que crucificaron a Cristo, los descendientes de los mismos que echaron a Bolívar de aquí y también lo crucificaron a su manera en Santa Marta, allá en Colombia. Una minoría se adueñó de las riquezas del mundo, una minoría se adueñó del oro del planeta, de la plata, de los minerales, de las aguas, de las tierras buenas, del petróleo, de las riquezas, pues, y han concentrado las riquezas en pocas manos

And this is the translation.

The world has enough for all, but a minority, the descendants of those who crucified Christ, the descendants of those who cast out Bolivar from here and also crucified him in a way in Santa Marta, over in Colombia--a minority has appropriated the riches of the world, a minority has appropriated the gold of the planet, the silver, minerals, water, good earth, petroleum, wealth, and has concentrated it in a small number of hands.

This isn't anti-semitism. This is Chavez talking politics in the same terms he always does.
Class.
Chavez often refers to Jesus as the first socialist. The minority he speaks of that killed Jesus, the first socialist is the same wealthy minority, he claims, that works against socialists and populists now. Minoria in Spanish isn't commonly used as a reference to an ethnic group. It's a term used to discuss socioeconomic groups.
This isn't antisemitism.

It is interesting the media hype his comments have received. And how blogs are biting on this stuff and using it as an excuse to smear one of the most high profile populist head of state on the radar. Some blogs and websites are falling for this misinformation. Others are actively pushing the story. I'm remembering the places I visit and that are sent to me that are pushing this story of Chavez as an anti-semite. It might be useful in understanding weird stories in the future that somehow get traction.

For those eager to smear anyone adequately enthusiastic about Western capitalism, try again.

According to the US Constitution the president of the United States is also the top military official of the United States of America. In that capacity he is referred to as the Commander-In-Chief. George Bush is the President of the United States. George Bush's legal advisor John Yoo has argued that Bush can torture children if he 'needs to do that'.

Attorney John Yoo is one of if not the most influential legal advisor in Bush's terror war. On December 1st 2005 a debate between Bush's advisor John Yoo and Notre Dame profesor and human rights scholar Doug Cassel occurred.

Cassel: If the President deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty.
Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

?
I'm not the only one that sees a problem with that am I? This is a good snapshot for all the Christians out there that are proud to have voted for Bush and his people that see this administration as being 'Christian'. Wondering why some on the left seem so rabidly secular and unwilling to mix church and state at all? This 'Christian' administration reserves the right to crush the testicles of children if it 'needs to do that'.

Disclaimer: I didn't vote for John Kerry nor would I advocate confidence or faith in the national Democratic Party leadership who are as responsible for this war and ongoing military offensive as is Bush and his gang. But crushing the testicles of children?

This is where we are. This is what we're dealing with here with Bush and his circle of born again 'Christians'.

Audio link of the debate exchange where the right is reserved to crush the testicles of children can be found here.