Monday 29th of April 2024

netanyahooey .....

netanyahooey ....

According to U.S. officials, Israel is training and supporting Iranian terrorists who are trying to topple the Iranian government. Those Israeli-funded terrorists have faked documents to falsely indicate that Iran is building a nuclear bomb. 1

 

Israel has admitted to previous use of false flag attacks to justify war against Middle Eastern nations.

For example, Israel admits that an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind “evidence” implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed) (and see this and this).

Numerous high-level government officials have warned that a false flag may be launched against Iran to start a war: 2 

·                  Former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski (who helped to create Al Qaeda to fight the soviets in Afghanistan) told the Senate that a terrorist act might be carried out in the U.S. and falsely blamed on Iran to justify war against that nation.

·                  Daniel Ellsberg – the famous Pentagon Papers whistleblower – said “if there is another terror attack, “I believe the president will get what he wants”, which includes war with Iran

·                  Robert David Steele – a 20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer, the second-ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, and former CIA clandestine services case officer – says that elements within the U.S. government are trying to carry out a false flag operation and blame it on Iran

·                  Former high-level CIA officer Michael Scheuer – who was the head of the CIA unit tasked with capturing Bin Laden – says that Israel or Saudi Arabia could be setting up Iran as a way to foment war 3

·                  Ron Paul has warned of a “Gulf of Tonkin type incident” in Iran

·                  Pulitzer-prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh says many ideas have been proposed for provoking a war, including building boats that look like Iranian boats, and then putting Navy Seals on them to “start a shoot-up”

·                  The highly influential Brookings Institution wrote a report in 2009 called “Which Path to Persia?” which states (pages 84-85):

It would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it. (One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression.) 

·                  A member of the British Parliament stated that “there is a very real danger” that the American government will stage a false flag terror attack in order to justify war against Iran

·                  A number of very high-level former intelligence officers – including several that personally briefed presidents every day on matters of national security – stated that better communications between the U.S. and Iran were needed to “reduce the danger of … covert, false-flag attack”  

One of America’s top constitutional and military law experts – Jonathan Turley – writes

Many critics have argued that there is a concerted effort to push the United States into a war with Iran by supporters of Israel. Patrick Clawson, director of research for the highly influential pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) think tank, seemed intent to prove those rumors true this week in comments as a luncheon on “How to Build US-Israeli Coordination on Preventing an Iranian Nuclear Breakout.” Clawson casually discusses how to create a false flag operation to push the U.S. into war to overcome any reluctance by the public. We have been discussing how many leaders like Senator Joe Lieberman had begun to use the same rhetoric that led to the last two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and how the suggest timing of an attack has been tied to the presidential election.

In his remarks, Clawson helpfully lists a series of historical events used to push the country into war like the Gulf of Tonkin incident that gave us the Vietnam War. Clawson expressed his frustration in acknowledging that it is “[v]ery hard for me to see how the United States President can get us to war with Iran.” However, there is hope. Clawson explains that the “traditional way” to get the country into a war is through false flags or manufactured incidents where Americans are killed. Thus, he observes, “we are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians, we could get nastier about it. So, if in fact the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war.”

The fact that one of the leading analysis for the WINEP would feel comfortable in making such comments is itself quite chilling. It indicates that such discussions have become sufficiently regular that it has crept into public discussion. It is a measure of the secret pressure building to push this country into a third major war despite our crippling economic conditions and losses in military personnel. The assumption in Washington is that neither Romney nor Obama could oppose such a war. Even if Obama does not publicly support Israel, the assumption is that political allies of Israel in Washington can guarantee that we would offer extensive military loans and intelligence. Even if there is a delay in such military loans and support, the assumption is that Israel can go to war with the understanding that the United States will cover a significant portion of the costs. Moreover, in his remarkably candid remarks, Clawson shows how the U.S. can easily be forced into direct combat by pushing Iran to simply kill some Americans or sink a few of our ships. Then members would be clamoring for revenge. Notably, the Israelis have been ratcheting-up the war rhetoric in pushing Iran, which predictably has now reserved the right to engage in a preemptive strike not just against Israeli but U.S. interests. We would then, again, find ourselves in a war without any public debate or collective decision.

While Clawson adds a passing caveat that he is not advocating such an approach, his remarks are clearly designed to show how the group can get the United States into a war for Israel if only we can get Iran to kill some of our citizens or soldiers. Those people are of course expendable props in Clawson’s realpolitik.

By the way, Clawson has been enlisted to give his insightful analysis at the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. He is also a member of the National Defense University’s Institute for National Strategic Studies. The World Bank connection is particularly interesting given the history with Paul Wolfowitz who pushed the U.S. into two disastrous wars in the Bush Administration and was rewarded with being made the head of the World Bank.

It is the callous disconnect that is most chilling in these remarks. Thousands of U.S. soldiers have died or have been crippled for life in these wars that have left the country near bankruptcy (and increasingly hostile “allies” in Afghanistan and Iraq). Those casualties and costs, however, appear immaterial in the discussion of supporting Israel in a war against Iran. 

1 Top American and Israeli military and intelligence officials actually say that:

·        Iran has not decided to build a nuclear bomb

·        Even if Iran did build a nuclear bomb – it would not be that dangerous, because Israel and America have so many more nukes. And see this

·        Attacking Iran would only speed up its development of nuclear weapons, empower its hardliners, and undermine the chance for democratic reform

2 False flag attacks have been carried out against Iran in the past. For example, the CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister

3 Saudi Arabia has also been supporting terrorists.

This article was originally published at WashingtonsBlog

by the middle of next year...

The super-terrorist plans to blow up parliament and the King; the very nation will be liquidated. Fawkes was a Catholic rather than a Muslim – though Renaissance Europe was pretty good at bestialising both – but what a cartoon! I loved the curly fuse and the "flashy" bit on the end – Dan Dare versus The Mekon – and the red line drawn on the black line. It was all oh-so-convincing. Ninety per cent convincing.

Not since the last set of cartoons flourished in the UN Donkey House has the world been so gobsmacked. Then it was Colin Powell (I was in the Security Council chamber as a witness to this nonsense in 2003) who displayed his own cartoon of white-coated Iraqi chemists making weapons of mass destruction in a mobile laboratory. It was a railway train, for heaven's sake. And, unlike Bibi's bomb and fuse, it was actually meant to be a railway train. Cartoons, you see, can be taken literally or metaphorically. Or just plain insult the intelligence of ordinary folk; like Bibi's – or cartoons of the Prophet Mohamed, for that matter. They all go "BANG" in the end. And I can see why Israel's sorrowful defenders had to trash Bibi's cartoon yesterday. Sure, it was awful – but the MESSAGE, that was the thing. Don't let the cartoon distract you from the truth (albeit that cartoons are supposed to contain an inner truth, are they not?) and the truth according to Bibi was that Iran could have a nuclear bomb "BY THE MIDDLE OF NEXT YEAR".

read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/robert-fisk-netanyahus-warning-reveals-his-moments-of-memory-loss-8190461.html

king fuckwit...

The bible is more a record of the Jews' wars with the rest of the world than their trials and tribulations in relation to god, the bearded woman... At every page corner of the book, the Jews are fighting someone else, winning or loosing and the results of the battles are analysed in obtuse verse, deemed to be in relation to their sins or their rightfulness... God of course could not care less, but these self-decidedly "chosen people"  end up in captivity somewhere like Egypt or they successfully ransack someone else's property, because "these someone else" pray to a golden goat instead of a burning bush... And of course, the western world has adopted the bush on fire mantra, after having got rid of its Jews who leeched like misers on the system of trade, as described in the bible in which Sunday is Saturday in the temple...

So, after the Kings Solomons, the Davids and the pisspot Noahs — all who had umpteen wives and concubines for sex, and were not righteous except in deranged minds — now comes King Fuckwit Netanya-who...

Hell...

Natanya-who should realise by now — if he has not registered in his crappy pigeon loft — that should he attack the Saracens in Iran, the Ruskies and the Chinese would not be very happy... Sure, the Yanks would have to support his silly quest by creating some flimsy excuse to bomb something, but even sabre-rattling Romney would be twice shy about taking on the Ruskies and the Chinese, plus Pakistan, even if having a few idiots and opportunists on its side, like the Saudis, who may not be there all the way because, let's face it really, they don't like the Jews... Anyway, declaring war on Iran would be ugly and stupid, like most of the battles described in the bible, in which the idea of god has been the shameful excuse and the illusionary motivator of ugly conflicts — all at the same time... 

Gus Leonisky