PDA

View Full Version : War with Iran?...A big No No!



Eric J (Viking)
25th November 2011, 13:19
This guy General Wesley Clark revealed 2007 that US planned to take out 7 countries in 5 years INCLUDING iran, Now november 14th 2011 he was on CNN saying how IRAN must be invaded. CNN blew it by showing this video cause now it is out in the open what they are doing.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Jlf7XYtBVlY

viking

RMorgan
25th November 2011, 13:43
What a disgusting man...

buckminster fuller
25th November 2011, 13:56
I wonder what drove him to be so willing to give it away in 2007, seeing how he's selling his lies now, live on tv...

NewFounderHome
25th November 2011, 14:18
He looks more link someone how wants to get the message out there. He appeared to be more surprised about the list and the action taken and wanted to let the population aware of it.
He, from my point of view might be on the good side of it. But that we don’t know!
That video has been around for a will now!

taizen
25th November 2011, 14:52
Here is an interesting link: US sells Bunker Busters to ISRAEL (http://www.npr.org/2011/09/24/140773755/u-s-sells-bunker-busters-to-israel). In the end, the chess game pieces aren't really being taken off the board, they are just being made to look invisible. If we were to connect the dots ... this guy is only another pawn trying to play a game for which he was put into position to play by the game masters. I feel the global political system is a grand scale of the teenage game : D & D. Those who don't want to play into this or have a different agenda of the game master are systematically wiped off the board.
Game strategies vary, but are pretty consistent. When everyone was busying themselves with the distraction of Occupy Wallstreet and a stock exchange sell off/dramatic gain, there was another exchange going on.
With this guy's announcement back in 2007 of the 7 country agenda, the Bunker Buster sale 4 years later, the upheavel of the Middle Eastern countries and now his new proclamation - time will tell if he will be allowed to stay in the game.

Eric J (Viking)
25th November 2011, 14:58
Here is an interesting link: US sells Bunker Busters to ISRAEL (http://www.npr.org/2011/09/24/140773755/u-s-sells-bunker-busters-to-israel). In the end, the chess game pieces aren't really being taken off the board, they are just being made to look invisible. If we were to connect the dots ... this guy is only another pawn trying to play a game for which he was put into position to play by the game masters. I feel the global political system is a grand scale of the teenage game : D & D. Those who don't want to play into this or have a different agenda of the game master are systematically wiped off the board.
Game strategies vary, but are pretty consistent. When everyone was busying themselves with the distraction of Occupy Wallstreet and a stock exchange sell off/dramatic gain, there was another exchange going on.
With this guy's announcement back in 2007 of the 7 country agenda, the Bunker Buster sale 4 years later, the upheavel of the Middle Eastern countries and now his new proclamation - time will tell if he will be allowed to stay in the game.

And lets not forget what one of Bill's contact has said ... !!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2VagWvc-_Y&NR=1

viking

Operator
25th November 2011, 15:17
I wonder what drove him to be so willing to give it away in 2007, seeing how he's selling his lies now, live on tv...

I think he was a candidate for the presidential elections during that time ...

Lord Sidious
25th November 2011, 16:24
I wonder what drove him to be so willing to give it away in 2007, seeing how he's selling his lies now, live on tv...

I think he was a candidate for the presidential elections during that time ...

Typical, the sharmouta will sell their souls to get into political office.

Calz
26th November 2011, 08:19
I expect the original plan was to push into Iran from Iraq ... but circumstances have changed dramatically.

Supposedly Iraq has insisted all US troops leave by the end of this year (ie one more month) and allegedly refused to even allow the asked for 17,000 to stay to maintain bases. According to this current article there are now less than 20,000 left:

_________________


US troops mark last Thanksgiving in Iraq with turkey, stuffing and rocket fire alarm

Published: November 24

COS ECHO, Iraq — American troops marked their last Thanksgiving in Iraq Thursday with turkey, stuffing and a rocket fire alarm.

Fewer than 20,000 American troops remain in Iraq at eight bases across the country. All of the forces must be out of Iraq by the end of this year, and American soldiers have been busily packing up their equipment and heading south.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/us-troops-celebrate-last-thanksgiving-in-iraq-with-turkey-stuffing-and-rocket-fire/2011/11/24/gIQAAupnsN_story.html
____________________________


A glimpse at a (somewhat aged) middle east map shows that takes away a large portion of a shared border with Iran.

11557

So it would *appear* that there is no longer any intention of occupying Iran (if there ever was) thus any involvement would be from the air (with various delievery systems). Yes, supposedly many of the US troops are still "bottlenecked" in Kuwait and there is the Afghan border as well ... but from a logistical perspective it seems obvious (to me at least) troops leaving Iraq has changed the nature of things.

Perhaps all that is "planned" is for the initial exchange between Iran and Israel to lead to WW3?

Asyloth
26th November 2011, 12:07
I also believe that WW3 is part of the plan of the PTB.
I mean what better idea could the PTB have to make themselves forget when all attention is being drawn on them? What better idea could they have to at the same time put their (totalitarian) world government after it? Today people are waking up about the PTB, the way they are manipulating society and the world in general, the way they're taking total control for cruel ends.
So what better plan could they have? Excepted the idea of a false flag alien attack?

I also think that it makes a lot of sense to trigger WW3 with a conflict between Israel and Iran, where Europe-U.S.(-Japan-Australia-Canada-Mexico) would ally with Israel into the conflict and China-Russia(-South America-Indonesia-India) would ally with Iran. This would be a WW not even comparable with the other 2 WW, this would be the REAL WW, fought all over the globe, and with China having supposedly 200 million soldiers, I don't see any other way than the atomic bomb to try to defeat them, even if they're technologically less advanced than we are, how do you defeat 200 million soldiers? xD

That's also I believe the reason why Iran is doing all it can to protect Syria, cause they know they're next on the list, with probably WW3 if they can't stop it.

I think we probably won't be able to avoid this, I mean look at how it would help the PTB:
-First this would be a great plan for their famous world population reduction, the deads would probably be counted in Billions.
-Second this would be a great way to draw the attention away from them, attention that's quite a lot on them right now.
-Third they could use the chaos to get rid of the free thinkers all over the globe.
-Fourth this would be a very smart way to put their world government in place at the end of it.

So yeah, I think the PTB are working hard over this, and I think we're more or less ****ed if the people of the world in general don't wake up very quickly!

Eric J (Viking)
26th November 2011, 12:46
Just a thought...If the stories about the Galactics intervening with Nuclear warheads are true...then how will this all unfold??

Both sides will be pressing the buttons with no effect..!! ha ha ...

viking

Calz
26th November 2011, 12:53
Just a thought...If the stories about the Galactics intervening with Nuclear warheads are true...then how will this all unfold??

Both sides will be pressing the buttons with no effect..!! ha ha ...

viking

Well "they" have certainly shut them down a number of times.

No denying that one.

percival tyro
26th November 2011, 15:38
They say that cockroaches leave their site before impending disaster. We'll have to keep a close eye on the migration from the Knesset.

Maia Gabrial
26th November 2011, 16:05
This general is two-faced for sure....However, I think he was more honest in 2007 than he is now. I want to ignore what he says now....

Seems to me that Israel is dangerously sitting on a powder keg of 60+ nuclear weapons and now add bunker busters to all that. To me, it seems more like a death trap for all of us on the planet. Either they don't know what they're doing with all of this.... Or they do and it has deadly consequences for all of us....

OmeyocaN777
26th November 2011, 18:44
It's obvious that General Wesley Clark has been threatened by Elite maybe he is afraid for his family........

modwiz
26th November 2011, 19:03
This general is two-faced for sure....However, I think he was more honest in 2007 than he is now. I want to ignore what he says now....

Seems to me that Israel is dangerously sitting on a powder keg of 60+ nuclear weapons and now add bunker busters to all that. To me, it seems more like a death trap for all of us on the planet. Either they don't know what they're doing with all of this.... Or they do and it has deadly consequences for all of us....

With your mention of a very dangerous country here, this is an article with high explosive potential:http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/11/25/iaea-cries-wolf-over-iran-nukes/

Guaxini
26th November 2011, 19:24
i have an word on this, rpt1 a Radio Television Portugal owned by the portuguese state interviewed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. they spoke English during this interview about the "regime", the nuclear program in Iran and the Islamic world and much interesting things :) i'm trying to found the interview but the only thing i could find was this http://tv1.rtp.pt/noticias/?t=RTP-esta-em-Teerao-para-entrevistar-Ahmadinejad.rtp&headline=20&visual=9&article=476680&tm=7 , the interview was live and i saw it. the link is spoken in Portuguese

ps- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected by the people, Iran is a Democratic state not a dictatorship.

Guaxini
26th November 2011, 19:37
the interview as a few months or weeks, its not old was made this present year..

Guaxini
26th November 2011, 20:50
i just heard on the news that NATO as killed 20 Pakistan soldiers.

Calz
27th November 2011, 02:37
i just heard on the news that NATO as killed 20 Pakistan soldiers.

Yep ... not getting much notice (or else the world is simply exhausted about hearing about war mongering and is ignoring it)

______________________

(Reuters) - NATO helicopters and fighter jets attacked two military outposts in northwest Pakistan Saturday, killing as many as 28 troops and plunging U.S.-Pakistan relations deeper into crisis.

Pakistan shut down NATO supply routes into Afghanistan - used for sending in nearly half of the alliance's land shipments - in retaliation for the worst such incident since Islamabad uneasily allied itself with Washington following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

Islamabad also said it had ordered the United States to vacate a drone base in the country, but a senior U.S. official said Washington had received no such request and noted that Pakistan had made similar eviction threats in the past, without following through.

NATO and U.S. officials expressed regret about the deaths of the Pakistani soldiers, indicating the attack may have been an error; but the exact circumstances remained unclear.

"Senior U.S. civilian and military officials have been in touch with their Pakistani counterparts from Islamabad, Kabul and Washington to express our condolences, our desire to work together to determine what took place, and our commitment to the U.S.-Pakistan partnership which advances our shared interests, including fighting terrorism in the region," said White House national security council spokesman Tommy Vieter.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar spoke by telephone, as did General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Pakistani Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

The NATO-led force in Afghanistan confirmed that NATO aircraft had probably killed Pakistani soldiers in an area close to the Afghan-Pakistani border.

"Close air support was called in, in the development of the tactical situation, and it is what highly likely caused the Pakistan casualties," said General Carsten Jacobson, spokesman for the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

He added he could not confirm the number of casualties, but ISAF was investigating. "We are aware that Pakistani soldiers perished. We don't know the size, the magnitude," he said.

Pakistan's Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani said the killings were "an attack on Pakistan's sovereignty," adding: "We will not let any harm come to Pakistan's sovereignty and solidarity."

Pakistan's Foreign Office said it would take up the matter "in the strongest terms" with NATO and the United States, while army chief Kayani said steps would be taken to respond "to this irresponsible act."

"A strong protest has been launched with NATO/ISAF in which it has been demanded that strong and urgent action be taken against those responsible for this aggression."

Two military officials said up to 28 troops had been killed and 11 wounded in the attack on the outposts, about 2.5 km (1.5 miles) from the Afghan border. The Pakistani military said 24 troops were killed and 13 wounded.

The attack took place around 2 a.m. (2100 GMT) in the Baizai area of Mohmand, where Pakistani troops are fighting Taliban militants. Across the border is Afghanistan's Kunar province, which has seen years of heavy fighting.

"Pakistani troops effectively responded immediately in self-defense to NATO/ISAF's aggression with all available weapons," the Pakistani military statement said.

The commander of NATO-led forces in Afghanistan, General John R. Allen, offered his condolences to the families of Pakistani soldiers who "may have been killed or injured."

Dempsey's spokesman, Colonel David Lapan, could not confirm the closure of the Pakistani border crossing to trucks carrying supplies for ISAF forces. However, he noted that "if true, we have alternate routes we can use, as we have in the past."

POORLY MARKED

Around 40 troops were stationed at the outposts, military sources said. Two officers were reported among the dead. "They without any reasons attacked on our post and killed soldiers asleep," said a senior Pakistani officer, requesting anonymity.

The border is often poorly marked, and Afghan and Pakistani maps have differences of several kilometres in some places, military officials have said.

However, Pakistani military spokesman Major-General Athar Abbas said NATO had been given maps of the area, with Pakistani military posts identified.

"When the other side is saying there is a doubt about this, there is no doubt about it. These posts have been marked and handed over to the other side for marking on their maps and are clearly inside Pakistani territory."

The incident occurred a day after Allen met Kayani to discuss border control and enhanced cooperation.

A senior military source told Reuters that after the meeting that set out "to build confidence and trust, these kind of attacks should not have taken place."

BLOCKED SUPPLIES

Pakistan is a vital land route for nearly half of NATO supplies shipped overland to its troops in Afghanistan, a NATO spokesman said. Land shipments account for about two thirds of the alliance's cargo shipments into Afghanistan.

Hours after the raid, NATO supply trucks and fuel tankers bound for Afghanistan were stopped at Jamrud town in the Khyber tribal region near the city of Peshawar, officials said.

The border crossing at Chaman in southwestern Baluchistan province was also closed, Frontier Corps officials said.

A meeting of the cabinet's defense committee convened by Gilani "decided to close with immediate effect NATO/ISAF logistics supply lines," according to a statement issued by Gilani's office.

The committee decided to ask the United States to vacate, within 15 days, the Shamsi Air Base, a remote installation in Baluchistan used by U.S. forces for drone strikes which has long been at the center of a dispute between Islamabad and Washington.

The meeting also decided the government would "revisit and undertake a complete review of all programs, activities and cooperative arrangements with US/NATO/ISAF, including diplomatic, political, military and intelligence."

A similar incident on Sept 30, 2010, which killed two Pakistani service personnel, led to the closure of one of NATO's supply routes through Pakistan for 10 days. NATO apologised for that incident, which it said happened when NATO gunships mistook warning shots by Pakistani forces for a militant attack.

Relations between the United States and Pakistan were strained by the killing of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden by U.S. special forces in Pakistan in May, which Pakistan called a flagrant violation of sovereignty.

Pakistan's jailing of a CIA contractor and U.S. accusations that Pakistan backed a militant attack on the U.S. embassy in Kabul have added to the tensions.

"This will have a catastrophic effect on Pakistan-U.S. relations. The public in Pakistan are going to go berserk on this," said Charles Heyman, senior defense analyst at British military website Armedforces.co.uk.

Other analysts, including Rustam Shah Mohmand, a former ambassador to Afghanistan, predicted Pakistan would protest and close the supply lines for some time, but that ultimately "things will get back to normal."



http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/26/us-pakistan-nato-idUSTRE7AP03S20111126

Calz
27th November 2011, 04:11
Regarding the "skirmish" with Pakistan ... here is something to make you go "hmmmmmmmmmmmmm" ...

_______________________


Pakistan defies US over Iran gas pipeline deal

Editor’s Note: The timing of this economic confrontation could very well be the raison d’être for today’s reports of a US-NATO attack on Pakistani border troops, as natural gas has emerged as one of the most significant pieces on the geopolitical chessboard in the 21st century- one which allows suppliers to dictate region policy and balance of power..

Press TV
November 26, 2011

Pakistan says it will press ahead with its Iran gas pipeline deal despite a strong opposition by the United States, Press TV reports.

Pakistan’s Information Minister Firdous Ashiq Awan said on Friday that Islamabad will not accept any dictation regarding its internal affairs from any foreign country, adding that exporting gas from Iran is in the country’s best interest.

The remarks came as a reaction to earlier pleas by Washington’s Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter that the Pakistani government abort its multi-billion dollar gas pipeline project with Iran.

“Pak-Iran gas pipeline is not a good idea….However, the plan to get gas from Turkmenistan is a better idea,” Press TV correspondent quoted Munter as saying on Friday.

The USD 7.6 billion gas pipeline deal, which was signed in June 2010, aims to export a daily amount of 21.5 million cubic meters (or 8.7 billion cubic meters per year) of Iranian natural gas to Pakistan.

Last month, Pakistan’s Minister of Oil and Natural Resources Asim Hussain said the Iran-Pakistan natural gas pipeline would be inaugurated before the end of 2013, one year ahead of the original schedule.

Maximum daily gas transfer capacity of the 56-inch pipeline, which runs over 900 km of Iran’s soil from Asalouyeh in Bushehr Province to the city of Iranshahr in Sistan and Baluchestan Province, has been given at 110 million cubic meters.

Iran and Pakistan finalized the details of the deal during bilateral talks held in Tehran in October 2007.

The deal comes in the face of Washington’s efforts to isolate Iran economically through UN Security Council sanctions and its own unilateral penalties over Tehran’s nuclear programs.

Iran ranks second in the world in natural gas resources after Russia with available gas reserves estimated at over 33 trillion cubic meters.

In addition to exporting gas to Turkey, Armenia, and Pakistan, the country is currently negotiating gas exports to Iraq.

http://www.infowars.com/pakistan-defies-us-over-iran-gas-deal/

Guaxini
28th November 2011, 20:34
this link brings some light over this topic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5-Gz_OG4qY&feature=related

ghostrider
29th November 2011, 04:46
Another country is not allowed to be strong and defend against the United Corporation of America ??? or any other invading country ??? if you don't join our Economic/banking system we make you our enemy and invade and replace your leadership with our puppets. What ??? you can't be free , you must march to our way of thinking.... or we will ocuppy your country and build a military base there and never leave. War with Iran will solve nothing. change nothing, gain nothing. just dead Irainians in the street, and revenge in the hearts of those who survive. War gains nothing it is insanity...

Calz
29th November 2011, 06:05
No way to confirm ... just passing along.

___________________________


Israel Preparing Iran Attack?

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
November 28, 2011

Aaron Klein reports today multiple eyewitness accounts of the Israeli military moving large missiles into position outside of Jerusalem and in the West Bank.

According to Klein, the missile descriptions are consistent with the Jewish state’s mid-to-long range Jericho ballistic missiles and their movement would be considered unusual.

The movement was confirmed by a member of the Palestinian Authority security services. “He claimed to me that a large missile was stationed five days ago near Neve Yaacov, a Jewish neighborhood in northeast Jerusalem. That neighborhood is adjacent to several Palestinian-inhabited towns,” Klein writes.

“The PA security member, speaking on condition of anonymity, speculated the missiles were related to a possible Israeli offensive against Iran. He commented that such missiles were offensive in nature, and usually not meant to serve as defensive posture.”

Israel Defense Forces would not confirm the information and referred Klein instead to Israel’s national police. Mickey Rosenfeld, the national police spokesperson, told Klein he had no information on any such movements.

Klein speculated that the missiles may have been repositioned as part of an exercise or a test. He said, however, that testing is almost always conducted at a military base and usually involves one missile fired from one location.

Another prospect is a possible NATO attack on neighboring Syria. If NATO engages in a military campaign against al-Assad in Syria, it may have ramifications for Israel, most notably the firing of rockets into Israel by Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.

Aaron Klein is an American author, Middle East correspondent, head of the Jerusalem bureau for WorldNetDaily.


http://www.infowars.com/israel-preparing-iran-attack/

modwiz
29th November 2011, 06:35
Here is an interesting article from VT on site that did a 180 just as it was needed. A slick psy-ops exposed. A must read. It is short. http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/11/28/integrity-to-indency-they-hyena-bares-its-fangs/

Black Panther
29th November 2011, 07:45
Another prospect is a possible NATO attack on neighboring Syria. If NATO engages in a military campaign against al-Assad in Syria, it may have ramifications for Israel, most notably the firing of rockets into Israel by Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.



Rockets fired from Lebanon land in northern Israel

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?35736-Rockets-fired-from-Lebanon-land-in-northern-Israel

Calz
29th November 2011, 07:51
Another prospect is a possible NATO attack on neighboring Syria. If NATO engages in a military campaign against al-Assad in Syria, it may have ramifications for Israel, most notably the firing of rockets into Israel by Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.



Rockets fired from Lebanon land in northern Israel

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?35736-Rockets-fired-from-Lebanon-land-in-northern-Israel


and so it begins


11628


... or not ...

Houman
29th November 2011, 07:57
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLBcNTO6lOI&feature=related

Eric J (Viking)
29th November 2011, 10:23
Found this on my travels ... oh the games they play...

Is Britain plotting with Israel to attack Iran?

Nov. 25, 2011

Ex-ambassador exposes government cover-up
Last February Britain’s then defense minister Liam Fox attended a dinner in Tel Aviv with a group described as senior Israelis. Alongside him sat Adam Werritty, a lobbyist whose “improper relations” with the minister would lead eight months later to Fox’s hurried resignation.

According to several reports in the British media the Israelis in attendance at the dinner were representatives of the Mossad, Israel’s spy agency, while Fox and Werritty were accompanied by Matthew Gould, Britain’s ambassador to Israel. A former British diplomat has now claimed that the topic of discussion that evening was a secret plot to attack Iran.

The official inquiry castigating the UK’s former defence secretary for what has come to be known as a “cash-for-access” scandal appears to have only scratched the surface of what Fox and accomplice Adam Werritty may have been up to when they met for dinner in Tel Aviv.

Little was made of the dinner in the 10-page inquiry report published last month by Gus O’Donnell, the cabinet’s top civil servant.

Instead O’Donnell concentrated on other aspects of Werritty’s behaviour: the 33-year-old friend of Fox’s had presented himself as the minister’s official adviser and jetted around the world with him arranging meetings with businessmen.

The former minister’s allies, seeking to dismiss the gravity of the case against him, have described Werritty as a harmless dreamer. Following his resignation, Fox himself claimed O’Donnell’s report had exonerated him of putting national security at risk.

However, a spate of new concerns raised in the wake of the inquiry challenge both of these assumptions. These include questions about the transparency of the O’Donnell investigation, the extent of Fox and Werritty’s ties to Israel and the unexplained role of Gould.

Craig Murray, Britain’s former ambassador to Uzbekistan until 2004, when he turned whistle blower on British and US collusion on torture, said senior British government officials were profoundly disturbed by the O’Donnell inquiry, seeing it as a “white wash.”

Murray himself accused O’Donnell of being “at the most charitable interpretation, economical with the truth.”

Two well-placed contacts alerted Murray to Gould’s central – though largely ignored – role in the Fox-Werritty relationship, he said.

Murray has pieced together evidence that Fox, Werritty and Gould met on at least six occasions over the past two years or so, despite the O’Donnell inquiry claiming they had met only twice. Gould is the only ambassador Fox and Werritty are known to have met together.

In an inexplicable break with British diplomatic and governmental protocol, officials were not present at a single one of the six meetings between the three men. No record was taken of any of the discussions.

Murray, who first made public his concerns on his personal blog, said a source familiar with the O’Donnell inquiry told him the parameters of the investigation were designed to divert attention away from the more damaging aspects of Fox and Werritty’s behaviour.

Subsequently, the foreign office has refused to respond to questions, including from an MP, about the Tel Aviv dinner. Officials will not say who the Israelis were, what was discussed or even who paid for the evening, though under Whitehall rules all hospitality should be declared.

Also unexplained is why Fox rejected requests by his own staff to attend the dinner, and why Werritty was privy to such a high-level meeting when he had no security clearance.

Nonetheless, O’Donnell appeared inadvertently to confirm that Mossad representatives were present at the dinner during questioning from an MP at a meeting of the House of Commons’ Public Administration Committee this week.

Responding to a question about the dinner from opposition MP Paul Flynn, O’Donnell said: “The important point here was that, when the Secretary of State [Fox] had that meeting, he had an official with him—namely, in this case, the ambassador [Gould]. That is very important, and I should stress that I would expect our ambassador in Israel to have contact with Mossad. That will be part of his job.”

The real concern among government officials, Murray said, is that Fox, Werritty and Gould were conspiring in a “rogue” foreign policy – opposed to the British government’s stated aims – that was authored by Mossad and Israel’s neoconservative allies in Washington.

This suspicion was partially confirmed by a report in the Guardian last month, as O’Donnell was carrying out his investigation. It cited unnamed government officials saying they were worried that Fox and Werritty had been pursuing what was termed an “alternative” government policy.

Murray said the Tel Aviv dinner was especially significant. His contact with access to O’Donnell’s investigations had told him that the discussion that night focused on ways to ensure Britain assisted in creating favourable diplomatic conditions for an attack on Iran.

Israel is widely believed to favor a military strike on Iran, in an attempt to set back its nuclear program. Israel claims Tehran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon under cover of a civilian nuclear energy project.

Israel has its own large but undeclared nuclear arsenal and is known to be fearful of losing its nuclear monopoly in the region.

Britain, like many in the international community, including the US government, officially favors imposing sanctions on Iran to halt its nuclear ambitions.

The episode of the Tel Aviv dinner, Murray said, raises “vital concerns about a secret agenda for war at the core of government, comparable to [former British prime minister Tony] Blair’s determination to drive through a war on Iraq.”

The Guardian revealed this month that the defense ministry under Fox had drawn up detailed plans for British assistance in the event of a US military strike on Iran, including allowing the Americans to use Diego Garcia, a British territory in the Indian ocean, as a base from which to launch an attack.

The O’Donnell inquiry has done little to allay many officials’ concerns about the series of strange meetings involving Fox, Werritty and Gould.

David Cameron, the British prime minister, has so far refused opposition demands to hold a full public inquiry into Fox and Werritty’s relationship. And the three men at the centre of the saga have refused to discuss the nature of their ties.

This month revelations surfaced that Werritty had had dealings with other government ministers.

“It is deeply inadequate of the prime minister to continue to refuse to probe this issue further,” said shadow defense spokesman Kevan Jones, in response to the new information.

The British media have cautiously raised the issue of apparent Israeli links to Fox and Werritty.

The Daily Telegraph reported that the pair secretly met the head of the Mossad – possibly at the Tel Aviv dinner, though the paper has not specified where or when the meeting took place.

Last month the Independent on Sunday claimed that Werritty had close ties to the Mossad as well as to “US-backed neocons” plotting to overthrow the Iranian regime. The Mossad were reported to have assumed Werritty was Fox’s “chief of staff.”

In addition, the O’Donnell report revealed that Werritty’s many trips overseas alongside Fox had been funded by at least six donors, three of whom were leading members of the pro-Israel lobby in Britain.

The donations were made to two organisations, Atlantic Bridge and Pargav, that Werritty helped to establish. Werritty apparently used the organizations as a way to gain access to Conservative government ministers, including three in the defense ministry.

The advisory board of Atlantic Bridge, which Werritty founded with Fox, included William Hague, the current foreign minister, Michael Gove, the education minister, and George Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Despite Werritty’s apparently well-established connections to the ruling Conservative party, the media coverage has implied at most that he was a lone “rogue operator,” hoping to use his contacts with Fox and other ministers to manipulate British government policy.

Murray, however, raises the more troubling question of whether Werritty was actually given access, through Fox and Gould, to the heart of the British government. Were all three secretly trying to pursue a policy on Iran favored by Israel and its ideological allies in the US?

The answer, according to Murray, may lie in a series of meetings between the three that have slowly come to light since O’Donnell published his findings.

According to the 2,700-word report, Werritty joined Fox on 18 of his official trips overseas, and the pair met another 22 times at the defense ministry, with almost none of their discussions recorded by officials. The Guardian has also reported that Fox’s staff repeatedly warned him off his relationship with Werritty but were overruled.

Despite the serious concerns raised about Werritty by defense ministry staff, Gould, one of the country’s most senior diplomats, appears nonetheless to have cultivated a close relationship with Werritty as well as Fox.

According to Murray’s sources, Gould and Werritty “had been meeting and communicating for years.” The foreign office has refused to answer questions about whether the two had any contacts.

When Murray sent an email request late at night this week for “all communications” between Gould and Werritty, he received a response from the foreign office in less than 90 minutes stating that providing an answer was “likely to exceed the cost limit”.

As well as noting that the answer should have been straightforward unless Gould and Werritty had had a protracted correspondence, Murray wrote on his blog: “The Freedom of Information team in the FCO is not a 24 hour unit. Plainly not only are they hiding the Gould/Werritty correspondence, they are primed and on alert for this cover-up operation.”

O’Donnell’s report mentions a second meeting between the three men, in September 2010. On that occasion, Gould met Fox in what a foreign office spokesman has described as a “pre-posting briefing call” – a sort of high-level induction for ambassadors to acquaint themselves with their new posting.

Werritty was also present, according to O’Donnell, “as an individual with some experience in…the security situation in the Middle East.” His participation at the meeting was “not appropriate,” O’Donnell concluded.

However, Murray said such briefings would never be conducted at ministerial level, and certainly not by the defense minister himself.

He added that a senior official in the defense ministry had alerted him to two other peculiar aspects of the meeting: no officials were present to take notes, as would be expected; and their conversation took place in the ministry’s dining room, not in Fox’s office.

“As someone who worked for many years as a diplomat, I know how these things should work,” Murray said. “So much of this affair simply smells wrong.”

Murray’s queries to the foreign office about this meeting have gone unanswered but have revealed other unexpected details not included in the O’Donnell report.

In a statement in late October, after the report’s publication, a foreign office spokesman said Gould had met Fox and Werritty earlier than previously known – before Gould was appointed ambassador to Israel and when Fox was in opposition as shadow defense minister.

The foreign office has refused to answer questions about this meeting too – including when it occurred and why – or to respond to a parliamentary question on the matter tabled by MP Jeremy Corbyn. All that is known is that it must have taken place before May 2010, when Fox was appointed defense minister.

In replying to Corbyn’s questions, William Hague, the foreign minister, acknowledged yet another meeting between Fox, Werritty and Gould – at a private social engagement in the summer of 2010.

Again, the foreign office has refused to answer further questions, including one from Corbyn about who else attended the social engagement.

The trio were also together shortly before the Tel Aviv dinner, when Fox made a speech at the hawkish Herzliya security conference in a session on the strategic threat posed by Iran.

And a sixth meeting has come to light. Fox and Gould were photographed together at a “We believe in Israel” conference in London in May 2011. Werritty was again present.

“That furtive meeting between Fox, Werritty and Gould in the MOD dining room [in September 2010], deliberately held away from Fox’s office where it should have taken place, and away from the MOD officials who should have been there, now looks less like briefing and more like plotting,” Murray wrote on his blog about the Ministry of Defense meeting.

Murray said he believed more meetings will surface. During questioning at the Commons’ Public Administration Committee this week, O’Donnell made two references to “meetings” between Gould and Fox before the general election and Fox’s appointment to the post of defence secretary.

Until now, only one such meeting had been admitted by the foreign office.

Murray noted: “A senior British diplomat cannot just hold a series of meetings with the opposition shadow Defence Secretary and a paid zionist lobbyist. What on earth was happening?”

Both Werritty and Gould are considered to have an expertise on Iran.

Gould was the deputy head of mission at the British embassy in Iran from 2003 to 2005, a role in which he was responsible for coordinating on US policy towards Iran. Next he was moved to the British embassy in Washington at a time when the neoconservatives still held sway in the White House.

Werritty, meanwhile, has travelled frequently to Iran where he has teamed up with opposition groups seeking the overthrow of the Iranian regime. On his return from one trip to Iran he was called in by Britain’s MI6 foreign intelligence service for a debriefing, according to the Independent on Sunday.

Werritty also arranged for Fox to travel with him to Iran in summer 2007, when Fox was shadow defense minister. And he organised a meeting in May 2009 at the British parliament between Fox and an Iranian lobbyist with links to the current regime in Tehran.

The murky dealings between Fox, Werritty and Gould, and the government’s refusal to clarify what took place between them, is evidence, said Murray, that a serious matter is being hidden. His fear, and that of his contacts inside the senior civil service, is that “a neo-con cell of senior [British] ministers and officials” were secretly setting policy in coordination with Israel and the US.

Gould’s unexamined role is of particular concern, as he is still in place in his post in Israel.

Murray has noted that, in appointing Gould, a British Jew, to the ambassadorship in Israel in September last year, the foreign office broke with long-standing policy. No Jewish diplomat has held the post before because of concerns that it might lead to a conflict of interest, or at the very least create the impression of dual loyalty. Similar restrictions have been in place to avoid Catholics holding the post of ambassador to the Vatican.

Given these traditional concerns, Gould was a strange choice. He is a self-declared Zionist who has cultivated an image that led the Forward, the most prominent Jewish newspaper in the US, to describe him recently as “not just an ambassador who’s Jewish, but a Jewish ambassador.”

A version of this story was first published in Al-Akhbar English, Beirut: http://english.al-akhbar.com

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net.

viking

Guaxini
29th November 2011, 20:20
Ahmadinejad speech at UN http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EBgqgIWuoc
and i think is right.

Calz
30th November 2011, 08:00
Sat images released of the Iranian missle base that was destroyed recently. Add to the story? You be the judge.

(larger image with better resolution at site ... link below)

_____________________


Satellite Images Show Iranian Missile Base Destroyed

Posted on November 28, 2011 at 11:59pm by Tiffany Gabbay


11647


A Washington-based research group has released satellite images showing extensive damage to an Iranian nuclear site two weeks after a mysterious explosion destroyed the facility.

The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), which specializes in the study of nuclear weapons programs, released images of the compound following the November 12 explosion near the city of Malard.

Before and after imagery offers a stark contrast of the site, but doesn’t provide any clues as to what actually caused the explosion.

The photographs clearly reveal that most of the buildings have been completely destroyed. Of course, some of the destruction may have resulted from subsequent controlled demolition of buildings and removal of debris, but because about the same number of trucks are visible in the image after the blast as in an image prior to the blast, it is likely that most of the damage resulted from the explosion.

Meanwhile, Iranian authorities have characterized the incident as an “accident,” involving the transport of ammunition. Continued use of this explanation, however, forces Iran into a predicament, given the increased number of recent industrial incidents the nation has suffered. In particular, Iran likely does not want to appear vulnerable at a time when Israeli leaders have been debating military intervention over Iran’s controversial nuclear program. But accident or not, the ISIS Photos leave no doubt that the facility has been effectively destroyed.

Paul Brannan, a senior ISIS analyst, indicated that it is impossible to tell from the imagery whether the blast was caused by sabotage, as has been speculated about this explosion and others at transport facilities, oil refineries and military bases in Iran, or if it is indeed the result of an accident.


When performing work with missiles, there are a variety of “volatile processes” that could cause an explosion, explained Brannan.

Brannan also added that ISIS had recently learned from “knowledgeable officials” that the blast occurred just as Iran had achieved a “milestone” in the development of a new missile, and may have been performing a “volatile procedure involving a missile engine at the site.”

Suspicions that covert actions may be responsible for this and other explosions continue to mount despite official denials by the Iranian regime.

Interestingly, on Monday The Blaze reported that a major blast also rocked the Iranian city of Isfahan, a town that is said to be “home to nuclear experimental reactors, and also a uranium enrichment facility for producing nuclear fuel.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/satellite-images-show-iranian-missile-base-destroyed/


_______________________


related story:


_______________


Who’s Blowing Up Iran?

November 28, 2011 - 7:16 pm - by Michael Ledeen

Another week, another explosion at or near an Iranian military installation (or is it a nuclear research facility?). As usual, the regime doesn’t know what to say. The mullahcracy is so intensely divided that different “spokesmen” from different ministries/news outlets/cults/mafias put out different versions. There was an explosion, or at least “the sound of an explosion.” This goes out on the wires. Then, no, there was no explosion, it was just the sound of our fierce military training. Then again, yes, there was something, but not to worry, just go home and shut up. And so it goes in the Islamic Republic of Iran, as our president so loves to call his intended international partners.

I’ve been reporting for many months about the ongoing sabotage of pipelines, refineries, military sites, Revolutionary Guards’ aircraft and trains, and groups of regime thugs. and have received the usual cold shoulder from publications “of record,” which is to say silent sneers. But the tempo of attacks, most notably the monster blast a week ago that vaporized General Moghaddam and his foreign visitors (at least some of whom had taken the shuttle from Pyongyang to be with him on what they wrongly expected would be a happy day) led the Washington Post’s man in Tehran, Thomas Erdbrink, to note the phenomenon in a useful story entitled “Mysterious Explosions Pose Dilemma for Iranian leaders.” He gives us a pretty good rundown of the explosions, and, living as he does in Tehran, gives ample space to regime “explanations” such as bad welding, western sanctions, and so forth. Given the number of foreign journalists who have come to a bad end in Iran, you’d do the same.

Safe in London, on the other hand, Roger Cohen of the New York Times has no doubt about what’s happening: his guy Obama is waging a secret war against the mullahs. “It would take tremendous naïveté,” he lectures the great unwashed, “to believe these events are not the result of a covert American-Israeli drive to sabotage Iran’s efforts to develop a military nuclear capacity. An intense, well-funded cyberwar against Tehran is ongoing.”

So color me tremendously naive. I would really love to believe Roger Cohen; the very idea that Obama, at long last, has ordered a response to the Iranian war against the west (totally unmentioned, needless to say), is delightful. But I don’t believe it, and Cohen doesn’t give us any evidence for it, aside from intoning, as the mullahs themselves are so wont to do, that it’s the infidels and the Zionists.

Yes, there’s a cyberwar, but Revolutionary Guards generals don’t get vaporized by Stuxnet. And Cohen’s judgment is so swayed by his fandom for Obama that it verges on the worst of the early Chris Matthews. Try this, for example:

Foreign policy has been Obama’s strongest suit. He deserves great credit for killing Osama bin Laden, acting for the liberation of Libya, getting behind the Arab quest for freedom, winding down the war in Iraq, dealing repeated blows to Al Qaeda and restoring America’s battered image.

I suppose some copy editor took out “ordering the” before “killing” and the “of” right after it, but sure, full marks for seeing it through. As for the Libyan, Egyptian, Tunisian and Iraqi decisions, the jury’s out, and seems to be leaning against Cohen’s client nowadays. The blows to Al Qaeda–by which he is referring to drone attacks and the like–are fine, albeit the really vicious body blow was the defeat of AQ and their sponsors in Iraq. If you think our national image has been “restored” under this president as a result of his great foreign policy, more power to you. Ring up Roger in London, maybe he’ll give you tea.

Since I’m pretty much the only guy in town who forecast the war against the mullahs, and it’s now so obvious that even MSM reporters and columnists can mention it without blushing, I’m sticking to my story. I don’t think the ongoing assault against the regime is coming from outside Iran. I think it comes from the Iranian opposition within the country. And I think it shows that the opposition is a great deal stronger than the experts have opined.

If you were Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, what would you be saying to that unhealthy face in the mirror? You’d say, “they come and go at will; they obviously have the full cooperation of traitors at very high levels of the regime, even inside the Guards. They not only knew Moghaddam was going to be there, but exactly where and when. Now Isfahan, another heavily guarded base. That doesn’t look like Zionists and infidels, whose pathetic collaborators we round up easily over and over again; it looks like people who are trusted and supported by the traitors in my own house.”

When a regime cracks, even very high officials start to do favors for the opposition, hoping to avoid the worst if the regime comes down. Khamenei knows that the head of the shah’s secret intelligence service went on to hold the same position under the fanatical Ayatollah Khomeini. Recent events will have convinced the supreme leader that his own security may be as compromised as the shah’s was.

Add to this the dreams common to regular users of opium (Khamenei is one of them) and you’ve got a very explosive situation.

http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2011/11/28/whos-blowing-up-iran/?singlepage=true

Eric J (Viking)
30th November 2011, 10:23
George Galloway says it like it is...you gotta love him!

George Galloway vs. war mongering parrot

The case against war with Iran

http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/iranus-sabre-rattling/george-galloway-vs-war-mongering-parrot.html

viking

Eric J (Viking)
1st December 2011, 21:37
A professor from the Chinese National Defense University says that China should not hesitate to protect Iran, even if it means launching world war three, as more US warships are dispatched to the region amidst heightening tensions.

According to NDTV, a Chinese news station based outside the country, in regard to recent speculation that Iran would be the target of a US-Israeli military assault, Major General Zhang Zhaozhong commented that, "China will not hesitate to protect Iran even with a third world war," remarks described as "puzzling to some".

The news report also quotes Professor Xia Ming as paraphrasing Zhaozhong's quote that, "not hesitating to fight a third world war would be entirely for domestic political needs."

China has vehemently reaffirmed its alliance with Iran in recent weeks, most notably yesterday when it refused to criticize Iran for a raid on the British Embassy in Tehran launched by Iranian students earlier this week. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia-pacific/china-refuses-to-criticize-i...

Both China and Russia have made it clear that they will veto any UN authorization of military action against Iran in the aftermath of claims that Iran is on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon.

"China has noted the tough reactions made by the relevant countries over this event and is concerned over the development of the situation," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hong Lei told reporters today. http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=338228

"We hope relevant countries will keep calm and exercise restraint and avoid taking emotional actions that may rachet up the confrontation."

Meanwhile, in a related development, three more US warships have been dispatched to join the USS John C. Stennis in the 5th fleet region.

With the Stennis, a Nimitz-class nuclear-powered supercarrier, already stationed just outside Iranian territorial waters, the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier has just been deployed from its home port to join the U.S. 5th Fleet AOR.

"In addition to the USS Carl Vinson's departure, guided-missile cruiser USS Bunker Hill and guided-missile destroyer left in the morning, and the USS Halsey will depart at 2 p.m," reports NBC SanDiego, adding that the ships are headed for the Middle East. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45493028#.TtdpAGMr2dB

Fears of an imminent military assault on Syria were sparked when the USS George H.W. Bush left its usual theater of operations to position itself just off the Syrian coast, but the warship has now completed its mission and is sailing back to its home port in Norfolk Virginia. View the latest naval update map: http://www.stratfor.com/ Source: Paul Joseph Watson: http://www.infowars.com/

Rice: U.S. Should Do Everything Possible to Bring Down Iran's Government http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/06/rice-us-should-do-everything-possi...

US sources: Israel ministers who opposed Iran strike are now for it http://www.debka.com/article/21453/

U.S. military official: We are concerned Israel will not warn us before Iran attack http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-military-official-we-are-co...

Pieczenik: Obama and Israel to Attack Iran Under Cover of Bogus Terror Threat: http://www.infowars.com/pieczenik-obama-and-israel-to-attack-iran-under-cover...

FBI Insider: Obama Administration Likely Manufactured Dubious Terror Plot: http://www.infowars.com/fbi-insider-obama-administration-likely-


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-3xeP7NFRE&sns=fb

viking

Corncrake
5th December 2011, 13:10
Interesting article by John Pilger on the role the media is playing with the possible war with Iran:

http://johnpilger.com/articles/once-again-war-is-prime-time-and-journalism-s-role-is-taboo

Black Panther
5th December 2011, 16:40
"World War III: The Launching of a Preemptive Nuclear War against Iran"

Global Research, December 4, 2011

by Michel Chossudovsky

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20111204&articleId=28026

Black Panther
7th December 2011, 14:06
Iran Moves Forces To War Alert

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/06/2011 12:18 -0500

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/iran-moves-forces-war-alert

Black Panther
7th December 2011, 14:23
Has the West's war with Iran already begun?

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070602/Iran-war-Mystery-explosions-nuke-sites-fuel-fears-covert-conflict-way.html#ixzz1frIgzQzG

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/12/06/article-2070602-016DCE90000004B0-104_634x473.jpg

Eric J (Viking)
9th December 2011, 19:08
Hmmmm not quite sure what going on here ... not sure if there is any truth in it!

~~~~~~~~

DAY OF INFAMY

Dec 8th 2011

Yesterday, 7 Dec 2011, two military bases were attacked from the air by the US Air Force using 2 modified TRB-3s firing a magnetic blast from 180 miles up at these Iranian Military Bases.

These TRB-3s were launched out of Edwards Air Force Base earlier in the day and given the mission in flight.

All Iranian Personnel were killed, including Hassan Moghadam, head of the Iranian ICBM program. Over 400 ICBM's were destroyed.

The state of Iran was a peace with the United States at the time. This was an unprovoked attack that has led to the deaths of hundred's of both Iranians and Russian military personnel.

The attack was ordered by Leon Panetti.

This attack was an Act of War by the United States and it's owners, the IMF (See 22USC286, 5USC105, Senate Report 93-549) located in London.

Last night forces paid by the IMF attacked the nation of Syria in an unprovoked attack killing Syrian Citizens and Syrian Military personnel.

To what extent the the Eastern Block will respond to this unprovoked attack remains to be seen.

Thus, in accordance with both International Law and UN regulations, a a State of War now exists between the United States & England against the rest of the 192 other states within the United Nations.

=====

Honorable Grace

Dr William B. Mount

Knight of Malta

Cpt (Ret) USA

http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=149495;article=139425

viking

percival tyro
9th December 2011, 21:43
Hi viking, I think it's not a plot or conspiracy but an historic plan by the khazars / ashkenazis / zionists of Israel , With their counterparts in the U.K. It has nothing to do with the people of Britain or Israel.

Eric J (Viking)
12th December 2011, 10:13
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5-1SY_nR_U&feature=player_embedded

viking

Black Panther
14th December 2011, 08:34
December 13, 2011

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/12/rumor-iran-to-practice-closing-strait-of-hormuz-plug-up-oil-tanker-corridor/

According to Reuters, Iran is going to ‘practice’ closing the Strait of Hormuz:

“TEHRAN (Reuters) – A member of the Iranian parliament’s National Security Committee said on Monday that the military was set to practice its ability to close the Gulf to shipping at the narrow Strait of Hormuz, the most important oil transit channel in the world, but there was no official confirmation.

The legislator, Parviz Sarvari, told the student news agency ISNA: “Soon we will hold a military maneuver on how to close the Strait of Hormuz. If the world wants to make the region insecure, we will make the world insecure.”

According to Business Insider oil prices have shot up from around $98 to over $100 a barrel.

11898

Black Panther
29th December 2011, 22:22
http://rt.com/news/usa-navy-iran-oil-903/

An Iranian warplane has spotted a US aircraft carrier during Tehran’s ongoing
navy drill in the Persian Gulf, reports IRNA news agency. The US fleet’s maneuvers
come after Iran threatened to block the oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran’s surveillance jet has shot a video and pictures of the American carrier,
which was later identified as John C. Stennis. The US Fifth Fleet keeps a military
base in Bahrain, while the ship was spotted in the Gulf of Oman after crossing the
Strait of Hormuz.

GaK7z0fnUp4

Calz
3rd January 2012, 15:07
Seems as if the chest pounding and posturing continues to rise ... but coming from MSM likely just another propaganda hit trying to build consent to ... what ... destroy the world???

How sweet.

(oh btw - what do you think would happen if Iran sailed an aircraft carrier fleet into USA waters???)

Silly me.

_________________


Iran warns U.S. to keep ship out of Gulf

12426

This file photo provided by the U.S. Navy shows the USS John C. Stennis at sea in the Pacific Ocean in November 2009.
(Credit: AP/U.S. Navy)

A senior Iranian Army commander has warned the U.S. Navy not to move an aircraft carrier which left the Persian Gulf during Iran's recent military drills back into the body of water which forms much of Iran's southern border.

According to the Reuters news agency, army chief Ataollah Salehi suggested to the IRNA network on Tuesday that Iran would take unspecified action if the carrier returned to Gulf waters.

The USS John C. Stennis and another U.S. Naval vessel headed out of the Gulf and through the Strait of Hormuz last Tuesday after a visit to Dubai.

"Iran will not repeat its warning ... the enemy's carrier has been moved to the Sea of Oman because of our drill. I recommend and emphasize to the American carrier not to return to the Persian Gulf," Salehi reportedly told IRNA.

"I advise, recommend and warn them (the Americans) over the return of this carrier to the Persian Gulf because we are not in the habit of warning more than once," Salehi told the semi-official Fars news agency, according to Reuters.

The U.S. Naval Forces Central Command would not immediately comment on Salehi's comments, or say whether the timing of the carrier's relocation was in any way linked to Iran's 10-day drills, which ended on Monday.

The U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet, based across the Gulf from Iran in Bahrain, had as many as five aircraft carriers in its ranks at the height of the war in Iraq, but that number has reportedly been reduced as the American presence in Iraq dwindled.

The last U.S. combat forces pulled out of Iraq just days before Christmas. Iran's military drills began on Christmas Eve.

Iran's warning comes after more than a week of heightened tension in the Gulf resulting from the Islamic Republic's military drills, and an early warning from the regime that any international effort to sanction Iran's oil exports would be met with the closure of the vital Strait of Hormuz.

About 40 percent of the world's oil supply is shipped through the strait, from the Persian Gulf into the Gulf of Oman and onto the rest of the world.

Iran's hypothetical threat to close the strait with military power drew sharp a rebuke from the United States, with the Fifth Fleet vowing to protect the passage of shipping through the channel.

Various Iranian officials backed away from the threat in the following days as the military drills continued. But tension remains high in the wake of the drills - which saw Iran test fire a number of medium and long-range missiles - over both the security of the vital shipping passage, and Iran's contentious nuclear program.


http://www.cbsnews.com/8300-503543_162-503543.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Calz
6th January 2012, 15:04
As much as we all try to shrug this off as yesterday's bad news ... the nitwits continue their march to war. Unless someone blinks ... allegedly by the end of this month the line in the sand has been drawn.

__________________


Iran Announces More War Games as Oil Embargo Nears


Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 6, 2012

Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi, naval commander of the Revolutionary Guards Corps, said on Friday that Iran will conduct new military exercises in the Straight of Hormuz.

Fadavi told Press TV the new exercise, dubbed the Great Prophet, will be different than the previous Velayat 90 drill initiated on December 24. Further details were not provided.


8ylwv04FO0o


Both the United States and the European Union are determined to stop Iranian oil shipments and shut down the country’s economy. The EU plans to unveil its effort at the end of the month. On New Year’s Eve, Obama signed the NDAA bill into law. The bill contains provisions imposing sanctions on foreign companies that do business with the Central Bank of Iran.

The price of oil reached $113 a barrel today on market concern of a supply disruption due to the growing tensions between the West and Iran. Brent crude rose 32 cents to $113.06 a barrel after declining by 96 cents on Thursday. U.S. crude was up 51 cents to $102.32, according to Reuters.

Analysts warn that the sanctions will worsen the eurozone economic crisis now playing out.

“Let’s assume the European Union is stupid enough to go along with the US in imposing sanctions on Iran. That would only mean 250,000 barrels of heavy sour oil not coming into the EU,” Paul Stevens, economist and emeritus professor at Dundee University in Scotland, told CNBC.

“But the impact that would have on countries like Italy and Greece would be enormous, and the Greeks are not going to slit their own throats for the sake of an EU sanction when Iran is the only country willing to offer them oil on favorable terms. It would utterly destroy the Greek economy.”

Stevens warned that if the Greek economy completely collapses it will take its European neighbors down with it.

China, the largest buyer of Iranian oil, has rejected the sanctions. “Sanctioning is not the correct approach to easing tensions,” said, Hong Lei, a ministry spokesman. “China opposes the placing of one’s domestic law above international law and imposing unilateral sanctions on other countries.”

Japan and South Korea are currently working to find a compromise that will allow Iranian oil to continue flowing. “We are considering our response and are closely discussing the matter with the U.S.,” explained Kazuhiro Kawase, a Japanese Foreign Ministry official. South Korea is attempting to minimize “the negative impacts” of sanctions as well.

On Thursday, Britain said it would use military force if need be to keep the Strait of Hormuz open.

“Alongside the US 5th Fleet in the Gulf, we have naval assets, we have mine counter-measures capability, we have a frigate present there, and we are an integrated part of the allied naval task force in the Gulf and one of the missions of that task force is to ensure that those shipping lanes remain open,” British Defense Secretary Philip Hammond announced.

Britain’s Royal Navy participates in the Combined Maritime Forces, a US-led, Bahrain-based naval flotilla drawn from 25 nations.


http://www.infowars.com/iran-announces-more-war-games-as-oil-embargo-nears/

Calz
10th January 2012, 09:59
This does not bode well. First I have heard of it so *if* this article is correct then they are certainly keeping it quiet.

_________________


Thousands of US troops deploying to Israel

Without much media attention, thousands of American troops are being deployed to Israel, and Iranian officials believe that this is the latest and most blatant warning that the US will soon be attacking Tehran.

Tensions between nations have been high in recent months and have only worsened in the weeks since early December when Iran hijacked and recovered an American drone aircraft. Many have speculated that a back-and-forth between the two countries will soon escalate Iran and the US into an all-out war, and that event might occur sooner than thought.

Under the Austere Challenge 12 drill scheduled for an undisclosed time during the next few weeks, the Israeli military will together with America host the largest-ever joint missile drill by the two countries. Following the installation of American troops near Iran’s neighboring Strait of Hormuz and the reinforcing of nearby nations with US weapons, Tehran authorities are considering this not a test but the start of something much bigger.

In the testing, America's Theater High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, missile system will be operating alongside its ship-based Aegis system and Israel's own program to work with Arrow, Patriot and Iron Drone missiles.

Israeli military officials say that the testing was planned before recent episodes involving the US and Iran. Of concern, however, is how the drill will require the deployment of thousands of American troops into Israel. The Jerusalem Post quotes US Commander Lt.-Gen Frank Gorenc as saying the drill is not just an “exercise” but also a “deployment” that will involve “several thousand American soldiers” heading to Israel. Additionally, new command posts will be established by American forces in Israel and that country’s own IDF army will begin working from a base in Germany.

In September, the US European Command established a radar system in Israel.

With America previously equipping Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates with weaponry to wreck any chance of an Iranian nuclear weapon program from close by, the US will now have added forces on the ready in Israel and Germany under what Tehran fears is a guise being merely perpetrated as a test-run. RT reported last week that the US is equipping Saudi Arabia with nearly $30 billion F-15 war planes, a deal that comes shortly after Washington worked out a contract with Dubai to give the UAE advanced “bunker buster” bombs that could decimate underground nuclear operations in neighboring Iran.

Since the US surveillance mission over Iran that left overseas intelligence with a captured American drone aircraft, tensions have only escalated between the two nations. After Iran threatened to close down the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial path for the nation’s oil trade, the US dispatched 15,000 marines into the area.


http://rt.com/usa/news/us-troops-israel-iran-257/

toad
10th January 2012, 18:21
the US won't allow Iran to close the strait, even tho Saudi Arabia has stated that it would compensate any oil production/distribution lose that is lost due to Iran closing the strait. Iran will suffer the most from closing the strait, they are already hurting economically it makes no sense for them to close it unless they are thirsty for a conflict. I personally don't think the closing of the strait is anything more then a threat, and a big pissing contest. What I forsee happening is a preemptive strike on their facilities, regardless of any drama over the strait.

Calz
10th January 2012, 18:25
I will offer something 100% unverifiable ... from a close friend who is super connected (IMHO)

NO CHANCE this time a nuke war will be allowed.

Gaia must and will be allowed her space for ascension.

What that means for the rest of us humans should be reflected upon???

Omni
14th February 2012, 16:45
Hopefully no war happens. If it does happen, I sincerely hope no nukes are used.