 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
civilian
|
Posted: Tue Jun 23rd, 2009 01:53 am |
|
Iran Falling to US PSYOPS?
Paul Craig Roberts
Infowars
June 22, 2009
President Obama called on the Iranian government to allow protesters to control the streets in Tehran. Would Obama or any US president allow protesters to control the streets in Washington, D.C.?
We are now witnessing in Tehran US "attempts to foment a popular revolution" in the guise of another CIA-orchestrated "color revolution".
There was more objective evidence that George W. Bush stole his two elections than there is at this time of election theft in Iran. But there was no orchestrated media campaign to discredit the US government.
On May 16, 2007, the London Daily Telegraph reported that Bush regime official John Bolton told the Telegraph"be a ‘last option’ after economic sanctions and attempts to foment a popular revolution had failed."
We are now witnessing in Tehran US "attempts to foment a popular revolution" in the guise of another CIA-orchestrated "color revolution".
It is possible that splits among the mullahs themselves brought about by their rival ambitions will aid and abet what the Telegraph (May 27, 2007) reported were "CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs." It is certainly a fact that the secularized youth of Tehran have played into the CIA’s hands.
The Mousavi protests have set up Iran either for a US puppet government or for a military strike. The mullahs are in a lose-lose situation. Even if the mullahs hold together and suppress the protests, the legitimacy of the Iranian government in the eyes of the outside world has been damaged. Obama’s diplomatic approach is over before it started. The neocons and Israel have won.
The US intervention and the orchestrated disinformation pumped out by the western media are so transparent that it is impossible to believe than any informed person or government is taken in. One cannot avoid the conclusion that the West wants the 1978 Iranian Revolution overthrown and intends to use deception or violence to achieve that goal.
It has become increasingly difficult to believe that facts and truth motivate the western news media. For the record, I would like to point out a few of the most obvious oversights, to use a euphemism, in the Iran reporting.
According to a wide variety of news sources (for example, London Telegraph, Yahoo News, The Globe and Mail, Asbarez.com, Politico), "Before the polling closed Mr. Mousavi declared himself ‘definitely the winner’ based on ‘all indications from all over Iran.’ He alleged widespread voting irregularities without giving specifics and hinted he was ready to challenge the final results."
Other news sources, which might not have been aware that the polls were kept open several hours beyond normal closing time in order to accommodate the turnout, reported that Mousavi made his victory claim the minute polls closed.
Mousavi’s premature claim of victory before polling was over or votes counted is clearly a preemptive move, the purpose of which is to discredit any other outcome. There is no other reason to make such a claim.
In Iran’s system, election fraud has no purpose, because a small select group of ruling mullahs select the candidates who are put on the ballot. If they don’t like an aspiring candidate, they simply don’t put him on the ballot.
When the liberal reformer Khatami ran for president, he won with 70% of the vote and served from 1997-2005. If the mullahs didn’t defraud Khatami of his win, it seems unlikely they would defraud an establishment figure like Mousavi, who was foreign minister in the most conservative government, and is backed by another establishment figure, Rafsanjani.
As Mousavi was seen as Rafsanjani’s man, why is it "unbelievable" that Ahmadinejad defeated Mousavi by the same margin that he defeated Rafsanjani in the previous election?
Neoconservative Kenneth Timmerman let the cat out of the bag that there was an orchestrated "color revolution" in the works. Before the election, Timmerman wrote: "there’s talk of a ‘green revolution’ in Tehran." Why would protests be organized prior to a vote and announcement of the outcome? Organized protests waiting in the wings are not spontaneous responses to a stolen election.
Timmerman’s organization, Foundation for Democracy, is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) for the explicit purpose of promoting democracy in Iran. According to Timmerman, NED money was funneled to "pro-Mousavi groups who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that the National Endowment for Democracy funds."
The US media has studiously ignored all of these highly suggestive facts. The media is not reporting or providing objective analysis. It is engaged in a propagandistic onslaught against the Iranian government.
We know that the US funds terrorist organizations inside Iran that are responsible for bombings and other violent acts. It is likely that these terrorist organizations are responsible for the burning buses and other acts of violence that have occurred during the demonstrations in Tehran.
A writer on pakalert.wordpress.com says that he was intrigued by the sudden appearance of tens of thousands of Twitter allegations that Ahmadinejad stole the Iranian election. He investigated, he says, and he reports that each of the new highly active accounts were created on Saturday, June 13th.
"IranElection" is their most popular keyword. He narrowed the spammers to the most persistent: @StopAhmadiIranRiggedElect @Change_For_Iran. He researched further and found that on June 14 the Jerusalem Post already had an article on the new Twitter. @
He concludes that the new Twitter sites are propaganda operations.
One wonders why the youth of the world, who do not protest stolen elections elsewhere, are so obsessed with Iran.
The unexamined question is Mousavi and his motives. Why would Mousavi unleash demonstrations that are obviously being used by a hostile West to discredit the government of the Iranian Revolution that overthrew the US puppet government?
Are these the actions of a "moderate"?
Or are these the actions of a disgruntled man who kept his disaffection from his colleagues in order to gain the opportunity to discredit the regime with street protests?
Is Mousavi being manipulated by organizations funded with US government money?
John Bolton laid out the US strategy. First we try to destabilize the regime. Failing that, we strike them militarily.
As this strategy unfolds, Iranians will pay in lost independence or in blood for the naiveness of its secularized youth and for the mistake the mullahs made in trusting Mousavi.
http://www.infowars.com/iran-falling-to-us-psyops/
____________________
Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him flee before his face.
Psalm 67
|
civilian
|
Posted: Tue Jun 23rd, 2009 01:58 am |
|
What Actually Happened in the Iranian Presidential Election?
Esam Al-Amin
Global Research
June 22, 2009
Since the June 12 Iranian presidential elections, Iran “experts” have mushroomed like bacteria in a Petri dish. So here is a quiz for all those instant experts. Which major country has elected more presidents than any in the world since 1980? Further, which nation is the only one that held ten presidential elections within thirty years of its revolution?
Much of the allegations of election fraud have been just that: unsubstantiated accusations. No one has yet been able to provide a solid shred of evidence of wide scale fraud that would have garnered eleven million votes for one candidate over his opponent.
The answer to both questions, of course, is Iran. Since 1980, it has elected six presidents, while the U.S. is a close second with five, and France at three. In addition, the U.S. held four presidential elections within three decades of its revolution to Iran’s ten.
The Iranian elections have unified the left and the right in the West and unleashed harsh criticisms and attacks from the “outraged” politicians to the “indignant” mainstream media. Even the blogosphere has joined this battle with near uniformity, on the side of Iran’s opposition, which is quite rare in cyberspace.
Much of the allegations of election fraud have been just that: unsubstantiated accusations. No one has yet been able to provide a solid shred of evidence of wide scale fraud that would have garnered eleven million votes for one candidate over his opponent.
So let’s analyze much of the evidence that is available to date.
More than thirty pre-election polls were conducted in Iran since President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his main opponent, former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, announced their candidacies in early March 2009. The polls varied widely between the two opponents, but if one were to average their results, Ahmadinejad would still come out on top. However, some of the organizations sponsoring these polls, such as Iranian Labor News Agency and Tabnak, admit openly that they have been allies of Mousavi, the opposition, or the so-called reform movement. Their numbers were clearly tilted towards Mousavi and gave him an unrealistic advantage of over 30 per cent in some polls. If such biased polls were excluded, Ahmadinejad’s average over Mousavi would widen to about 21 points.
On the other hand, there was only one poll carried out by a western news organization. It was jointly commissioned by the BBC and ABC News, and conducted by an independent entity called the Center for Public Opinion (CPO) of the New America Foundation. The CPO has a reputation of conducting accurate opinion polls, not only in Iran, but across the Muslim world since 2005. The poll, conducted a few weeks before the elections, predicted an 89 percent turnout rate. Further, it showed that Ahmadinejad had a nationwide advantage of two to one over Mousavi.
How did this survey compare to the actual results? And what are the possibilities of wide scale election fraud?
According to official results, there were 46.2 million registered voters in Iran. The turnout was massive, as predicted by the CPO. Almost 39.2 million Iranians participated in the elections for a turn out rate of 85 percent, in which about 38.8 million ballots were deemed valid (about 400,000 ballots were left blank). Officially, President Ahmadinejad received 24.5 million votes to Mousavi’s 13.2 million votes, or 62.6 per cent to 33.8 per cent of the total votes, respectively. In fact, this result mirrored the 2005 elections when Ahmadinejad received 61.7 per cent to former President Hashemi Rafsanjani’s 35.9 per cent in the runoff elections. Two other minor candidates, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaee, received the rest of the votes in this election.
Shortly after the official results were announced Mousavi’s supporters and Western political pundits cried foul and accused the government of election fraud. The accusations centered around four themes. First, although voting had been extended several hours due to the heavy turnout, it was alleged that the elections were called too quickly from the time the polls were closed, with more than 39 million ballots to count.
Second, these critics insinuated that election monitors were biased or that, in some instances, the opposition did not have its own monitors present during the count. Third, they pointed out that it was absurd to think that Mousavi, who descended from the Azerbaijan region in northwest Iran, was defeated handily in his own hometown. Fourth, the Mousavi camp charged that in some polling stations, ballots ran out and people were turned away without voting.
The next day, Mosuavi and the two other defeated candidates lodged 646 complaints to the Guardian Council, the entity charged with overseeing the integrity of the elections. The Council promised to conduct full investigations of all the complaints. By the following morning, a copy of a letter by a low-level employee in the Interior Ministry sent to Supreme Guide Ali Khamanei, was widely circulating around the world. (Western politicians and media outlets like to call him “Supreme Leader” but no such title exists in Iran.)
The letter stated that Mousavi had won the elections, and that Ahmadinejad had actually come in third. It also promised that the elections were being fixed in favor of Ahmadinejad per Khamanei’s orders. It is safe to assume that the letter was a forgery since an unidentified low-level employee would not be the one addressing Ayatollah Khamanaei. Robert Fisk of The Independent reached the same conclusion by casting grave doubts that Ahmadinejad would score third – garnering less than 6 million votes in such an important election- as alleged in the forged letter.
There were a total of 45,713 ballot boxes that were set up in cities, towns and villages across Iran. With 39.2 million ballots cast, there were less than 860 ballots per box. Unlike other countries where voters can cast their ballots on several candidates and issues in a single election, Iranian voters had only one choice to consider: their presidential candidate. Why would it take more than an hour or two to count 860 ballots per poll? After the count, the results were then reported electronically to the Ministry of the Interior in Tehran.
Since 1980, Iran has suffered an eight-year deadly war with Iraq, a punishing boycott and embargo, and a campaign of assassination of dozens of its lawmakers, an elected president and a prime minister from the group Mujahideen Khalq Organization. (MKO is a deadly domestic violent organization, with headquarters in France, which seeks to topple the government by force.) Despite all these challenges, the Islamic Republic of Iran has never missed an election during its three decades. It has conducted over thirty elections nationwide. Indeed, a tradition of election orderliness has been established, much like election precincts in the U.S. or boroughs in the U.K. The elections in Iran are organized, monitored and counted by teachers and professionals including civil servants and retirees (again much like the U.S.)
There has not been a tradition of election fraud in Iran. Say what you will about the system of the Islamic Republic, but its elected legislators have impeached ministers and “borked” nominees of several Presidents, including Ahmadinejad. Rubberstamps, they are not. In fact, former President Mohammad Khatami, considered one of the leading reformists in Iran, was elected president by the people, when the interior ministry was run by archconservatives. He won with over 70 percent of the vote, not once, but twice.
When it comes to elections, the real problem in Iran is not fraud but candidates’ access to the ballots (a problem not unique to the country, just ask Ralph Nader or any other third party candidate in the U.S.) It is highly unlikely that there was a huge conspiracy involving tens of thousands of teachers, professionals and civil servants that somehow remained totally hidden and unexposed.
Moreover, while Ahmadinejad belongs to an active political party that has already won several elections since 2003, Mousavi is an independent candidate who emerged on the political scene just three months ago, after a 20-year hiatus. It was clear during the campaign that Ahmadinejad had a nationwide campaign operation. He made over sixty campaign trips throughout Iran in less than twelve weeks, while his opponent campaigned only in the major cities, and lacked a sophisticated campaign apparatus.
It is true that Mousavi has an Azeri background. But the CPO poll mentioned above, and published before the elections, noted that “its survey indicated that only 16 per cent of Azeri Iranians will vote for Mr. Mousavi. By contrast, 31 per cent of the Azeris claim they will vote for Mr. Ahmadinejad.” In the end, according to official results, the election in that region was much closer than the overall result. In fact, Mousavi won narrowly in the West Azerbaijan province but lost the region to Ahmadinejad by a 45 to 52 per cent margin (or 1.5 to 1.8 million votes).
However, the double standard applied by Western news agencies is striking. Richard Nixon trounced George McGovern in his native state of South Dakota in the 1972 elections. Had Al Gore won his home state of Tennessee in 2000, no one would have cared about a Florida recount, nor would there have been a Supreme Court case called Bush v. Gore. If Vice-Presidential candidate John Edwards had won the states he was born and raised in (South and North Carolina), President John Kerry would now be serving his second term. But somehow, in Western newsrooms Middle Eastern people choose their candidates not on merit, but on the basis of their “tribe.”
The fact that minor candidates such as Karroubi would garner fewer votes than expected, even in their home regions as critics charge, is not out of the ordinary. Many voters reach the conclusion that they do not want to waste their votes when the contest is perceived to be between two major candidates. Karroubi indeed received far fewer votes this time around than he did in 2005, including in his hometown. Likewise, Ross Perot lost his home state of Texas to Bob Dole of Kansas in 1996, while in 2004, Ralph Nader received one eighth of the votes he had four years earlier.
Some observers note that when the official results were being announced, the margin between the candidates held steady throughout the count. In fact, this is no mystery. Experts say that generally when 3-5 per cent of the votes from a given region are actually counted, there is a 95 per cent confidence level that such result will hold firm. As for the charge that ballots ran out and some people were turned away, it is worth mentioning that voting hours were extended four times in order to allow as many people as possible the opportunity to vote. But even if all the people who did not vote, had actually voted for Mousavi (a virtual impossibility), that would be 6.93 million additional votes, much less than the 11 million vote difference between the top two candidates.
Ahmadinejad is certainly not a sympathetic figure. He is an ideologue, provocative, and sometimes behaving imprudently. But to characterize the struggle in Iran as a battle between democratic forces and a “dictator,” is to exhibit total ignorance of Iran’s internal dynamics, or to deliberately distort them. There is no doubt that there is a significant segment of Iranian society, concentrated around major metropolitan areas, and comprising many young people, that passionately yearns for social freedoms. They are understandably angry because their candidate came up short. But it would be a huge mistake to read this domestic disagreement as an “uprising” against the Islamic Republic, or as a call to embark on a foreign policy that would accommodate the West at the expense of Iran’s nuclear program or its vital interests.
Nations display respect to other nations only when they respect their sovereignty. If any nation, for instance, were to dictate the United States’ economic, foreign or social policies, Americans would be indignant. When France, under President Chirac opposed the American adventure in Iraq in 2003, some U.S. Congressmen renamed a favorite fast food from French Fries to “Freedom Fries.” They made it known that the French were unwelcome in the U.S.
The U.S. has a legacy of interference in Iran’s internal affairs, notably when it toppled the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953. This act, of which most Americans are unaware, is ingrained in every Iranian from childhood. It is the main cause of much of their perpetual anger at the U.S. It took 56 years for an American president to acknowledge this illegal act, when Obama did so earlier this month in Cairo.
Therefore, it would be a colossal mistake to interfere in Iran’s internal affairs yet again. President Obama is wise to leave this matter to be resolved by the Iranians themselves. Political expediency by the Republicans or pro-Israel Democrats will be extremely dangerous and will yield serious repercussions. Such reckless conduct by many in the political class and the media appears to be a blatant attempt to demonize Iran and its current leadership, in order to justify any future military attack by Israel if Iran does not give up its nuclear ambition.
President Obama’s declarations in Cairo are now being aptly recalled. Regarding Iran, he said, “I recognize it will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude, and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect.”
http://www.infowars.com/what-actually-happened-in-the-iranian-presidential-election/
____________________
Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him flee before his face.
Psalm 67
|
civilian
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 04:02 pm |
|
Flashback: CIA Discovered Planning “Soft Revolution” in Early 2009
Mehr News Agency)
June 22, 2009
TEHRAN, Jan. 19 (Mehr News Agency) — Iran has broken up a CIA-backed network that sought to carry out a “soft revolution” in Iran through people-to-people contacts.
The “soft revolution” plan is based in Dubai and is similar to a U.S. plan that targeted the Soviet Union in 1959, the director of the counterespionage department of the Intelligence Ministry told reporters at a press conference here on Monday.
He said the CIA was seeking to implement the plan under the cover of scientific and cultural contacts between Iranian and U.S. nationals.
Unfortunately, some Iranian nationals, especially cultural and scientific figures, were deceived through such activities, he added.
“The U.S. intelligence agency was seeking to (repeat) its experiences of color revolutions through such public contacts with influential persons and elites.”
The CIA tried to attain its goals by taking advantage of people-to-people contacts, joint studies, efforts to share scientific experiences, and other similar projects, he added.
The soft revolution plan was carried out through “NGOs, union protests, non-violent demonstrations, civil disobedience… and (efforts to) foment ethnic strife” all across Iran, the official stated.
Four of the people who led the network inside Iran were actively and intentionally cooperating with CIA agents, he noted.
These four persons were put on trial, some others were pardoned, and some others were acquitted due to lack of sufficient evidence, he explained.
These four persons confessed and videotapes of parts of their confessions will be released soon, he noted.
He only named two of the persons, the brothers Dr. Arash Alaei and Dr. Kamyar Alaei.
The Intelligence Ministry official said that $32 million of the $75 million allocated by the U.S. Congress to destabilize Iran was spent on this project.
The CIA used institutions such as the Woodrow Wilson Foundation, the Soros Foundation, AIPAC, and charity organizations and sought the help of William Burns and other people in the United States and agents in the Azerbaijan Republic, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait.
He stated that the CIA enlisted scientists, physicians, university professors, clergymen, artists, athletes, and dress designers for its plot.
He went on to say that these people were invited to the United States in groups of 10-15 people, with visas issued for them in Dubai in the shortest possible time, and according to their professions, they participated in scientific seminars and toured various states, and when they returned home they were asked to write “analyses” of the situation inside Iran.
The CIA was actively seeking to recruit more people for the network, who also would have been invited to visit the United States, he added.
These persons were ordered to put pressure on the government to change its policy and to sow discord between the government and the people, he explained.
The Intelligence Ministry found out about the secret plan from the very beginning and “even allowed the operation to be conducted to a (certain level) so that we could inform talented people with full confidence that they should not be deceived by such scientific centers,” he stated.
The Iranian Intelligence Ministry countered the plot by “infiltrating” the network and even derailed it from its path by providing false information, but the CIA eventually discovered the ruse, he explained.
Advice for Obama
The official advised the incoming U.S. administration to avoid repeating the previous “failed” policies toward Iran.
He made the remarks one day before Barack Obama is officially inaugurated as the next U.S. president.
The Intelligence Ministry official said the U.S. is discrediting its scientific and charity organizations by allowing the CIA to use them as cover for its activities.
“It is not in the interests of scientific and political institutions (to allow themselves) to be used by the CIA for its hidden agenda.”
Employing such organizations to conduct spy activities will create skepticism about them that will be very difficult to eliminate, he noted.
http://www.infowars.com/flashback-cia-discovered-planning-soft-revolution-in-early-2009/
____________________
Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him flee before his face.
Psalm 67
|
civilian
|
Posted: Mon Apr 26th, 2010 03:36 am |
|
____________________
Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him flee before his face.
Psalm 67
|
civilian
|
Posted: Tue May 18th, 2010 05:44 am |
|
Useless calling
“My children, you must understand: your country, the United States, will become involved and be asked to send more young to be slaughtered in foreign lands. You must not follow that calling. It will be useless.”
Our Lady, October 6, 1978
____________________
Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him flee before his face.
Psalm 67
|
civilian
|
Posted: Tue May 18th, 2010 05:46 am |
|
Anguished Moms
“The Middle East crisis will worsen. My heart is torn with sorrow for what lies ahead. I cry for the mothers of these lost sons. I cry for the mothers of these broken bodies. Pray to hold back the engulfment that lies ahead.”
Our Lady, October 2, 1970
____________________
Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him flee before his face.
Psalm 67
|
civilian
|
Posted: Mon May 31st, 2010 03:15 am |
|
Israel stations nuclear missile subs off Iran
Uzi Mahnaimi
London Times
May 30, 2010
Three German-built Israeli submarines equipped with nuclear cruise missiles are to be deployed in the Gulf near the Iranian coastline.
The first has been sent in response to Israeli fears that ballistic missiles developed by Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, a political and military organisation in Lebanon, could hit sites in Israel, including air bases and missile launchers.
The submarines of Flotilla 7 — Dolphin, Tekuma and Leviathan — have visited the Gulf before. But the decision has now been taken to ensure a permanent presence of at least one of the vessels.
The flotilla’s commander, identified only as “Colonel O”, told an Israeli newspaper: “We are an underwater assault force. We’re operating deep and far, very far, from our borders.”
Full article here
____________________
Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him flee before his face.
Psalm 67
|
civilian
|
Posted: Sun Jun 6th, 2010 02:41 am |
|
Infowars.com Poll: War in the Middle East?
Infowars.com
June 5, 2010
An Infowars.com poll conducted earlier in the week suggests Israel’s commando raid on a flotilla headed for Gaza with humanitarian aid will result in war between Israel and its Arab neighbors.
Between 9 and 19 pro-Palestinian activists were killed by Israeli commandos in the raid conducted in international waters of the Mediterranean. Most of the dead are Turkish citizens.
Turkey has threatened to sever diplomatic and commercial ties with Israel over the incident. News reports earlier in the week suggested Turkey may provide future aid ships headed to the blockaded Gaza Strip with military escorts.
Namik Tan , Turkey’s ambassador to Washington, outlined three Turkish demands for Israel on Friday including a public apology. He said Israel also must accept a credible independent investigation of the raid and end its blockade against Gaza.
Israel has rejected calls for an international investigation. Israeli PM Netanyahu told a meeting of Israel’s inner cabinet on June 2 that he would not bow to pressure to lift the blockade on Gaza
“We support an Israeli investigation that meets those criteria. We are open to different ways of assuring a credible investigation, including international participation, and we will continue to discuss these ideas with the Israelis and our international partners in the days ahead,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters on Tuesday.
Obama administration officials and most members of Congress, according to the Forward newspaper, indicate the United States will not urge Israel to lift its blockade of Gaza
Israel insists its commandos responded with deadly fire after they were attacked by activists on the Mavi Marmara, the lead ship of the flotilla. On Thursday, Al Jazeera English broadcast an interview with Jamal Elshayyal, one of the channel’s journalists who was on board the Mavi Marmara on Monday. Elshayyal insisted that the Israelis had fired live ammunition at the ship from the air before commandos landed on the boat.
Numerous eyewitnesses told the media Israeli commandos opened fire prior to boarding and it appeared they targeted certain individuals.
The nine Turkish activists killed during the raid, including one with U.S. citizenship, were shot a total of 30 times and five died of gunshot wounds to the head, according to Reuters. In addition to those killed, 48 others suffered gunshot wounds and six activists are still missing, Britain’s Guardian newspaper reported on Friday.
On Saturday, the Turkish newspaper Zaman reported that the Istanbul Prosecutor’s Office began compiling evidence against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi. If the prosecutor’s office can compile enough evidence against Israel at the end of its probe, it will charge the Israeli officials with various crimes, including murder, injury, taking hostages, attacking Turkish citizens on the open seas and piracy.
In a televised speech on Wednesday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the activists as members of Hamas. An earlier assertion by the Israelis that al-Qaeda was involved in the incident was retracted on Friday.
In reaction to the fatal raid, demonstrations have erupted around the world. A demonstration outside the White House called for the U.S. to remove Israel’s ambassador. Amid shouts of “no more nickles, no more dimes, no more funding Israel’s crimes,” protesters in Washington also called for the end of Israeli occupation and blockade of Gaza. Angry protests have occurred in Turkey, the United Kingdom, Europe, South America, Australia, India, and elsewhere.
Max Hastings for the Mail Online. “It is Israel’s tragedy that many of its people have decided that permanent war is preferable to peace on terms their enemies might accept, which would include evacuation of the occupied territories and east Jerusalem.”
____________________
Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him flee before his face.
Psalm 67
|
civilian
|
Posted: Sat Jun 26th, 2010 04:34 am |
|
These Last Days News - June 22, 2010
U.S. and Israeli Warships are Moving Into the Middle East. War is About to Breakout...
"Wars are a punishment for man's sins. My children, My heart is torn. I stand with you observing your road, the path you are traveling. Many lives shall be lost in the great War.
"The forces of evil are gathering about the city of Jerusalem. I walked there, My children. My home will be destroyed. There shall be much blood shed upon My home."
- Our Lady, June 24, 1976
U.S. and Israeli warships cross Suez Canal toward Red Sea
More than twelve United States Naval warships and at least one Israeli ship crossed the Suez Canal towards the Red Sea on Friday, British Arabic Language newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi reported Saturday. According to the report, thousands of Egyptian soldiers were deployed along the Suez Canal guarding the ships' passage, which included a U.S. aircraft carrier.
The Suez Canal is a strategic Egyptian waterway which connects between the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea. According to eyewitnesses, the U.S. battleships were the largest to have crossed the Canal in many years, Al-Quds reported.
Egyptian opposition members have criticized the government for cooperating with the U.S. and Israeli forces and allowing the ships' passage through Egyptian territorial waters. They said they viewed the event as Egyptian participation in an international scandal, and added that the opposition would not sit with its arms crossed while the country allowed a fleet of U.S. and Israeli military ships to cross.
Israel stations nuclear cruise missile subs in the Persian Gulf off Iran
Three German-built Israeli submarines equipped with nuclear cruise missiles are to be deployed in the Gulf near the Iranian coastline. The first has been sent in response to Israeli fears that ballistic missiles developed by Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, a political and military organization in Lebanon, could hit sites in Israel, including air bases and missile launchers.
The submarines of Flotilla 7 — Dolphin, Tekuma and Leviathan — have visited the Gulf before. But the decision has now been taken to ensure a permanent presence of at least one of the vessels. The flotilla’s commander, identified only as “Colonel O”, told an Israeli newspaper: “We are an underwater assault force. We’re operating deep and far, very far, from our borders.”
Each of the submarines has a crew of 35 to 50, commanded by a colonel capable of launching a nuclear cruise missile. The vessels can remain at sea for about 50 days and stay submerged up to 1,150ft below the surface for at least a week. Some of the cruise missiles are equipped with the most advanced nuclear warheads in the Israeli arsenal.
The deployment is designed to act as a deterrent, gather intelligence and potentially to land Mossad agents. “We’re a solid base for collecting sensitive information, as we can stay for a long time in one place,” said a flotilla officer.
The submarines could be used if Iran continues its programed to produce a nuclear bomb. “The 1,500km range of the submarines’ cruise missiles can reach any target in Iran,” said a navy officer. Apparently responding to the Israeli activity, an Iranian admiral said: “Anyone who wishes to do an evil act in the Persian Gulf will receive a forceful response from us.”
Israel’s urgent need to deter the Iran-Syria-Hezbollah alliance was demonstrated last month. Ehud Barak, the defence minister, was said to have shown President Barack Obama classified satellite images of a convoy of ballistic missiles leaving Syria on the way to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Binyamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, will emphasize the danger to Obama in Washington this week. Tel Aviv, Israel’s business and defense centre, remains the most threatened city in the world, said one expert. “There are more missiles per square foot targeting Tel Aviv than any other city,” he said.
____________________
Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him flee before his face.
Psalm 67
|
admin
| Joined: | Fri Apr 18th, 2003 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 265 |
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Tue Jul 27th, 2010 06:24 pm |
|
Ahmadinejad: US Expansion Of War In Middle East Imminent
Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Tuesday, Jul 27th, 2010
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stated that he believes the US, backed by Israel, is preparing to attack two countries in the middle East within months as part of an expansion of the ‘war on terror’.
Ahmadinejad also stated that the attacks would function as a psychological war on Iran, without specifying whether he believed Iran would be physically attacked or how he had reached his conclusions.
“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.
Though Ahmadinejad did not elaborate on which two countries were in US crosshairs, it must be assumed he is referring to Syria and Lebanon – both Iranian allies and both previous targets of US backed Israeli aggression in recent years.
He added that the US has two main objectives:
“First of all, they want to hamper Iran’s progress and development since they are opposed to our growth, and secondly they want to save the Zionist regime because it has reached a dead-end and the Zionists believe they can be saved through a military confrontation,”.
Ahmadinejad’s statements come in the wake of the announcement of new economic sanctions against Iran by the EU, the US and the UN.
Tarpley also cited an editorial penned by former Senator Chuck Robb and former NATO deputy commander General Charles Wald calling for the U.S. to begin preparing an attack. “We cannot afford to wait indefinitely to determine the effectiveness of diplomacy and sanctions. Sanctions can be effective only if coupled with open preparation for the military option as a last resort,” Robb and Wald wrote.
Just last week, a report in Time magazine stated that Israel has managed to convince Washington to put the option of a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities back on the table.
Two months ago insiders at the annual Trilateral Commission unwittingly leaked the information that globalist interests are planning a war with Iran, citing the country’s fierce nationalist outlook as hampering to an embryonic structure of global governance. Less than a month later, in June, Bilderberg delegates also voiced their support for airstrikes for the first time. http://www.infowars.com/ahmadinejad-us-expansion-of-war-in-middle-east-imminent/
|
admin
| Joined: | Fri Apr 18th, 2003 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 265 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Aug 10th, 2010 08:09 pm |
|
Fidel Castro Warns of Imminent Nuclear War;
Admiral Mullen Threatens Iran;
US-Israel Vs. Iran-Hezbollah Confrontation Builds On Multiple Fronts
Webster G. Tarpley
TARPLEY.net
August 9, 2010
On July 21, the present writer offered the evaluation that an attack on Iran by the United States and Israel was now emphatically back on the agenda after a two-year hiatus.1 More than two weeks after issuing that warning, it is possible to offer a second installment of evidence to buttress the original finding. The author considers that this evidence is now sufficient to confirm the July 21 analysis. The contours of the coming conflagration are becoming somewhat more distinct, and give us reason to fear not just a Middle East regional war, but possibly even a world war, with increasing danger that nuclear weapons will come into play.
http://tarpley.net/2010/08/10/fidel-castro-warns-of-imminent-nuclear-war/
Comment:
The Bible Code I use (Bible Code Plus 2000) indicates the Iran War will lead to the Second Coming of Christ.
|
admin
| Joined: | Fri Apr 18th, 2003 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 265 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Aug 17th, 2010 06:42 pm |
|
Former Pakistani Intel Chief Fears World War Three Is Imminent
Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Tuesday, Aug 17th, 2010
- Global clique, an “ultra-Imperial club” shaping world affairs
- Destabilization exercise known as ‘war on terror’ could lead to World War Three
- All of Islamic world could be provocateured into “international jihad”
- 9/11 was a fabricated pretext to dominate the middle east and beyond
- Intelligence claims exposed by Wikileaks are “diabolical nonsense”
Former Pakistani General and intelligence chief Hamid Gul appeared on the Alex Jones Show yesterday for a full hour in what turned out to be a fascinating extended interview, addressing the major geopolitical issues that are shaping modern history.
Gul, who served as the director general of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence during 1987-89 and worked with the CIA in the covert war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, is a wealth of knowledge on the so called ‘war on terror’.
Gul spoke on a host of issues, beginning with his version of events surrounding the recent Wikileaks expose of US and Afghan military intelligence.
“My version (of events) is not going out to America, I’ve been denied the visa to travel to America. These people will not let me into America because they are afraid that I will speak the truth. People will listen to the truth…” Gul stated in response to the claims that he is personally “quarter backing” attacks on US forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
“Fareed Zakaria (of CNN), he recorded me for twenty minutes and he put out only six minutes of my version.” Gul continued.Task Force 373, which has been indulging in massive civilian casualties. They have been killing people left right and centre. Every time they are given the information, they have bombed wedding parties, they have bombed funeral processions, they have bombed innocents, and they have even bombed the hospitals.”
“So you can imagine that the intelligence based on the information provided by security contractors has resulted in this massive violation of human rights, it has been anti-human, it has destroyed everything that the American people and the American Constitution ever stood for.” Gul urged
“They think that anyone criticizing their policy is the enemy. This is totally wrong, this is a misconception. We work together with the CIA, we work together with the Americans, I have a lot of friends there, I respect them and my advice could also be useful.” Gul said.
“If they get embroiled in Pakistan they will keep on staying here for a long time. If they expand this war, a fight is going to be put up against America, whether in Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran. The larger the area of conflict and the longer the period of conflict, the established power, the one that is equipped with more firepower, cannot win – this is a lesson from history – it is immutable.”
“My fear is that if Pakistan is put to the corner and pushed against the wall – Pakistan being an Islamic state – could also declare international jihad.” Gul noted with great trepidation.
“Now if that Islamic state declares international jihad, it becomes binding on the muslims of the rest of the world to come out in support of jihad. It will change modern history altogether if that call is given.”
“They would have us believe that Iran is our enemy. Iran is not our enemy. There has been no hostility between Iran and Pakistan… This is an utter lie, it is only to malign Iran. But I tell you Israel is hell bent to draw America into a wider war attacking Iran. If they go in unilaterally to attack some targets, even drop a few bombs here and there, I think it will flare up a conflict that it will not be able to control.” Gul stated, following up with a harrowing prediction of what will follow.
“America is likely to get sucked into this war, and this may turn out to be the third world war. It would be a disaster of the first order, it must be avoided at all costs.”
“I don’t know if Russia or China could be held back. This could be an inferno that would consume so many things, and corporate America would be the biggest sufferer – where are they going to sell their gold and how are they going to pick up the oil?” Gul stated.
The General urged that if the world is to avoid such devastating conflict, people everywhere must not accept the propaganda being thrown at them by the elite clique attempting to shape global affairs.
“There is no clash of civilizations, this is a mindset that has been created unfortunately. …As far as Islam is concerned, why is it being looked upon as an enemy, as an adversary? Islam encompasses Christianity and Judaism, it is not an entity in itself, but actually it encompasses all the three religions of the book, so there has to be amicable peace among us.”
“There is no need for the dark impulse in the American system. I won’t say the American people, because they are so good, it is in the American system that the dark impulse has to be removed – and it can only be removed by the American people.”
Gul previously appeared on the Alex Jones show to share his contention that the 9/11 attack was an inside job, laying out details that were censored during a CNN interview on the same week.
Gul reiterated his stance on the 9/11 attacks, that it was a black operation to be used as a pretext for entering Afghanistan and using it as a launch pad to enter Pakistan and dominate the region.
Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)
Gul also spoke about the evidence that the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks were a Western controlled intelligence operation that was to be blamed on Pakistan, a claim he made shortly after the attacks which has since been vindicated by mainstream reports that US and Indian undercover agents were involved in the attacks.
The General also spoke on the death of former Pakistan leader Benazir Bhutto, reasserting his previous analysis that Bhutto was eliminated by a neocon controlled assassination squad after she “became rebellious” toward globalist interests.
Watch this groundbreaking interview in full below:
Steve Watson is the London based writer and webmaster at Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and regular contributor to Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.
 Print this page.-
- http://www.infowars.com%2Fformer-pakistani-intel-chief-fears-world-war-three-is-imminent%2F]Join the discussion, sign up/login to post a comment![/url] /* */ /* */ © 2010 Alex Jones |
|
Current time is 08:31 pm | Page:   ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 |
|
|
|
|
