Author Topic: Does the banker-owned "U.S." government have the moral high-ground on nukes?  (Read 64284 times)

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Infowars.com Poll: Attack On Iran Imminent
« Reply #40 on: August 12, 2010, 05:48:35 pm »
http://www.infowars.com/infowars-com-poll-attack-on-iran-imminent/

Infowars.com Poll: Attack On Iran Imminent

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 12, 2010

Nearly 60% of respondents to an Infowars.com poll believe the U.S and Israel will attack Iran in the near future.

       

On July 27, Steve Watson, writing for Prison Planet.com, reported on a comment made by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stating he thinks the U.S., backed by Israel, is preparing to attack two countries in the middle East within months.

“We have precise information that the Americans have devised a plot, according to which they seek to launch a psychological war on Iran,” Ahmadinejad told Iranian state media Press TV. “They plan to attack at least two countries in the region within the next three months,” he added.

Watson wrote that although Ahmadinejad did not elaborate on which two countries were targeted, it must be assumed his reference was to Syria and Lebanon, both Iranian allies and both previous targets of U.S. backed Israeli aggression in recent years.

16 percent of those taking part in the poll believe Iran will be attacked after the U.S. mid-term elections, while 13% think the attack will occur next year or later. 15 percent responded that there will not be an attack on Iran or any other country in the Middle East.

Earlier today, Tabatabaei-Nejad, an Iranian lawmaker, said the U.S. and Israel are incapable of building a global consensus to strike Iran over its nuclear program, according to Press TV. The comments arrive nearly two weeks after the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, spoke of a U.S. military plan to wage a war on Iran.

“The claim of attacking Iran’s nuclear plants is made by the US and the Zionist regime to assess its global repercussions,” IRNA quoted Tabatabaei-Nejad as saying. Tabatabaei-Nejad said that the U.S. “has paid a heavy price for attacking Iran’s neighboring countries” and has got “stuck in the quagmire of Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari, commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps in Iran, said on Thursday the U.S. is fully aware of Iran’s defense capabilities and is not capable of carrying out its threats, according to Tehran Times. Jafari added that the enemy has stepped up its “soft war” against the Islamic Republic since they realize a military attack is not an option.

Appearing on Fox News yesterday, former CIA director Michael Hayden repeated his assertion that a U.S. attack against Iran is “inexorable.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
A Neocon Preps US for War with Iran
« Reply #41 on: August 16, 2010, 10:36:38 am »
http://www.infowars.com/a-neocon-preps-us-for-war-with-iran/

A Neocon Preps US for War with Iran

Ray McGovern
Consortiumnews
August 16, 2010

I guess I was naïve in thinking that The Atlantic and its American-Israeli writer Jeffrey Goldberg might shy away from arguing for yet another war — this one with Iran — while the cauldrons are still boiling in Afghanistan and Iraq.


Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic.

It’s worth remembering how Goldberg helped to make the case for the U.S. invasion of Iraq. For instance, on Oct. 3, 2002, as America’s war fever was building, Goldberg wrote in Slate, the online magazine:

“The [Bush] administration is planning … to launch what many people would undoubtedly call a short-sighted and inexcusable act of aggression. In five years, however, I believe that the coming invasion of Iraq will be remembered as an act of profound morality.”

Looking back on Goldberg’s commentaries at the time, it’s also a reminder of how many U.S. publications that are considered centrist or even liberal were bending over backward to get in line with that coming invasion.

Even earlier, on March 25, 2002, Goldberg filled the pages of The New Yorker with a mammoth 17,000-word story hyping Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s ties to terrorism and glossing over the ambiguities regarding the gassing of civilians in the Kurdish city of Halabja during the Iran-Iraq war.

Goldberg’s magnum opus, entitled “The Great Terror,” earned him high marks from other neocons and essentially “made” Goldberg’s career. The story was also made to order, so to speak, for President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

Presenting Goldberg with an award for the article, the Overseas Press Club saw fit to note that former CIA director James Woolsey described the story as a “blockbuster.” Woolsey, the self-described “anchor of the Presbyterian wing of JINSA (The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs),” has been a strong advocate for the use of force against any and all perceived enemies of Israel.

Woolsey also was the prime manufacturer and a key disseminator of bogus “intelligence” on the Saddam-al-Qaeda connection. In The New Yorker article, while exaggerating Iraq’s links to terrorism, Goldberg quotes Woolsey complaining about the CIA’s alleged aversion to learning about Saddam’s ties to al-Qaeda.

It is a safe bet that Goldberg’s prose under the subhead “The Al-Qaeda Link” was inspired by Woolsey. But it gets worse; the detail in that section came mostly from a drug dealer in a Kurdish prison, whom a British journalist, following upon Goldberg’s reporting, quickly determined to be a “liar.”

A Friendly Reception

Yet, not surprisingly, Goldberg emerged from his work prepping the PR ground for the U.S. invasion of Iraq as a well-respected “journalist,” so much so that he was afforded deferential treatment when he made a tour of the cable TV news programs this week promoting his new case for a new war, this time with Iran.

Goldberg had just produced a new magnum opus for another prestige journal, The Atlantic, entitled “The Point of No Return,” explaining Israel’s case for bombing Iran and the reasons why the United States should join in.

On Wednesday, Goldberg swatted away softball questions from MSNBC anchor Andrea Mitchell, who joined in a friendly chat about whether the U.S. or Israel or both should opt for what Mitchell described as a “military response” to the “Iranian nuclear threat,” and when.

Goldberg claimed that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu sees the challenge from Iran as being on a par with the Holocaust, believing that Iran is bent on the destruction of Israel with its 6 million people.

“Are you persuaded that Israel would take action against Iran unilaterally?” asked Mitchell. “Yes, I am; I am,” Goldberg responded.

Goldberg added that he believes that President Barack Obama is not prepared to live with a nuclear Iran but that it remains an open question whether he would take military action to prevent that eventuality. Goldberg said Obama “probably” would not.

And that being the case, Goldberg thought Netanyahu would be inclined to unleash Israeli forces unilaterally and absorb any damage this might do to bilateral relations with Washington.

At the end of the Mitchell interview, she lofted what appeared to be a canned question and, in response, Goldberg seemed downright eager to share what he called a “secret,” as he put it.

Mitchell asked when Obama planned to visit Israel. Goldberg, however, expressed a concern: “The Israelis are worried about Obama coming; they don’t want him to be boo-ed wherever he goes; that’s the last thing they need. Obama is not popular in Israel in the way Bush and Clinton were.”

The unmistakable message: An Obama tour of Israel could be an ugly affair.

Chatting with Wolf

Goldberg walked through a similar discussion on the merits of war when he appeared on CNN, a guest of Wolf Blitzer’s “The Situation Room.”

Goldberg: “The question is what can the Obama administration do to stop the Iranians from pursuing the nuclear program … it seems unlikely to me at this point that Iran is simply going to say, because President Obama asks, you know, we’re going to end our nuclear program.”

Blitzer: “You have concluded that an Israeli air strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities is — in your word — a near certainty?”

Goldberg: “Well, it’s a near certainty, in the long term, but even in the next year I give it a 50 percent or better chance. Next year, meaning by next July.”

Not that it probably would have mattered, but someone probably should have told Andrea Mitchell and Wolf Blitzer that more skeptical observers have described Goldberg’s previous “journalism” in very unflattering terms.

One critic deemed Goldberg’s pre-Iraq War reporting for The New Yorker as “a journalism-school nightmare: bad sources, compromised sources, unacknowledged uncertainties … with alarmist rhetoric that is now either laughable or nauseating, depending on your mood.”

For instance, the fact that many civilians were gassed as Iraqi and Iranian forces clashed on March 16, 1988, in the area of Halabja, just barely inside Iraq’s border with Iran, is beyond dispute.

However, what is not clear is the blockbuster charge that it was the Iraqis, rather than the Iranians, who used the deadly chemical warfare agents. The U.S. government has pointed the finger in both directions, often depending on which side of the conflict Washington was tilting toward.

A joint CIA and Defense Intelligence assessment focused in on the “blood agents (cyanogen chloride) deemed responsible for most of the deaths in Halabja and determined that the Iraqis had no history of using those particular agents, but that the Iranians did.

That particular CIA-DIA report concluded that, despite the conventional wisdom, “the Iranians perpetrated this attack.”

Dr. Stephen Pelletiere, a senior CIA analyst on Iraq during its war with Iran, told Roger Trilling of the Village Voice that he is one among many who believe that Goldberg’s account of the killings at Halabja was wrong and that the issue was far from academic.

Pelletiere said: “We say Saddam is a monster, a maniac who gassed his own people, and the world shouldn’t tolerate him. But why? Because that’s the last argument the U.S. has for going to war with Iraq.”

It may well have been the most emotionally riveting argument, I suppose.

Debunking the Junk

But what about Iraq’s alleged WMDs and supposed ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda? Goldberg made an attempt to include those canards as well, focusing mostly on chemical and biological warfare agents. (He left to the New York Times’ Judith Miller, who was later fired, and Michael Gordon, who is still chief military correspondent, to do the heavy lifting for the lies about Iraq’s supposed nuclear weapons.)

A final story about Jeffrey Goldberg’s pre-Iraq-invasion stories: Just a week before Congress bowed to Bush’s request for war authorization against Iraq, Goldberg was writing in Slate about the dangers of “aflatoxin,” which he had cited 15 times in his New Yorker article.

“Aflatoxin does only one thing well,” Goldberg wrote. “It causes liver cancer. In fact, it induces it particularly well in children.”

However, Goldberg’s obsession with “aflatoxin” didn’t stand up too well after the U.S.-led invasion found no evidence that Iraq still had bio-weapons stockpiles. Regarding aflatoxin, Charles Duelfer, the Bush administration’s chief weapons inspector in Iraq, concluded that there was “no evidence to link those tests [of aflatoxin] with the development of biological weapons agents for military use.”

Ken Silverstein of Harper’s, among the more serious journalists who have had macabre fun critiquing Goldberg’s contribution to the Iraq War effort, wrote “Goldberg’s War,” one of the best critiques.

Silverstein wrote:

“Whatever Saddam’s regime intended to do with the aflatoxin … it did not involve wholescale tot-slaughter. But it seems to me that Goldberg was out to prove that Saddam was singularly evil — a man who would kill kids using cancer, no doubt cackling with glee as he watched them expire — because the American public might be less willing to support a war if he was merely an evil dictator, which are a dime a dozen.”

But who is Jeffrey Goldberg and how did he achieve such influence, helping to create the false conventional wisdom that sleep-walked the American people into war with Iraq and is now pointing toward a new war with Iran?

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Flashback to 1953 : Joint CIA/MI6 Military Coup in Iran: "Operation Ajax"
« Reply #42 on: August 19, 2010, 11:12:17 am »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/flashback-to-1953-operation-ajax-joint-cia-mi6-military-coup-in-iran/20698

Flashback to 1953 : Joint CIA/MI6 Military Coup in Iran: "Operation Ajax

by Andrew Gavin Marshall



Global Research
August 19, 2010

The following text is an excerpt from excerpt from: A New World War for a New World Order - The Origins of World War III: Part 3, by Andrew Gavin Marshall


Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, accompanied by CIA Director Allen Dulles,
returns from exile to Tehran on 22 August 1953.


To understand the nature of American and British “democracy promotion” in Iran, it is important to examine their historical practices regarding “democracy” in Iran. Specifically, the events of 1953 present a very important picture, in which the United States orchestrated its first foreign coup, with guidance and direction from the British, who had extensive oil interests in Iran. The first democratically elected government of Mohommad Mossadeq in 1951 announced the nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (later to be re-named British Petroleum), which had an exclusive monopoly on Iranian oil. This naturally angered the British, who, in 1952, convinced the CIA to help in a plot to overthrow Iran’s government.

The idea to topple the Iranian government was born in Britain, but it didn’t take much to convince the CIA to launch a joint operation with the SIS. Government documents were made public which revealed that CIA “officers orchestrating the Iran coup worked directly with royalist Iranian military officers, handpicked the prime minister's replacement, sent a stream of envoys to bolster the shah's courage, directed a campaign of bombings by Iranians posing as members of the Communist Party, and planted articles and editorial cartoons in newspapers.” The strategy was aimed at supporting an Iranian General and the Shah through CIA assets and financing, which would overthrow Mossadeq, “particularly if this combination should be able to get the largest mobs in the streets.”

The Shah was to play a pivotal role, as he was “to stand fast as the C.I.A. stirred up popular unrest and then, as the country lurched toward chaos, to issue royal decrees dismissing Dr. Mossadegh and appointing General Zahedi prime minister.” CIA operatives stoked pressure by pretending to be Iranian Communists, threatening Muslim leaders with “savage punishment if they opposed Mossadegh,” in an effort to stir anti-Communist and anti-Mossadeq sentiments in the religious community. The CIA even bombed the house of a prominent Muslim. Further, the CIA was advancing a major propaganda campaign, as a major newspaper owner was paid $45,000 to support the efforts. The CIA, once the coup was underway, used American media as propaganda, in an attempt to legitimize the coup plotters, as the CIA sent The Associated Press a news release saying that, “unofficial reports are current to the effect that leaders of the plot are armed with two decrees of the shah, one dismissing Mossadegh and the other appointing General Zahedi to replace him.” The CIA also disseminated this propaganda through Iranian media.

Following the beginning of the coup, which began on August 15, Mossadeq suspended the Parliament, which ultimately played “into the C.I.A.'s hands.” After having several plotters arrested, he let his guard down. Then the American Embassy planned a counterattack for August 19, specifically using religious forces. At this time, the Communist Party blamed “Anglo-American intrigue” for the coup. However, just as the CIA thought it was a failure, Iranian papers began publishing en masse the Shah’s decrees, and suddenly large pro-Shah crowds were building in the streets. An Iranian journalist who was an important CIA agent, “led a crowd toward Parliament, inciting people to set fire to the offices of a newspaper owned by Dr. Mossadegh's foreign minister. Another Iranian C.I.A. agent led a crowd to sack the offices of pro-Tudeh papers.”

Then coup supporters in the military began to enter the streets, and soon “the crowds began to receive direct leadership from a few officers involved in the plot and some who had switched sides. Within an hour the central telegraph office fell, and telegrams were sent to the provinces urging a pro-shah uprising. After a brief shootout, police headquarters and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs fell as well.” Interestingly, according to the declassified documents, the CIA “hoped to plant articles in American newspapers saying Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi's return resulted from a homegrown revolt against a Communist-leaning government,” but that ultimately, “its operatives had only limited success in manipulating American reporters.” The CIA planted stories in US media, such as one instance where the State Department planted a CIA study in Newsweek.

One of the key lessons the CIA learned in this operation, was that it “exposed the agency's shortcomings in manipulating the American press.” The CIA even manipulated a reporter with the New York Times to disseminate propaganda. While Soviet media was proclaiming the US responsible for the coup, American mentions of this in the media dismissed these accusations outright, and never “examined such charges seriously.”

By the end of Operation Ajax, as the CIA coup was codenamed, “some 300 people had died in firefights in the streets of Tehran,” largely due to the CIA “provoking street violence.” The coup resulted in “more than two decades of dictatorship under the Shah, who relied heavily on US aid and arms.”


Related Articles

Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Part I: Global Warfare

by Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, 1 August 2010

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20403

US Sponsored Regime Change in Iran
Mossadegh and Ahmadinejad: Iran Faces Almost the Same Dilemma as in 1953

by Ardeshir Ommani, Global Research, 3 February 2010

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17380


© Copyright Andrew Gavin Marshall, Global Research, 2010
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
http://www.prisonplanet.com/cia-launches-%e2%80%9ccounterproliferation-center%e2%80%9d-as-iran-attack-rhetoric-kicks-into-high-gear.html

CIA Launches “Counterproliferation Center” as Iran Attack Rhetoric Kicks Into High Gear

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 19, 2010

As the rhetoric heats up in preparation for an attack on Iran, the CIA has announced it will christen a “counterproliferation center to combat the spread of dangerous weapons and technology, a move that comes as Iran is on the verge of fueling up a new nuclear power plant,” reports the Associated Press.



Obama’s CIA boss, Leon Panetta, said the CIA will formalize a collaboration between its “operators” — presumably the “Dark Side” Cheney talked about so fondly — and its more sedate analysts.

CIA spokesman George Little said the collaboration has already produced results and cited last year’s “revelation” of the “discovery of the Syrian covert nuclear reactor and Iran’s undeclared uranium enrichment facility near Qom.”

In fact, the CIA knew about Iran’s Qom facility more than three years ago, but decided to roll out this “revelation” late last year as the bomb Iran bandwagon began turning its wheels with renewed vigor under a new and (at the time) less tainted president.

Israel claimed it had taken out Syria’s fledgling nuclear program, but this was later exposed as propaganda. “We don’t have any independent intelligence that it was a nuclear facility — only the assertions by the Israelis and some ambiguous satellite photography from them that shows a building, which the Syrians admitted was a military facility,” said one official, wishing to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the subject. As usual, the adjective “anonymous” and the noun “sensitivity” are inextricably linked in government parlance, especially when script-read by the corporate media.

Part of the effort to butt into the business of sovereign nations was the trickery employed by the CIA to interrupt Iran’s nuclear centrifuge operations at Natanz. Paul Brannan, a senior analyst at the Institute for Science and International Security, said the CIA managed to sneak “faulty parts into Iran’s nuclear supply chain.”

Imagine if you will the Iranians interfering in the United States’ nuclear program. Congress would declare war in a less than a fortnight. Or rather, since Congress is not in the business of declaring war as the Constitution states, the all-powerful imperial executive would issue an order calling for an attack.

Brannan, however, was obliged to admit reality. “Brannan said the Bushehr site is not a proliferation threat since Iran does not have the ability to reprocess the spent fuel into nuclear weapons-grade material,” the Associated Press reports.

Not that the CIA is about to issue the Iranians a get out of jail card. “But that site will be watched closely not only by the CIA but by other elements of the intelligence community,” undoubtedly including the neocon-friendly variety determined to start World War III, or as the neocons lovingly call it, World War IV.

At best, the CIA’s “counterproliferation center” is a bad joke. The United States is the only nation on the face of the earth to nuke another country. In regard to proliferating “weapons of mass destruction — nuclear, chemical and biological,” the CIA should take a look at the U.S. Department of Commerce. It licensed 70 biological exports to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq between 1985 and 1989, including at least 21 batches of lethal strains of anthrax.

Transnational corporations figured prominently in this effort — Phillips Petroleum, Unilever, Alcolac, Allied Signal, the American Type Culture Collection, and Teledyne all sold Iraq dual-use chemicals and biological samples for its biological weapons program. During a trial charging Teledyne with violations of the Export Administration Act and the Arms Export Control Act, the corporation said the CIA had authorized the shipments.

As for nukes and rogue nations, let us consider the role of Donald Rumsfeld, the former Secretary of Defense. In 2003, it was revealed that Rumsfeld played a key role in making sure North Korea would get nuclear weapons. Before assuming the role as Master of Death and Destruction (more than a million killed in Iraq alone), Rumsfeld occupied a place high up in the Swiss-based corporation ABB that made a tidy $200 million when it sold North Korea equipment and services for two nuclear power stations at Kumho.

Of course, the CIA’s counterproliferation center is not about preventing corporations and the CIA itself from selling materials destined for weapons of mass destruction. It is about demonizing Iran, Syria, North Korea and other officially declared enemies.

It’s about future wars and the propaganda required to sell the increasingly irrelevant American people those wars.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline ryanwv

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 284
    • The Ghost of Liberty
Re: Does the banker-owned U.S. government have the moral high-ground on nukes?
« Reply #44 on: September 06, 2010, 06:32:54 am »
A lot of information is posted in this tread but I found the remarks made by Castro to be of interest. Castro does not say much these days yet when he says that there is a serious chance of nuke war breaking out people should listen. There really is a chance that nuke war could happen in the middle east. The media is not covering this the right way at all. Everything is not okay for sure.
The gentlemen from Tokyo MR. Ryan D. Smith

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
U.S. Threat to Attack Iran with Nukes is “Criminal"
« Reply #45 on: October 12, 2010, 02:32:15 pm »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-threat-to-attack-iran-with-nukes-is-criminal/21402

U.S. Threat to Attack Iran with Nukes is “Criminal"

by Sherwood Ross



Global Research
October 11, 2010

The U.S. today is threatening to attack Iran “under the completely bogus pretext” that it might have a nuclear weapon, a distinguished American international legal authority says.

When Obama administration officials, like those of the Bush regime before it, say “all options are on the table,” they are threatening nuclear war and that is prohibited by international law, says Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois at Champaign.

Not only has the International Atomic Energy Commission said this charge against Iran “is simply not true,” Boyle pointed out, but threatening Iran with nuclear war in itself constitutes an international crime.

“If we don't act now, Obama and his people could very well set off a Third World War over Iran that has already been threatened publicly by (President George W.) Bush Jr.,” he asserted.

In a speech on nuclear deterrence to the 18th conference on “Direct Democracy” in Feldkirch, Austria, Boyle said it has been estimated an attack on Iran with tactical nuclear weapons by the U.S. and Israel could kill nearly 3-million people.

(Boyle charges the U.S. has already committed “acts of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, and has authorized, armed, equipped, and supplied Israel to commit...outright genocide against Lebanon and Palestine.”)

Nuclear weapons and “nuclear deterrence” have “never been legitimate instruments of state policy but have always constituted instrumentalities of internationally lawless and criminal behavior,” Boyle said.

Thus, the governments of all the nuclear weapons states are “criminal” for threatening to exterminate humanity. Boyle named the U.S., Russia, France, Britain, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel. He reminded that “If mass extermination of human beings is a crime, the threat to commit mass extermination is also a crime.”

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
NYT Still Stalking Iran
« Reply #46 on: December 06, 2010, 11:23:32 am »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/nyt-still-stalking-iran.html

NYT Still Stalking Iran

RAY McGOVERN
Counterpunch
Dec 5, 2010

From the scary photo dominating page nine of the New York Times of Nov. 29, you can just tell from the look on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s face, not to mention the endless ranks of military officers standing in rows behind him, that Iran is determined to build a nuclear weapon. That defiant look should be proof enough that the Iranian President is a menace to us all. Right?

Never mind the doubting-Thomas wimps in those 16 U.S. intelligence agencies who – so far, at least — have been holding out for what they call real evidence before reversing their “high confidence” judgments of three years ago that Iran had stopped work on a nuclear warhead in the fall of 2003 and had not resumed it.

No doubt someone will ask about those 19 advanced missiles Iran supposedly bought from North Korea. But, hah! We have a photo of them in a parade in North Korea, which proves this “mystery missile” really exists – notwithstanding all the missile experts who say the North Koreans were just wheeling around a mock-up, not the real thing.

But the missiles — or the mock-ups — still look real enough to be highlighted by the Times for later use by the likes of Senators Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman to underscore the alleged threat from Iran and the “urgent” need to thwart it. Clearly the New York Times editors don’t want to let up on their relentless campaign to rally the nation behind regime change for Iran, much as the Times and many other leading U.S. newspapers pumped for regime change in Iraq.

So, with the new WikiLeaks documents, the Times highlighted how Sunni Arab leaders and Israelis alike have “Sharp Distress Over a Nuclear Iran,” offering little context regarding the long history of the often hysterical hostility against Shiite-ruled Iran that has emanated from Riyadh as well as Tel Aviv.

If you’re a Times editor who knows it’s smart to go with the flow, don’t forget to post the missile-parade photo in color on the Times’ Web page, making the menacing missiles seem even more dangerous, dripping with bright red blood-color paint on the payload tips. Yes, and give it a scary title, say, “Iran Fortifies Its Arsenal With the Aid of North Korea.”

Full article here
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
While everyone is focused on the birth certificate and the 'death' of Osama Bin Laden...

'Israeli jets prepare in Iraq to strike Iran'
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/177824.html

Israeli jet fighters have reportedly conducted drills at a military base in Iraq in order to strike targets inside Iran.

A considerable number of Israeli warplanes were seen at al-Asad base in Iraq, reported a source close to prominent Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sader's group.

The aircraft reportedly included F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, and KC-10 jet fighters.

The warplanes carried out their week-long exercises at nights, the same source added.

The drills were reportedly aimed at preparing to strike Iran's air defense systems, disrupt Iran's radars and attack targets deep inside Iran.

Iraqi officials had not been notified of the exercises, which were conducted in collaboration with the US military.

The United States maintains numerous bases in Iraq, and the Baghdad government is not involved in any of the military deployments taking place there.

NN/TG/HJL/HRF
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
"No Shred of Evidence", Iran Building Nukes, Ex Head of IAEA Says
« Reply #48 on: June 02, 2011, 12:38:13 pm »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/no-shred-of-evidence-iran-building-nukes-ex-head-of-iaea-says/25088

"No Shred of Evidence", Iran Building Nukes, Ex Head of IAEA Says

by Sherwood Ross



Global Research
June 2, 2011

The former Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) said in a new published report that he had not seen “a shred of evidence” that Iran was “building nuclear-weapons facilities and using enriched materials.”

Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient who spent 12 years at the IAEA, told investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, “I don't believe Iran is a clear and present danger. All I see is the hype about the threat posed by Iran.”

El Baradei, who is now a candidate for the presidency of Egypt, added, “The core issue is mutual lack of trust. I believe there will be no solution until the day that the United States and Iran sit down together to discuss the issues and put pressure on each other to find a solution.”

El Baradei's remarks are contained in an article by Hersh titled “Iran And The Bomb,” published in the June 6th issue of The New Yorker magazine.

Hersh points out that the last two U.S. National Intelligence Estimates (N.I.E.s) on Iranian nuclear progress “have stated that there is no conclusive evidence that Iran has made any effort to build the bomb since 2003.”

An N.I.E. Report supposedly represents the best judgment of the senior offices from all the major American intelligence agencies.

The latest report, which came out this year and remains highly classified, is said by Hersh to reinforce the conclusion of the last N.I.E. Report of 2007, that “Iran halted weaponization in 2003.”

A retired senior intelligence officer, speaking of the latest N.I.E. Report, told Hersh, “The important thing is that nothing substantially new has been learned in the last four years, and none of our efforts---informants, penetrations, planting of sensors---leads to a bomb.”

Hersh revealed that over the past six years, soldiers from the Joint Special Operations Force, working with Iranian intelligence assets, “put in place cutting-edge surveillance techniques” to spy on suspected Iran facilities. These included:

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
‘Iran has no nukes and US knows that’
« Reply #49 on: June 13, 2011, 11:07:59 am »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/iran-has-no-nukes-and-us-knows-that.html

‘Iran has no nukes and US knows that’

RT
June 12, 2011

Washington is ignoring its own intelligence because it is hell-bent on finding nuclear weapons that do not exist, Pulitzer-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh told RT.

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_HvZHdcXQk
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Satyagraha

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,145
Re: ‘Iran has no nukes and US knows that’
« Reply #50 on: June 13, 2011, 12:04:29 pm »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/iran-has-no-nukes-and-us-knows-that.html

‘Iran has no nukes and US knows that’

RT
June 12, 2011

Washington is ignoring its own intelligence because it is hell-bent on finding nuclear weapons that do not exist, Pulitzer-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh told RT.

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_HvZHdcXQk

Also in the June Issue of the New Yorker:

Annals of National Security
Iran and the Bomb
How real is the nuclear threat?

by Seymour M. Hersh June 6, 2011
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/06/06/110606fa_fact_hersh#ixzz1PAl5mjWT

ABSTRACT:

ANNALS OF NATIONAL SECURITY about whether Iran’s nuclear program is being exaggerated.

Is Iran actively trying to develop nuclear weapons? Members of the Obama Administration often talk as if this were a foregone conclusion, as did their predecessors under George W. Bush. There’s a large body of evidence, however, including some of America’s most highly classified intelligence assessments, suggesting that the U.S. could be in danger of repeating a mistake similar to the one made with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq eight years ago—allowing anxieties about the policies of a tyrannical regime to distort our estimates of the state’s military capacities and intentions.

The two most recent National Intelligence Estimates (N.I.E.s) on Iranian nuclear progress have stated that there is no conclusive evidence that Iran has made any effort to build the bomb since 2003. Yet Iran is heavily invested in nuclear technology. In the past four years, it has tripled the number of centrifuges in operation at its main enrichment facility at Natanz, which is buried deep underground. International Atomic Energy Agency (I.A.E.A.) inspectors have expressed frustration with Iran’s level of coöperation, but have been unable to find any evidence suggesting that enriched uranium has been diverted to an illicit weapons program.

In mid-February, Lieutenant General James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, provided the House and Senate intelligence committees with an updated N.I.E. on the Iranian nuclear-weapons program. A previous assessment, issued in 2007, created consternation and anger inside the Bush Administration and in Congress by concluding, “with high confidence,” that Iran had halted its nascent nuclear-weapons program in 2003. Mentions the Defense Intelligence Agency (D.I.A.), W. Patrick Lang, and Lieutenant General Ronald L. Burgess, Jr. Thomas E. Donilon, Obama’s national-security adviser, said in a speech on May 12th that the U.S. would continue its aggressive sanction policy until Iran proves that its enrichment intentions are peaceful and meets all its obligations under the nonproliferation treaty.

Obama has been prudent in his public warnings about the consequences of an Iranian bomb, but he and others in his Administration have often overstated the available intelligence about Iranian intentions. Mentions Robert Einhorn. Israel views Iran as an existential threat. Nevertheless, most Israeli experts on nonproliferation agree that Iran does not now have a nuclear weapon. A round of negotiations five months ago between Iran and the West, first in Geneva and then in Istanbul, yielded little progress. Mentions Benjamin Netanyahu. The unending political stress between Washington and Tehran has promoted some unconventional thinking. One approach, championed by retired ambassador Thomas Pickering and others, is to accept Iran’s nuclear-power program, but to try to internationalize it, and offer Iran various incentives. Pickering and his associates are convinced that the solution to the nuclear impasse is to turn Iran’s nuclear-enrichment programs into a multinational effort. Mentions a 2008 essay Pickering, Jim Walsh, and William Luers published in The New York Review of Books. Mohamed ElBaradei, a Nobel Peace Prize recipient who is now a candidate for the Presidency of Egypt, spent twelve years as the director-general of the I.A.E.A., retiring two years ago. In his recent interview, he said, “I don’t believe Iran is a clear and present danger. All I see is the hype about the threat posed by Iran.”

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/06/06/110606fa_fact_hersh#ixzz1PAkdP8iZ
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

~ Thomas Paine, A Dissertation on the First Principles of Government, 1795

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Iran's Nuclear Program and the UN Security Council's Sanctions Regime
« Reply #51 on: August 19, 2011, 02:47:31 pm »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/iran-s-nuclear-program-and-the-un-security-council-s-sanctions-regime/26068

Iran's Nuclear Program and the UN Security Council's Sanctions Regime

by Dr. Ismail Salami and Kourosh Ziabari



Global Research
August 19, 2011

Almost five years have passed since the United Nations Security Council imposed its first round of sanctions against Iran over the allegations that Tehran might be moving toward developing nuclear weapons. Since that time, four rounds of devastative sanctions have been imposed on Iran by the Security Council and several European nations, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea and other countries joined the march of imposing sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program.

Many resources indicate that Iran's nuclear program was initiated by the United States in 1950s as part of a program named Atoms for Peace. "Atoms for Peace" was a title given to a speech by the former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower before the UN General Assembly on December 8, 1952. Following this speech in which President Eisenhower alluded to his experience as a military man and stressed the necessity of paying especial attention to the use of nuclear energy in the 20th century, the U.S. government launched a program called Atoms for Peace and pledged financial and scientific help and support for hospitals, schools, universities, scientific centers and research institution, seeking to carry out studies on nuclear energy. This program helped Iran and Pakistan build their first nuclear reactors in 1950s.

In line with their policy of empowering the client states, the United States and its European allies supported, financed, backed and advanced Iran's nuclear program until the Islamic Revolution of 1979 overthrew the U.S.-installed Shah of Iran and brought to power the Islamic Republic which was from the beginning of its inception a thorn in the side of the United States and its European cronies.

Right after the beginning of Iran's new era under the leadership of Imam Khomeini, the U.S. and Western nations started to take an aggressive stance against Iran and set in motion their irrational animosity with a country which had proclaimed its decision to be a defender of the subjugated and an enemy of the oppressors and hegemonic powers.

The West began to create hurdles and impediments on Iran's way toward self-sufficiency. Iran sought to extricate itself from the manacles of the U.S. and its cronies. When Mohammad Reza Pahlavi fled Iran, the country was practically in the hands of American and British consultants and advisors. Imam Khomeini's movement was a popular uprising against the de facto occupation of Iran by the United States and Britain and this was extremely unfavorable and bitter for the White House. They provoked Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to wage a war against Iran in the high hopes that a heavy military expedition would paralyze Iran and bring the Islamic Republic to its knees. They promised Saddam that they would help him financially and militarily; however, after an 8 year war of attrition which cost the lives of more than 500,000 Iranians, and after several diplomatic, underground operations to topple the government in Iran, the American statesmen realized that the Islamic Republic was too powerful and determined to be defeated easily. It was when the financial sanctions and soft war commenced.

Holding back Iran's nuclear program was on the high agenda of the United States. They knew that the theological mindset of the Iranian leaders would keep them away from planning to produce nuclear weapons, and at the same time, they knew that their close allies in Europe and Israel possess hundreds of nuclear warheads; however, their main objective was to hamper Iran's scientific progress and slowing down Iran's movement toward the zeniths of success and glory.

After years of psychological propaganda against Iran and introducing the people of Iran as an uncultured, uncivilized and terrorist nation, the U.S. and Europe joined the anti-Iranian terrorist organization MKO, which is notorious for the killing of more than 40,000 civilians, to stage a charade against Tehran and accuse it of developing nuclear weapons. They were too quick in their moves and for the first step, publicized forged documents and materials which allegedly showed that Iran is developing weapons of mass destruction and atomic weapons. The first step was taken by Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesperson for the MKO terrorist organization who claimed in 2002 that he accessed documents, revealing that Iran has clandestine nuclear facilities in Natanz and Arak. The Western media swiftly picked up the story and aggrandized it to the extent of an international concern which involved the whole world, including the numerous enemies of Iran in Europe and the Northern America. The story continued as IAEA stated its decision to send inspectors to Iran to investigate Iran's nuclear facilities. The atomic watchdog demanded that Iran cease uranium enrichment and all of the research activities related to uranium enrichment and then start negotiations with the five permanent members of the UNSC plus Germany and resolve the crisis diplomatically.

Although Iran was one of the first world countries to ratify the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968 and had the legal right of enriching uranium under the comprehensive safeguards of the IAEA, it has been discriminatorily pressured by the U.S. and its allies to suspend its nuclear activities since 2003.

On October 21, 2003, and in league with the governments of France, the UK and Germany (called EU-3), Iran declared that it would suspend uranium enrichment voluntarily and sign and implement an Additional Protocol as a confidence-building measure and freeze its enrichment and reprocessing activities during the course of talks with the P5+1.

Interestingly enough, following Iran's voluntary suspension of uranium enrichment, IAEA issued antagonistic reports, claiming that Iran did not fully cooperate with the inspectors and that it failed to submit regular reports of its activities in the Natanz and 40 MW heavy-water reactor in Arak. Despite all this, Iran continued its suspension of uranium enrichment until 2006 when it decided to open the seals of the nuclear facilities and resume uranium enrichment in compliance with the IAEA regulations. The IAEA inspectors were allowed to travel to Iran several times a year and look into Iran's nuclear activities. It's an undeniable reality that no country in the world has been so cooperative with IAEA as Iran has been.

The U.S. and EU, however, retained their unwarranted hostility towards Iran and during a period of 5 years, they imposed harsh sanctions on Iran which targeted the country's economy and adversely affected the daily life of the ordinary citizens.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Georgiacopguy

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,490
  • 'Cause it's a revolution for your mind...K?!
Iraq playbook being used on Iran now... while the economy burns
« Reply #52 on: September 07, 2011, 02:37:36 pm »
Well, while Europe begins it's death-spiral, the power elite are already drawing up plans for their distraction. It's called war with Iran!!!! Yup, suddenly the UN cares that Iran isn't 'being transparent" about it's nuclear program. Now we will watch as they ramp up the rhetoric about Iran in coming weeks and months, as they begin working their playbook to the max in order to distract people from the the economies as they falter. Hell, they may even try to use Iran, or the coming war with Iran as the scapegoat for why the economies are faltering.

Source- Zerohedge - http://www.zerohedge.com/news/un-security-council-finds-iran-violating-nuclear-weapons-program-ban#comments
The resistance starts here. Unfortunately, the entire thing is moving beyond the intellectual infowar. I vow I will not make an overt rush at violent authority, until authority makes it's violent rush at me and you. I will not falter, I will not die in this course. For that is how they win.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Obama Tells Allies U.S. Will Attack Iran By Fall 2012
« Reply #53 on: November 04, 2011, 02:51:33 pm »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-tells-allies-u-s-will-attack-iran-by-fall-2012.html

Obama Tells Allies U.S. Will Attack Iran By Fall 2012

President prepared to use war as re-election campaign tool

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, November 4, 2011

Barack Obama has told America’s allies that the United States will attack Iran before fall 2012 unless Tehran halts its nuclear program, a time frame that suggests Obama is willing to use war as a re-election campaign tool to rally the population around his leadership.



A subscriber-only report by DebkaFile, the Israeli intelligence outfit which has been proven accurate in the past, reveals that shortly after the end of NATO operations in Libya at the start of this week, “President Barack Obama went on line to America’s senior allies, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Israel and Saudi Arabia, with notice of his plan to attack Iran no later than September-October 2012 – unless Tehran halted its nuclear weaponization programs.”

According to the report, the window of opportunity for an attack before Iran moves the bulk of its nuclear processing underground is quickly evaporating.

Obama’s directive contributed to the flurry of reports this week about NATO powers putting their Iran war contingency plans on standby.

“Obama’s announcement was not perceived as a general directive to US allies, but a guideline to blow the dust off the contingency plans for a strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities which stayed locked in bottom drawers for three years,” states the report, adding that “Obama’s announcement spurred Germany, France, Britain, Italy and Israel into girding their navies, air forces, ballistic units and anti-missile defense systems for the challenges ahead.”

The imminent withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq is part of a program to re-arrange the United States’ presence in the Gulf. This dovetails with numerous reports over the past few weeks that large numbers of U.S. troops are being stationed in Kuwait.

“Military sources in the Gulf report that NATO and Persian Gulf leaders are treating the prospect of a US strike against Iran with the utmost seriousness,” states the article, adding that America plans to rebuild its Gulf presence as part “of a new US focus on cutting Iran down to size.”

The timing of a potential fall 2012 attack would of course coincide with Obama’s attempt to secure a second term in the White House. If by that time the United States has embarked on yet another military assault in the Middle East, it would undoubtedly play to Obama’s advantage, just as George W. Bush cited U.S. involvement in Iraq as a reason for voters not to “change horse” in the middle of a race back in 2004.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
No smoking gun: IAEA Iranian nuclear report falls flat on its face
« Reply #54 on: November 08, 2011, 09:52:32 am »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/no-smoking-gun-iaea-iranian-nuclear-report-falls-flat-on-its-face.html

No smoking gun: IAEA Iranian nuclear report falls flat on its face

Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
November 7, 2011

The US-British-Israeli axis looks to have sped up its plans for a pre-emptive attack against Iran, with its latest case for war pinned on the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) quarterly report on Iran which was pre-leaked to the press this past weekend.

According Washington experts, the much hyped IAEA nuclear intelligence estimate promised to deliver the smoking gun that could somehow turn into a mushroom cloud, but in fact, the report contained nothing more than pedestrian observations baked in with existing speculative western pro-war innuendo on the development of Iranian nuclear weapons.

While the UN’s IAEA poses as a neutral party, its ambiguous case against Iran is then picked up and run with by Washington, Tel Aviv, London and the axis power’s newest power player, Nicholas Sarkozy in Paris.

Media robots and warmongers in Washington insisted that Iran has made ‘computer models’ of a nuclear warhead. Meanwhile, Iran expects to trump this latest round of US propaganda by unveiling documents that will detail the US links and funding of terrorist operations in the region.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Using Fake Intelligence to Justify War on Iran
« Reply #55 on: November 09, 2011, 02:59:47 pm »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/using-fake-intelligence-to-justify-war-on-iran/27547

Using Fake Intelligence to Justify War on Iran

by Michel Chossudovsky



Global Research
November 9, 2011

Washington is in the process of concocting a new string of lies pertaining to Iran's nuclear program with a view to justifying the implementation of punitive bombings.

Threats directed against Iran have been ongoing for the last eight years. Fake intelligence has been used to justify these threats.

There are indications, however, that this time the Western military alliance is not "crying wolf".

In the wake of the war on Libya, the implementation of an air campaign against Iran is currently on the drawingboard of the Pentagon.

The operation, were it to be carried out, would involve the active participation of  Britain and Israel.

The criminal process of fabricating lies to justify a military agenda must be understood.

Without the lie, the US-NATO Israel military alliance has no leg to stand on. Iran does not constitute a threat to Global Security or to the security of Israel.

The antiwar movement must forcefully address the role of these lies and fabrications.

Without the Lie, the military agenda has no legitimacy in the eyes of public opinion.

The following text on the role of fake intelligence was written in November 2010. For the complete text click below:

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
War Clouds Form over Iran
« Reply #56 on: November 10, 2011, 07:30:30 pm »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/war-clouds-form-over-iran/27584

War Clouds Form over Iran

by Wayne Madsen



Global Research, November 10, 2011
Strategic Culture Foundation  

Israel’s all-powerful lobby in Washington, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), an organization composed of Israeli collaborators, infiltrators, and outright traitors to the United States, is steamrolling through the House of Representatives H.R. 1905, which would prohibit the President of the United States, the Secretary of State, members of the U.S. Foreign Service, or any special envoy from engaging in any sort of diplomatic contact, official or unofficial, with any member or agent of the government of Iran. Only when the President informs the requisite committees may he proceed with engaging on diplomatic contact with Iran. Israel has de facto control over the foreign affairs committees of Congress, so any White House notification of the need to contact Iranian officials would be instantly transmitted to Binyamin Netanyahu’s office in Jerusalem and Israel would then circumvent any U.S.-Iranian contact. AIPAC, with its resolution, is further making the United States a vassal of the Jewish state.

Israel’s strategy is to make certain that its plans to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities and, perhaps other targets, meet no opposition from diplomatic circles in the United States… Israel has placed its own interests well beyond and in contravention of those of the United States.

Faced with the prospect of an Israeli attack on Iran, backed by Saudi Arabia – Israel’s secret ally in the region – has had ripple effects across the Middle East and Asia.

Countries in Asia are scrambling to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as full members. Confronted by a belligerent United States, NATO, and Israel intent on toppling the governments of Syria and Iran, the economic, cultural, and de facto collective security pact that comprises Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan announced after its prime ministers' summit in St. Petersburg that SCO would soon be opening its doors for full membership for Pakistan, Iran, and India. The Asian nations want to freeze the United States out of interference in Asia.

Ahead of the St. Petersburg summit, Russia and China strongly warned the West against any military attack on Iran. The words being used in international diplomacy are reminiscent of the Cold War era, however, it is the West that is playing to role of the aggressor, albeit an aggressor led around by Israel and its intelligence spies and assets embedded in the upper echelons of governments in Washington, London, Paris, Berlin, and within the United Nations hierarchy.

Even America's vassal state of Afghanistan, eager to break free of the bonds of NATO and Washington, has attained observer status in SCO. Recent comments by the deputy commander of NATO training in Afghanistan, U.S. Army Major General Peter Fuller, that the Afghan government leadership is erratic, ungrateful, and isolated from reality because President Hamid Karzai said Afghanistan would side with Pakistan in an American war on Pakistan, resulted in Fuller’s firing. Fuller’s comments also resulted in Karzai asking for observer status in SCO as American aggression against the Muslim world and opposition to sovereignty for Palestine has seen Washington’s standing around the world plummet.

Another nation where the CIA, Pentagon, has their agents creeping and crawling, Mongolia, is also a SCO observer. There are also SCO "partners in dialogue" -- nations that could attain SCO observer or membership status in the future. Partners in dialogue nations include Belarus, Sri Lanka, and one that should worry Tel Aviv and Washington, Turkey, a NATO member. Moscow and Ankara agree that Turkey should eventually become a full SCO member. Turkey has close historical and cultural links with the Turkic nations of central Asia and with many of the autonomous Turkic republics of Russia, including Tuva, Bashkortostan, and Adygeya.

Turkey has grown tired of Israeli interference in its internal and external affairs, as witnessed by the vicious and bloody Israeli attack on the Turkish Gaza aid vessel, the Mavi Marmara; Mossad support for Kurdish PKK terrorist attacks in Turkey; and covert Israeli entanglement in the Ergenekon "deep state" network in Turkey.

Iran has now seen Israel's most-open secret ally, Saudi Arabia, appoint the former Egyptian intelligence chief and close Netanyahu friend, Omar Suleiman, as an adviser to Saudi heir apparent, Crown Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud, who is also the Interior Minister. The Jerusalem-Riyadh axis is being further cemented as the Obama administration is shifting 4,000 troops from Iraq to Kuwait and beefing up other U.S. military assets in Bahrain -- home of the U.S. Fifth Fleet – and Qatar, United Arab Emirates, and Oman. The CIA and Pentagon have set up Predator drone bases in Djibouti, Seychelles, Ethiopia, and, reportedly, Saudi Arabia.

The president-elect of Kyrgyzstan, Prime Minister Almazbek Atambaev, has announced he wants the U.S. and NATO to leave the Manas Transit Center airbase in his country after the current lease expires in 2014. Already, Soros-funded non-governmental organization (NGO) agents in Kyrgyzstan are attempting to suggest that under the new Kyrgyz constitution, Atambaev does not have the authority to close the base. It is this type of U.S. interference in the affairs of the nations of Asia that has SCO readying an expansion of its membership to include two nations that have received direct U.S. military threats: Iran and Pakistan. Suspicion of U.S. intentions and military plans has also made Washington’s request to enter SCO as a partner in dialogue a dead issue. Washington’s interest in attending SCO summits as a “partner” says more about the CIA’s inability to crack into the inner workings of SCO, even through erstwhile “allies” like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Mongolia, than in having any great desire to “dialogue” with SCO members and observers. After all, AIPAC and its minions have managed to jam through the U.S. House a law that prohibits any U.S. diplomatic contact with Tehran’s officials.

President Obama is under tremendous pressure from the Israel Lobby during an election year to support an Israeli military strike on Iran, action that will inevitably lead the United States military in the Gulf region into war against Iran on behalf of the Tel Aviv/west Jerusalem regime. At the G-20 summit in Cannes, French President Nicolas Sarkozy was overheard telling Obama, "I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar." To which Obama replied, "you're fed up, but I have to deal with him every day."

The Sarkozy-Obama interchange is instructive. Obama did not disagree that Netanyahu is a patent liar who will do anything or say anything to advance Israeli and global Zionist interests over all else, even to the point of lying about a bogus Iranian nuclear weapons threat to promote a military attack on Iran.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
The IAEA Report on Iran is based on Fake Intelligence
« Reply #57 on: November 11, 2011, 02:55:01 pm »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-iaea-report-on-iran-is-based-on-fake-intelligence-iaea-soviet-nuclear-scientist-never-worked-on-weapons/27599

The IAEA Report on Iran is based on Fake Intelligence. IAEA "Soviet Nuclear Scientist" Never Worked on Weapons

by Gareth Porter



Global Research, November 11, 2011
IPS - 2011-11-09

The report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) published by a Washington think tank Tuesday repeated the sensational claim previously reported by news media all over the world that a former Soviet nuclear weapons scientist had helped Iran construct a detonation system that could be used for a nuclear weapon.

But it turns out that the foreign expert, who is not named in the IAEA report [.pdf] but was identified in news reports as Vyacheslav Danilenko, is not a nuclear weapons scientist but one of the top specialists in the world in the production of nanodiamonds by explosives.

In fact, Danilenko, a Ukrainian, has worked solely on nanodiamonds from the beginning of his research career and is considered one of the pioneers in the development of nanodiamond technology, as published scientific papers confirm.

It now appears that the IAEA and David Albright, the director of the International Institute for Science and Security in Washington, who was the source of the news reports about Danilenko, never bothered to check the accuracy of the original claim by an unnamed "Member State" on which the IAEA based its assertion about his nuclear weapons background.

Albright gave a "private briefing" for "intelligence professionals" last week, in which he named Danilenko as the foreign expert who had been contracted by Iran's Physics Research Centre in the mid-1990s and identified him as a "former Soviet nuclear scientist", according to a story by Joby Warrick of the Washington Post on Nov. 5.

The Danilenko story then went worldwide.

The IAEA report says the agency has "strong indications" that Iran's development of a "high explosions initiation system", which it has described as an "implosion system" for a nuclear weapon, was "assisted by the work of a foreign expert who was not only knowledgeable on these technologies, but who, a Member State has informed the Agency, worked for much of his career in the nuclear weapon program of the country of his origin."

The report offers no other evidence of Danilenko's involvement in the development of an initiation system.

The member state obviously learned that Danilenko had worked during the Soviet period at the All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Technical Physics in Snezhinsk, Russia, which was well known for its work on development of nuclear warheads and simply assumed that he had been involved in that work.

However, further research would have revealed that Danilenko worked from the beginning of his career in a part of the Institute that specialised in the synthesis of diamonds. Danilenko wrote in an account of the early work in the field published in 2006 that he was among the scientists in the "gas dynamics group" at the Institute who were "the first to start studies on diamond synthesis in 1960".

Danilenko's recollections of the early period of his career are in a chapter of the book, "Ultrananocrystalline Diamond: Synthesis, Properties and Applications" edited by Olga A. Shenderova and Dieter M. Gruen, published in 2006.

Another chapter in the book covering the history of Russian patents related to nanodiamonds documents the fact that Danilenko's centre at the Institute developed key processes as early as 1963-66 that were later used at major "detonaton nanodiamond" production centres.

Danilenko left the Institute in 1989 and joined the Institute of Materials Science Problems in Ukraine, according to the authors of that chapter.

Danilenko's major accomplishment, according to the authors, has been the development of a large-scale technology for producing ultradispersed diamonds, a particular application of nanodiamonds. The technology, which was later implemented by the "ALIT" company in Zhitomir, Ukraine, is based on an explosion chamber 100 cubic metres in volume, which Danilenko designed.

Beginning in 1993, Danilenko was a principal in a company called "Nanogroup" which was established initially in the Ukraine but is now based in Prague. The company's website boasts that it has "the strongest team of scientists" which had been involved in the "introduction of nanodiamonds in 1960 and the first commercial applications of nanodiamonds in 2000".

The declared aim of the company is to supply worldwide demand for nanodiamonds.

Iran has an aggressive programme to develop its nanotechnology sector, and it includes as one major focus nanodiamonds, as blogger Moon of Alabama has pointed out. That blog was the first source to call attention to Danilenko's nanodiamond background.

Danilenko clearly explained that the purpose of his work in Iran was to help the development of a nanodiamond industry in the country.

The report states that the "foreign expert" was in Iran from 1996 to about 2002, "ostensibly to assist in the development of a facility and techniques for making ultra dispersed diamonds (UDDs) or nanodiamonds…" That wording suggests that nanodiamonds were merely a cover for his real purpose in Iran.

The report says the expert "also lectured on explosive physics and its applications", without providing any further detail about what applications were involved.

The fact that the IAEA and Albright were made aware of Danilenko's nanodiamond work in Iran before embracing the "former Soviet nuclear weapons specialist" story makes their failure to make any independent inquiry into his background even more revealing.

The tale of a Russian nuclear weapons scientist helping construct an "implosion system" for a nuclear weapon is the most recent iteration of a theme that the IAEA introduced in its May 2008 report, which mentioned a five-page document describing experimentation with a "complex multipoint initiation system to detonate a substantial amount of high explosives in hemispherical geometry" and to monitor the detonation.

Iran acknowledged using "exploding bridge wire" detonators such as those mentioned in that document for conventional military and civilian applications. But it denounced the document, along with the others in the "alleged studies" collection purporting to be from an Iranian nuclear weapons research programme, as fakes.

Careful examination of the "alleged studies" documents has revealed inconsistencies and other anomalies that give evidence of fraud. But the IAEA, the United States and its allies in the IAEA continue to treat the documents as though there were no question about their authenticity.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Nuclear Israel revisited
« Reply #58 on: November 12, 2011, 09:40:29 am »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/nuclear-israel-revisited/27612

Nuclear Israel revisited

To have or not to have nuclear weapons is a question of human security and not European privilege.

by Prof. Joseph Massad



Global Research, November 11, 2011
Al Jazeera  

How many times must this story be retold? It is common knowledge in the United States, in Europe, in the Arab World, indeed in the entire world. The international press has been reporting on it since the late 1960s. The historical details of the story are also well known. In 1955, President Dwight Eisenhower gave Israel its first small nuclear reactor at Nahal Sorek; in 1964, the French built for Israel its much larger and major Dimona nuclear reactor in the Naqab (Negev) Desert; in 1965, Israel stole 200 pounds of weapons-grade uranium from the United States through its spies at the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation company in Pennsylvania; in 1968, Israel hijacked a Liberian ship in international waters and stole its 200-ton shipment of yellowcake. Israel has possessed nuclear bombs since the early 1970s. Despite official US denials, Golda Meir, the fourth prime minister of Israel, reportedly prepared to launch 13 nuclear bombs on Syria and Egypt in 1973 and was stopped short of committing this genocidal act when Henry Kissinger gave Israel the most massive weapons airlift in history at the time to reverse the course of the 1973 war (as Time Magazine reported the story). Israel has had an ongoing nuclear weapons collaboration with the South African Apartheid regime for decades, which only ended with the collapse of the regime in 1994.

Since then, experts have estimated that Israel has upwards of 400 nuclear devices, including thermonuclear weapons with megaton range, as well as neutron bombs, tactical nuclear weapons, and suitcase nukes. It also has the missile delivery systems to launch them with a reach of 11,500km (which can reach beyond Iran). Israel also has submarines that are capable of launching nuclear attacks as well as jet fighters that can deliver Israel’s nuclear cargo.

Israel has diligently prevented its neighbours from even acquiring nuclear reactors for peaceful purposes. It violated international law by bombing the Iraqi French-built Osirak nuclear reactor still under construction in 1981 in an unprovoked raid even though the reactor was going to be used, according to the French and Iraqi governments, for peaceful scientific purposes. Israel also bombed what intelligence reports allege was a North Korean nuclear reactor under construction in Syria in 2007. Israel’s Mossad has also been linked to the assassination of numerous Egyptian, Iraqi, and Iranian nuclear scientists over the decades. Israel continues to refuse to join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and refuses to allow members of the International Atomic Energy Commission to inspect its Dimona reactor.

Israel, a predatory and aggressive country that has consistently launched wars on all its neighbours since its establishment, expelled hundreds of thousands of people, created millions of Palestinian, Lebanese, and Egyptian refugees, murdered tens of thousands of civilians and used internationally-banned weapons (from napalm to phosphorous bombs, to name the most notorious cases), continues to occupy the Palestinian territories and the Palestinian people in violation of international law, is governed by a foundational anti-Arab and anti-Muslim racist state ideology to which all its leaders, governing structures, and institutions adhere, as does its popular and political culture and a variety of its laws. Indeed, Israel not only consistently launches wars against its neighbours but also urges world powers to invade these neighbours as well, and in the meanwhile sponsors anti-Arab and anti-Muslim racist campaigns of hatred in the United States and across Europe in addition to integrating such racism in its school and university curricula and much of its cultural production.

Racist policies

Israel’s protector, the United States, is the only country on Earth that has ever deliberately used nuclear bombs against civilian populations and continues to defend this decision 66 years after this genocidal act, and inculcates its population, in its school curricula and in the media, to defend it. The United States has also made certain that Israel’s nuclear arsenal would not ever be discussed at the UN Security Council despite persistent proposals over the decades to discuss it. Indeed, the United States insistence on keeping Israel’s nuclear capability an open "secret" is engineered, among other things, to keep United States aid to Israel flowing, especially as a key legal condition of receiving such aid is for recipient countries to be signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Israel refuses to sign.

Yet the United States and Israel, which have been the major threats to world peace and indeed the major global warmongers since World War II, insist on telling the world that Iran, a country whose current regime never invaded any country (but was rather invaded by Saddam’s Iraq in 1981 at the behest of the dictatorial ruling Gulf oil-rich families and their US and French sponsors), is a threat to world peace were it to possess a nuclear device.

The racist policies of the United States as to who should get to possess nuclear weapons and who should not (according to racial criteria of whether they are European or of European stock or not) aside, it must be made clear that the extent to which there is a nuclear race in the Middle East, it is one fostered by Israel’s warmongering and its possession of such weapons of mass destruction. If the Middle East is to be a nuclear-free zone, then the international effort to rid it of such weapons must begin with Israel, which is the only country in the region that possesses these weapons, and not with Iran who may or may not be developing them.

The racism of the Obama administration against Arabs and Muslims clearly knows no limits, but for the people of the Middle East (Arabs, Turks, and Iranians), Obama’s racist criteria are not terribly persuasive. To have or not to have nuclear weapons is a question of human security, as far as the people of the region are concerned, and not one of European racial privilege. While the US may not fear Israeli nukes, Israel’s neighbouring countries and their civilian populations have for decades been (and continue to be) terrorised by them; and for good reason. Once Obama learns this lesson, the people of the region will reconsider US credibility about its alleged concern about nuclear proliferation.

Joseph Massad is Associate Professor of Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University in New York.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Hillary Clinton's Deceptive Bluffs on Iran's Nuclear Program
« Reply #59 on: November 12, 2011, 09:53:14 am »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/building-a-justification-for-waging-war-hillary-clinton-s-deceptive-bluffs-on-iran-s-nuclear-program/27621

Building a Justification for Waging War: Hillary Clinton's Deceptive Bluffs on Iran's Nuclear Program

by Kourosh Ziabari



Global Research
November 12, 2011

When Hillary Clinton doesn't make sense

U.S. President Barack Obama will be a lame duck next year and the officials in his administration, especially his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are hilariously doing their best to make sure that they haven't spared any effort to intervene in the internal affairs of other countries and sabotage the stability and security of those whom they call "enemies", like Iran.

On October 27, Hillary Clinton gave an exclusive interview to the UK's state-funded, state-run BBC Persian TV and in an attempt aimed at reaching out to the Iranian nation, made bombastic remarks which have certainly infuriated the Iranian nation and demonstrated that the hostile behavior and antagonistic stance of the U.S. government toward the Iranian nation is a manifestation of the idiom "the leopard can't change its spots."

At the beginning of the interview, Clinton referred to the sanctions imposed against Iran by the U.S. and its European allies and said that these sanctions are targeted at forcing the Iranian government into abandoning its nuclear program which she called is an effort to construct nuclear weapons and not for civilian purposes. Forgetting the detrimental impacts of economic sanctions against the ordinary people, Clinton talked of the United States as a friend of the Iranian people, and said that she wanted to reaffirm her country's "very strong support for and friendship toward the people of Iran." She further added that the behavior of the United States towards the Iranian government is different from its behavior toward the Iranian people, and by saying that, she clearly paraded her diplomatic naiveté and artlessness. How do you justify enmity with a government which is democratically elected by a group of people which you claim of being supportive of?

Secondly, maybe Mrs. Secretary has forgotten that the U.S. itself is the largest possessor of nuclear weapons in the world. How can such a police state which has so far killed millions of people around the world, from Nagasaki and Hiroshima to Baghdad and Kabul, boast of its concerns about the development of nuclear bombs by a country which is the most pacifist country in a boiling and tumultuous region such as Middle East and hasn't ever invaded nor attacked any country in the past century?

A Reuters report quoting U.S. officials revealed in May 2010 that the U.S. has an arsenal of 5,113 nuclear warheads. It is the only country which has used nuclear weapons in the warfare and the only nation that has conducted around 1,054 nuclear tests and developed many long-range weapon delivery systems. So, who is really entitled to be concerned? Shouldn't the international community be anxious about the nuclear arsenal of the self-proclaimed superpower, the U.S.? Who may guarantee that the U.S. won't use its nuclear weapons in the prospective wars which it will be waging in the future? If the criterion of imposing financial sanctions is the possession of nuclear weapons and pursuing the development of them, why shouldn't the U.S. or its Middle East client state, Israel, which is the sole possessor of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, be the target of sanctions? A report by Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis showed that between 1940 and 1996, the U.S. spent at least $8.15 trillion in present day terms on nuclear weapons development. Which country can be pinpointed on the world map which has invested in nuclear program, even for peaceful purposes, so enormously?

But it was not only Clinton's deceptive bluffs on Iran's nuclear program that seemed perplexing and ridiculous. She lived beyond her means by claiming that the international community is angry at what Iran is today and wants a better future for its people!

"But I would ask you to put yourself in the position of the international community and those who seek a better future inside Iran. If you do not want to have a conflict, if you do not want to just give way to behavior that is very reckless, as we saw in this recent plot against the Saudi ambassador, potentially dangerous, sanctions is the tool that we have at our disposal to use," she said.

Clinton went on to raise the issue of the alleged terror plot against the Saudi ambassador in Washington and attributed this plot to Iran. She, however, certainly remembers that they were the agents of CIA, MI6 and Mossad in Iran that assassinated four Iranian nuclear scientists immediately after their name was put on the UNSC sanctions list. Wasn't the assassination of Dariush Rezaei, Massoud Alimohammadi or the foiled assassination plot against Fereydoon Abbasi a conspicuous sponsorship of terrorism by a government which calls itself the number one defender of democracy and peace? Wasn't awarding the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize to the President of such a country which murders and kills people with impunity some kind of degrading and humiliating this prestigious award?

But an interesting juncture in Clinton's interview with BBC was where a recorded video containing a question by one of the viewers of BBC was aired. The viewer asked Hillary Clinton about America's perpetual adherence to double standards, its support for repressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, its backing of the dreadful coup d'etat against the democratic government of Iran's then Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953 and its heinous shooting down of the Iran Air Flight 655 on July 3, 1988 which claimed the lives of 290 innocent passengers including 254 Iranians. Clinton was apparently taken aback by the question as her awkward response showed that the U.S. government has never found any way to account for its hypocritical policies and actions: "we have consistently spoken out about Bahrain and we have pushed the government to do more, and we support the independent investigation… We know that everything we have done in the course of our 235-plus year history is going to appeal to or be supported by everyone, and we take our history seriously. So, for example, we've expressed regret about what was done in 1953… And then we also have tried to point out that the tragedy of the shooting down of the airline is something that we deeply are sorry for, and we have said that repeatedly."

Isn't it ludicrous? Shooting down a civilian aircraft, killing all the 290 people aboard and then simply saying that we are sorry? Overthrowing a democratic government which reflected the communal will of a nation and then simply saying that we are sorry? Waging wars and imposing sanctions which hurt the daily life of the ordinary people and saying that we are sorry?

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
If the West Attacks Iran, It Could Lead to World War III
« Reply #60 on: November 15, 2011, 03:05:57 pm »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/if-the-west-attacks-iran-it-could-lead-to-world-war-iii/27669

If the West Attacks Iran, It Could Lead to World War III

by Devon DB



Global Research
November 15, 2011

It was reported a week ago that the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a report that argued that Iran may have been attempting to build nuclear weapons based on the fact that it had computer models of a nuclear warhead, in addition with other information. On the matter, the report itself states Iran conducted computer model studies and the like, but gives no conclusive damning evidence. [1]

This has led many to argue that Iran is in fact attempting to build a nuclear weapon. What many fail to realize is that not only does the UN report not state the Iran is attempting to build a nuclear weapon, but also the fact that the UN report may very well be biased due to the head of the IAEA's ties to the US and also that this report could be used as part of a media war for the US-NATO-Israeli alliance to wage war on Iran.

The UN may seem like a neutral organization, but in reality, it can be influenced by outside forces. An example of this is with the head of the IAEA. It was reported last month by The Guardian that a cable released by Wikileaks stated that the new head of the IAEA, Yukiya Amano, "was solidly in the U.S. court on every key strategic decision, from high-level personnel appointments to the handling of Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program." [2] In addition to this, when Amano had his first post-election meeting with the US, the Americans came away with the notion that the meeting "illustrate[d] the very high degree of convergence between his priorities and [America's] agenda at the IAEA" and that the coming transition period would "[provide] a further window for [the US] to shape Amano's thinking before his agenda collide[d] with the IAEA Secretariat bureaucracy." The fact that the US had plans to shape Amano's thinking should make one wonder how much influence the US had over him.

The US and Israel could be using this report to argue that their countries should go to war with Iran. However, the information could potentially be false as it was noted by Russia Today that the UN “has found no smoking gun, but has succeeded nonetheless in hyping up fears that Iran is continuing its research on nuclear weapons” [3] (emphasis added) and that the information could be false as

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Big Media’s Double Standards on Iran
« Reply #61 on: November 16, 2011, 02:27:56 pm »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/big-media-s-double-standards-on-iran/27697

Big Media’s Double Standards on Iran

by Robert Parry



Global Research, November 16, 2011
Consortiumnews - 2011-11-15

The mainstream U.S. press corps is again pounding the propaganda war drums, this time over dubious accusations of Iran’s secret work on a nuclear bomb. It is a pattern of bias that Robert Parry calls the U.S. media’s worst — and most dangerous – ethical violation.

Arguably, the most serious ethical crisis in U.S. journalism is the deep-seated bias about the Middle East that is displayed by major American news outlets, particularly the Washington Post and the New York Times.

When it comes to reporting on “designated enemies” in the Muslim world, the Post and the Times routinely jettison all sense of objectivity even when the stakes are as serious as war and peace, life and death. Propaganda wins out over balanced journalism.

We have seen this pattern with Iraq and its non-existent stockpiles of WMD; with the rush to judgment about Syria’s supposed guilt in the killing of Lebanese leader Rafik Hariri; with the false certainty about Libya’s role in the Lockerbie bombing; and many other examples of what everyone just “knows to be true” but often turns out isn’t. [For more on these cases, click here.]

The latest example of this ethical failing relates to reporting about Iran on such topics as the buffoonish plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington and a new set of dubious allegations about Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

In these cases, U.S. mainstream news media happily marshals sources with histories of credibility problems; treats implausible scenarios with utmost respect; jettisons crucial context; and transforms the grays of ambiguity into black-and-white morality tales of good versus evil.

Then, behind these war drums of the U.S. press corps, the American people are marched toward confrontation and violence, while anyone who dares question the perceived wisdom of the Post, the Times and many other esteemed outlets is fair game for marginalization and ridicule.

An example of this propaganda passing as journalism has been the recent writings of Joby Warrick of the Washington Post about a vague but alarmist report produced by the new leadership of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

On Monday, the Post put on its front page a story about Russian scientist Vyacheslav Danilenko, a leading expert in the formation of nanodiamonds who spent several years assisting Iranians develop a domestic industry in these micro-diamonds that have many commercial uses.

But Warrick’s story is fraught with spooky shadows and scary music that suggest Danilenko is really part of an ongoing drive by Iranian authorities to overcome technological obstacles for a nuclear bomb. Just like in that spy thriller “Sum of All Fears,” a greedy ex-Soviet nuclear scientist is helping to build a rogue nuclear bomb.

Warrick wrote: “When the Cold War abruptly ended in 1991, Vyacheslav Danilenko was a Soviet weapons scientist in need of a new line of work. At 57, he … struggled to become a businessman, traveling through Europe and even to the United States to promote an idea for using explosives to create synthetic diamonds. Finally, he turned to Iran, a country that could fully appreciate the bombmaker’s special mix of experience and talents.”

Now, Warrick continued, Danilenko has been identified by Western diplomats as the unnamed scientist cited in the IAEA report as advising Iran on the explosive techniques to detonate a nuclear bomb. Warrick’s story continues:

“No bomb was built, the diplomats say. But help from foreign scientists such as Danilenko enabled Iran to leapfrog over technical hurdles that otherwise could have taken years to overcome, according to former and current U.N. officials, Western diplomats and weapons experts.”

Slanted Tale

However, Warrick crafts the story in a very misleading way, leaving out key facts that would create a less ominous picture. For instance, the article fails to mention that the U.S. intelligence community issued a National Intelligence Estimate in 2007 that Iran had stopped its work on a nuclear bomb in late 2003.

Danilenko, who has insisted that his work was limited to advising Iranians on the explosions used to manufacture nanodiamonds, last worked in Iran in 2002 and the explosive test that the IAEA associates with Danilenko – and which supposedly might have nuclear implications – was conducted in 2003.

In other words – even if one accepts that Danilenko is lying about his work in Iran – nothing in the Danilenko story undercuts the U.S. intelligence community’s NIE. To leave out this crucial context in the Post’s article suggests an intention to frighten rather than to inform.

Indeed, what is notable about the curious IAEA report is how much of it predates late 2003. [For a contrasting view of the Danilenko evidence, see Consortiumnews.com’s “Iran’s Soviet Bomb-Maker Who Wasn’t.”]

Warrick also relies heavily on the expertise of discredited arms control analyst David Albright, the founder and president of the Institute for Science and International Security. Albright was a prominent voice in promoting President George W. Bush’s pre-invasion case that Iraq possessed stockpiles of WMD.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
America And Israel Will Go From Tough Talk To A Real War Against Iran
« Reply #62 on: November 23, 2011, 04:38:13 pm »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/america-and-israel-will-go-from-tough-talk-to-a-real-war-against-iran.html

America And Israel Will Go From Tough Talk To A Real War Against Iran

Saman Mohammadi
The Excavator
November 23, 2011

“Make no mistake: American elites are gearing up for military confrontation with the Islamic Republic—and, in the process, displaying all of the cultural, intellectual, and political pathologies that produced the 2003 Iraq war.” - Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett, two former senior officials in the National Security Council.
 
“Maybe common sense will prevail. Or maybe some diplomat or some official with standing will stand up and say, as nobody did before the Iraqi war, and nobody may do now, somebody in the inside will say this is crazy. But so far it’s not happened,” said investigative journalist Seymour Hersh on Antiwar Radio with Scott Horton on Tuesday, November 22, 2011.
 
Hersh commented on the the validity of the latest IAEA report, the split in the Israeli military over an attack on Iran, and the ramifications of all the fear-mongering about the “Iranian bomb” by the Western media.

Hersh’s clear-eyed reporting about the Iranian nuclear program in The New Yorker, along with reporting done by other journalists like Gareth Porter, is countering the “doom and gloom” narrative about Iran that is being pushed by Tel Aviv and Washington.
 
But as we saw in 2003, journalism can’t stop war. At least not the kind of journalism that perpetually misses the target.
 
Porter, Hersh and other outstanding journalists are courageous on the Iranian nuclear question, but where are they on 9/11 truth? As historian Webster Tarpley and others have pointed out, exposing the truth about the 9/11 attacks is key to stopping an emerging war with Iran, which would inevitably become a regional war with global repercussions.
 
Lies lead to war. Truth leads to peace. Pretty simple, huh?
 
Why tell the truth about Iran’s nuclear program and Iraq’s non-existent WMDs, but cover your eyes from the truth about 9/11 and scream “conspiracy theory! conspiracy theory!” like a little girl? It doesn’t make sense. Even war correspondents who face death for days on end turn to wussies and wimps when the subject of 9/11 truth is brought up.
 
Are non-mainstream, investigative journalists being threatened with death and told not to touch 9/11 truth? If this is the case then I completely understand why journalists are silent and play dumb.
 
But if Western journalists are not being threatened with death by the CIA, MI6, and Mossad, then they are really a bunch of cowards for not exposing the truth about 9/11.
 
A generation of journalists have abandoned the craft and let down the public, and non-mainstream, investigative journalists have played a big role in this betrayal.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Constitutionary

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,243
Look I hate to rain on everyone's parade but the world isn't going to give the Globalists another war no matter how bad they want one, or no matter how many media hacks incite one.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Look I hate to rain on everyone's parade but the world isn't going to give the Globalists another war no matter how bad they want one, or no matter how many media hacks incite one.

The "world" wasn't able to stop the Globalists from launching all these other wars in our name, so what makes you think this will be any different?

Don't get me wrong, I want you to be right about this. But articles like the following don't give me much hope:

---------------------------

http://www.prisonplanet.com/half-of-us-voters-say-bomb-iran-if-sanctions-fail.html

Half of US voters say bomb Iran if sanctions fail

AFP
Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Fifty percent of Americans believe military action should be taken to stop Iran’s nuclear program if sanctions do not work, a national poll released on Wednesday said.

The Quinnipiac University survey also found that more Americans disapprove, by 50 percent to 44 percent, of the job President Barack Obama is doing — although more people than not approve of the way he has handled foreign policy, including his management of thorny US relations with Tehran.

Some 55 percent of respondents said the United States should not take immediate military action against Iran, with 36 percent in favor.

The number in favor of using force increases to 50 percent however if sanctions fail, with 38 percent against.

Full story here.

---------------------------
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Satyagraha

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,145
Writing back in 2008, Scott Ritter, U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998 and author of "Target Iran”:

Iran Shows Its Cards
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080714_iran_shows_its_cards/
Posted on Jul 14, 2008

By Scott Ritter

There can no longer be any doubt about the consequences of any U.S. and/or Israeli military action against Iran. Armchair warriors, pundits and blustering politicians alike have been advocating a pre-emptive military strike against Iran for the purpose of neutralizing its nuclear-related infrastructure, as well as retarding Iran’s ability to train and equip “terrorist” forces on Iranian soil before dispatching them to Iraq or parts unknown. Some, including me, have warned of the folly of such action, and now Iran itself has demonstrated why an attack would be insane.

I’ve always pointed out that no plan survives initial contact with the enemy, and furthermore one can never forget that, in war, the enemy gets to vote. On the issue of an American and/or Israeli attack on Iran, the Iranian military has demonstrated exactly how it would cast its vote. Iran recently fired off medium- and long-range missiles and rockets, in a clear demonstration of capability and intent. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, regional oil production capability and U.S. military concentrations, along with Israeli cities, would all be subjected to an Iranian military response if Iran was attacked.

The Bush administration has shrugged off the Iranian military display as yet another example of how irresponsible the government in Tehran is. But the Pentagon for one has had to sit up and pay attention. For some time now, the admirals commanding the U.S. 5th Fleet in the Persian Gulf have maintained that they have the ability to keep the Strait of Hormuz open. But the fact is, the only way the United States could guarantee that the strait remained open would be to launch a massive pre-emptive military strike that swept the Iranian coast clear of the deadly Chinese-made surface-to-surface missiles that Iran would use to sink cargo ships in the strategic lane. This strike would involve hundreds of tactical aircraft backed up by limited ground action by Marines and U.S. Special Operations forces which would involve “boots on the ground” for several days, if not weeks. Such a strike is not envisioned in any “limited” military action being planned by the United States. But now that it is clear what the Iranian response would entail, there can no longer be any talk of a “limited” military attack on Iran.

The moment the United States makes a move to secure the Strait of Hormuz, Iran will unleash a massive bombardment of the military and industrial facilities of the United States and its allies, including the oil fields in Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. American military bases in Iraq and Kuwait, large—fixed and well known— would be smothered by rockets and missiles carrying deadly cluster bombs. The damage done would run into the hundreds of millions, if not into billions, of dollars, and hundreds, if not thousands, of U.S. military personnel would be killed and wounded.

To prevent or retard any Iranian missile attack, the United States would have to commit hundreds of combat sorties, combined with Special Operations forces, to a counter-missile fight which would need to span the considerable depth of the Persian landmass from which missiles might reach potential targets. While there has been some improvement in the U.S. military’s counter-missile capability, one must never forget that in 1991 not a single Iraqi Scud missile was successfully interdicted by any aspect of American military action (airstrike, ground action or antiballistic missile), and in 2003 the U.S. military had mixed results against the far less capable Al-Samoud missiles. Israel was unable to prevent Hezbollah from firing large salvos of rockets into northern Israel during the summer 2006 conflict. There is no reason for optimism that the U.S. and Israel have suddenly found the solution to the Iranian missile threat.

There is virtually no chance the U.S. Navy would be able to prevent Iran from interfering with shipping through the strait. There is every chance the Navy would take significant casualties, in both ships lost and personnel killed or wounded, as it struggled to secure the strait. There would be a need for a significant commitment of ground forces to guarantee safe passage for all shipping, civilian and military alike. The longer ground forces could operate on Iranian soil, the better the chances Iranian missiles would not be able to effectively interdict shipping. Conversely, the longer ground forces operated on Iranian soil, the greater likelihood there would be of decisive ground engagement. With U.S. air power expected to be fully committed to the missile interdiction mission, any large-scale ground engagement would create a situation in which air power would have to be redirected into tactical support, and away from missile interdiction, creating a window of vulnerability which the Iranians would very likely exploit.

Iran has promised to strike targets in Israel as well, especially if Israel is a participant in any military action. Such Israeli involvement is highly unlikely, since to do so in any meaningful fashion Israel would need to fly in Iraqi air space, a violation of sovereignty the Iraqi government will never tolerate. The anti-American backlash that would be generated in Iraq would be immediate and severe. In short, virtually every operation involving the training of Iraqi forces would be terminated as the U.S. military trainers would need to be withdrawn to the safety of the fortified U.S. bases to protect them from attack. U.S. civilian contractors would likewise need to be either withdrawn completely from Iraq or restricted to the fortified bases. All gains alleged to have been made in the “surge” would be wiped away instantly. Worse, the Iraqi countryside would become a seething mass of anti-American activity, which would require a huge effort to reverse, if it ever could be. Iraq as we now know it would be lost, and what would emerge in its stead would not only be unsympathetic to the United States but actually a breeding ground for anti-American action that could very well expand beyond the boundaries of Iraq and the Middle East.

(Note: A withdrawal from Iraq is planned for Jan. 1, 2012.)

The chances of preventing an Iranian-Israeli clash in the event of a U.S. strike against Iran are slim to none. Even if Iran initially showed restraint, Hezbollah would undoubtedly join the fray, prompting an Israeli counterstrike in Lebanon and Iran which would in turn bring long-range Iranian missiles raining down on Israeli cities.

Neither the Israeli nor the American (and for that reason, European and Asian) economy would emerge intact from a U.S. attack on Iran. Oil would almost instantly break the $300-per-barrel mark, and because the resulting conflict would more than likely be longer and more violent that most are predicting, there is a good chance oil would top $500 or even more within days or weeks.  Hyperinflation would almost certainly strike every market-based economy, and the markets themselves would collapse under the strain.

The good news is that the military planners in the Pentagon are cognizant of this reality. They know the limitations of American power, and what they can and cannot achieve. When it was uncertain how Iran would respond to a limited attack, either on their nuclear facilities or bases associated with the Revolutionary Guard Command, some planners might have thought that the U.S. could actually pull off a quick and relatively bloodless attack. Now that Iran has made it crystal clear that even a limited U.S. attack would bring about a massive Iranian response, all military planners now understand that any U.S. military attack will have to be massive. Simply put, the United States does not now have the military capacity in the Middle East to launch such a strike, and any redeployment of U.S. forces into the region could not go undetected, either by Iran, which would in turn redeploy its forces, or the rest of the world. Because a U.S. attack against Iran would have such horrific detrimental impact on the entire world, it is hard to imagine the international community remaining mute as American military might is assembled.

Likewise, despite the disposition of Congress to either remain silent on the issue or actively facilitate military action against Iran, it would become increasingly difficult for American lawmakers to ignore the consequences of a military strike on Iran, economically and politically. The same can be said of both major presidential candidates. The decision by Iran to show its hand on how it would respond to any American aggression has cleared the air, so to speak, about what is actually being discussed when one speaks of military action against Iran. In many ways, the Iranian missile tests have made it less likely that there will be a war with Iran, simply because the stakes of any such action are so plainly obvious to all parties involved.

Iran continues, based upon all available intelligence information, to pursue a nuclear program which is exclusively intended for peaceful energy purposes. Any concerns which may exist about the dual-use potential of Iran’s uranium enrichment programs can be mitigated through viable nuclear inspections conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency. IAEA inspections should be improved upon by getting Iran to go along with an additional inspection protocol, rather than pursuing military action which will destroy the inspection process and remove the very verification processes which provide the international community with the confidence that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

The reality is that Iran’s nuclear program is here to stay. Iran has every right under international law to pursue this program, and regional and global tensions would be greatly reduced (along with the price of oil) if American policies, and in related fashion U.N. Security Council mandates, were adjusted accordingly. Israeli paranoia—derived not so much from any genuine Iranian threat but rather an affront to Israeli nuclear hegemony in the Middle East—must in turn be subdued. This can be done through a mixture of international pressure designed to punish Israel diplomatically and economically for any failure to adhere to international norms when it comes to peaceful coexistence with its neighbors, and international assurances that Israel’s sovereignty and viability as a nation-state will forever be respected and defended.

Of course, there can be no meaningful international pressure brought to bear on Israel without American participation, and herein lies the crux of the problem. Until the U.S. Congress segregates legitimate national security concerns from narrow Israeli-only issues, the pro-Israel lobby will have considerable control over American national security policy. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s continued push for congressional action concerning the implementation of what is tantamount to a naval blockade of Iran (and as such, an act of war) by pushing House Resolution 362 and Senate Resolution 580 is mind-boggling given the reality of the situation. Congress must stop talking blockade, and start discussing stability and confidence-building measures.
There has never been a more pressing time than now for Congress to conduct serious hearings on U.S. policy toward Iran. Such hearings must not replicate the rubber-stamp hearings held by the U.S. Senate and House in the summer of 2002. Those hearings were simply a facilitating vehicle for war with Iraq. New hearings must expand the body of witnesses beyond administration officials and those who would mirror their policy positions, and include experts and specialists who could articulate a counter point of view, exposing Congress to information and analysis that might prompt a fuller debate. This is the last thing AIPAC and the Bush administration want to see. But it is the one thing the American people should be demanding.

Only an irrational person or organization could continue to discuss as viable a military strike against Iran. Sadly, based upon past and current policy articulations, neither AIPAC nor the Bush administration can be considered rational when it comes to the issue of Iran. It is up to the American people, through their elected representatives in Congress, to inject a modicum of sanity into a situation that continues to be in danger of spinning out of control.
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

~ Thomas Paine, A Dissertation on the First Principles of Government, 1795

Offline Satyagraha

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,145
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

~ Thomas Paine, A Dissertation on the First Principles of Government, 1795

Offline Satyagraha

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,145
This is an interview with Seymour Hersh - November 21, 2011: Please watch.

Seymour Hersh is outing the new IAEA head, Yukia Amano, as a useful puppet of the US/NATO, and the latest report (which Ehud Barak has used to further the case to attack Iran) shows NO NEW EVIDENCE.

Instead, this "new" report from the IAEA is a collection of rehashed (and already debunked) field 'reports' that have been repackaged and presented as "evidence" by Amano, who - prior to taking his job at the head of IAEA, was a Japanese diplomat and international civil servant for the United Nations and its subdivisions.  So this latest IAEA report is clearly political, not evidentiary.



Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVyNk5S4SHg
Also on: http://www.democracynow.org/2011/11/21/seymour_hersh_propaganda_used_ahead_of

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

'Amano violates IAEA safeguards'
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/211103.html

Iran's Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Ali Asghar Soltanieh says the IAEA has violated its agreements by revealing the names of Iranian nuclear scientists.

As several Iranian nuclear scientists have been assassinated many may wonder if IAEA is an independent body or just an extension of Washington and Tel Aviv's dictates.

This edition of the “News Analysis”, Press TV interviews Sara Flounders, Co-director of the International Action Center, so that she may share her opinions with viewers.

Here is a rough transcription of the interview:  (continued)
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

~ Thomas Paine, A Dissertation on the First Principles of Government, 1795

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
THE CLOCK IS TICKING: Shadow War Heating Up. War With Iran: A Provocation Away?
« Reply #68 on: December 05, 2011, 11:35:47 am »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-clock-is-ticking-shadow-war-heating-up-war-with-iran-a-provocation-away/28045

THE CLOCK IS TICKING: "Shadow War" Heating Up. War With Iran: A Provocation Away?

by Tom Burghardt



Global Research, December 5, 2011
Antifascist Calling...  

Amid conflicting reports that a huge explosion at Iran's uranium conversion facility in Isfahan occurred last week, speculation was rife that Israel and the United States were stepping-up covert attacks against defense and nuclear installations.

The Isfahan complex transforms mined uranium into uranium fluoride gas which is then "spun" by centrifuges that enrich it into usable products for medical research and for Iran's civilian nuclear energy program.

While Iranian officials sought to distance themselves from initial reporting by the semi-official Fars news agency that a "loud explosion" was heard across the city, but that "the sound of the explosion was from [a] military exercise," has been contradicted by several sources.

Indeed, some Iranian officials have denied that an explosion even took place.

On Tuesday however, The Times reported that "satellite imagery ... confirmed that a blast that rocked the city of Isfahan on Monday struck the uranium enrichment facility there, despite denials by Tehran."

"The images," Times reporter Sheera Frenkel averred, "clearly showed billowing smoke and destruction, negating Iranian claims yesterday that no such explosion had taken place. Israeli intelligence officials told The Times that there was 'no doubt' that the blast struck the nuclear facilities at Isfahan and that it was 'no accident'."

Despite clear evidence that Israel and the United States have stepped-up their shadow war against the Islamic Republic, Defense Minister Ehud Barak "played down speculation on Saturday that Israel and U.S.-led allies were waging clandestine war on Iran, saying sanctions and the threat of military strikes were still the way to curb its nuclear program," Reuters reported.

Proverbial "facts on the ground" however, tell a different tale.

The latest attack on Iran's civilian nuclear program followed a blast two weeks ago at the sprawling Bid Ganeh missile base 25 miles west of Tehran.

That blast killed upwards of 30 members of the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), including Major General Hassan Moqqadam, a senior leader of Iran's missile program.

Satellite imagery shows much of the base in ruins. The attack was described by Time Magazine as the work "of Israel's external intelligence service, Mossad."

In a backhanded confirmation that Monday's blast was the handiwork of Mossad and their terrorist proxies, the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK), Frenkel wrote that "Dan Meridor, the Israeli Intelligence Minister, said: 'There are countries who impose economic sanctions and there are countries who act in other ways in dealing with the Iranian nuclear threat'."

Frenkel reported that "Major-General Giora Eiland, Israel's former director of national security told Israel's army radio that the Isfahan blast was no accident. 'There aren't many coincidences, and when there are so many events there is probably some sort of guiding hand, though perhaps it's the hand of God'," Eiland said.

The Isfahan blast, as with other recent attacks, were allegedly in response to allegations made last month in a report filed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that Iran may be seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

However, while the "Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material at the nuclear facilities," the ginned-up report relied on information provided by "Member states," presumably Israel and United States in the form of forged computer laptop documents and other "intelligence sources."

The Agency claims they were "unable to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran, and therefore to conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities."

Black operations targeting the Islamic Republic aren't solely the province of America's "stationary aircraft carrier in the Middle East," Israel. As Seymour Hersh reported last spring in The New Yorker: "In the past six years, soldiers from the Joint Special Operations Force, working with Iranian intelligence assets, put in place cutting-edge surveillance techniques, according to two former intelligence officers."

In 2007, ABC News disclosed that "the CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert 'black' operation to destabilize the Iranian government."

Unnamed sources told ABC News that President Bush signed a presidential finding "that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions."

Congress has appropriated some $300 million for the CIA and the Pentagon's covert war.

In the intervening years, those programs have turned lethal. Widely applauded by "liberal" Democrats and "conservative" Republicans alike, these programs have continued, indeed expanded under Barack Obama's "progressive" Democratic administration.

Despite the fact that there "is also constant satellite coverage of major suspect areas in Iran," The New Yorker reported "that nothing significantly new had been learned to suggest that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon."

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline global_fiefdom

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
The special drone that was "shot down" in Iran and spoken of on the news today,
Did it have ebomb or nuclear capabilities?
THe pic of the back looked much as you'd expect an automated B2 bomber to appear!

wtf is going on, did someone in nato deliver the towelies a bomb/new tech????

@@

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2011/12/iran-us-drone-afghanistan.html

kind of "sum of all fears" stuff but I don't know what payload the "special drones" carry.  ::)

Although i suspect the X-37B unmanned craft has a tether power generator perhaps and an Ebomb apparatus or worse.

Are they calling all such weapons "reconnaissance", assuming our "enemies" are too stupid to reverse engineer???

and what the hell is a "ROGUE DRONE", a skynet? lol

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-05/iran-shoots-down-surveillance-drone/3712092

Quote
Drone downed in Iran 'could have gone rogue'

Updated December 05, 2011 12:55:05


plausible deniability

Quote
"The UAV to which the Iranians are referring may be a US unarmed reconnaissance aircraft that had been flying a mission over western Afghanistan late last week. The operators of the UAV lost control of the aircraft and had been working to determine its status," the ISAF statement said.

In Washington, US officials said there was no indication that the drone which crashed had been shot down.

"There is absolutely no indication up to this point that Iranians shot down this drone," the official, who declined to be named, told Reuters.

drone allegedly an RQ-170

Quote
TEHRAN: Iran's armed forces brought down a US drone that officials said had violated the country's airspace along the eastern border.

Iranian media reported that the aircraft, which officials identified an RQ-170 drone, suffered minor damage and was in the possession of the military.

NATO's US-led force in Afghanistan said Iran might be referring to an unarmed US reconnaissance plane that went missing during a mission in western Afghanistan last week.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/downed-drone-a-potential-windfall-for-iran-20111205-1offw.html#ixzz1fgUndcLO





http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2069818/Iran-shoots-U-S-spy-plane.html
http://rt.com/news/iran-us-war-drone-013/

Quote
Drone downed in Iran: 'US great game could spark WWIII'
Get short URL
email story to a friend print version

Published: 04 December, 2011, 23:00
Edited: 05 December, 2011, 03:25

Lockheed RQ-170
expensive replacement for older aircraft with defective wing boxes and mismatched parts!

The RQ-170 Sentinel is an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) developed by Lockheed Martin and operated by the United States Air Force (USAF). It has been deployed to Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom.

he RQ-170 Sentinel was developed by Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works as a stealth Unmanned Aerial Vehicle [UAV]. Journalists have noted design similarities between the RQ-170 and previous stealth and UAV programs such as the RQ-3 DarkStar and Polecat.[1][2] It is a tail-less flying wing aircraft with pods, presumably for sensors or SATCOMS, built into the upper surface of each wing. Few details of the UAV's characteristics have been released, but estimates of its wingspan range from approximately 65 feet (20 m)[3] to between 75 feet (23 m) and 90 feet (27 m).[4]

The "RQ" designation indicates that the RQ-170 Sentinel does not carry weapons.[5] Aviation Week's David A. Fulghum believes that the UAV is probably a "tactical, operations-oriented platform and not a strategic intelligence-gathering design".[3]

The USAF confirmed the "grainy photos of a gray, flying-wing-typed unmanned airplane near Kandahar Airfield"[6] in relation to the discussion of the RQ-170 Sentinel on 4 December 2009.[3][7] A USAF colonel subsequently commented that RQ-170 is separate from the MQ-X program, which has yet to determine stealth or powerplant requirements, and thus the Sentinel will not replace the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper drones currently in service.[8] As of May 2011, the US Military had not released any statements concerning the Sentinel since December 2009.[9]


DRONE MAKERS HAVE HUGE INTEREST IN NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS AND NUCLEAR MONOPOLY

DRONES A TOOL OF CORPORATE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX MONOPOLISTS WHO TOOK YOUR MIRANDA RIGHTS AWAY AND DISOBEY GENEVA CONVENTION RULES
NO SUCH THING AS A NONCOMBAT DRONE in USAF lol


Quote
General Atomics is a nuclear physics and defense contractor headquartered in San Diego, California. General Atomics’ research into fission and fusion matured into competencies in related technologies, allowing the company to expand into other fields of research. General Atomics develops systems ranging from the nuclear fuel cycle to remotely operated surveillance aircraft, airborne sensors, and advanced electric, electronic, wireless and laser technologies.

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI), an affiliate of General Atomics, provides unmanned aerial vehicles and radar solutions for military and commercial applications worldwide. The company’s Aircraft Systems Group is a designer and manufacturer of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), including the Predator, Predator B, Sky Warrior and Predator C. The Reconnaissance Systems Group designs, manufactures, and integrates the Lynx Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)/GMTI radar into both manned and unmanned aircraft, as well as the CLAW sensor control and image analysis software, and integrates sensor and communications equipment into manned ISR aircraft.

Offline Ambriel

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,683
  • Dare to resist
    • Consfearacynewz
Truth Squad: Is Iran "a few months" away from a nuclear weapon?
« Reply #70 on: December 16, 2011, 09:34:33 am »
Editor's note: Part of the CNN Republican debate fact-checking series

(CNN) -- When Rep. Michele Bachmann said that a report by the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency had described Iran as poised to join the world's elite club of nuclear powers, during Thursday's Republican candidates' debate in Sioux City, Iowa, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas responded immediately that she was mistaken.

The statements:

"We have an IAEA report that just recently came out that said, literally, Iran is within just months of being able to obtain that weapon." -- Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minnesota

"There is no U.N. report that said that. It's totally wrong what you just said. That is not true. They produced the information that led you to believe that, but they have no evidence." -- Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas

The facts: The IAEA Board of Governors released a 14-page report on November 8 that concluded that it had "serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program. After assessing carefully and critically the extensive information available to it, the agency finds the information to be, overall, credible. The information indicates that Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device. The information also indicates that prior to the end of 2003, these activities took place under a structured program, and that some activities may still be ongoing."

The verdict: False. The IAEA report does not say that Iran is within months of being able to obtain a nuclear weapon. So Bachmann is wrong. But the report does cite "credible" information that Iran may be developing nuclear weapons, so Paul's blanket denial that "they have no evidence" may also be wrong, depending on whether he is referring to evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon or evidence that such a weapon could be ready within months.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/16/politics/truth-squad-iran-nukes/index.html

Offline Valerius

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,696
Re: Truth Squad: Is Iran "a few months" away from a nuclear weapon?
« Reply #71 on: December 16, 2011, 12:03:15 pm »
I can't believe how they spun that.

Yes, Ron is right that it was b.s., but he is still wrong because otherwise right looses all credibility because it is Ron Paul.
"No man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened about his own neck."  -Frederick Douglass

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,771
Re: Truth Squad: Is Iran "a few months" away from a nuclear weapon?
« Reply #72 on: December 16, 2011, 12:26:36 pm »
 So what if they do, no really.. Israel has a stockpile though they won't admit it, have we bothered them, well JFK did but he was whacked out not long after he made inquires..
Its none of our FK business unless they pose a threat to the USA, and they don't. Who is the enemy of man, lets define them. Those up there in the elites plateau looking down at the weeds in their garden, and ya, we are the weeds.
  I'm all for the eradication of all nuclear weaponry and every FN nuke station on the face of the planet.
YA, here in the USA as well.  The waste alone could eradicate the majority of the human population.
  I've worked for Iranians, long ago but so what, I bodyguarded various familys, I was treated with the upmost respect, in fact I ate at their table, they are people, human beings, familys for FK sake, they don't want us genociding them. I hate this phony shit and am fed the FK up with the elites propaganda methods and those who beleive it.

Offline Georgiacopguy

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,490
  • 'Cause it's a revolution for your mind...K?!
Re: Truth Squad: Is Iran "a few months" away from a nuclear weapon?
« Reply #73 on: December 16, 2011, 01:27:32 pm »
Rush Limbaugh is being his usual distasteful self...lambasting Ron Paul for his stance on Iran and backing newt for his wardog approach.
The resistance starts here. Unfortunately, the entire thing is moving beyond the intellectual infowar. I vow I will not make an overt rush at violent authority, until authority makes it's violent rush at me and you. I will not falter, I will not die in this course. For that is how they win.

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,628
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Truth Squad: Is Iran "a few months" away from a nuclear weapon?
« Reply #74 on: December 16, 2011, 01:49:16 pm »
Editor's note: Part of the CNN Republican debate fact-checking series

(CNN) -- When Rep. Michele Bachmann said that a report by the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency had described Iran as poised to join the world's elite club of nuclear powers, during Thursday's Republican candidates' debate in Sioux City, Iowa, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas responded immediately that she was mistaken.

The statements:

"We have an IAEA report that just recently came out that said, literally, Iran is within just months of being able to obtain that weapon." -- Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minnesota

"There is no U.N. report that said that. It's totally wrong what you just said. That is not true. They produced the information that led you to believe that, but they have no evidence." -- Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas

The facts: The IAEA Board of Governors released a 14-page report on November 8 that concluded that it had "serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program. After assessing carefully and critically the extensive information available to it, the agency finds the information to be, overall, credible. The information indicates that Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device. The information also indicates that prior to the end of 2003, these activities took place under a structured program, and that some activities may still be ongoing."

The verdict: False. The IAEA report does not say that Iran is within months of being able to obtain a nuclear weapon. So Bachmann is wrong. But the report does cite "credible" information that Iran may be developing nuclear weapons, so Paul's blanket denial that "they have no evidence" may also be wrong, depending on whether he is referring to evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon or evidence that such a weapon could be ready within months.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/16/politics/truth-squad-iran-nukes/index.html

I can't believe how they spun that.

Yes, Ron is right that it was b.s., but he is still wrong because otherwise right looses all credibility because it is Ron Paul.

Here is where Dr. Paul calls Bachmann on this lie...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZVds4o7F6k

This is just one more lie in a long train of LIES that have been foisted over the last 20 years to make America the driving military engine of terror. All to bring in the globalist's Middle Eastern Union to fruit, after the MEFTA program failed because the people of the middle east could see through the sham....

We are whipping a dead horse, we are degrading our soldiers using them this way... after demonizing every country the globalist's need take in order to complete their grid.  Ron Paul represents the political spearhead for exposing this global piracy and bringing the corporate banking and monarchical monsters to justice before the world!

Oldyoti

"You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get
yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is
to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding
fathers used in their struggle for independence."

~C. A. Beard

Offline Satyagraha

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,145
Re: Truth Squad: Is Iran "a few months" away from a nuclear weapon?
« Reply #75 on: December 16, 2011, 02:10:05 pm »
Bachmann was reacting to the "new" IAEA report as they WANTED her to react: with fear. In fact, there was nothing new in that report, and Ron Paul was 100% correct in his statement:

"There is no U.N. report that said that. It's totally wrong what you just said. That is not true. They produced the information that led you to believe that, but they have no evidence." -- Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas

Here's confirmation:

This is an interview with Seymour Hersh - November 21, 2011: Please watch.

Seymour Hersh is outing the new IAEA head, Yukia Amano, as a useful puppet of the US/NATO, and the latest report (which Ehud Barak has used to further the case to attack Iran) shows NO NEW EVIDENCE.

Instead, this "new" report from the IAEA is a collection of rehashed (and already debunked) field 'reports' that have been repackaged and presented as "evidence" by Amano, who - prior to taking his job at the head of IAEA, was a Japanese diplomat and international civil servant for the United Nations and its subdivisions.  So this latest IAEA report is clearly political, not evidentiary.



Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVyNk5S4SHg
Also on: http://www.democracynow.org/2011/11/21/seymour_hersh_propaganda_used_ahead_of

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

~ Thomas Paine, A Dissertation on the First Principles of Government, 1795

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,771
Re: Truth Squad: Is Iran "a few months" away from a nuclear weapon?
« Reply #76 on: December 16, 2011, 03:38:35 pm »
 Here we go again,Same shiiite-different country,, IRAQ and WMD's was their ticket to invade. Pre-emptive strikes my arse, it was genocide plain and simple. A DECEPTION and any American who can't see that is braindead or missing a soul.
  So here we go again, Iran is on the table, fact is its been there a while. The only way they can pull this off is an FF and blaming Iran. These fakes, LIL rat bastards on stage calling for more war, let them pick up a weapon lead the charge.
  Disqusted, you bet I am. Those who have not seen innocent victims cut to ribbons may not get it, you guys do, but how many cits running around have no idea, to them it may be similar a football game, or simply numbers on the CNN telly. 
 

Offline Catalina

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,511
  • Government Censorship, Protecting You From Reality
Re: Truth Squad: Is Iran "a few months" away from a nuclear weapon?
« Reply #77 on: December 16, 2011, 03:43:00 pm »
Deja vu US court claims Iranian 9/11 link

A US court has won a default judgement that Iranian officials, including its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, provided help to the 9/11 hijackers behind the worst terror attack on American soil. The lawsuit was filed by the families of the atrocity's victims. There was no Iranian representation in court. RT talks to Michel Chossudovsky, Director of the Center for Research on Globalization.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHdePe4GZM&list=UUpwvZwUam-URkxB7g4USKpg&index=1&feature=plcp
Spare no cost for truth's sake, neither depart from it for any gain. -Proverbs 23:23

Bestow not the gifts that God has given you to get worldly riches. -Proverbs 23:4

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,919
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
U.S Threat to Attack Iran with Nukes is "Criminal"
« Reply #78 on: December 24, 2011, 06:31:37 pm »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-threat-to-attack-iran-with-nukes-is-criminal/28337

U.S Threat to Attack Iran with Nukes is "Criminal"

"No Options Off the Table" is an Illegal Threat to the Peace

by Sherwood Ross



Global Research
December 23, 2011

The U.S. today is threatening to attack Iran “under the completely bogus pretext” that it might have a nuclear weapon, a distinguished American international legal authority says.

When Obama administration officials, like those of the Bush regime before it, say “all options are on the table,” they are threatening nuclear war and that is prohibited by international law, says Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois at Champaign.

Not only has the International Atomic Energy Commission said this charge against Iran “is simply not true,” Boyle pointed out, but threatening Iran with nuclear war in itself constitutes an international crime.

“If we don't act now, Obama and his people could very well set off a Third World War over Iran that has already been threatened publicly by (President George W.) Bush Jr.,” he asserted.

In a speech on nuclear deterrence to the 18th conference on “Direct Democracy” in Feldkirch, Austria, Boyle said it has been estimated an attack on Iran with tactical nuclear weapons by the U.S. and Israel could kill nearly 3-million people.

(Boyle charges the U.S. has already committed “acts of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, and has authorized, armed, equipped, and supplied Israel to commit...outright genocide against Lebanon and Palestine.”)
 
Nuclear weapons and “nuclear deterrence” have “never been legitimate instruments of state policy but have always constituted instrumentalities of internationally lawless and criminal behavior,” Boyle said.

Thus, the governments of all the nuclear weapons states are “criminal” for threatening to exterminate humanity. Boyle named the U.S., Russia, France, Britain, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel. He reminded that “If mass extermination of human beings is a crime, the threat to commit mass extermination is also a crime.”

“The whole (George W.) Bush Doctrine of preventive warfare, which is yet to be officially repealed by Obama now after 18 months, was made by the Nazi lawyers for the Nazi defendants at Nuremberg, and it was rejected,” Boyle said.

He noted Article 2 of the UN Charter “prohibits both the threat and the use of force except in cases of legitimate self-defense” and the U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, “do not qualify under that definition.” He adds the U.S. today is engaged in “ongoing international criminal activity” for “planning, preparation, solicitation, and conspiracy to commit Nuremberg crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide.”

What's more, “the design, research, testing, production, manufacture, fabrication, transportation, deployment, installation, storing, stockpile, sale, and purchase and the threat to use nuclear weapons are criminal under well-recognized principles of international law,” Boyle said.

And the leaders of NATO states that go along with U.S. nuclear policies “are all accomplices as well,” Boyle said, noting that pressure is mounting within Germany for the removal of U.S. nuclear warheads and that public opinion in much of Europe favors the elimination of nuclear arsenals.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Ambriel

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,683
  • Dare to resist
    • Consfearacynewz
Didn't ole Barry get a Nobel for something to do with nuclear war.

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html
The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.

For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."

Oslo, October 9, 2009


The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
ROLFLMFAOLAWLACOPTERROLFLMFAO


Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.

WHAT f**kING PLANET DO THEY LIVE ON?