The two aims of the Party are to conquer the whole surface of the earth and to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought. George Orwell, 1984. The Washington Times declared at the end of last March that The 2009 cyber-attack by the US and Israel that crippled Iran's nuclear program by sabotaging industrial equipment constituted an act of force, and was likely illegal under international law, according to a manual commissioned by NATO's cyber defense center in Estonia. What the Washington Times probably did not know or did not want to tell its readers was that the attack was indirectly mapped out by one of the leading neoconservative think tanks in the United States, the Brooking's Institution declare: A policy determined to overthrow the government of Iran might very well include plans for a full-scale invasion as a contingency for extreme circumstances. Certainly, if various forms of covert and overt support simply failed to produce the desired effect, a president determined to produce regime change in Iran might consider an invasion as the only other way to achieve that end. Moreover, the United States would have to expect Iran to fight back against the American regime change operations, as it has in the past. Although the Iranians typically have been careful to avoid crossing American red lines, they certainly could miscalculate, and it is entirely possible that their retaliation for US regime change activities would appear to Americans as having crossed just such a threshold. For example, if Iran retaliated with a major terrorist attack involving WMDs, especially on US soil, Washington might decide that an invasion was the only way to deal with such a dangerous Iranian regime. Indeed, for this same reason, efforts to promote regime change in Iran might be intended by the US government as deliberate provocations to try to goad the Iranians into an excessive response that might then justify an American invasion. In other words, the Zionist regime has been in the process of provoking Iran, and if Iran does react to the provocation in a negative way, that would be a legitimate way to invade Iran and ask for a regime change. The Zionist regime has used this form of weapon before in Iraq under Bush. Two months prior to the invasion of Iraq, Bush was so concerned that he would not find WMDs there that he thought about provoking Hussein and forcing him to get into a conflict: In a five page memo stamped 'extremely sensitive' dated January 31, 2003, that summarized the discussion at the meeting, a summary the Bush administration has never challenged, David Manning wrote that Bush and Blair expressed their doubts that any chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons would ever be found in Iraq, and that there was tension between Bush and Blair over finding justification for the war that would be acceptable to other nations.