The United States kills Quds Commander Qasem Soleimani

[Praxis]

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1212934206986293248

America just declared war on Iran.

We shall see if they accept.

So much for Trump being the anti war anti imperialism candidate.

The people who look the other way on this war mongering disgust me.

Welcome to the new year.

[Frank V]

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1212934206986293248

America just declared war on Iran.

We shall see if they accept.

So much for Trump being the anti war anti imperialism candidate.

The people who look the other way on this war mongering disgust me.

Those who are encouraging it ─ see the followup tweets ─ disgust me even more. It's sickening. :bad:

[Sue (Ayt)]

Can someone explain to me what Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, was doing in Iraq?

[Franny]

Then there's this one though it's not necessarily about impeachment...

1212934329438851072

[earthdreamer]

I just saw this news tonight and it is very worrisome. So this was an air strike on the Iranian general in Iraq, not necessarily a war on Iran.

[onawah]

WWW3 was no doubt always in the elite's game plan.

[RskikR]

Having a Beer with his mates.

[Iyakum]

Ok, I don't understand enough about the laws of the United States. But Obama has already been elected twice. Is it possible to be re-elected as president? Or does the election possibly refer to Michelle Obama? Ok Trump has kills Quds Commander
from Iran. Who is one of the most dangerous people on earth. But that happened in Iraq. What was the Quds Commander doing in Iraq, why was he there?

I don't know what to make of it. The commander was in Iraq to do what? Why and for what reason did Trump kill him? Is this the beginning of the fourth Gulf War? So what is behind it, what does Trump want to achieve with it? War against Iran? I don't know if it will be that easy.

Or is that the first provocation and a call to war? So if one of you has more detailed information, then I ask for it.

[ByTheNorthernSea]

Ok, I don't understand enough about the laws of the United States. But Obama has already been elected twice. Is it possible to be re-elected as president? Or does the election possibly refer to Michelle Obama? Ok Trump has kills Quds Commander
from Iran. Who is one of the most dangerous people on earth. But that happened in Iraq. What was the Quds Commander doing in Iraq, why was he there?

I don't know what to make of it. The commander was in Iraq to do what? Why and for what reason did Trump kill him? Is this the beginning of the fourth Gulf War? So what is behind it, what does Trump want to achieve with it? War against Iran? I don't know if it will be that easy.

Or is that the first provocation and a call to war? So if one of you has more detailed information, then I ask for it.

Hi Iyakum, this well considered Twitter thread may help clarify things for you (in hard political terms anyway)...

https://twitter.com/RymMomtaz/status/1213045597223165952

[mountain_jim]

From my view this region has been broken ever since the horrible Bush-Cheney Iraq War.

I hated what happened then and I never cheer for war or deaths.

I have observed in the past that many in Iran want out from under the theocracy and want many freedoms that we enjoy, but they have had to express this in private or be subjected to harsh punishments.

So I wait to see what happens next.

For some alternative views of the reasons for this and where this may lead..

https://saraacarter.com/maryam-rajavi-qassem-soleimani-was-a-vicious-criminal-it-is-time-to-evict-the-mullahs-from-the-region/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=social-pug



Maryam Rajavi: Qassem Soleimani was a vicious criminal, it is time to evict the mullahs from the region

Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), described the elimination of Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mehdi Muhandes, the head of Iraq’s suppressive Bassij force, as an irreparable blow to the clerical regime.

She emphasized that the time had come to evict the mullahs from the region, especially from Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, and expel the IRGC from these countries.

In this way, Iraq, which had been delivered by the United States to the clerical regime on a silver platter, will be liberated from the yoke of the religious fascism ruling Iran.

Qassem Soleimani was one of the most vicious criminals in Iran’s history. He was personally involved in the massacre of hundreds of thousands of people in the region and in driving millions of others from their homes. He was also the mastermind of the massacre of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/MEK) in Camp Ashraf in Iraq, and of many other terrorist operations against the Iranian Resistance in that country, in Iran, and in other countries. With his elimination, the process of overthrowing the mullahs will be greatly expedited.

Moreover, with the death of the criminal Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the head of Iranian regime’s proxy Bassij force in Iraq and a notorious murderer, whose crimes had been exposed by the Iranian Resistance since two decades ago, the time has come for the victory of the Iraqi people’s uprising and the liberation of Iraq from the Iranian regime’s occupation.

Mrs. Rajavi added: While the prospects for the ruling theocracy’s overthrow is within reach, it is time for the regime’s armed forces to refrain from firing on the Iranian people, lay down their weapons and surrender. The armed forces’ patriotic personnel must join the people of Iran.

Recalling the martyrdom of at least 1,500 children of the Iranian people and endless arrests during the November 2019 uprising, Mrs. Rajavi underscored: The international community, especially the European Union, must end the policy of appeasement and recognize the right of the Iranian people to resist and rise for freedom to replace popular sovereignty in place of the mullahs’ rule.





https://saraacarter.com/pompeo-reiterated-u-s-position-to-de-escalation-with-iran-after-u-s-air-strike-killed-soleimani/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=social-pug



Pompeo Reiterated U.S. Position To De-escalation With Iran After U.S. Air Strike Killed Soleimani

The U.S. military operation Thursday that killed Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, a U.S. designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, has “made the world a much safer place,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in an interview with CNN Friday morning.


“I can assure you that Americans in the region are much safer today after the demise of Qassem Soleimani… as for the protests that you described, there’s no doubt the last vestiges of theocracy, the kleptocracy in Iran will continue to try and put down these uprisings from the people. They’ve jailed thousands, they’ve killed hundreds. It won’t surprise me if they try to continue to do that,” said Pompeo.

He continued, “But know this, the Iranian people understand that America is a force for good in the region and I’m convinced that the support that we have provided to the people of Iran and the support that we continue to provide for the people in Iraq will work for American interests and make lives better for those people as well.”

On Friday, Pompeo continued to reach out to counterparts throughout the world explaining the U.S. decision to strike Soleimani.

He said on Twitter that he told Chinese Politburo Member Yang Jeichi about Soleiman’s plans to imminently threaten American lives and “I reiterated our commitment to de-escalation.”

Soleimani was planning to carry out an imminent attack on Americans in the region. However, at the directive of President Donald Trump, the U.S. military put a stop to it by striking Soleimani, who was in a vehicle convoy near the Baghdad airport. Seven people in the convoy were killed in the U.S. airstrike.

“General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region,” a Defense Department spokesman said late Thursday. “General Soleimani and his Quds Force were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more.”

[mountain_jim]

Some are asking whether the New York Times writer knew of the plan and tried to warn him yesterday:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/opinion/hypersonic-missiles.html

https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/027/198/469/original/e4578803eac95461.jpeg?1578026710

some commentary at Gab



The author has some interesting credentials, including National Security Council for Obama and Council on Foreign Relations:

Steven Simon is an analyst at the Quincy Institute, professor of the practice of international relations at Colby College and a co-author of “Our Separate Ways: The Struggle for the Future of the U.S.-Israel Alliance,” was senior director for the Middle East and North Africa on the National Security Council from 2011 to 2012 and for counterterrorism from 1995 to 1999. <--from NYT on the article page.

Steven Simon is a Senior Fellow at the Middle East Institute based in Washington, D.C. [1] Previously, he was the Executive Director IISS-US and Corresponding Director IISS-Middle East [2] and former United States National Security Council senior director, for the Middle East and North Africa.[3] He was Hasib J. Sabbagh Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies, at the Council on Foreign Relations. He was a Spring 2008 Berlin Prize Fellow. <--from Infogalactic

[silvanelf]

Can someone explain to me what Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, was doing in Iraq?

Soleimani coordinated the struggle of the "Axis of the Resistance" against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, he had close ties to the PMU (Popular Mobilisation Units) in Iraq and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Qasim Soleimani uses a walkie-talkie at the front line during offensive operations against Islamic State militants in the town of Tal Ksaiba in Salahuddin Province, March 8, 2015. (Photo: Reuters) (https://kurdistan24.blob.core.windows.net/filemanager/resources/files/2019/03/SoleimaniIRaq.jpg)
source: http://www.iraqnow.news/TopArticles/51414

edit: more info


Earlier today a U.S. drone or helicopter killed Major General Qassim Soleimani, the famous commander of the Iranian Quds ('Jerusalem') force, while he left the airport of Baghdad where he had just arrived. He had planned to attend the funeral of the 31 Iraqi soldiers the U.S. had killed on December 29 at the Syrian-Iraqi border near Al-Qaim.

The Quds force is the external arm of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Soleiman was responsible for all relations between Iran and political and militant movements outside of Iran. Hajji Qassim advised the Lebanese Hisbullah during the 2006 war against Israel. His support for Iraqi groups enabled them to kick the U.S. invaders out of Iraq. He was the man responsible for, and successful in, defeating the Islamic State in iraq and Syria. In 2015 Soleimani traveled to Moscow and convinced Russia to intervene in Syria. His support for the Houthi in Yemen enabled them to withstand the Saudi attackers.

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/01/us-will-come-to-regret-its-assassination-of-qassim-soleimani.html#more

[mountain_jim]

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/iranians-and-iraqis-celebrate-thank-trump-airstrike-killed-ruthless-military-general



Iranians And Iraqis Celebrate, Thank Trump For Airstrike That Killed Ruthless Military General

[bearcow]

The media is certainly making a big deal about the killing of a general, who was snooping around in a country other than his own, likely directing the insurgency against the US embassy. Why?

Is this the chance the deep state was waiting for? To get an "A sum of all fears" scenario. It seems like they are setting it up that way.

Allow, or aid an Iranian national to detonate a dirty nuke in an American city, then say to the world, if Trump hadn't been so reckless, none of this would have happened. Bank on Trump to come down hard on Iran, and say he is about to start world war 3, then push for impeachment under article 25 of the constitution, saying he is mentally unstable.

lets hope not, but i wouldnt put it past them.

[edina]

I'm less concerned about how the media pundits are reacting to this news.

What I wanted to know was how are the people inside Iran reacting.

They have been in protests against their present regime for decades and it escalated in the last 4 - 6 years.

I had thought that Qassem Soleimani had been behind the killing of so many protesters in Iran, and this was confirmed for me today, while reading the tweets that Iranians are sharing under this hashtag:

#TnxPOTUS4Soleimani (https://twitter.com/hashtag/TnxPOTUS4Soleimani?src=hash)

Americans are starting to wake up and share under this hashtag now, too. So scroll down to see the Iranian, Iraqi, and Syrian people's responses.

This one is one of my favorites, made me laugh.
1213066993630359553
https://twitter.com/Rza0098/status/1213066993630359553

On a more serious note, I'm not ready to make up my mind in one direction or another, on this situation.

I'm still in observer mode and gathering information.

[ExomatrixTV]

No Trump DID NOT Just Start World War Three, WW3 and Franz Ferdinand Trending Over Fear Of World War:
ZeYkzZwD4tQ

[mountain_jim]

Thanks edina - tweets are arriving every 5-10 seconds to that tag.

right above your dancing tweet:

https://twitter.com/hashtag/TnxPOTUS4Soleimani?src=hash



I'm an Iranian

Using Twitter through A VPN and Parody account in order to hide my identity not to be killed by the Ayatollah

But All I put My life in danger was to

Thank President Trump for killing the murderer of Iranian protesters.
#TnxPOTUS4Soleimani

[silvanelf]

I had thought that Qassem Soleimani had been behind the killing of so many protesters in Iran, and this was confirmed for me today, while reading the tweets that Iranians are sharing under this hashtag:

#TnxPOTUS4Soleimani (https://twitter.com/hashtag/TnxPOTUS4Soleimani?src=hash)

Nope. The Quds force is the external arm of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Soleiman was responsible for all relations between Iran and political and militant movements outside of Iran.

[Frankie Pancakes]

To AYT Post#3.

From Jim Stone's site

The hit on Soleimani was not a work of genius

He was hit while traveling in a car during a publicly announced visit to Iraq to attend the funerals of 31 Iraqi soldiers the U.S. killed on Dec 29. That changes things quite a bit. That was not a legitimate intelligence based hit against an enemy operating where hit, it was instead the killing of a government official who went to attend a funeral and was going to leave the same day.

THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING OF ALL: The moment Trump approved the killing of this Iranian General, he got the approval from the shadow state to FINALLY purge Obama holdovers from his white house. That was not coincidence, Trump had this general killed as part of a deal to finally be allowed to do what all other presidents have been allowed to do on day one of their presidency. That proves he's still not in charge of even the basics.

Iranians are not celebrating this despite what the tech left is scamming on Twitter and other social media, and the fallout could be bad. Iran can now with full "eye for an eye" legitimacy target the highest ranking U.S. officials at will. As it turns out, this general was not in the area commanding anything. He arrived on a regularly scheduled commercial flight. There was no secrecy attached to his visit. That does make a difference, because it is the same as picking off American officials with drones when they leave the air port in France or elsewhere, and Iran has lots of drones.

[edina]

I had thought that Qassem Soleimani had been behind the killing of so many protesters in Iran, and this was confirmed for me today, while reading the tweets that Iranians are sharing under this hashtag:

#TnxPOTUS4Soleimani (https://twitter.com/hashtag/TnxPOTUS4Soleimani?src=hash)

Nope. The Quds force is the external arm of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Soleiman was responsible for all relations between Iran and political and militant movements outside of Iran.

Thanks silvanelf, I had considered that, as well.

What tipped my thinking on the matter is how many Iranians, regular people on the street, have called him out for the deaths of protesters inside their country in their tweets.

[edina]

I've been waiting for Pompeo's response. Many people here have probably already watched this, sharing to bring it into the conversation.

Pompeo joins 'Fox & Friends' after US airstrike kills top Iranian general
DJ9T4FaP2Kc

Pompeo is active, talking to other world leaders on this issue, sharing this on his Twitter feed. (https://twitter.com/SecPompeo)

He repeatedly speaks to a "commitment to de-escalation".

[T Smith]

The media is certainly making a big deal about the killing of a general, who was snooping around in a country other than his own, likely directing the insurgency against the US embassy. Why?

Is this the chance the deep state was waiting for? To get an "A sum of all fears" scenario. It seems like they are setting it up that way.

Allow, or aid an Iranian national to detonate a dirty nuke in an American city, then say to the world, if Trump hadn't been so reckless, none of this would have happened. Bank on Trump to come down hard on Iran, and say he is about to start world war 3, then push for impeachment under article 25 of the constitution, saying he is mentally unstable.

lets hope not, but i wouldnt put it past them.

That's the problem with this type of scenario. It is very easy to get backed into the corner with no "wining" move. 9 times out of 10 the losers of the non-winnable game are the lives of innocent people. I hope your scenario never plays out, but the scariest thing is, it is among the most plausible outcomes.

[T Smith]

On a more serious note, I'm not ready to make up my mind in one direction or another, on this situation.

I'm still in observer mode and gathering information.

Although I'm hardly surprised by your take, I feel compelled to echo your words here. Very wise, Edina...

[ExomatrixTV]

Trump's first public comments on US killing Iran's Soleimani
PpOq5Xe4T3E

[kfm27917]

effectively they managed to paint a bullseye on every US official worldwide !

[Gracy]

So here's my simple question: Has there actually been any evidence presented to back up this latest round of accusations as an excuse for this action, or is this just more of the same old "Iran bad guy, U.S. good guy here to save the day" type of rhetoric that serves as news and foreign policy these days?

Surely we're not just going to take these people at their word.... Again?

DPt-zXn05ac

Po1IUsiBvYU

[pyrangello]

I found this comment on another internet site and thought this may give another window to look thru............................................... I'm not in favor of any war, but the statement "when good men do nothing, evil prevails " has always applied throughout history. Now everyone knows exactly where President Trump stands , agree with him or not.

Iran Vows Revenge Amid Fears of 'Devastating War': Supreme Leader Promises 'Jihad' Against US for Killing Of Top General As Hezbollah Vows 'Worldwide Resistance' and ALL Americans Are Told Get Out of Iraq NOW – NOTE: Why does Iran think it's OK for them to kill our soldiers, our people and our allies in Iraq, but get their panties in a bunch when we return the favor? Soleimani, a formally declared terrorist by the U.S. govt. in 2005, was responsible for killing 17% of our soldiers in Iraq, (over 600 people), with Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFPs). Thousands more not killed lost limbs and eyes to these devices.

Brett Velicovich is an American drone expert, former U.S. Army intelligence and special operations soldier who once tracked Soleimani. He revealed that Obama had numerous clear-cut opportunities to capture or kill Soleimani and chose not to. Astonishingly, rather than excise a cancer, he gave Iran $1.5 billion in cash, which allowed them further development of nuclear weapons. Instead of appeasement and turning a blind eye that Obama opted for, Trump took action.

Iran started this latest round of hostilities when they killed an American contractor and wounded 4 others Dec. 27.

As to yesterday's action that took out Soleimani, govt. agencies have intel that Soleimani's imminent plans were to kill more Americans, specifically U.S. diplomats. Civilians. What a pig.

Iran may gripe and threaten in the wake of Soleimani's demise, but the only thing Middle Easterners understand and respect is strength – something Obama never had the will or courage to deliver. Velicovich stated that Iran may look at Soleimani's killing as an act of war, but they had already committed that act when they attacked the U.S. embassy, which is U.S. soil.

What fallout comes next is impossible to predict so Democrats ought to sit down and shut up. They are sycophants, yappers-with-agendas and pencil-pushers, not military strategists. Most are worth about a wart on a toad, a parasitic lump of do-nothings. The President has the authority to conduct actions against acknowledged terrorists without Congressional participation. So they can stop the partisan rhetoric.

Obama 'drew a red line' and when Iran crossed it, Obama went all squishy and spineless. Trump is a man of his word. Now our enemies and our allies – know without question – to take Trump's threats and promises seriously.

[silvanelf]

An excellent analysis:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auUyCpTXq3w

[TomKat]

THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING OF ALL: The moment Trump approved the killing of this Iranian General, he got the approval from the shadow state to FINALLY purge Obama holdovers from his white house. That was not coincidence, Trump had this general killed as part of a deal to finally be allowed to do what all other presidents have been allowed to do on day one of their presidency. That proves he's still not in charge of even the basics.


Sources please.

[ExomatrixTV]

Celebrities "FREAK OUT" Over Iran, Rose McGowan BEGS Iran For Forgiveness In INSANE Virtue Signal:
dxK_qPT2JtY

[Baby Steps]

Only the most ignorant and unsophisticated will try to kill an idea by killing a man.

history shows that the opposite occurs

Turning a dogged soldier into a heroic martyr will lionize his ideas , whatever their merit.

On what planet would such an escalation be considered a way to SAVE life?

[silvanelf]

Pompeo is active, talking to other world leaders on this issue, sharing this on his Twitter feed. (https://twitter.com/SecPompeo)

He repeatedly speaks to a "commitment to de-escalation".

Did he speak about "commitment to de-escalation"??
It sounds like Orwellian doublespeak:



New Wave Of Airstrikes Hits Iraqi Capital, Kills Several PMU Personnel (Photos)

Several airstrikes targeted early on January 4 three vehicles of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) near al-Taji camp north of the Iraqi capital, Baghdad.

A source in the Iraqi military told the Reuters News Agency that two of the three vehicles were found burned. Six burned corpses were also found in the airstrikes’ site.

Initial reports claimed that the airstrikes killed senior commanders of the PMU, including Shibil al-Zaydi, Hamid al-Jazrawi and Ra’d al-Kwrawi.

These claims were denied by the PMU, which revealed in an official statement that the airstrikes targeted one of its medical units. The Iraqi Shi’ite coalition didn’t provide any additional details.

According to several Iraqi sources, the airstrikes were carried out by U.S. warplanes. This is yet to be confirmed.

https://southfront.org/new-wave-of-airstrikes-hits-iraqi-capital-kills-several-pmu-personnel-photos/

[Chester]

I don't want to jinx it... but if the Iraq Parliament votes (noting that they are planning to do so tomorrow, Sunday) that US forces need to leave Iraq, and Trump seizes the opportunity and gets the US out, this may turn out a big win for those who wish for the US footprint in the middle east to be reduced.

[Gracy]

Pompeo is active, talking to other world leaders on this issue, sharing this on his Twitter feed. (https://twitter.com/SecPompeo)

He repeatedly speaks to a "commitment to de-escalation".

Did he speak about "commitment to de-escalation"??
It sounds like Orwellian doublespeak:

Indeed it does, 2+2=5 right? While I'm waiting for any evidence to come forth backing the usual U.S. claims and excuses for open aggression, how does openly assassinating a leading military official = "de-escalation"?

Really, omg like this?


We took action last night to stop a war
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/03/mike-pompeo-us-war-iran-093149

[Praxis]

I don't want to jinx it... but if the Iraq Parliament votes (noting that they are planning to do so tomorrow) that US forces need to leave Iraq, and Trump seizes the opportunity and gets the US out, this may turn out a big win for those who wish for the US footprint in the middle east to be reduced.

This is the most spicy take I have seen so far in this thread.


Trump 14d chessed the Iraqi people into voting for the US to leave, which means that up until this point they very badly wanted us to be in their country, by attacking an Iranian Government Official, Who was in Iraq as an adviser in an official capacity, because he as Commander in Chief he has absolutely zero authority to withdraw without the consent of the Iraqi people.

Trump is so pro peace that he uses drone strikes on a countries to trick their people into convincing us to stop occupying them.

I knew the takes in here would be spicy once the Q anon right showed up, but this is truly a special piece of thinking.

[Soda]

So here's my simple question: Has there actually been any evidence presented to back up this latest round of accusations as an excuse for this action, or is this just more of the same old "Iran bad guy, U.S. good guy here to save the day" type of rhetoric that serves as news and foreign policy these days?

Surely we're not just going to take these people at their word.... Again?

DPt-zXn05ac

Po1IUsiBvYU

Thank you. Patrick Clawson's video is a classic! Every American needs to see it.

[Pam]

Trump seems to be in full support of the Israeli agenda, and Israel has been looking for any way to initiate a war with Iran. Of course, it will be done courtesy of the US taxpayer if it happens. I hope I am wrong here.

[edina]

I don't want to jinx it... but if the Iraq Parliament votes (noting that they are planning to do so tomorrow) that US forces need to leave Iraq, and Trump seizes the opportunity and gets the US out, this may turn out a big win for those who wish for the US footprint in the middle east to be reduced.

This is the most spicy take I have seen so far in this thread.


Trump 14d chessed the Iraqi people into voting for the US to leave, which means that up until this point they very badly wanted us to be in their country, by attacking an Iranian Government Official, Who was in Iraq as an adviser in an official capacity, because he as Commander in Chief he has absolutely zero authority to withdraw without the consent of the Iraqi people.

Trump is so pro peace that he uses drone strikes on a countries to trick their people into convincing us to stop occupying them.

I knew the takes in here would be spicy once the Q anon right showed up, but this is truly a special piece of thinking.

I think you may not pay much attention to what Sammy has written in the past. He is not into Q Anon, so this assumption on your part is inaccurate.

I think he is talking about a potential effect or outcome. (Not Trump playing whatever chess... lol )

It'll be interesting to see how that plays out.

This is an opportunity for Iraq to take a stronger role in their own country.

Personally, I would like to see that.

And I think many people would like to see Iraq ask the US to leave.

[edina]

Pompeo is active, talking to other world leaders on this issue, sharing this on his Twitter feed. (https://twitter.com/SecPompeo)

He repeatedly speaks to a "commitment to de-escalation".

Did he speak about "commitment to de-escalation"??
It sounds like Orwellian doublespeak:



New Wave Of Airstrikes Hits Iraqi Capital, Kills Several PMU Personnel (Photos)

Several airstrikes targeted early on January 4 three vehicles of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) near al-Taji camp north of the Iraqi capital, Baghdad.

A source in the Iraqi military told the Reuters News Agency that two of the three vehicles were found burned. Six burned corpses were also found in the airstrikes’ site.

Initial reports claimed that the airstrikes killed senior commanders of the PMU, including Shibil al-Zaydi, Hamid al-Jazrawi and Ra’d al-Kwrawi.

These claims were denied by the PMU, which revealed in an official statement that the airstrikes targeted one of its medical units. The Iraqi Shi’ite coalition didn’t provide any additional details.

According to several Iraqi sources, the airstrikes were carried out by U.S. warplanes. This is yet to be confirmed.

https://southfront.org/new-wave-of-airstrikes-hits-iraqi-capital-kills-several-pmu-personnel-photos/

Yes, I'm watching this development, as well.

I've also heard that Marines have arrested some of the people involved in the Embassy attack.

I haven't been able to confirm that to my satisfaction. But, if so, they probably cleared that with the Iraqi government.

There's a lot of noise happening around this situation. And a lot of efforts to agitate emotions in every direction.

I'm keen to dig a bit deeper and draw out a wide range of potential understandings of the situation, rather than to jump to one conclusion, or another.

As far as the fact that I made note that Pompeo was making a point of contacting world leaders and also tweeting about this, again with the continued emphasis on de-escalation.

It could be double-speak, I can see how people would interpret it that way.
Others are interpreting it as leadership.

I took it a bit differently,

At this point I've listened to Pompeo's remarks several times.

He speaks to de-escalation in the context of four D's


Disrupt
Defend
Deter
and create the conditions for De-escalation
.
There is an equal emphasis on all four D's and he talks about de-escalation in terms of creating the conditions for de-escalation.

This sounds like a strategy to me.

I stumbled across an article that clarifies the meaning of this in terms of international political strategy.


The political scientist Robert Jervis once distinguished between the “spiral model” and the “deterrence model” of conflict. In the spiral model, hitting an opponent simply causes him to hit you back; escalation begets escalation. In the deterrence model, hitting an opponent hard enough leads him to back down; escalation, or simply a show of strength, can beget de-escalation.

Trump’s Deadly Message to Iran’s Terrorist Regime (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-01-03/u-s-strike-against-iran-shows-trump-knows-how-to-fight-terrorism) by Eli Lake (Bloomberg)

Admittedly, it's a gamble. A risk.

I imagine that when Pompeo is talking to world leaders, he is understood in the light of this Deterrence model of de-escalation.

Early on, I wanted to clarify for myself if the rocket attack at the airport was an independent rogue action and Trump was left holding the bag to figure out how to navigate through this, or if Trump had truly planned this action. Senator Lindsey Graham's comments that Trump had discussed the issue with him earlier (https://youtu.be/RY0PQqZ_AYY), let me know that this was not a rogue action.

A rogue action would mean one thing, a planned action would mean something else.

It's also why I wanted to pay close attention to Pompeo's remarks.

I'll be interested, too, to see what Mandy Bombard says about Pompeo's body language, if she choses to do an analysis on that.

The whole Bloomberg article is useful to read, at least it has been for me.

I'm also reading another article that is linked out of the Bloomberg article.


Iran Loses Its Indispensable Man: The killing of Qassem Soleimani robs the regime of the central figure for its ambitions in the Middle East. (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/iran-loses-qassem-soleimani-its-indispensable-man/604375/)

[silvanelf]

Early on, I wanted to clarify for myself if the rocket attack at the airport was an independent rogue action and Trump was left holding the bag to figure out how to navigate through this, or if Trump had truly planned this action. Senator Lindsey Graham's comments that Trump had discussed the issue with him earlier (https://youtu.be/RY0PQqZ_AYY), let me know that this was not a rogue action.

A rogue action would mean one thing, a planned action would mean something else.


Other sources agree with your view: it was a planned action, not just a "target of opportunity" (second tweet below from Elijah J. Magnier)
1213209532907872257

[Pam]

This is a great discussion about the potential ramifications of this murder and why the murder of Soleimani is different than some of the other ones.

E8UYcEnwGg4

[thepainterdoug]

All these responses are far too reactionary ! Is anyone here read into the intel our government has? This President didn't decide this on his own. He did not act in a vacuum against all military advisors and cabinet.

This is a deeply divided government and its all power and politics. But this country is in a far bigger crisis in my opinion. and that crisis is a deeply partisan Media.
This media is no longer a news source. Its a biased and bought mouthpiece for varying political and social agendas.

We , the people should be able to turn on the news, any news, any channel and hear the facts plain and simple . Instead we are fed propaganda and then seek out media that suites our pre determined outlook as we cherry pick the info that bolsters our ego created identity.
How the hell do people even know , when they can't even understand the running of their own family and business matters.

How does anyone know the outcome of this within a day. ? This is insane. this could be the smartest move when looked back on , or equally the most dire. But is their any patience, any patriotism and support for this country, or just armchair condemnation .
Why doesn't anyone talk to the somewhere near 800 soldiers killed and disabled at the hands of this general?

To hear these Candidate liberal chicken hawks in the wake of Iraq, Libya and all the other wars they were part of, now take political advantage makes me sick. I voted liberal democrat all my life I will never consider this deranged party again regardless of outcome.

No sane person wants war. but this sends a message in many corners, N Korea as well, that this Administration, like them or not, acts.

[mountain_jim]

Personal historical note: When I was a child in late 60s, the private school my father worked at had a son of the Shah of Iran attending there (before his overthrow in 79) - a long ago component of US / CIA messing around in other countries governments for often nefarious aims, the results of which continue to spiral outward to this day...

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/cia-assisted-coup-overthrows-government-of-iran



1953
August 19
CIA-assisted coup overthrows government of Iran

The Iranian military, with the support and financial assistance of the United States government, overthrows the government of Premier Mohammad Mosaddeq and reinstates the Shah of Iran. Iran remained a solid Cold War ally of the United States until a revolution ended the Shah’s rule in 1979.

Mosaddeq came to prominence in Iran in 1951 when he was appointed premier. A fierce nationalist, Mosaddeq immediately began attacks on British oil companies operating in his country, calling for expropriation and nationalization of the oil fields. His actions brought him into conflict with the pro-Western elites of Iran and the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi. Indeed, the Shah dismissed Mossadeq in mid-1952, but massive public riots condemning the action forced the Shah to reinstate Mossadeq a short time later. U.S. officials watched events in Iran with growing suspicion. British intelligence sources, working with the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), came to the conclusion that Mossadeq had communist leanings and would move Iran into the Soviet orbit if allowed to stay in power. Working with Shah, the CIA and British intelligence began to engineer a plot to overthrow Mossadeq. The Iranian premier, however, got wind of the plan and called his supporters to take to the streets in protest. At this point, the Shah left the country for “medical reasons.” While British intelligence backed away from the debacle, the CIA continued its covert operations in Iran. Working with pro-Shah forces and, most importantly, the Iranian military, the CIA cajoled, threatened, and bribed its way into influence and helped to organize another coup attempt against Mossadeq. On August 19, 1953, the military, backed by street protests organized and financed by the CIA, overthrew Mossadeq. The Shah quickly returned to take power and, as thanks for the American help, signed over 40 percent of Iran’s oil fields to U.S. companies.






Always a good read in my view is this researcher's views, whether I agree with them or not - and I also agree with the above comment about 'responses are far too reactionary' while much info and points of view continue to flow in.

Her article supports peterpam's views from previous page:


Trump seems to be in full support of the Israeli agenda, and Israel has been looking for any way to initiate a war with Iran.

https://www.mintpressnews.com/dubious-official-story-qassem-soleimani-assassination/263869/



The Drumbeat of War

A Dubious Official Story Masks the True Motives Behind the Soleimani Assassination

Behind the official yet dubious justifications for the U.S. airstrike that killed a top Iranian general on Friday lies a confluence of factors — some decades in the making, others more recent — that are pushing the U.S. towards yet another catastrophic war in the Middle East.

by Whitney Webb



and constitutional scholar Turley's article and views

https://jonathanturley.org/2020/01/03/trump-orders-defense-department-to-publicly-confirm-assassination-of-iranian-general/



In a break from long-standing intelligence practices, President Donald Trump ordered the Defense Department to confirm that the United States was behind the missile strike that killed Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran’s secretive Quds Force, and six others, including Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis. The public acknowledgement of responsibility is a game changer. While Iran (like most of us) assumed it was the United States, the public confirmation of the assassination removes any doubt and forces Iran and Iraq to deal with a direct and official attack. International law treats the targeted killing of a ranking military figure on foreign sovereign soil as a presumptive act of war. As always however there is no shortage of hypocrisy in the condemnations from Capitol Hill.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has denounced the failure to confer with Congress before taking this act. I agree with that criticism and has been a long-standing critic of the expanded war powers given to presidents. However, the Democrats are in no position to criticize since they are less concerned with consultation when the president is from their own party. President Obama acted unilaterally in launching the Libyan War. I represented Democratic and Republican members challenging that unilateral action.

Michael Bloomberg has criticized Bernie Sanders for calling this an assassination but I am not sure what the distinction is between a “targeted killing” and an “assassination.” Both are targeting an individual.

For decades, I have criticized how Congress has ignored the constitutional requirement to declare war and given presidents blank checks in pursuing wars at their discretion. Most relevantly, President Obama claimed the right to kill not just any foreigner but American citizens on his unilateral authority. I denounced this kill list policy but Democrats like Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others supported President Obama.

Of course, the congressional Democrats are not the only ones caught in the hypocrisy of the moment. Russia, which has assassinated people around the world, has objected over the violation of international law.

I have long posed the question of what would happen if another country took out an American leader or military figure on U.S. soil. We would certainly treat that as an act of war. Claiming American exceptionalism is not enough. We have to maintain a clear and credible position on military interventions if we expect the same protections of international law.

This is precisely the danger that the Framers sought to avoid with the requirement that only Congress can declare a war. While the Administration claims that another attack was “imminent,” it should make that case to Congress. Even if one accepts that there are cases where a president must act on an exigent basis, that does not mean that the White House cannot confer with a handful of congressional leaders known as the Gang of Eight. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) however says that he was given a briefing when visiting the President in Florida.

This brings us back to the official declaration of responsibility for the assassination. We are now on the record in committing an act that is widely defined as an act of war not just against Iran but arguably against Iraq. That places even greater pressure on our rationale for the right to carry out a missile attack in a sovereign country to kill a foreign military leader. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has referred to the “active . . . plotting” further acts. That has not been used previously as the basis for taking out a figure who is widely viewed as the second most powerful figure in a sovereign nation.

Few people are grieving the death of Soleimani who has a long history of terrorist associations as well as connections to operations killing many American personnel. He is not the issue. The issue is the constitutional authority of a president to unilaterally take an act that is widely viewed as a act of war without conferral, let alone a declaration, from Congress. Again, President Trump is not the first president to assert such unilateral authority, but this remains a glaring contradiction in our constitutional system of checks and balances.

[Gracy]

This is a great discussion about the potential ramifications of this murder and why the murder of Soleimani is different than some of the other ones.

E8UYcEnwGg4

There's a reason why none of these people will be allowed anywhere near a mainstream news outlet, and that fact alone should be quite telling to the discerning mind. Just as one example, remember when panelist Scott Ritter was openly mocked, and ultimately sidelined because he wasn't finding any evidence of current wmd's pre Iraq War (2003)?

His findings didn't go along with narrative, did they?

Well, he's on the right side of history again on this one, as were the rest of that panel. Contrary to the well propagandized popular belief in this country, the U.S. is light years away from being 'the good guys" when it comes to foreign policy.

At least they made an attempt to fabricate supporting evidence for that Iraq invasion, since then they seem not too concerned about even making the effort any more, just unnamed sources citing secret Intel, Orwellian type distortions of what's really going on, and we're all just expected to fall in line like good lil boys and girls.

[thepainterdoug]

Thanks Gracie May. and immediately someone will say, Oh RT you can't believe that Russian mouthpiece! As Alex Jones once said, theres a war on for our minds

And I do remember Scott Ritter and how he was silenced.

I know very little except for my own everyday reality. Its all a big game and it will play itself out regardless of my opinion.

I will review all.
blessings!

doug

[silvanelf]

Why doesn't anyone talk to the somewhere near 800 soldiers killed and disabled at the hands of this general?


First of all, your assertion that "nobody talks about it" is wrong ... many people are parroting that claim. But that claim is a lie:

1213227956178436097


In fact, the myth that Tehran is responsible for killing over 600 U.S. troops in the Iraq War is merely a new variant of a propaganda line that former Vice President Dick Cheney used to attempt to justify a war against Iran more than a decade ago. Reviewing the history of that earlier effort is necessary to understand why the new myth is a palpable lie.

https://truthout.org/articles/lies-about-iran-killing-us-troops-in-iraq-are-a-ploy-to-justify-war/

[thepainterdoug]

thanks Silvenef Perhaps this General was an innocent man? I don't know, I wasn't there. i gave my opinion and now will let you all you sort it out. Anyhow, its all the beginning of a proxy war agenda thats as old as the hills.

blessings all!
d

[WhiteFeather]

Ok, I don't understand enough about the laws of the United States. But Obama has already been elected twice. Is it possible to be re-elected as president? Or does the election possibly refer to Michelle Obama? Ok Trump has kills Quds Commander
from Iran. Who is one of the most dangerous people on earth. But that happened in Iraq. What was the Quds Commander doing in Iraq, why was he there?

I don't know what to make of it. The commander was in Iraq to do what? Why and for what reason did Trump kill him? Is this the beginning of the fourth Gulf War? So what is behind it, what does Trump want to achieve with it? War against Iran? I don't know if it will be that easy.

Or is that the first provocation and a call to war? So if one of you has more detailed information, then I ask for it.

Don't blame Trump, blame the inside government. He's just the bathroom cologne clerk, like the others before him.

[silvanelf]

Oh my ... one day ago Trump was even bragging about the assassination ... now the US government is already caving in ...

1213473846499643393

edit:

US Asked Iran for ‘Proportionate Response’ to Suleimani Assassination: IRGC (http://thesaker.is/us-asked-iran-for-proportionate-response-to-suleimani-assassination-irgc/)

[Sue (Ayt)]

thanks Silvenef Perhaps this General was an innocent man? I don't know, I wasn't there. i gave my opinion and now will let you all you sort it out. Anyhow, its all the beginning of a proxy war agenda thats as old as the hills.

blessings all!
d

For all we know, he isn't even dead. The orchestrations can run deep. I try not to get drawn into the "squawking" anymore. (Been duped too often in the past)
Blessings back PainterDoug

[thepainterdoug]

Wise words Ayt! I'm going to hold my horses.
in the meantime, cover me!

[ExomatrixTV]

Trump statement (https://banned.video/watch?id=5e0fa9a55af6fe001daf446b) on Iran: We Took Action Against Iran To Stop War

5e0fa9a55af6fe001daf446b

[Gracy]

Trump statement on Iran: We Took Action Against Iran To Stop War

I'm glad you posted this John. It's actually one of the recent statements which I was referring to earlier as Orwellian.

Sounds like a bit of news straight from "The Ministry of Truth". :nod:

[Baby Steps]

Pepe Escobar:

EXCLUSIVE

WHO SET IT ALL UP

The top intel - from a top AMERICAN intel source:

"The Trump position on Iran is dictated by the Deep State, who will impeach him if he disobeys... Trump could not pull out any troops from Syria without Israel hammering him. Lindsay Graham threatened the Republicans would move to impeachment if those troops are withdrawn. Trump is a marionette as relates to this assassination."

And the clincher:

"Israel set up the killing of General Qassem Soleimani to draw the United States into a war with Iran as with Iraq. That is what this is all about."

[Frank V]

Here's Abby Martin and Mike Prysner's take on it all. This was live-streamed on YouTube yesterday. The video ─ at 1 hour and 48 minutes ─ is now unlisted, but it was still in my viewing history.

Most of the video is about the events at the subject of this thread ─ the last part of the video focuses on the US Democratic candidates and their respective responses to these events ─ and I am glad to say that this discourse sheds quite a different light on the events, which have been greatly warped and colorized by the corporate media and their propaganda machine, as well as by US politicians from both sides of the bipartisan divide.

There is no sound at the start of the video, up until about a minute in. Please listen very carefully at what these genuinely independent investigative journalists ─ albeit self-admittedly with a left-wing perspective ─ have to say on the matter.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k4_fjCv-Tk

[thepainterdoug]

And the clincher:

"Israel set up the killing of General Qassem Soleimani to draw the United States into a war with Iran as with Iraq. That is what this is all about."


Baby Steps , as I alluded to in my earlier [post

[Tangri]

Can someone explain to me what Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, was doing in Iraq?

If you can explain why did USA president visit Iraq, may be, you can be get close to avoid hypocrisy.

"President Donald Trump's surprise trip to Iraq to visit US troops, his first combat-zone visit as president, fell short among some political commentators, including one of the most highly decorated officers in the US Army."

https://www.businessinsider.com/barry-mccaffrey-trump-visit-us-troops-in-iraq-2018-12?utm_source=hearst&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=allverticals

[Sue (Ayt)]

Pepe Escobar:

EXCLUSIVE

WHO SET IT ALL UP

The top intel - from a top AMERICAN intel source:

"The Trump position on Iran is dictated by the Deep State, who will impeach him if he disobeys... Trump could not pull out any troops from Syria without Israel hammering him. Lindsay Graham threatened the Republicans would move to impeachment if those troops are withdrawn. Trump is a marionette as relates to this assassination."


I wouldn't know for sure, but sure feels like more of the same old perpetual war games. Might help to stop focusing on the figureheads, like we always tend to do.
42227

[Tangri]

I just saw this news tonight and it is very worrisome. So this was an air strike on the Iranian general in Iraq, not necessarily a war on Iran.

:confused: Do you really belive that?

Think this scenario:

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) was killed by Russian drones at mexican airport.

What does it mean to you?

[Bill Ryan]

Think this scenario:

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) was killed by Russian drones at Mexican airport.

What does it mean to you?That's a very good analogy!

[Tangri]

Think this scenario:

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) was killed by Russian drones at Mexican airport.

What does it mean to you?That's a very good analogy!

Actually, this one better explains (from post 28)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=26&v=auUyCpTXq3w&feature=emb_logo

[Bill Ryan]

An excellent analysis:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auUyCpTXq3w

Bumping this. Yes, an excellent analysis it is.

[thepainterdoug]

and some more to consider/

https://saraacarter.com/maryam-rajavi-qassem-soleimani-was-a-vicious-criminal-it-is-time-to-evict-the-mullahs-from-the-region/

Qassem Soleimani was one of the most vicious criminals in Iran’s history. He was personally involved in the massacre of hundreds of thousands of people in the region and in driving millions of others from their homes. He was also the mastermind of the massacre of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/MEK) in Camp Ashraf in Iraq, and of many other terrorist operations against the Iranian Resistance in that country, in Iran, and in other countries. With his elimination, the process of overthrowing the mullahs will be greatly expedited.

Moreover, with the death of the criminal Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the head of Iranian regime’s proxy Bassij force in Iraq and a notorious murderer, whose crimes had been exposed by the Iranian Resistance since two decades ago, the time has come for the victory of the Iraqi people’s uprising and the liberation of Iraq from the Iranian regime’s occupation.

Mrs. Rajavi added: While the prospects for the ruling theocracy’s overthrow is within reach, it is time for the regime’s armed forces to refrain from firing on the Iranian people, lay down their weapons and surrender. The armed forces’ patriotic personnel must join the people of Iran.

Recalling the martyrdom of at least 1,500 children of the Iranian people and endless arrests during the November 2019 uprising, Mrs. Rajavi underscored: The international community, especially the European Union, must end the policy of appeasement and recognize the right of the Iranian people to resist and rise for freedom to replace popular sovereignty in place of the mullahs’ rule.

[Caliban]

In the above RT video Scott Ritter says no, the guy wasn't a "terrorist," he was a "skilled combatant." They also spoke of him as being key in the fight against ISIS. So, this guy and his forces were fighting against ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Enemies of the U.S. And yet...what? What the hell is going on? Ah, Israel wanted this General dead for many years. And the PNAC crowd has wanted a war with Iran since before 9/11. And in terms of what this guy supposedly has done? What has Israel done in Gaza? What has the U.S. done for almost 20 years in Afghanistan and Iraq? Devastation is devastation.

[ExomatrixTV]

REMINDER: ‘According To The Washington Times Former President Obama Launched More Than 3,000 Strikes In Iraq And Syria (https://theredpillednews.com/reminder-according-to-the-washington-times-former-president-obama-launched-more-than-3000-strikes-in-iraq-and-syria-without-congressional-authorization/) without Congressional Authorization’

1212973941527965696

While his Republican critics described Obama as “weak” on counter-terrorism and accused him of being “anti-war,” former Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, pushed back on this notion stating, “President Obama has authorized more military actions in Muslim countries than any previous president and that the most conservative estimate identifies more than 3,000 drone strike fatalities during his tenure, including much of Al Qaeda’s leadership. He is the first president since the Civil War to authorize the assassination of another American — Anwar ­al-Awlaki, himself.” Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic similarly defended Obama saying, “this president who has this reputation [of being weak] is the greatest terrorist hunter in the history of the American presidency. I mean, we just saw in the last week the 150 militants in Somalia wiped out by a U.S. strike. Who ordered that strike?”

Source (https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/05/04/book-excerpt-obamas-drone-war-in-pakistan-was-bigger-than-people-think/)

President Obama's Super Aggressive Drone War In One Graphic

Michael B Kelley (https://www.businessinsider.com/author/michael-b-kelley) Dec 14, 2013, 7:16 PM

Earlier this week a U.S. drone mistakenly targeted a wedding convoy (https://www.cnn.com/2013/12/12/world/meast/yemen-u-s-drone-wedding/) in Yemen, killing 14 people.

It's not the first time U.S. hellfire missiles have struck a wedding party (https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/05/world/asia/05iht-afghan.3.17553439.html), and far from the only time civilians have been killed (https://www.aclu.org/national-security/al-majalah-targeted-killing-foia-request) by U.S. drones in Yemen during the Obama administration.

In total there have been upwards of 350 (http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/) strikes targeting "suspected terrorists (https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html)" so far under President Barack Obama — killing upwards of 4,000 people (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/21/lindsey-graham-drone-strikes_n_2734133.html) overall — compared to 52 (https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/story/2012-06-12/drones-kill-Qaeda-terrorists/55556800/1) strikes under George Bush.

During the 2012 campaign, the commander-in-chief commented on the White House's aggressive targeted killing policies when he reportedly told aides that he's "really good at killing people."

The claim is as indisputable as it is grim (http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-said-hes-really-good-at-killing-people-2013-11#ixzz2nTPmX6Nj), the death-from-above mentality has set a dangerous precedent (http://www.businessinsider.com/america-is-setting-a-dangerous-precedent-for-the-drone-age-2013-1) for the drone age.
Here's a Reuters graphic of the recorded U.S. drone strikes under Bush and Obama:

https://image.businessinsider.com/52ac97e9ecad0403132119a4?width=1600&format=jpeg&auto=webp

Source (https://www.businessinsider.com/president-obamas-super-aggressive-drone-war-in-one-graphic-2013-12?international=true&r=US&IR=T)

While Obama praised the transparency of the response, secrecy still surrounds the vast majority of drone strikes that one senator estimated in 2013 had killed 4,700 people (http://www.wired.com/2013/02/graham-drones/).

This was only the second time, following a presidential speech that year, that Obama has acknowledged killing innocents. These have included a 16-year-old boy (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/23/us-justification-drone-killing-american-citizen-awlaki) with US citizenship.

Critics have lambasted Obama for conducting a counter-terrorism war almost entirely in secret.

The American Civil Liberties Union in March sued the Obama administration (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/16/aclu-files-new-lawsuit-over-obama-administration-drone-kill-list) for disclosure of critical legal documents underpinning what the administration calls its “targeted killing” program – including the criteria for placement on a list permitting the US to kill people, including its own citizens, without trial.
Giovanni Lo Porto, killed in US drone strike, was ‘incredibly loyal’ friend

Obama’s admission regarding the deaths of Weinstein and Lo Porto is likely to intensify criticism of the president’s drone strikes, conducted by the CIA and the military’s Joint Special Operations Command. A recent analysis by human-rights group Reprieve estimated that US drone strikes intending to target 41 men had killed 1,147 people (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147) as of November.

Source (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/23/us-drone-strike-killed-american-italian-al-qaida)

In Speech, President Obama Talks Drone War Policy | The New York Times:
a4SgBVk0q_Q
Obama Jokes About Killing With Predator Drones
WWKG6ZmgAX4
Obama’s Drone War Kills 178 Children (https://www.sovereignman.com/videos/obamas-drone-war-kills-178-children-with-surgical-precision-13097/) with “Surgical” Precision

ACLU & CCR Lawsuit: American Boy Killed By U.S. Drone Strike
xSwoRP-Y3a8
Is it Legal for the U.S. to Kill a 16-year-old U.S. Citizen (https://www.amnestyusa.org/is-it-legal-for-the-u-s-to-kill-a-16-year-old-u-s-citizen-with-a-drone/) with a Drone?

Watchdog groups are criticizing recently released numbers on the number of people killed by American drone strikes outside of war zones.

An unprecedented report released Friday (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-administration-discloses-civilian-deaths-drones/) reveals the Obama administration has killed more than 2,300 so-called "enemy combatants." But critics say the report significantly undercounts the number of "non-combatant" deaths.

The news came Friday afternoon right before the July Fourth weekend, with the president signing an executive order aimed at creating more transparency for the drone program that he expanded. But it's precisely that transparency that now has critics asking whether the administration is revealing enough, reports CBS News correspondent Jan Crawford.

While the Obama administration (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-acknowledges-civilian-deaths-cause-by-drone-strikes/) says it has killed over 2,300 enemy combatants by counterterror strikes, it acknowledged the harsh reality that the once-secret drone program may have been involved in anywhere from 64 to 116 civilian deaths since 2009 in areas outside active war zones.

"The president believes that our counterterrorism strategy is more effective when we're as transparent as possible," White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said.
But critics say they aren't transparent enough and now it's the lack of precision in those numbers getting scrutiny.

"We're going to be asking really hard questions about these numbers. They're incredibly low for the number of people killed who are civilians," said Naureen Shah of Amnesty International.

Even the highest U.S. government estimates are significantly lower than death totals compiled by watchdog groups. One estimates a maximum of 801 civilian deaths.
Critics say the report also does not designate the region where the deaths occurred.
Since taking office, President Obama has significantly expanded the drone program. Earlier this year he acknowledged there have been unintended consequences (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-acknowledges-civilian-deaths-cause-by-drone-strikes/).

"There's no doubt that civilians were killed that shouldn't have been," Obama said.
In this latest reform of the program, Mr. Obama signed an executive order meant to protect civilians and make the public disclosure of civilian deaths by drone routine.
"It's a clear statement by the U.S. government that the protection of civilians is at the core of national interests, of legal obligations, and an ethical concern," said Federico Borello of the Center for Civilians in Conflict.

The ODNI (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-administration-discloses-civilian-deaths-drones/) said it is open to revising its numbers on civilian deaths should new information come to light. They also said the discrepancy in numbers may be because they rely on information generally not available to the public and that some of those numbers may be "complicated" by misinformation spread by terrorist groups for propaganda purposes.

Source (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-house-report-obama-administration-drones-civilian-casualties-raises-questions/)

[Soda]

Interesting clip
3w-q4839KGc

[happyuk]

He was such a powerful person in Iran even the Supreme Leader feared him apparently.
A bit like the Rebel Alliance killing Darth Vader.

[Iyakum]

Ok, but there is something I would like to mention. Trump or whoever ordered their attack and the killing of Soleimani. Has achieved something that even the Islamic government was unable to do on its own. The attack and obliteration of Soleimani ensured that the Iranian people were brought closer to the faith again. It ensured that even those who were against the regime now stand with each other. Fanaticism has been rekindled and Trump should now put this in order.

Whatever Iran's answer will be, how it will turn out, nobody can really say yet. But that's not important either, because the United States has no answer to that, and Trump certainly doesn't.

As I see it there will be no war. The United States will not attack Iran. To do this, they must expect more attacks in and outside the United States.

[ByTheNorthernSea]

As I see it there will be no war. The United States will not attack Iran...

I wish I had your confidence in this scenario...

[edina]

I don't want to jinx it... but if the Iraq Parliament votes (noting that they are planning to do so tomorrow, Sunday) that US forces need to leave Iraq, and Trump seizes the opportunity and gets the US out, this may turn out a big win for those who wish for the US footprint in the middle east to be reduced.

Iraq's Parliament calls for expulsion of U.S. troops (https://apnews.com/7c94f2ca6c51d9fd822444941893d4be)

BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraq’s Parliament called for the expulsion of U.S. troops from the country Sunday in reaction to the American drone attack that killed a top Iranian general.

Lawmakers approved a resolution asking the Iraqi government to end the agreement under which Washington sent forces to Iraq more than four years ago to help in the fight against the Islamic State group.

A pullout of the estimated 5,200 U.S. troops could cripple the fight against ISIS and allow its resurgence.

The majority of about 180 legislators present in Parliament voted in favor of the resolution. It was backed by most Shiite members of parliament, who hold a majority of seats. Many Sunni and Kurdish legislators did not show up for the session, apparently because they oppose abolishing the deal.

The vote came two days after a U.S. airstrike killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani at the Baghdad airport, dramatically increasing regional tensions and raising fears of war. Iran has vowed revenge.

Meanwhile. amid Iran’s threats of vengeance, the U.S.-led military coalition in Iraq announced Sunday it is putting the fight against Islamic State militants on hold to focus on protecting its troops and bases. The coalition said it is suspending the training of Iraqi forces and other operations in support of the fight against ISIS.

This has been qualified in that it is not the end of this decision-making process.

[edina]

1213828450194198528
https://twitter.com/HanifJazayeri/status/1213828450194198528

This may create some fear in some people.

However, since this has been a planned (or strategized) action, I'm certain this possibility was considered before the action was taken.

Still in observer mode ...

[ByTheNorthernSea]

I don't want to jinx it... but if the Iraq Parliament votes (noting that they are planning to do so tomorrow, Sunday) that US forces need to leave Iraq, and Trump seizes the opportunity and gets the US out, this may turn out a big win for those who wish for the US footprint in the middle east to be reduced.

Iraq's Parliament calls for expulsion of U.S. troops (https://apnews.com/7c94f2ca6c51d9fd822444941893d4be)

BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraq’s Parliament called for the expulsion of U.S. troops from the country Sunday in reaction to the American drone attack that killed a top Iranian general.

Lawmakers approved a resolution asking the Iraqi government to end the agreement under which Washington sent forces to Iraq more than four years ago to help in the fight against the Islamic State group.

A pullout of the estimated 5,200 U.S. troops could cripple the fight against ISIS and allow its resurgence.

The majority of about 180 legislators present in Parliament voted in favor of the resolution. It was backed by most Shiite members of parliament, who hold a majority of seats. Many Sunni and Kurdish legislators did not show up for the session, apparently because they oppose abolishing the deal.

The vote came two days after a U.S. airstrike killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani at the Baghdad airport, dramatically increasing regional tensions and raising fears of war. Iran has vowed revenge.

Meanwhile. amid Iran’s threats of vengeance, the U.S.-led military coalition in Iraq announced Sunday it is putting the fight against Islamic State militants on hold to focus on protecting its troops and bases. The coalition said it is suspending the training of Iraqi forces and other operations in support of the fight against ISIS.

This has been qualified in that it is not the end of this decision-making process.

I would just add this perspective...read the comments following the tweet. God help the long-suffering Iraqi people, caught, as they are, in the middle of all of this...

https://twitter.com/MPPregent/status/1213837121259216896

[Iyakum]

As I see it there will be no war. The United States will not attack Iran...

I wish I had your confidence in this scenario...


Soleimani became too powerful and too troublesome for the regime in Iran. They had to get rid of it, so it was easy. Trump needed something to prove himself in the Middle East. Isn't it strange that he was killed by a drone or whatever? So many US Army troops stationed in Baghdad at the airport. They could have just arrested the general. To be able to create in The Hague and put before the court martial. But no, Trump had to set an example. The mullahs wanted to get rid of the general and the song is done. Both achieved what they wanted. It is all swept under the table slowly and quietly. There will be no war, no assassinations, nothing of the sort. Do you think about how often would US troops have had the opportunity to kill the general? Often enough, whether it's a drone, rocket, arrest or even Israeli operation. Why did you wait for so long? The time had to be right and now it was there, then they struck.

[edina]

In the background of this, because there hasn't been a lot of news coverage on it.
The communication channel between the US and Iran had not been fully closed.

Reuters reported the use of a Swiss Envoy to send a message (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-blast-swiss/swiss-deliver-u-s-message-to-iran-over-soleimani-killing-idUSKBN1Z21AC) to Iran and the use of a Swiss envoy to send a message back to the US.
(https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-blast-swiss-iran/iran-summons-swiss-envoy-again-to-answer-u-s-message-state-media-idUSKBN1Z21QU)

I'm also considering the relationship of all this with the Uranium 1 deal (https://canadafreepress.com/article/understanding-the-uranium-one-scandal) that was brokered that sold US uranium that tracked through Canada, then Europe (I'm now considering that it was moved through the Ukraine), to Russia, North Korea and Iran.


Note: Rosatom also built the Bushehr nuclear reactors in Iran (https://rosatom.ru/en/rosatom-group/engineering-and-construction/modern-reactors-of-russian-design/) and supplies Iran with uranium.

Just considering a broader context.

[Satori]

What does history tell us about the re-election prospects for the incumbent “war-time” POTUS?

[silvanelf]

https://twitter.com/HanifJazayeri/status/1213828450194198528


Quoting from that tweet:

Iran's ppl however are overjoyed at Soleimani's death. As the #IranProtests have shown, they long for an end to the mullahs' tyranny #FreeIran2020

Something doesn't add up ... this is only in Ahwaz, southwest of Iran and the first leg of Solaimani’s funeral procession. These people are not "overjoyed" at Soleimani's death, just the opposite.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH0HfYhA-Ic

[Houman]

Iraqi parliament votes to expel US troops | DW News

GK0cdQseQw0

[silvanelf]

But no, Trump had to set an example. The mullahs wanted to get rid of the general and the song is done. Both achieved what they wanted.

Do you think that Trump and "the mullahs" worked together to assassinate Soleimani? You are using an awkward kind of reasoning.

[Houman]

https://www.winterwatch.net/2020/01/factors-to-consider-during-the-countdown-to-war/


...we also learn Prime Minister Abdul Mahdi, said that Soleimani was due to meet with him on Tuesday to discuss a Saudi offer to de-escalate tension in the area...

From H. Makow's Twitter feed


"No More Threats" -Trump Warns Iran "52 Targets Will Be Hit Very Fast & Hard"

Trump's "52" refers to Judaic/Talmudic/Kabbalah : 52 = Moshiach's arrival & Isaiah 52 "Zion" ruler & Ezra re-built Jerusalem Walls in 52 days

[edina]

What does history tell us about the re-election prospects for the incumbent “war-time” POTUS?

It's significantly high.

I think that this was not a factor in the decision for this action.

Trump is already projected to win by a landslide.

And, while it may be an unpopular opinion, I'm think Trump genuinely doesn't want to start a war.

In the Doug Wead interview with Jan Jekielek (https://youtu.be/FI-aLLG7zXw), Doug told a story of how Obama told Trump, "You will be a war President."

The anti-war journalist Justin Raimondo (who sadly died this past summer) and who had co-founded antiwar.com, recounts a conversation where General Mattis insisted to Trump (https://original.antiwar.com/justin/2018/02/11/president-held-hostage/),


“‘Unfortunately, sir, you have no choice,’ Mattis told Trump, according to officials. ‘You will be a wartime president.’”

Both of them stated this as fact, and as if Trump had no choice.

The status quo elite, (DC Swamp) and the internationalist cabal, want war. It’s figures into their long term plans.

These factions use their media proxies like a carrot and stick to manuever presidents into their bidding. (In addition to other tools in their manipulation toolkit.)

We see this in action everyday. The most stark example of this is when Trump dropped the MOAB on Syria, while Xi Jinping and his delegation was here in the US at Mar-a-Lago.


Day before this action, over 90% negative media coverage on Trump.
After the bomb dropped over 95% positive coverage of Trump.
If you remember, everyone was calling him, “Presidential”.

When he stated he still wanted to pull troops from Syria, BAM, 180 degree turn by the elite media proxies. And they haven’t let up since.

If Trump wanted to be a "war president" he would have been one by now.

The pressure to be one has been enormous.

He does a very fine delicate dance to prevent himself from being manuevered into becoming a war president.

This is one reason why I wanted to clarify for myself if he had been pushed into this action, or if it had been planned. Many special ops people and lower rank (and/or ex) intel still think he has been pushed, or tricked into action. I respectfully disagree with that assessment. But, I could be wrong.

Trump is not afraid of war, but I think he doesn’t want war.

I think he wants peace.

Peace and prosperity.

[Bill Ryan]

Houman, are you able to say anything at all about what you personally think or suspect may happen next regarding the domino effect of Soleimani's assassination?

[Houman]

Houman, are you able to say anything at all about what you personally think or suspect may happen next regarding the domino effect of Soleimani's assassination?

I don't know what will happen next... all I know is that some prophecies in the Talmud/Midrash are being used as a script to ignite a war between Edom (USA/the West) and Persia (Iran), a war that is supposed to hasten the arrival of the Moshiah...

rHBiT6eJaQQ

Soleimani seems to have been interfering with that script:
fighting ISIS/DAESH (proxies for the creation of the Greater Israel) and planning de-escalation with Saudis...

From that script we have an end-goal, some milestones but not the details of its implementation...

What is worrisome is that, the implementation of that script is a matter of subjective reality, it does not matter whether Iran actually retaliates against American interests or if that retaliation is a false flag carried by the US itself or a third party, the end result is the same if the masses accept that subjective reality as objective...

Ezekiel 38:4


…and declare that this is what the Lord GOD says: Behold, I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal. I will turn you around, put hooks in your jaws, and bring you out with all your army— your horses, your horsemen in full armor, a huge company armed with shields and bucklers, all brandishing their swords. Persia, Cush, and Put will accompany them, all with shields and helmets,…

[Chester]

I don't want to jinx it... but if the Iraq Parliament votes (noting that they are planning to do so tomorrow, Sunday) that US forces need to leave Iraq, and Trump seizes the opportunity and gets the US out, this may turn out a big win for those who wish for the US footprint in the middle east to be reduced.

Hopefully, the following post will not be mis-characterized and creatively misinterpreted as the one I made a few days ago and have quoted above.

So to avoid such as best I can, I will first quote the Iraqi Parliament Speaker Mohammed al-Halboosi said in an address to lawmakers before the vote -


The Iraqi government has an obligation to end the presence of all foreign forces on Iraqi soil and prevent it from using Iraqi lands, waters, and airspace or any other reason Note: the emphasis is mine.

I will now offer an Observation: Interesting that the corporate media headlines parrot "expulsion of U.S. troops" without direct mention the goal is that all foreign presence leaves Iraq.

I will now provide my Commentary: Speaking as a US citizen (and all the "good and bad" that goes with being one), as someone currently residing in the US and as a human being - I hope that Trump seizes the moment to eliminate all US "presence" in Iraq to the extant he can so do. If he strives to do so and somehow succeeds, this may start a momentum of reduction of US forces in the region, again, if he is allowed so to do by both his string pullers from above (the controllers) and his string pullers to the side (the rest of the US political spectrum).

I am realistic that the odds that my wish and desire actually happens are extremely low. But I am reminded of one of the top five reasons many voted for Trump... that being to reduce the presence of US forces around the globe, especially in the middle east.

We shall see what happens.

[ExomatrixTV]

As I see it there will be no war. The United States will not attack Iran...

I wish I had your confidence in this scenario...

Indeed, I assume that USA Eugenic PsychoTechnocrats at the Pentagon and those who control them (The Deep Sate?) may want to test tons of new weapon-technologies including from space! ... Partial A.I. & EMP Warfare?

[silvanelf]

The US assassinated an envoy -- Soleimani was on a diplomatic mission.


Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdl Mahdi has now officially revealed that the US had asked him to mediate between the US and Iran and that General Qassem Soleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer to his mediation efforts. Thus, Soleimani was on an OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC MISSION as part of a diplomatic initiative INITIATED BY THE USA.

http://thesaker.is/the-usa-is-now-at-war-de-facto-and-de-jure-with-both-iraq-and-iran/

[thepainterdoug]

Houman, are you able to say anything at all about what you personally think or suspect may happen next regarding the domino effect of Soleimani's assassination?
Parent Post


Bill, our problem, as humans, is we name and label things as good or bad. Is a thunder storm or hurricane a good thing or a bad thing? Is a forest fire good? or bad? It just is , and depending on our position or point of view we assign it meaning. A tsunami is a bad thing if you live on the coast and are directly in its path. If not, it replenishes the earth as it has done since the beginning of time. We suffer from short term memory, as well as personal self interest, that guides our thoughts.

short answer, have to wait and see

[edina]

The US assassinated an envoy -- Soleimani was on a diplomatic mission.


Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdl Mahdi has now officially revealed that the US had asked him to mediate between the US and Iran and that General Qassem Soleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer to his mediation efforts. Thus, Soleimani was on an OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC MISSION as part of a diplomatic initiative INITIATED BY THE USA.

http://thesaker.is/the-usa-is-now-at-war-de-facto-and-de-jure-with-both-iraq-and-iran/

If true, this would be very serious.

Normally there is an author attributed in the Saker articles, there wasn't an author attributed that I could see.
It's sort of anonymous?

I was able to track the language used in the above quote to Elijah J. Magnier's Twitter account.

That tweet was written about 8 hours ago.

I haven't been able to find another source to confirm it?

Eight hours is a long time to not see a confirmation in the legacy news wires.

I've also looked at Al-Jazeera, Arab News, AINA and Tass.

[uzn]

Iraq lodges complaint to UN chief, UNSC over US assassination of Lt. Gen. Soleimani, Muhandis

Iraq says it has lodged a formal complaint to the UN chief and the UN Security Council (UNSC) over the US assassination of Iran's top military commander, Lt. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, and the second-in-command of Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.
The Iraqi foreign ministry said in a statement on Sunday that it had submitted two letters of complaint to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres and the UNSC, asking the world body to condemn the assassination of General Soleimani and Muhandis in a US drone strike near Baghdad International Airport in the early hours of Friday.
According to the statement, the complaint is about “American attacks and aggression on Iraqi military positions and the assassination of Iraqi and allied high-level military commanders on Iraqi soil.”
The assassination was “a dangerous breach of Iraqi sovereignty and of the terms of US presence in Iraq,” the ministry added.
Four other Iranians as well as four Iraqis accompanying them were also martyred in the US strike.

more:
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/05/615442/Iraq-complaint-UNSC-US-assassination-Soleimani-Muhandis-parliament-Daesh
https://www.mofa.gov.iq/2020/01/?p=7418&fbclid=IwAR0MB-bRz3pR5sBvfP7xEcpliA0yJzlbVMa2_k7WxfCSSjBPE3EKi_E6eP8

[ExomatrixTV]

Trump Just 'Accidentally' Ended The Iraq War, Iraq Votes For Us Military To LEAVE
fwKYInkvZfE

[apokalypse]

don't know why people jump up and down over iran attack right now or having media talking point...i was expecting people over Oil Attack months ago and blame on Iran. It's well known Trump backed by zionist and part of agenda.

srxU3uCyNvU

just pissed off Trump Trump Trump but fail to see big picture..

[silvanelf]

The US assassinated an envoy -- Soleimani was on a diplomatic mission.


Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdl Mahdi has now officially revealed that the US had asked him to mediate between the US and Iran and that General Qassem Soleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer to his mediation efforts. Thus, Soleimani was on an OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC MISSION as part of a diplomatic initiative INITIATED BY THE USA.

http://thesaker.is/the-usa-is-now-at-war-de-facto-and-de-jure-with-both-iraq-and-iran/

If true, this would be very serious.

Normally there is an author attributed in the Saker articles, there wasn't an author attributed that I could see.
It's sort of anonymous?

I was able to track the language used in the above quote to Elijah J. Magnier's Twitter account.

That tweet was written about 8 hours ago.

I haven't been able to find another source to confirm it?

Eight hours is a long time to not see a confirmation in the legacy news wires.

I've also looked at Al-Jazeera, Arab News, AINA and Tass.


Normally there is an author attributed in the Saker articles, there wasn't an author attributed that I could see.
It's sort of anonymous?

The article "The USA is now at war, de-facto and de-jure, with BOTH Iraq and Iran" (http://thesaker.is/the-usa-is-now-at-war-de-facto-and-de-jure-with-both-iraq-and-iran/) was written by the Saker itself.



During the Iraqi parliament’s emergency session, in which some members repeatedly chanted “no to America,” Mahdi revealed new information about the run up to the American drone strike that killed Qasem Soleimani, a prominent Iranian military leader who commanded the country’s elite Quds Force. Mahdi said President Donald Trump called him and asked him to mediate with Iran even as the American president was secretly ordering Soleimani’s killing. Mahdi also said he was set to meet Soleimani, who was carrying a response to an initiative from Saudi Arabia intended to deescalate tensions.

https://time.com/5759101/iraqi-parliament-vote-for-us-withdrawal/

[edina]

The US assassinated an envoy -- Soleimani was on a diplomatic mission.


Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdl Mahdi has now officially revealed that the US had asked him to mediate between the US and Iran and that General Qassem Soleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer to his mediation efforts. Thus, Soleimani was on an OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC MISSION as part of a diplomatic initiative INITIATED BY THE USA.

http://thesaker.is/the-usa-is-now-at-war-de-facto-and-de-jure-with-both-iraq-and-iran/

If true, this would be very serious.

Normally there is an author attributed in the Saker articles, there wasn't an author attributed that I could see.
It's sort of anonymous?

I was able to track the language used in the above quote to Elijah J. Magnier's Twitter account.

That tweet was written about 8 hours ago.

I haven't been able to find another source to confirm it?

Eight hours is a long time to not see a confirmation in the legacy news wires.

I've also looked at Al-Jazeera, Arab News, AINA and Tass.

Reuters wrote an article that has similar but not exact language to Elijah's information in the Saker article.
I think it was written a few hours ago (I've been away from the computer, and updated 33 minutes ago.)

Iraq wants foreign troops out after air strike; U.S. urges leaders to reconsider (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security/iraq-wants-foreign-troops-out-after-air-strike-u-s-urges-leaders-to-reconsider-idUSKBN1Z409A)

Abdul Mahdi said that despite the “internal and external difficulties” the country might face, canceling its request for help from U.S.-led coalition military forces “remains best for Iraq on principle and practically.”

He said he had been scheduled to meet Soleimani the day he was killed, and that the general had been due to deliver an Iranian response to a message from Saudi Arabia that Abdul Mahdi had earlier passed to Tehran. Sunni Muslim Saudi Arabia and Shi’ite Iran had been about to “reach a breakthrough over the situation in Iraq and the region”, Abdul Mahdi said.


It seems to me that if that were the case, that "breakthrough" could still continue if it didn't involve the US, but rather involved the Saudi's.

This is the reason why the special ops and intel people I mentioned earlier (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109557-The-United-States-kills-Quds-Commander-Qasem-Soleimani&p=1330061&viewfull=1#post1330061) think that Trump had been pushed or tricked into this action. From their point of view, the strategy he had been using was very close to accomplishing the mission.

The death of Soleimani is almost like a sabatoge of what Trump was working toward.

They think that people like me who think that this was a planned decision, part of a larger strategy already in place, a tactic to use should it be needed, sort of thing, are naive. (It's hard to say without a better understanding of the intelligence, we're all speculating at this point.)

Their logic is that a good portion of intelligence is in interpretation. And that someone steered the interpretation a certain way, and that this is how Trump was 'pushed'.

The thing for me is that I don't rule out the possibility of the use of a "looking glass" sort of technology. Whereas for many, that idea is just "crazy talk." :)

Regardless, what is done, is done.

I continue to hold all involved in prayer...

[Caliban]

The assassination was “a dangerous breach of Iraqi sovereignty and of the terms of US presence in Iraq,” the ministry added.
Four other Iranians as well as four Iraqis accompanying them were also martyred in the US strike.

So nine people, not just One, were killed, in this thing. NINE people.

[Tangri]

Trump Just 'Accidentally' Ended The Iraq War, Iraq Votes For Us Military To LEAVE
fwKYInkvZfE

"Accidentally"
;)I don't believe it was an accident but outcome is going to be a surprise.

[Houman]

https://aawsat.com/english/home/article/1929396/soleimani-reveals-details-role-he-played-2006-israel-hezbollah-war


Soleimani Reveals Details of Role He Played in the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War
Thursday, 3 October, 2019 - 07:00


The Iranian State TV broadcast on Tuesday an exclusive interview with Commander of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Commander, Major General Qasem Soleimani, who has given an insight on his role in Lebanon during the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war.

This is the first interview of Soleimani, who is in charge of foreign operations especially in Syria and Iraq.

During the 90-minute interview, Soleimani gave details of his role in Lebanon in advising ‘Hezbollah’ during the 34-day war. He came to Lebanon accompanied by Hezbollah military leader Imad Mughniyeh who was later assassinated in 2008.

Mughniyeh was considered the engineer of the 2006 war, which killed 1,200 Lebanese and 160 Israelis.
...



https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-5601160,00.html


Photo: AP
Qassem Soleimani
Photo: AP

facebook
print
send to friend
comment

Iran general: Israel came close to killing me, Hezbollah chief in Second Lebanon War
The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, Qassem Soleimani, claims the pair under constant surveillance of 'Israeli regime' and miraculously escaped the building that was bombed...

i24NEWS|Published: 10.02.19 , 12:35


The commander of the elite Quds Force of Iran's Revolutionary Guards said Tuesday that Israel came very close to killing him and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah during the Second Lebanon War.

In a rare interview, Qassem Soleimani - who was in Beirut at the time of the 34-day conflict - recalled that one night he and Hezbollah's second-in-command Imad Mughniyeh went outside and were spotted by Israeli surveillance drones...

Israeli spy planes were "constantly" flying over the Hezbollah stronghold of Dahiyeh, a neighborhood of Beirut, with Jerusalem “watching every movement” on the ground, said Soleimani.



That's when the Iranian made the decision to evacuate their position and escort Nasrallah to a second building. Moments later, Soleimani recounts, Israeli forces unleashed two bombardments nearby.



“We were feeling that these two bombings were about to be followed by a third one … so we decided to get out of that building. We didn’t have a car, and there was complete silence, just the Israeli regime aircraft flying over Dahiyeh,” he recounted.


https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/The-unthinkable-Soleimani-killed-in-Iraq-612962


Soleimani's luck couldn't last; this time he met his end (obit-analysis)

[edina]

For years I followed a FB page called "My Stealthy Freedom (https://www.facebook.com/StealthyFreedom/)".

I've mentioned this in the Q thread back in 2018; that I would share posts from their page from time to time to help raise awareness of what these women were experiencing. They were taking brave actions of NOT wearing a hijab.

These are courageous warrior women in my opinion, and all too often they pay a huge price for their small acts of protest.

Sometimes Iranian women would share photos of the bruises on their bodies from the lashings and beatings they received if caught not wearing a hijab. I'm often astounded at how many women here in the US who are very defensive about women's rights yet seem to have no idea what it's like for women in Iran.

I've been reading many different articles and tweets and interesting twitter threads over the past few days related to this situation in Iran.

This tweet reminded me of the women of "My Stealthy Freedom."
1213899549489516544
https://twitter.com/IranianforTrump/status/1213899549489516544

For some, they are fighting for a right/freedom that all too often is hardly appreciated here in the US.

https://www.mystealthyfreedom.org/

[Tintin]

"Remember, this is not just academic argument, the Bethlehem Doctrine is the formal policy position on assassination of Israel, the US and UK governments. So that is lie one. When Pompeo says Soleimani was planning “imminent” attacks, he is using the Bethlehem definition under which “imminent” is a “concept” which means neither “soon” nor “definitely going to happen”. To twist a word that far from its normal English usage is to lie. To do so to justify killing people is obscene. That is why, if I finish up in the bottom-most pit of hell, the worst thing about the experience will be the company of Daniel Bethlehem."




"So when Pompeo says attacks by Soleimani were “imminent” he is not using the word in the normal sense in the English language. It is no use asking him what, where or when these “imminent” attacks were planned to be. He is referencing the Bethlehem Doctrine under which you can kill people on the basis of a feeling that they may have been about to do something."

Craig Murray (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/01/lies-the-bethlehem-doctrine-and-the-illegal-murder-of-soleimani/) - January 4th, 2020

________________________________________

Lies, the Bethlehem Doctrine, and the Illegal Murder of Soleimani

In one of the series of blatant lies the USA has told to justify the assassination of Soleimani, Mike Pompeo said that Soleimani was killed because he was planning “Imminent attacks (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/03/politics/mike-pompeo-iran-soleimani-strike-cnntv/index.html)” on US citizens. It is a careful choice of word. Pompeo is specifically referring to the Bethlehem Doctrine of Pre-Emptive Self Defence.

Developed by Daniel Bethlehem when Legal Adviser to first Netanyahu’s government and then Blair’s, the Bethlehem Doctrine is that states have a right of “pre-emptive self-defence” against “imminent” attack. That is something most people, and most international law experts and judges, would accept. Including me.

What very few people, and almost no international lawyers, accept is the key to the Bethlehem Doctrine – that here “Imminent” – the word used so carefully by Pompeo – does not need to have its normal meanings of either “soon” or “about to happen”. An attack may be deemed “imminent”, according to the Bethlehem Doctrine, even if you know no details of it or when it might occur. So you may be assassinated by a drone or bomb strike – and the doctrine was specifically developed to justify such strikes – because of “intelligence” you are engaged in a plot, when that intelligence neither says what the plot is nor when it might occur. Or even more tenuous, because there is intelligence you have engaged in a plot before, so it is reasonable to kill you in case you do so again.

I am not inventing the Bethlehem Doctrine. It has been the formal legal justification for drone strikes and targeted assassinations by the Israeli, US and UK governments for a decade. Here it is (https://web.archive.org/web/20140912080044/http://www.un.org/law/counsel/Bethlehem%20-%20Self-Defense%20Article.pdf) in academic paper form, published by Bethlehem after he left government service (the form in which it is adopted by the US, UK and Israeli Governments is classified information (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/15/syria-drone-strikes-uk-attorney-general-refuses-to-disclose-advice)).

So when Pompeo says attacks by Soleimani were “imminent” he is not using the word in the normal sense in the English language. It is no use asking him what, where or when these “imminent” attacks were planned to be. He is referencing the Bethlehem Doctrine under which you can kill people on the basis of a feeling that they may have been about to do something.

The idea that killing an individual who you have received information is going to attack you, but you do not know when, where or how, can be justified as self-defence, has not gained widespread acceptance – or indeed virtually any acceptance – in legal circles outside the ranks of the most extreme devoted neo-conservatives and zionists.

Daniel Bethlehem became the FCO’s Chief Legal Adviser, brought in by Jack Straw, precisely because every single one of the FCO’s existing Legal Advisers believed the Iraq War to be illegal. In 2004, when the House of Commons was considering the legality of the war on Iraq, Bethlehem produced a remarkable paper for consideration which said that it was legal because the courts and existing law were wrong (https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmfaff/441/4060808.htm), a defence which has seldom succeeded in court. [My emphasis - TQ]

(Extract):


(b)
following this line, I am also of the view that the wider principles of the law on self-defence also require closer scrutiny. I am not persuaded that the approach of doctrinal purity reflected in the Judgments of the International Court of Justice in this area provide a helpful edifice on which a coherent legal regime, able to address the exigencies of contemporary international life and discourage resort to unilateral action, is easily crafted;

The key was that the concept of “imminent” was to change:



The concept of what constitutes an “imminent” armed attack will develop to meet new circumstances and new threats

In the absence of a respectable international lawyer willing to argue this kind of tosh, Blair brought in Bethlehem as Chief Legal Adviser, the man who advised Netanyahu on Israel’s security wall and who was willing to say that attacking Iraq was legal on the basis of Saddam’s “imminent threat” to the UK, which proved to be non-existent.

It says everything about Bethlehem’s eagerness for killing that the formulation of the Bethlehem Doctrine on extrajudicial execution by drone came after the Iraq War, and he still gave not one second’s thought to the fact that the intelligence on the “imminent threat” can be wrong. Assassinating people on the basis of faulty intelligence is not addressed by Bethlehem in setting out his doctrine. The bloodlust is strong in this one.

There are literally scores of academic articles, in every respected journal of international law, taking down the Bethlehem Doctrine for its obvious absurdities and revolting special pleading. My favourite is this one (https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5305/amerjintelaw.107.2.0390?seq=1) by Bethlehem’s predecessor as the FCO Chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood and his ex-Deputy Elizabeth Wilmshurst.

I addressed the Bethlehem Doctrine as part of my contribution to a book reflecting on Chomsky‘s essay “On the Responsibility of Intellectuals (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Responsibility-Intellectuals-Reflections-Chomsky-Others/dp/1787355527/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=)”

[Written in 2017]




In the UK recently, the Attorney General gave a speech (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/11/raf-drone-strikes-terror-attorney-general) in defence of the UK’s drone policy, the assassination of people – including British nationals – abroad. This execution
without a hearing is based on several criteria, he reassured us. His
speech was repeated slavishly in the British media.

In fact, the Guardian newspaper simply republished the government press release absolutely verbatim, and stuck a reporter’s byline at the top.
The media have no interest in a critical appraisal of the process
by which the British government regularly executes without trial. Yet
in fact it is extremely interesting.

The genesis of the policy lay in the appointment of Daniel Bethlehem as the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s Chief Legal Adviser. Jack Straw made the appointment, and for the first time ever it was external, and not from the Foreign Office’s own
large team of world-renowned international lawyers. The reason for that
is not in dispute.

Every single one of the FCO’s legal advisers had advised that the invasion of Iraq was illegal, and Straw wished to find a new head of the department more in tune with the neo-conservative world view.

Straw went to extremes. He appointed Daniel Bethlehem, the legal
‘expert’ who provided the legal advice to Benjamin Netanyahu on the
‘legality’ of building the great wall hemming in the Palestinians away
from their land and water resources. Bethlehem was an enthusiastic
proponent of the invasion of Iraq. He was also the most enthusiastic
proponent in the world of drone strikes.

Bethlehem provided an opinion on the legality of drone strikes
which is, to say the least, controversial. To give one example, Bethlehem
accepts that established principles of international law dictate that
lethal force may be used only to prevent an attack which is ‘imminent’.
Bethlehem argues that for an attack to be ‘imminent’ does not require it
to be ‘soon’. Indeed you can kill to avert an ‘imminent attack’ even if you
have no information on when and where it will be. You can instead rely
on your target’s ‘pattern of behaviour’; that is, if he has attacked before,
it is reasonable to assume he will attack again and that such an attack is
‘imminent’.

There is a much deeper problem: that the evidence against the
target is often extremely dubious. Yet even allowing the evidence to
be perfect, it is beyond me that the state can kill in such circumstances
without it being considered a death penalty imposed without trial for
past crimes, rather than to frustrate another ‘imminent’ one.
You would think that background would make an interesting
story.

Yet the entire ‘serious’ British media published the government
line, without a single journalist, not one, writing about the fact that
Bethlehem’s proposed definition of ‘imminent’ has been widely rejected
by the international law community.

The public knows none of this.

They just ‘know’ that drone strikes are keeping us safe from deadly attack by
terrorists, because the government says so, and nobody has attempted to
give them other information

Remember, this is not just academic argument, the Bethlehem Doctrine is the formal policy position on assassination of Israel, the US and UK governments. So that is lie one. When Pompeo says Soleimani was planning “imminent” attacks, he is using the Bethlehem definition under which “imminent” is a “concept” which means neither “soon” nor “definitely going to happen”.

To twist a word that far from its normal English usage is to lie. To do so to justify killing people is obscene. That is why, if I finish up in the bottom-most pit of hell, the worst thing about the experience will be the company of Daniel Bethlehem.

Let us now move on to the next lie, which is being widely repeated, this time originated by Donald Trump, that Soleimani was responsible for the “deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans”. This lie has been parroted by everybody, Republicans and Democrats alike.

42230

Really? Who were they? When and where? While the Bethlehem Doctrine allows you to kill somebody because they might be going to attack someone, sometime, but you don’t know who or when, there is a reasonable expectation that if you are claiming people have already been killed you should be able to say who and when.

The truth of the matter is that if you take every American killed including and since 9/11, in the resultant Middle East related wars, conflicts and terrorist acts, well over 90% of them have been killed by Sunni Muslims financed and supported out of Saudi Arabia and its gulf satellites, and less than 10% of those Americans have been killed by Shia Muslims tied to Iran.

This is a horribly inconvenient fact for US administrations which, regardless of party, are beholden to Saudi Arabia and its money. It is, the USA affirms, the Sunnis who are the allies and the Shias who are the enemy. Yet every journalist or aid worker hostage who has been horribly beheaded or otherwise executed has been murdered by a Sunni, every jihadist terrorist attack in the USA itself, including 9/11, has been exclusively Sunni, the Benghazi attack was by Sunnis, Isil are Sunni, Al Nusra are Sunni, the Taliban are Sunni and the vast majority of US troops killed in the region are killed by Sunnis.

Precisely which are these hundreds of deaths for which the Shia forces of Soleimani were responsible? Is there a list? It is of course a simple lie. Its tenuous connection with truth relates to the Pentagon’s estimate – suspiciously upped (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2019/04/04/iran-killed-more-us-troops-in-iraq-than-previously-known-pentagon-says/) repeatedly since Iran became the designated enemy – that back during the invasion of Iraq itself, 83% of US troop deaths were at the hands of Sunni resistance and 17% of of US troop deaths were at the hands of Shia resistance, that is 603 troops. All the latter are now lain at the door of Soleimani, remarkably.

Those were US troops killed in combat during an invasion. The Iraqi Shia militias – whether Iran backed or not – had every legal right to fight the US invasion. The idea that the killing of invading American troops was somehow illegal or illegitimate is risible.

Those were US troops killed in combat during an invasion. The Iraqi Shia militias – whether Iran backed or not – had every legal right to fight the US invasion. The idea that the killing of invading American troops was somehow illegal or illegitimate is risible. Plainly the US propaganda that Soleimani was “responsible for hundreds of American deaths” is intended, as part of the justification for his murder, to give the impression he was involved in terrorism, not legitimate combat against invading forces.

The idea that the US has the right to execute those who fight it when it invades is an absolutely stinking abnegation of the laws of war.

As I understand it, there is very little evidence that Soleimani had active operational command of Shia militias during the invasion, and in any case to credit him personally with every American soldier killed is plainly a nonsense. But even if Soleimani had personally supervised every combat success, these were legitimate acts of war. You cannot simply assassinate opposing generals who fought you, years after you invade.

42231

The final, and perhaps silliest lie, is Vice President Mike Pence’s attempt to link Soleimani to 9/11. There is absolutely no link between Soleimani and 9/11, and the most strenuous efforts by the Bush regime to find evidence that would link either Iran or Iraq to 9/11 (and thus take the heat off their pals the al-Saud who were actually responsible) failed. Yes, it is true that some of the hijackers at one point transited Iran to Afghanistan. But there is zero evidence, as the 9/11 report specifically stated, that the Iranians knew what they were planning, or that Soleimani personally was involved. This is total bull****. 9/11 was Sunni and Saudi led, nothing to do with Iran.

Soleimani actually was involved in intelligence and logistical cooperation with the United States in Afghanistan post 9/11 (the Taliban were his enemies too, the shia Tajiks being a key part of the US aligned Northern Alliance). He was in Iraq to fight ISIL.

The final aggravating factor in the Soleimani murder is that he was an accredited combatant general of a foreign state which the world – including the USA – recognises. The Bethlehem Doctrine specifically applies to “non-state actors”. Unlike all of the foregoing, this next is speculation, but I suspect that the legal argument in the Pentagon ran that Soleimani is a non-state actor when in Iraq, where the Shia militias have a semi-official status.

But that does not wash. Soleimani is a high official in Iran who was present in Iraq as a guest of the Iraqi government, to which the US government is allied. This greatly exacerbates the illegality of his assassination still further.

The political world in the UK is so cowed by the power of the neo-conservative Establishment and media, that the assassination of Soleimani is not being called out for the act of blatant illegality that it is. It was an act of state terrorism by the USA, pure and simple.

——————————————

Resource: - Bethlehem Doctrine

http://projectavalon.net/Bethlehem_Self-Defense_Article.pdf

[Iyakum]

But no, Trump had to set an example. The mullahs wanted to get rid of the general and the song is done. Both achieved what they wanted.

Do you think that Trump and "the mullahs" worked together to assassinate Soleimani? You are using an awkward kind of reasoning.

Silvanelf, what do you think is "embarrassing" about my way of thinking?

If you are such a professional in politics and world affairs, shouldn't you know better?
How about an example or two? US Embassy hostage in Tehran. 1979 to mid-January 1980. President Carter could not free her, now that was intentional so he was not elected. But Reagan made a promise that the hostage-taking would end the hostage-taking if he won the election and took over the presidency.

The Iranian government announced the release of the hostages 20 minutes after Reagan's speech ended when he took office on January 20, 1981. This and other evidence suggest that the Reagan camp had been holding secret negotiations with representatives of Tehran for some time before the election on November 4, 1980, in order to delay the release of the hostages so that they would not benefit from the October Surprise in the election Carter's impact.

What about the United States' illegal arms delivery to Iran? 1986 Iran-Contra Scandals Extensive, Illegal Reagan Government Arms Deliveries to Iran? Contact processing is said to have taken place through Reagan's campaign manager and later director of central intelligence William Joseph Casey and the Iranian arms dealer Jamshid Hashemi.

That's how politics works. If the United States wanted to silently and secretly dump Soleimani, they had plenty of options. But why then with a drone or a rocket so that everyone can watch it?

Your posts read as if you lived in Iran. Do you have that ? Before you drag the participants in this thread into the dirt, you should consider whether you have been attacked by others or by me. If not, then your report is a lot more embarrassing than mine.

[Iyakum]

Tensions are growing not only between the United States and Iran, but also between Washington and the government in Baghdad, Iraq. US President Donald Trump has now threatened Iraq with drastic sanctions in the event of the hostile expulsion of some 5,000 US soldiers from the country.

If the country does not meet the US conditions for withdrawal, the US government will impose sanctions "like never before," Trump said journalists traveling on Sunday evening (local time) during the return flight from Florida to Washington, Trump said.

In addition, the United States would not leave Iraq unless the country paid for the US Air Force base there: "We have an extremely expensive air force base there. The construction cost billions of dollars long before my time. We will not leave before we do don't pay for it. "

Trump went on to say that his government might consider publishing intelligence related to the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimanis. The pressure on the US government to justify the deadly attack on Iraqi soil is growing daily.

I just hear the news from Radio Israel Free Iran. As far as the news is true, the Iranian government has suspended a $ 80 million bounty on Trump. We all knew that there would be an answer. Still, that's still a war away.

[mountain_jim]

Avalon member mgray has an article today questioning motives for this, as it relates to the past Iran Nuclear Deal that Obama sent all the cash over for, Ukraine-related arms trafficking, impeachment to cover up, etc.

https://grayseconomy.com/2020/01/06/soleimani-death-silences-iran-deal-partner/



Soleimani death silences Iran deal partner

..
Soleimani was the key negotiator working with Bijan Kian for the US, who worked with Lt. Col. Mike Flynn, to broker the Iran nuclear deal.
..

If I was President Trump, then I would take another look at the advisor(s) who brought the idea of taking out Soleimani and question motive. Did we take out Soleimani as an appropriate response to the attack on our embassy in Baghdad, or did they want to silence a know collaborator?
Question everything Mr. President.

[Iyakum]

"US President Donald Trump has now threatened Iraq with drastic sanctions in the event of the hostile expulsion of some 5,000 US soldiers from the country." At this point you can stop reading. Hostile. So so. And what exactly is the murder of a high-ranking military officer once again visiting abroad? A nice gesture? Who canceled the nuclear deal, who held an oil tanker first, who flew over Iranian territory with drones.

In addition: Who struck back IS in Iraq? On the other hand, who attacked Syria without a UN mandate and thereby provoked Iran's reactions? USA, the war country. Hopefully, Iraq will see its decision confirmed by the threat of sanctions.

[Iyakum]

If Trump doesn't let the troops withdraw unconditionally and without
that the United States would get paid billions for the base beforehand, he risks a siege or a cold expulsion from the base because one could assume that the 5000 soldiers have no way of being supplied by air. But that can also be deceiving if you see what the United States did with the Berlin Airlift.

But how long should this go well, against the Iraqi government and against the will of millions of Iraqis and suspected terrorist attacks on the grassroots, etc.? The situation is really exacerbated. However, if the US clears the base quickly, the ensuing US sanctions against Iraq would certainly result in greater cooperation between the country and Iran. Exactly the opposite of what Trump wants. Should US / Iran combat operations occur shortly, will Iraq protect the base against Iran or will it stop protecting the US soldiers at the base? It looks like a real conflagration for the region. Trump sets fire ... Or still reason and "humanity" win let´s hope...

[Chester]

My personal reaction to this "act" was that I didn't like it but also, the "act" was not surprising. In addition, what is not surprising is the immediate "following up" of disinformation and spin... by all parties. But also believe, this will likely die down as always seems to happen these days or if not, result in a standoff with no "side" benefiting.

If folks are interested in what I believe is a "more informed" opinion of the immediate reactions and from Iraq, the actuality of these reactions and positions and what is the most likely future regarding Iran, here ya go - https://mobile.twitter.com/hahussain/status/1213866852314763265?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=11487

[Frank V]

My personal reaction to this "act" was that I didn't like it but also, the "act" was not surprising. In addition, what is not surprising is the immediate "following up" of disinformation and spin... by all parties. But also believe, this will likely die down as always seems to happen these days or if not, result in a standoff with no "side" benefiting.

If folks are interested in what I believe is a "more informed" opinion of the immediate reactions and from Iraq, the actuality of these reactions and positions and what is the most likely future regarding Iran, here ya go - https://mobile.twitter.com/hahussain/status/1213866852314763265?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=11487

Three pages ago, I posted an in-depth analysis (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109557-The-United-States-kills-Quds-Commander-Qasem-Soleimani&p=1329942&viewfull=1#post1329942) by Abby Martin and Mike Prysner that was live-streamed on YouTube right after the attack, but only one person thanked that post, which to me says something about the political bias of the majority of the people monitoring this thread, given that Abby and Mike are outspokenly progressive journalists.

Sadly enough, most people seem to want to listen to what the mainstream media have to say ─ on both sides of the US bipartisan divide, neither of which has been truthful. Abby and Mike are investigative journalists, and they know the region because they've been there. In addition to that, Mike Prysner is also a war veteran.

[Praxis]

My personal reaction to this "act" was that I didn't like it but also, the "act" was not surprising. In addition, what is not surprising is the immediate "following up" of disinformation and spin... by all parties. But also believe, this will likely die down as always seems to happen these days or if not, result in a standoff with no "side" benefiting.

If folks are interested in what I believe is a "more informed" opinion of the immediate reactions and from Iraq, the actuality of these reactions and positions and what is the most likely future regarding Iran, here ya go - https://mobile.twitter.com/hahussain/status/1213866852314763265?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=11487

Three pages ago, I posted an in-depth analysis (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109557-The-United-States-kills-Quds-Commander-Qasem-Soleimani&p=1329942&viewfull=1#post1329942) by Abby Martin and Mike Prysner that was live-streamed on YouTube right after the attack, but only one person thanked that post, which to me says something about the political bias of the majority of the people monitoring this thread, given that Abby and Mike are outspokenly progressive journalists.

Sadly enough, most people seem to want to listen to what the mainstream media have to say ─ on both sides of the US bipartisan divide, neither of which has been truthful. Abby and Mike are investigative journalists, and they know the region because they've been there. In addition to that, Mike Prysner is also a war veteran.

Sorry my friend. I do thank but maybe not as much as I should. I kind of hate the thanks button on this forum as it is a form of social manipulation. Boy I know that I feel special when certain people thank my posts, even though I know it shouldnt. I should feel special when I post my genuine thoughts and explain myself well, even if , and it often does, goes against the grain of the people around here.

I wanted to post this thread here to get a taste for what the political opinion is. I am very surprised at the takes in here. We are doing some serious mental gymnastics. The video that silvanelf posted and Bill reposted was actually very good and even handed analysis.

I am not surprised by other takes. Trump did NOT need to blow any one up to get peace. He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA. I think this bears repeating.

He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.
He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.
He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.
He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.
He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.
He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.

He, as president, could immediately withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan. Full Stop. There might be political fallout, as democrats are pro imperalism secretly and republicans are openly ok with it, but he could do it legally.

Then there is what he tweets.
Literally, The president of the United States threatened a war crime on twitter then followed it up with this

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1213919480574812160

Anything he tweets is official AS PER HIS MOUTH. He said he would destroy cultural sites. That is illegal. FULL STOP.


I am upset that the overton window is not here: Immediately withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan. Remember when the MAGA people were saying that Trump is pro peace . . . .

one last time He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.

[Chester]

I don't think Trump is able to withdraw from anything. I think Trump was knowingly fully compromised soon after his inauguration. That Trump would have escaped the political blackmail system is a long shot IMO. In addition, and in my opinion, he is allowed a "win" here or there and probably wins in November. Trump accelerates the massive breakdown in continuity of folks in the US. Trump polarizes even further a massively polarized world. He's not the only entity playing this role.

The goal is a one world totalitarian government. The goal is to separate type one human beings (the managerial elite) from the rest including genetically. While type one humans are able to develop all aspects of their being which importantly includes their physical body vehicles, type two human beings (the rest of us) are subjugated to every possible diminishment of capablity in matching a type one human.

Type one humans are already developing advanced "mind tech" both via hardware and consciousness. It will be (and in some cases may already be) advanced telepathic capability operationally held by type one humans. The advantage of this alone is, as we say in sports betting, "ballgame, folks" (meaning, it's over, folks).

The only reports that matter to me with regards to the entertainment value I derive from these "world events" are reports based on facts, first, followed by informed opinion (specifically from those with a verifiable track record of being more right than wrong). I don't value opinion discussions where the degree to which an information source is actually and factually informed is usurped by their clear bias, especially when that bias believes their political ideology and/or the economic system (which attracts their affinity) is superior. In addition, when their emotional hatred leaks through, I value their opinion even less.

I thank a post because either I liked it, I may agree with at least most of it or I want to remember I read (listened to) it so I don't waste my time in the future. Sometimes I might read or listen to a post and decide I don't want to give an impression I agree with it so I will consciously choose to not thank it. In some cases I skip a post by someone I have already concluded is so entrenched in their bias, I don't need to waste my time on their post.

Sometimes (rarely) I use the ignore list (have done so perhaps 5 or 6 times in 8 years on all forums). Some forums do not allow "mods" to be placed on ignore lists (though a mod can always PM even if PMs are turned off which makes such a configuration unecessary). That's one reason I chose to leave another forum as a mod was uncontrollably political.

I hope this post clears up several unknowns and several misconceptions as to myself, my operational protocols and my obvious disdain for all of this political bs when instead what seems important is what I covered in the beginning of this post.

If people do not understand that UFO/ET ("The Phenomenon") coupled with the end game of the type one humans (the managerial elite) especially as that also relates to the usage of demonics to be the real, paramount and important subjects then each of us should consider how we are making the case for the type one humans to complete their goal.

[graciousb]

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1212934206986293248

America just declared war on Iran.

We shall see if they accept.

So much for Trump being the anti war anti imperialism candidate.

The people who look the other way on this war mongering disgust me.

Welcome to the new year.

I am horrified with the idea of war with Iran, knowing a certain middle eastern country has been pushing for this forever. HOWEVER, I have family members (by marriage - my ex was Iranian and my sister married his best friend, also Iranian), they have told me their friends and family back in Iran are actually happy Soleimani was killed, that he was tyrant and terrorist. None of the people saying this were Trump supporters at all, but they do say people back home are cheering these events. I did not know what to believe at first because I have up close experience with seeing MSM lies on Iran related stories (was there in 1979 after Shah overthrown). For what it's worth. Nothing is what it seems.

[Floating]

A different viewpoint...

https://twitter.com/projectcamelot

"KERRY CASSIDY @projectcamelot

WAR? Not exactly….I have been told that the build-up to war between IRAN, China/US/Russia is a cover for prep for a coming alien or AI invasion!"

[graciousb]

To AYT Post#3.

From Jim Stone's site

The hit on Soleimani was not a work of genius

He was hit while traveling in a car during a publicly announced visit to Iraq to attend the funerals of 31 Iraqi soldiers the U.S. killed on Dec 29. That changes things quite a bit. That was not a legitimate intelligence based hit against an enemy operating where hit, it was instead the killing of a government official who went to attend a funeral and was going to leave the same day.

THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING OF ALL: The moment Trump approved the killing of this Iranian General, he got the approval from the shadow state to FINALLY purge Obama holdovers from his white house. That was not coincidence, Trump had this general killed as part of a deal to finally be allowed to do what all other presidents have been allowed to do on day one of their presidency. That proves he's still not in charge of even the basics.

Iranians are not celebrating this despite what the tech left is scamming on Twitter and other social media, and the fallout could be bad. Iran can now with full "eye for an eye" legitimacy target the highest ranking U.S. officials at will. As it turns out, this general was not in the area commanding anything. He arrived on a regularly scheduled commercial flight. There was no secrecy attached to his visit. That does make a difference, because it is the same as picking off American officials with drones when they leave the air port in France or elsewhere, and Iran has lots of drones.

Actually many ARE celebrating. This is directly from in laws who have family /friends in Iran right now, we're being told they are celebrating this. None of the US based Iranians reporting this were supporters of POTUS btw. I'm personally more libertarian and a deep skeptic of ANYTHING the msm promotes. For what it's worth.

[ExomatrixTV]

Iran's Leadership Puts $80 Million Bounty On Trump's Head, Tore Up Nuclear Deal:
DDR6BvnDNb8

Deep State may use this as an excuse when creating a new False Flag operation!

cheers,
John

[Franny]

Issuing edicts and threats to a sovereign country via social media.

Is this the direction in which the US is moving to conduct foreign policy or is it warming up the population for the inevitable?

1213919480574812160

A few clips, tweets and perspectives of some immediate responses:

Eugene Gu, MD

Wow. Trump is quite literally using Twitter as a way to declare war on Iran without even notifying Congress through official means. Never before in the history of the United States has any President been this unhinged and disrespectful of our Constitution.

Even after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, “a date which will live in infamy,” President Franklin D. Roosevelt went to Congress on December 8 to declare war. But for us, we may wake up to see one of “These Media Posts” from Trump to see the start of WW3 on Twitter.

Thinking for yourself here:
1213919830958649349


Advice and urging from Nissar Ally
1213920389853638657


Brian Tyler Cohen

This is a ****ing tweet.

Sara Williams

The United States now governs on Twitter.

There isn't much lower to go.



Jeffrey Guterman

Do I believe my eyes? You are notifying Congress of your intentions via tweet. Go play golf. We will be safer that way.


From a mostly grateful world
AnthemRespect🇺🇸Text Trump to 88022⭐️⭐️⭐️

Mr. President, most people in America & throughout the world are very grateful for you.

Never forget, the Dems in Congress weren’t very fond of Lincoln or Reagan either.

Lincoln rid the USA of the Dems’ slaves, & Reagan rid the world of the USSR.

Dems lost, World won. Deja Vu.

Across the spectrum it seems this is helping to warm some of the some of the population but others are still out in the chill.

[Frank V]

[...]

1213919830958649349

[...]

Across the spectrum it seems this is helping to warm some of the some of the population but others are still out in the chill.

"I genuinely believe that some people here have begun mating with vegetables."

(Jeremy Clarkson, when he was still working for the BBC's "Top Gear", and the entire crew was nearly lynched in Florida for having provocative slogans in easily removable paint on the used cars they had acquired for a road trip to the Katrina disaster area, and that they gave away for free (with the slogans washed off again) to some of the people whose belongings had been hit by hurricane Katrina.)

___

"Hillary for president" on Richard Hammond's car, "Country music sucks" on James May's car, and "Man-love is great" (or something to that effect) on Jeremy Clarkson's car. They painted the slogans on each other's cars, not on their own.

When refueling at a gas station, the woman who owned the place asked them if they were looking for trouble, and in spite of Clarkson's very friendly and polite explanation, she said she was going to "call the boys." Not even five minutes later, a pickup truck arrived with a bunch of armed southerners in the back. The whole crew had to get out of there as fast as they could, and I seem to remember that rocks were thrown at them as they pulled away.

Those were all people with the legal right to vote, and Donald Trump is their president.

[ExomatrixTV]

Trump: 52 sites to be targeted if Iran retaliates over Soleimani:
MwRO8MGdyos

[Soda]

Sammy, you are brilliant. As always.

[edina]

My personal reaction to this "act" was that I didn't like it but also, the "act" was not surprising. In addition, what is not surprising is the immediate "following up" of disinformation and spin... by all parties. But also believe, this will likely die down as always seems to happen these days or if not, result in a standoff with no "side" benefiting.

If folks are interested in what I believe is a "more informed" opinion of the immediate reactions and from Iraq, the actuality of these reactions and positions and what is the most likely future regarding Iran, here ya go - https://mobile.twitter.com/hahussain/status/1213866852314763265?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=11487

Thanks for posting this twitter thread, this is one of the threads I read yesterday that I thought was quite helpful and had planned to post it tomorrow if someone else had not yet posted it. Great twitter thread.

I have a few others I'm still considering, but a lot has been posted today while I've been away.

Lot's to catch up on, and I still want to dive deeper into the Uranium One connection to this ...

One thing to note, early this morning, I was reading some more posts from the middle east and the subject of a potential dirty bomb came up???

I need to follow up a bit more to see where that thread leads.

[ExomatrixTV]

1214361947832893440

[Chester]

U.S.-led coalition says it will withdraw from Iraq -letter

read here (http://news.trust.org/item/20200106193750-gbx3f)

Then read this "walk back (https://twitter.com/TaraCopp/status/1214297078190497792?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1214297078190497792&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Fnational-security%2F2020%2F01%2F06%2Fletter-u-s-led-coalition-to-withdraw-from-iraq%2F)"

A wise man once advised me, "Everything is a negotiation, son."

[shaberon]

Tactically, this was really the upswing of events from about a week prior.

The U. S. is at all the Iraqi-Syria border points except one, held by Iraqi Popular Militia.

So there was an incident of a small ground rocket which killed an American inside Iraq. There was of course no investigation or proof of attack; the U. S. immediately used a pretext to annihilate the border post with over 30 killed and more injured, despite it being 450 km in the other direction.

That has to do with Islamic State and the Syrian oil, and, of course, a pretty major smash against a unit that does not like them.

The American Embassy in Baghdad was swarmed by thousands and called Marines to protect it.

Then in Baghdad, they blew up an Iraqi Popular Militia leader in the same stroke as this. So they killed members of two countries, and among other things, this had caused the U. S. to invigorate Aden (https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13981016000666), Yemen. At the same time, Turkey is moving a lot of the U. S.-backed Free Syrian Army into the Libyan theater.

This particular attack sounds stupid, illegal, and desperate. Possibly among the highest in each of those categories.

Edit: actually this reprisal in Kenya (https://www.rt.com/news/477594-pentagon-sends-reinforcements-kenya-shabaab/) is probably the tip of the iceberg.

[Agape]

The skies in Himalayas looked ominous this morning. Quickly changing shapes of planes and whale like missiles in the clouds , I saw double crossed cloud ship as well through breaking sunrise and before everything was wrapped in mist again.
Quick mirror reflection to our human activities .

Iran, in all my respect has but one clean option and that is take a step ahead and get rid of nuclear power. Realise how it’s too big and dangerous in human hands of present time, how much destruction it causes to life, outweighing any possible benefits of playing with the nuclear fire.

Surely those who amass and threaten the world with nukes can’t be the right people.
Whole arsenal of militaries worldwide is being educated to the idea that these are somehow controllable and safe to use tools of war. Some have sort of got used to the idea, even if most people never consider the option seriously.
Media is payed by the richest, they seldom portray correctly the sheer amount of suffering going on , on this planet every day.

You pay to see the good looks of people enjoying their best time.

Ignoring the rest in order to protect the “little human mind”.

None of us wish to see these images of intense suffering.


In truth, dear Iran and the rest of the world , take step ahead, declare yourself the Zone of Peace and you will be protected by all Nations.

Be the First and the Glorious , be in Peace



Yes let the US go home . These billions that any military base costed could have fed all the people of Yemen for a year or ten.
Sending another thousands of nearly teenagers to get damaged in bloody war of these powerful ones is inhumane.

Please do not feel offended for wherever you are or what’s your presumed nationality. It’s not a personal matter.

All of nuclear weapons should be abandoned, by all nations, all countries, all regimes.

Preserve our culture, preserve our humanity. Act logically, way ahead of dirty strategies . Stop the option from arising .

Even if it’s 5 to 12.


Peace to the Earth and its People

Peace to us All

Peace to the Sky and wherever you are

Peace with you


Happy New Year


Oh 20:20, on the Precipice we change ?


🙏🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🙏

[shaberon]

There apparently are a few more results.


There is apparently one American withdrawal from Iraq simply going to Syria. ISIS (https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-terrorists-launch-several-attacks-against-syrian-army-troops-in-eastern-syria/), defeated by Trump in March, suddenly pulls off damaging attacks against the Syrian Army in that area.

A Russian cruiser is returning to Syria after having left only a couple weeks ago.


Openly signed pact (https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-iran-and-houthis-sign-first-military-cooperation-agreement/) between Iran and Yemen's Houthis.

Multiple random rocket fire (https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-new-blasts-heard-in-baghdads-green-zone-near-us-embassy/) towards U. S. Baghdad Embassy.

Dispatch 82nd Airborne (https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/first-us-troops-from-fort-bragg-deploy-to-middle-east-amid-tensions-with-iran-video/).

This is all timely with the conclusion that Syria cannot be disposed of, but, one can try to hang on to a piece of it for a while.

[Franny]

Some high octane speculation from Dr Farrell...

JANUARY 6, 2020

EARTHQUAKE NEAR IRANIAN NUCLEAR PLANT: HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Well... here we go folks! It's 2020, and Daniel and I want to wish everyone a very Happy New Year and every good thing in the year to come.

And speaking of the New Year, I want to start of this year's blogs by a look back to the very tail end of last year, and to rehearse an old high octane speculation, because I think we're looking at that old pattern of high octane speculation in action once again. We've seen, for example, the fires in California over the past two years, with clear evidence that something more is involved than just (1) plain old arson, (2) just plain old drought, and (3) just plain old neglect to trim back brush and undergrowth. Indeed, we've seen strange pictures from those fires, from what appears to be beams of collimated energy, to evidence of fires having been started near the electrical junction boxes of power lines going into homes. I've blogged about these things before and offered some pretty wild high octane speculation in explanation of their potential technological and scientific aspects of what may be going on. Other researchers in the alternative research field such as Elana Freeland have also offered scientific and technological explanations.

As for the events themselves, former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Catherine Austin Fitts and I have also speculated that the fires were a kind of small scale "beta test" of how to practice "disaster capitalism" by initiating the disasters themselves via exotic technologies, and of course, the good old fashioned methods of blackmailing people into committing acts of arson and so on. And now... Australia burns, and more and more people are questioning the public narratives. I wish I could share some of the questions - and information - I've been getting, but suffice it to say there is a growing concern among some in the alternative research field that something is very fishy about what's going on in Australia.

Then, looking further back, there are three other signal events of a few years ago that form part of my "old high octane speculation" pattern: 1) the Fukushima tsunami-earthquake-reactor disaster, 2) the Indonesian tsunami, and 3) the strange earthquakes in the Soviet Union that preceded the German reunification. In each of these cases, what appeared to have been natural disasters all occurred within a political context that suggests that they may not have been so natural after all. Prior to the Fukushima disaster, for example, there was a new Japanese government which was gently but firmly requesting that the USA close its base in Okinawa, and which was openly talking about state visits of then-Japanese-Emperor Akahito to visit China. This was followed by a stern threat from Obama's Secretary of Defense Robert Gates that Japan would face dire consequences if it went forward on its independent course. A few days later, the tsunami struck Fukushima, and the rest is history. And in the case of the Indonesian tsunami, as recounted many times by Catherine Fitts, about a week prior to the tsunami, she noticed a massive sell-off of Indonesian sovereign securities for no apparent reason, but the reason came about a week later when the tsunami struck. In the case of the Soviet Union, Georgia was struck by strong earthquakes during the period of the events surrounding German reunification, a fact that was conveniently coincidental, because the then Soviet Foreign Minister, Eduard Schervenadze was from ... you guessed it ... Georgia.

To this pattern we might add a fourth: the earthquakes that just conveniently devastated North Korean nuclear facilities during the height of renewed tensions between that country and the Trump administration over its nuclear policy. Then came a press conference with an American general who stated "all options are on the table." When asked by a reporter if that included "kinetic weapons" or Rod of God technologies, the general's answer was a simple yes.

It's not much of a "pattern," I'll grant you, but it at least raises to the level of "hunch": natural disasters in the context of political tensions might not be natural disasters at all, but examples of the use of exotic technologies.

With that in mind, consider the recent droning-assassination of a top Iranian general that currently has much of the lamestream corporate controlled media in a tizzy. And within the same time frame, we have this:

5.1 earthquake hits near Bushehr nuclear plant in Iran (https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ani/5-1-earthquake-hits-near-bushehr-nuclear-plant-in-iran-119122700226_1.html)

Now as the article states, the Iranian nuclear facility at Bushehr is indeed near a natural fault line and experiences almost daily tremors. Normally, that would be enough to make me dismiss the story as "mere earthquake."

But given the previous "pattern of hunches," the political commentary and tensions previous to Fukushima and again in North Korea, I cannot dispel the queasy feeling that we might be looking at the same thing here. And it is perhaps significant that prior to this earthquake, we also had one of those curious "tweets from Trump" that the USA had weapons that were not "nukes" and equally destructive.

And when you do the math on earthquakes, they certainly fall into that category...

See you on the flip side...

[Jayke]

Beginning of World War 3? Or the desperate death throes of a declining empire?

===========

https://journal-neo.org/2020/01/06/soleimani-s-killing-may-drive-the-us-out-of-the-region-trump-out-of-office/





Soleimani’s Killing may Drive the US Out of the Region & Trump Out of Office

While General Qasim Soleimani’s death in a US air strike may apparently seem not big enough a development to start an all-out war, or even World War 3, there is no gainsaying that this deliberate attempt to escalate tensions in the region will have severe consequences. For one thing, Soleimani was no ordinary Iranian soldier, for another, his death is a US response to the increasing Iranian military strength in the region—a situation that the US and Israel have long been trying to reverse. Iranian influence in the region, specifically in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon is a major bone of contention between the US/Israel/Saudia and Iran and a primary reason for the Trump administration’s exit from the Iran-nuclear deal—a step that practically mothered the present crisis.

The US president’s assertion that the decision to take Soleimani out was taken to ‘prevent a war’ is no more than a sham. Historically speaking, Iran has been averse to starting all-out wars. More than ever, this historical fact holds true today because of one simple fact: Iran’s resistance against the US-Israeli-Saudi nexus in Syria and Iraq has been phenomenally successful. In fact, if this resistance had not been successful, the US and its allies would not have been too worried about Iranian presence in the Levant; hence, the simple question: why would Iran want to start a new war when it has already won a major part of the old war, and is most likely to stay the course?

Of course, Iran would ideally want to drive the US out of the region for obvious reasons. While it may seem that a new war, which trump said Soleimani was just about to start, might, hypothetically speaking, enable the Iranians to accomplish their objective, even this objective does not most certainly warrant an all-out war. On the other hand, all it requires is a tenacious continuation of the same strategy and tactics that the Iranians have been following ever since Syria’s eruption into a US/Saudia/Israel sponsored ‘civil-war’ and its resort not to an all-out war but the ideologically motivated resistance groups.

By killing Soleimani and Muhandis, the US has only killed those two figures that had been the two major faces of resistance against the grand US strategic project whereby the terror networks were to grow for the Levant and penetrate the west and central Asian regions and then go all the way into Russia and China—a project that was and still is crucial for sustaining US hegemony in the region.

The air strike that killed Soleimani, therefore, has nothing to do with a ‘new war.’ On the contrary, it is a continuation of the same war the US has almost lost in the region. Notwithstanding the many loses the US has suffered, there is little doubt that the absolute crucial importance of this war for US global hegemony would any time make the US act in as reckless a manner as it did when it did the fateful air strike.

The US would idealise an all-out Iranian response, a pretext that the US-Israel-Saudia would use to extend their war towards west and central Asia. However, as said earlier, Iran is averse to starting all-out wars. While a befitting Iranian response would come, it will most likely be in the form of an even more entrenched resistance to the US occupation of the Levant.

Ever since the recent Baghdad-embassy incidents, the US has been sending its troops to the region, turning it into a new war-zone—a situation that Trump thought would work to his advantage in his re-election bid at a time when he feels cornered due to impeachment. The same holds true for the indicted Netanyahu in Israel.

But a calculated Iranian response would defeat these objectives. At the same time, it would lead to more Americans being killed. In other words, with more and more body-bags coming home even when there is no all-out war, Trump’s political fortunes would most likely suffer. The war that Trump wanted to prevent would spread. The only difference would be that between an all-out war i.e., what the US wants, and an entrenched resistance i.e., what Iran will do.

As the deputy commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, General Ali Fadavi, said, “The Americans should be waiting for that severe revenge; that vengeance is not to be taken by Iran only.… The great resistance front covering a vast geographical area stands ready to take revenge, and that is sure to happen.”

Iranian response would, therefore, most likely focus on hurting the US well beyond Iraq, where the US strike killed Soleimani. And, the objective of this calculated horizontal escalation would be to make life extremely difficult for the US in the Levant and force it to drive itself out of the region.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

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

The Iranians aren’t stupid, they know it’s really Israel who ordered the strike on Soleimani. No World War 3, but could stimulate an all out war in the Middle East that ends in the mutual destruction of Israel and Iran (isn’t that what Albert Pike wrote about in his plan for 3 World Wars?), which would make me look further afield as to where the kill order really came from.

Curious how the assassination came just days after Ursula Von Der Leyen (president of the EU commission) declared “We must use force” to restore Europe’s colonial hegemony over the Middle East and wider world. Thierry Meyssan posted this on 31st December...

=========


https://www.voltairenet.org/article208739.html





For the European Union, the time has come to use force
by Thierry Meyssan

The new European Commission has clearly stated its project in the era of US withdrawal: to restore Western Europe’s dominance over the rest of the world from the 16th to the 19th century. To achieve this, it is adopting a trumped-up ideology that uses the vocabulary of its philosophers in the wrong way. This posture would be laughable if it could not lead to war.

The European Union aims to restore to its members the status they had acquired by force in their respective empires. As the world has changed, it is no longer possible to base colonial reality on the educational abyss that separated the savages from civilization. A new ideology must therefore be formulated which dresses European domination with noble ideals.

This already exists in embryonic form and was used by the United States to justify its own leadership. It needs to be made more coherent and clearer.

Its basic slogan states that "universalism" should no longer be understood as the equality of all before the law, regardless of origin, wealth and religion, but as the equal treatment that everyone can enjoy in whatever country they travel to. From this point of view, the real enemy is no longer the disorder and insecurity that it engenders, but the States that are supposed to protect us and abusively create differences between us according to our nationalities; excellent doctrine for a supranational State! (the US federal state, then the European federal state).

- At the sociological level, this ideology indiscriminately supports any form of migration (because it allows the disappearance of borders between men) and any gender confusion (because it allows the disappearance of inequalities based on physical differences).
- At the economic level, it militates for the free circulation of capital (which cannot be hindered by States) and the globalisation of trade (because it binds people through trade).
- On the military level, it supports the interference of the "international community" in "non-globalized states" (because they are resistant to the New Order) and the use of non-state armed forces (because some states must disappear).
- At the political level, it supports any global cause such as the fight against human responsibility for global warming. Ultimately, it rejects International Law (i.e., agreed upon by nations) in order to replace it with Global Law (i.e., binding on all) [1].

If the issue of migration has become taboo for the European elites after the failure of Chancellor Merkel in 2015, all other points are commonly accepted.
- Gender confusion, part of the gender parity and which continues today with the development of a transgender model. No one dares to observe any longer that parity in the Parliamentary Assemblies and Boards of Directors has not benefited the working classes at all, but only the elites. It is not clear why the shift from the integration of transsexuals to an apology for gender uncertainty will advance anything.
- The free movement of capital is one of the "Four Freedoms" established since the Single European Act (1986). It allows large companies to avoid national taxes, which is why everyone deplores it, but no one wants to abolish it. The globalisation of trade has destroyed millions of jobs in Europe and has begun to erode the middle classes [2].
- Military interference in non-globalized states is at the heart of the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski doctrine adopted by the United States in 2001. It is astounding that Western elites still seem to ignore it. For example, the release of a wide-ranging survey on the 18-year "failure" of the United States to pacify Afghanistan has generated a great deal of comment. But absolutely no one has dared to say that far from being a failure, it was the mission assigned in 2001 to the Pentagon by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld; 18 years that the "Endless War" has been going on in more and more theatres of operation [3].
The use of non-state military forces has peaked with jihadist organizations. One of them -Daesh- even went so far as to take over a non-recognized state. It continues today with the official support of the European Union to a terrorist organization, the PKK, provided that it operates in Syria and not in Turkey [4].
- The fight against the human cause of global warming is first and foremost a policy aimed at regenerating the automotive industry at the end of the cycle: switching from petrol engines to electric motors. The fact that Milutin’s theory Milanković (position of the Earth in relation to the Sun) is sufficient to explain the current changes does not prevent the claim that it has been "scientifically proven" that they are due to human industry [5].

The worst is to come with the invention of a Global Law.

Ignoring the different legal traditions in the world, the European Union subsidizes the International Criminal Court. After having long been a tool of European colonialism in Africa, the Court intends to assert the superiority of Europeans over all other human beings.

After having unsuccessfully attempted to try Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi for crimes against humanity, the Court hopes to try Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for resisting the Muslim Brotherhood and Israel for its crimes in the Palestinian Territories. Since Europeans have no particular concern for the Rohingas, the Syrians or the Palestinians, how can we fail to observe that the Union is taking the opposite tack from the United States and trying to assert itself as the defender of the Muslims, even if it means selling off its tradition of secularity? [6]

The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, announced the forthcoming creation of a comprehensive sanctions regime against human rights violations, as called for by the European Parliament last April (B8-0181/2019). Inspired by the US model of the Global Magnitski Act [7], the European Union will, like a teacher, teach Good and Evil and award good and bad points to everyone.

The meaning of the words changes. From the sixteenth to the eighteenth century, universalism enjoined to fight against colonialism. In the 19th and 20th centuries, it dictated "the duty of the white man" and authorized the mandates of "developed" countries to help the "underdeveloped". In the 21st century, it became the justification for neo-colonialism.

President Ursula van des Leyen summed up her programme for the restoration of European domination with these words: The time has come, "We must use Force".

Thierry Meyssan
=========

[Eric J (Viking)]

Dozens of people have been killed in a crush in the south-eastern Iranian city of Kerman, where hundreds of thousands of mourners have gathered for the burial of the military commander Qassem Suleimani, according to state media.

Local TV reports said 35 people had been killed and another 48 injured. A video purportedly from the scene showed a number of mourners lying prostrate on the floor with others rubbing their chests or administering CPR. Some of those on the ground had their faces covered with jackets or scarves.

Mourners had filled the streets of Suleimani’s home town on Tuesday morning in numbers that appeared to match the huge turnouts in Baghdad, Tehran, Qom, Mashhad and Ahvaz in recent days to say farewell to the commander of the Revolutionary Guards external operations force, who was killed by a US drone strike in Iraq on Friday.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/07/qassem-suleimani-burial-iran-general-home-town

Viking

[Pam]

Well, if that doesn't add insult to injury I don't know what does. Looks like the US has has really done it this time. I have been watching Trump's actions from the vantage point of his Narcissistic personality. It has allowed him to withstand criticism at almost a superhuman level, but I think we are now witnessing the dark side of his Narcissistic, grandiose personality. This drone killing personifies what everyone hates about the US government in real time. Absolutely oblivious to the cultural ramification of martyring Soleimani. What was done was so disrespectful of both Iraq and Iran and probably the bulk of the middle east, except the Israeli government of course..

Where Americans are divided in all sorts of trivial ways, with little to no moral convictions to guide them that does not seem to be the case in Iran,whether we agree with that conviction or not.

[Praxis]

I don't think Trump is able to withdraw from anything. I think Trump was knowingly fully compromised soon after his inauguration. That Trump would have escaped the political blackmail system is a long shot IMO. In addition, and in my opinion, he is allowed a "win" here or there and probably wins in November. Trump accelerates the massive breakdown in continuity of folks in the US. Trump polarizes even further a massively polarized world. He's not the only entity playing this role.

The goal is a one world totalitarian government. The goal is to separate type one human beings (the managerial elite) from the rest including genetically. While type one humans are able to develop all aspects of their being which importantly includes their physical body vehicles, type two human beings (the rest of us) are subjugated to every possible diminishment of capablity in matching a type one human.


So here is where you narrative falls apart.

WHo had the dirt on Trump? Probably Epstein. And it turns out Sulemani himself probably had dirt on Trump Azerbaijan property. What happened to both of these dudes? Dead by federal government.

A totalitarian government keeps people seeking asylum in concentration camps at the border and separates families in the procsss.

A totalitarian government continues to occupy Iraq Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay just to name a few.

You can only black mail dirty people.

This is why the CIA uses the honeypot.

You know why you couldnt label me as a pedophile rapist who hung out with pedophile rapists? Cause I dont run in those circles.

You know who did run in Epstein circle? Trump.

This is what I am talking about living in different realities. Literally the dude Sammy is defending has a quote about Epstein liking girls young but somehow he is good dude fighting for the little guy.

He literally floated holding a NATO summit at what he calls" The southern White house."

I have that tweet if you dont believe the southern white house part.

Say it with me again

He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.

[Chester]

Praxis, because you either do not read my posts or because your bias so massively clouds your ability to understand my posts, your replies to my posts are senseless but worse, present a reinterpretation of my post that has no resemblance to the post I made at all whatsoever. Re-read my post then re-read yours, if possible, without what appears to be a strong bias against me or against what you interpret my posts to say even though they don't.

[Ernie Nemeth]

The religious hegemony in Iran is directly due to foreign meddling from decades ago. It has nothing to do with Trump. Wipe out one of the two major parties and you would have the same sort of situation in the USA.

That general was a terrorist. That regime is our enemy. They would kill every one of us with no mercy.

And Iran has a huge military. The only reason they are not invading other countries is because of the economic sanctions they have lived under for the past 40 years. Like Cuba and others on their list, the west has kept the lid shut tight on Iran and its ability to prosper from economic trade with other countries.

Their conviction is anachronistic and brutal.

[Praxis]

Praxis, because you either do not read my posts or because your bias so massively clouds your ability to understand my posts, your replies to my posts are senseless but worse, present a reinterpretation of my post that has no resemblance to the post I made at all whatsoever. Re-read my post then re-read yours, if possible, without what appears to be a strong bias against me or against what you interpret my posts to say even though they don't.

No I read it again just now and I stand by my words.

Further, You brought WOO WOO to a concrete discussion. I find your TYPE 1 and TYPE 2 human conversation as being apologetic to the Status quo. You might well have points here. They are irrelevant to practical geo political considerations. Like I said: What you believe about aliens doesn't affect me and my family but allowing the DHS to hold and prevent Iranian Americans from traveling freely does directly affect me.

I find your initial paragraph very problematic because it is reinforcing memes which I have already dissected in my earlier post. He can withdraw. You should rephrase it maybe by saying "He would experience a political problem as most of his base is actually very much pro empire if he withdrew from occupations."

Which could be true.

But when you say " I don't think Trump is able to withdraw from anything." It helps people think he has no power when, say it with me:

He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.

Sammy, if I am engaging you it is because I still care about you and your opinions. I am sorry for being direct but I grow tired of decades long occupations based on 9-11 which we all know wasnt what we were told. NEVER FORGET THIS. Notice I dont engage Q anon people. . .

[Chester]

Praxis, you, as all, are entitled to your opinion. What I do not believe you, or anyone, is entitled to is a blatant mischaracterization of my posts which you have done twice on this thread. You remind me of a member at another site who followed the same MO. I am left with having one option only... that which is the utilization of a feature I am thankful is offered on this forum.

[Pam]

The religious hegemony in Iran is directly due to foreign meddling from decades ago. It has nothing to do with Trump. Wipe out one of the two major parties and you would have the same sort of situation in the USA.

That general was a terrorist. That regime is our enemy. They would kill every one of us with no mercy.

And Iran has a huge military. The only reason they are not invading other countries is because of the economic sanctions they have lived under for the past 40 years. Like Cuba and others on their list, the west has kept the lid shut tight on Iran and its ability to prosper from economic trade with other countries.

Their conviction is anachronistic and brutal.


I never accused Trump of creating religious hegemony. Look at the bigger picture. Let's look at the brilliant analogy created by Tangri on another thread:
[QUOTE]The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) was killed by Russian drones at Mexican airport.

Would you find that behavior acceptable from all governments? If they don't like what someone does or thinks, wait till they are traveling , create a shoddy excuse and drone strike them. And if the country where you did it doesn't like it, threaten and bully them as well. This kind of behavior is grandiose and insane.

[Chester]

If I jump in and dissect Tangri's analogy, which would reveal it to be a poor one, there will be some readers who cheer my post and draw false conclusions (as Praxis has done elsewhere in this QUDS thread) as to my personal views related to Trump, his actions and what may underlie my political ideology as it stands today... and their will be readers who hate it because by pointing out the details of Tangri's anology while lining them up with the details of the Suleimani assassination, false implications can be drawn that I am somehow a supporter of Trump and/or US interventionist policies.

I had taken a few risks in the other thread in hopes that readers might see the bigger picture forces at play and pull their heads out of Trumps backside enough to understand how their reactions are simply feeding the monster.

One observation - the polarization I pointed to in the other thread has rendered common sense discussions of issues, issue by issue, a waste of time, especially with regards to US politics. The dynamic we are now experiencing is pure "side a" vs "side b" and all are required to agree with all policy positions of either side a or side b or you are attacked as being in alignment with the other side and/or their symbol (like the Orange Man has become, like Greta has become, etc,).

It is my opinion (and I would like to cite the almost three decades of the work of David Icke as just one of many proponents of this same "bigger picture view") that the public has played right into the hands of the managerial elite who control both sides via hidden layers behind the scenes and above "the Trumps" and their counterparts.

[silvanelf]

What's going on there??

First of all, I would expect Assad visiting Putin and not the other way around. You can see that Shoigu (Russian Defense Minister) is there as well. By the way, today Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas -- therefore this visit is pretty unusual.


https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/3EA0/production/_110423061_058eb8f4-89c8-4c7b-b119-3e09d51c8321.jpg
source:https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler-dunya-51024884



Putin makes rare visit to Syria, meets Assad

Russian President Vladimir Putin shakes hands with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, Syria, on January 7, 2020. AFP/Syrian presidency
(https://s.france24.com/media/display/e9e42064-315d-11ea-b2cf-005056a98db9/w:980/p:16x9/20200107-poutine-assad.jpg)
Russian President Vladimir Putin visited Syria on Tuesday and met with officials including President Bashar Assad, Syrian state media and a Kremlin spokesman reported.

--- snip ---

https://www.france24.com/en/20200107-putin-makes-rare-visit-to-syria-meets-assad

[ExomatrixTV]

The Media’s Not-So-Secret Iran Agenda:

64VN9v0Hljc
The media continue to lose their minds over Trump’s killing of Soleimani, the US takes protective steps to prevent further Iranian aggression, and John Bolton signals he could testify in the impeachment trial.

[uzn]

Sometimes a picture says more than words

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KINf07p4M40/XSS6s9A86MI/AAAAAAAFjvY/72RI_L6fELoTNcFoZIrh-Mz1TLNmwV3TACLcBGAs/s1600/66007500_10156514025253036_1997320308452753408_n.jpg

https://img-comment-fun.9cache.com/media/aqnR5MY/aM71jG4g_700w_0.jpg

[ExomatrixTV]

ABC, MEDIA COVERAGE ON IRAN: Why is a TERRORIST like Qassem Soleimani being treated like a hero?
pYAX1U-9bac
Trump: Soleimani was a monster
CNVDU3L7EeM


I share above NOT because I agree with all they say ... but to balance the pro-Iran Liberal MSM counter-propaganda ... I want to study all (BS) sides!

[Ron Mauer Sr]

The answer depends on which side you are on. Unfortunately, one man's "terrorist" is another man's "patriot".

[atman]

Sometimes a picture says more than words

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KINf07p4M40/XSS6s9A86MI/AAAAAAAFjvY/72RI_L6fELoTNcFoZIrh-Mz1TLNmwV3TACLcBGAs/s1600/66007500_10156514025253036_1997320308452753408_n.jpg



And sometimes a little research provides more truth than a picture.

That picture of Trump with Epstein is a composite image. In other words, a F-A-K-E.

Trump is seen kissing the head of his daughter Ivanka at the grand opening of the Harley Davidson Cafe in New York City, in 1993.

Epstein (from a picture taken in 2005) was added digitally to infer the kind of perverse propaganda that you seem to be intent on peddling.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1150891/Ivanka-trump-news-latest-jeffrey-epstein-Donald-Trump-Us-president-viral-fake-usa-news

[mountain_jim]

Sometimes a picture says more than words

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KINf07p4M40/XSS6s9A86MI/AAAAAAAFjvY/72RI_L6fELoTNcFoZIrh-Mz1TLNmwV3TACLcBGAs/s1600/66007500_10156514025253036_1997320308452753408_n.jpg

https://img-comment-fun.9cache.com/media/aqnR5MY/aM71jG4g_700w_0.jpg

Sometime a picture says you did not do your research before posting fake crap. :thumbsdown:

(Don't expect MSM tactics here at Avalon.)

in one search - determined faked - plus that's his daughter.

later edit - atman post above (just) beat me calling this out.

https://apnews.com/afs:Content:6155870094



CLAIM: Photo shows Donald Trump kissing the head of a young Ivanka Trump next to a Harley Davidson motorcycle and billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, who was arrested Saturday on child sex trafficking charges.
AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The 1993 photograph of Trump and Ivanka next to a motorcycle has been manipulated to include Epstein, a 66-year-old hedge fund manager who was charged Monday with sexually abusing dozens of girls at his New York and Florida homes. He pleaded not guilty Monday to the sex trafficking charges. Epstein was registered as a sex offender after entering into a 2008 plea deal to avoid prosecution on federal charges of molesting teenage girls.

THE FACTS: The photo was taken Oct. 19, 1993, at the grand opening of the Harley-Davidson Cafe in New York City, when Trump was best known for his real estate dealings. Celebrity photographer Ron Galella is credited with taking the picture, which can be found in the Getty Images archives.
The image was manipulated to add Epstein, standing in a blue pullover and jeans. It has been circulating widely on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Some social media posts include the caption “it is NOT normal” with the altered image.

[muxfolder]

So WW3 is about to come. I was waiting for civil war 2 in US. It seemed more likely than war with Iran. Well, guess now we all have to participate then.

[Kamikaze]

delete it all.

[alexius]

There will not be another War. Soleimani was a strong opponent of the Belt & Road Initiative, and that with Communist China in the driving seat. Soleimani also spoke out about his dislikes of Israel and was one of the few real threats as a person of influence, still alive in the Middle East. He had to be erased. Nothing personal, it’s just business. Irani president Hassan Rouhani was more than likely involved. The bankers make sure that Rouhani is being looked after. There is a lot more to say about Soleimani, and this does not even cover a small portion of it.

China, Russia and Israel. Israel has been sharing technology with both Russia and China now for a long time. In fact it’s mostly tech stolen from the US. This is not well spoken about and seems to be of no interest for the mainstream media. And why this may be of a serious concern is because: Microsoft, Intel, Google, IBM, Apple, Amazon – And the list goes on. Some of them with design, fabrication and manufacturing in Israel. US just gave it away, with no interest of getting anything back. Makes you wonder doesn’t it.

China, Russia and Israel. All in the same bed. And Israel as the great ally of US. Something is very odd about all this.

I have not made comments here on Avalon for a while. Just been passing by, reading up on things from time to time. I do feel like this is an important subject but I can’t seem to find the right people to talk to about all this. Wish I could though.

The Talpiot Program: The key to understand Israel's power.
Unit 8200

I love you all. Blessings :heart:

Short video (2min31sec) about Israel’s Intel Arc Processor presented by Brendon O’Connell:
bqy-AUb5hWw

[Kryztian]

So WW3 is about to come. I was waiting for civil war 2 in US. It seemed more likely than war with Iran. Well, guess now we all have to participate then.

I am going to guess that it isn't ... yet. There might be some more skirmishes, but I don't think the media department of the military war complex (MSNBC, FOX & CNN) is fully done with its conditioning of Americans for war.

Remember after 9/11, the media was telling us how "we are now all united now" and the rifts that were created in the 2000 election debacle in Florida were healed? One needs a majority of people to support a war and the media made it seem like it was the unified will of the American people to go into Afghanistan and Iran. But right now the media is telling us that we are hopelessly divided. They've cultivated the knee jerk liberal reaction in some American that if Trump is for it, it must be bad (e.g. the reaction to Trumps talk with Kim.)

The Iranian (or Syrian, or both) war will wait until there is a Democrat in the White House. As with Trump, there will be knee-jerk conservatives who will oppose everything that the Dem president wants, but they will be conditioned to being Pro-War on Iran, thanks to the Trump years. Or perhaps another false flag will be used to "unify the will" of Americans into being pro-War. American will all be so happy that the pro and anti Trump divisions are erased if we can all just agree on a lovely little war.

When you are running a planet and hell bent on turning every nation into a colony whose wealth you can extort and people you can subjugate, it's especially important that you mind control the people of nation that has the most armaments and political influence, keeping them divided and bickering about stupid things, but uniting them on the important issues, like war. Nothing brings people together like a good old fashioned blood bath.

[Kamikaze]

delete it all.

[Gracy]

When you are running a planet and hell bent on turning every nation into a colony whose wealth you can extort and people you can subjugate, it's especially important that you mind control the people of nation that has the most armaments and political influence, keeping them divided and bickering about stupid things, but uniting them on the important issues, like war. Nothing brings people together like a good old fashioned blood bath.

Very well put. Nice and simple I like that.

The bloodbath has yet to be seen, at least for the average well insulated westerner.

[muxfolder]

There's an actual war going on right now. At least it seems to be so. Trump's going to speak.

E: Trumps not going to speak. Guess he will tweat like hell then.

[ExomatrixTV]

Video (https://www.infowars.com/video-iran-launches-missiles-at-iraq-military-base-housing-us-forces/): Iran Launches Missiles at Iraq Military Base Housing US Forces

[Chester]

My guess (which matches my hope) is that if the reports I just heard are true, all Iranian missiles missed their targets. And that suggests intention to miss.

Reminds me of Trumps "missile strike (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Shayrat_missile_strike)" on Syria.

The US has had plenty enough time to have responded and so far, has not... (Still has not and it is after 10:30 PM Eastern Time).

Still, it is (IMO) an actual war as muxfolder stated, but I would contend it has been raging since 1979 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis) and, in fact, going back to 1953 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat).

I think this is the key moment. If the US responds, I will conclude the hawks hold Trump hostage and that he doesn't have the guts to do the right thing which, IMO, would be not to respond and then, after the waters calm, announce a serious, time based withdrawal of all military personnel from Iraq - get 'em all out by election time.

I would add one "coincidence" - Bolton's veiled threat (https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/06/politics/john-bolton-testify-impeachment-subpoena/index.html) that emerged on Monday. Understand, too, that the Trump firing of Bolton did not change the advice he was receiving as far as Iran goes. It appears he's surrounded (his own fault) with the "same ole same ole" military industrial career folks, the "think tankers" and ideologues.

This is his Kennedy moment IMO.

[ExomatrixTV]

IRANIAN STRIKES ON USA? WAR?!? (Also Ask Me Anything) - Stefan Molyneux from Freedomain!
qbRSQACGXdM

[ExomatrixTV]

Sometimes a picture says more than words

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KINf07p4M40/XSS6s9A86MI/AAAAAAAFjvY/72RI_L6fELoTNcFoZIrh-Mz1TLNmwV3TACLcBGAs/s1600/66007500_10156514025253036_1997320308452753408_n.jpg




Dear @uzn (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/member.php?26345-uzn) study theese 2 ORIGINALS with your version combining them in to one (click on picture to enlarge):


42239<<< PLUS: >>> 42240 combined = 100% FAKE!


@uzn (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/member.php?26345-uzn) you are spreading DISINFO! :facepalm::tsk::shocked::suspicious::yell:

What is worse? ... those who spread manipulated doctored pictures to smear people or ... people who believe these pictures to be "true" without any FACT CHECKING without own research and helping to spread the BS.


cheers,
John Kuhles

[edina]

This may complicate matters:
1214756874324606977
https://twitter.com/NewsBreaking/status/1214756874324606977

It's Ukrainian. 180 passengers on board. Confirmed by AP
Iran state TV says Ukrainian airplane crashes near Tehran (https://apnews.com/2a253e68d45381f16b89edc5cc45bba1?utm_medium=AP&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter)

The AP article is claiming is was mechanical difficulties, but local reports are saying it was accidentally shot down.

And in case people missed this:
1214736614217469953
https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/1214736614217469953

[T Smith]

I find it very intriguing that the usual consortium of Trump-hating propagandists, i.e. mainstream media, is surprisingly neutral on this move to war. Surfing CNN, ABC, CBS, BBC, etc., I can't find any hate. What gives? Where is the doubt? The scandal? The outrage? Where is the disingenuous reporting on the disastrous foreign policy blunder typical of every other Trump decision? I don't mean to suggest the media is praising Trump; they just aren't hating on it, as they do 24/7 on every other piece of Trump reporting.

The lesson here is the Ministry of Truth can't even pretend to be consistent in their reporting? Trump rescuing drowning puppies from iceberg waters is summarily spun to a horrendous act of murderous animal abuse; were Trump to broker a peace accord between waring tribes of a thousand years, or avert a nuclear holocaust, the aforementioned observers would undoubtedly portray the Orange One as the second-coming of Adolph Hitler plotting apocalyptic and planetary doom. Yet, arguably, Trump's controversial and bold decision to assassinate a high-ranking Iranian general (and possibly escalating a very real war) should invite valid criticism from haters and supporters alike. Yet we hear nothing but crickets from the peanut gallery. In fact, the loudest criticism has been from his base (https://dailycaller.com/2020/01/06/ann-coulter-trump-different-iran-war/) Hmmm....

It is obvious that the Deep State and its Trump-hating faction of trolls and propagandists want this to escalate to full-blown war, but I still think they would take every opportunity in the process to be the hypocrites they are and condemn the move. We all know their motives, but are they really that transparent?

I have no idea how this will all play out. The whole situation is somehow analogous to children playing with matches and gasoline; I'm not saying Trump or the Iranians will not make a mistake, but I do believe (contrary to Deep State Hawks who are surprisingly silent on any criticism) that neither Trump nor Iran wants this war. All parties (save for Deep State) want a viable exit.

What we are seeing unfold could be nothing but theater, on both sides. Trump is surrounded by Hawks -- and his biggest detractors are Hawks (which is a very dangerous dynamic) -- but I'm hopeful he has the wherewithall to resist and understand this is all a trap.

Despite the hysteria in the media, the retaliation we've seen thus far from Iran is encouraging. It seems to me the missiles were launched to save face to create the necessary theater, but for all intents and purposes those missiles missed any target of significance and did not kill anyone.

The question is whether or not the Trump Administration will fall prey to the latest round of provocation--and perhaps even more dangerously--to the haters surrounding him who are now snuggling up to the Administration beating on the war drums and whispering sweet encouragements and blessings into his ear.

[shaberon]

Retaliation is ongoing.

6 ballistic missiles have hit Ain al-Asad an American airbase in Iraq. Fired from Tehran it's reported.

Yes, at Ain al Assad (https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13981018000060) has also been confirmed by Pentagon. Similar report for airbase at Erbil (https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13981018000065). I can't remember which one Trump was dictating Iraq pay for.

There are some claims Saudi royalty are fleeing their country for Europe.

Whole thing is in one part a farcical replay of Yemen War 1962 used to sell the Saudis an air force, and the region generally attributes its problems to Sykes-Picot. Seems pretty accurate to me.

All U. S. military is now blacklisted and any and all in the region are targets. Oh, and block Iran from the Security Council while you're at it.

Interestingly the military have also received the bloody flag of revenge which has not been raised in 1,200 years. That's a cultural turning point or an epoch or something.

[Eric J (Viking)]

Everyone on board a Ukrainian Boeing 737 died when it crashed shortly after take off from Iran's main international airport, according to Iran state television.

Iranian state television said there were 170 passengers and 10 crew on the plane when it came down due to what it described as "technical problems" after leaving the Imam Khomeini airport in Tehran en route to Kiev.

https://news.sky.com/story/airliner-with-180-people-on-board-crashes-after-taking-off-from-tehran-international-airport-11903445


Update

I wonder if insiders sold Boeing stock short earlier today?

WATCH ball of flame falling from the sky alleged to be Ukrainian plane that crashed in Iran
RT | Jan 7, 2020
https://on.rt.com/a8l4

[snip]

An unconfirmed video has emerged online purporting to show a Ukrainian Boeing 737 crashing soon after takeoff while en route back to Kiev from the Iranian capital.

Posted online late on Tuesday night, the brief video clip shows what is said to be a Ukraine International Airlines flight as it hit the ground, giving off a bright flash. There were reportedly some 167 passengers and crew on board; their fate remains unknown.

Ali Hashem علي هاشم
@alihashem_tv
#Breaking First footage of the Ukrainian airplane while on fire falling near #Tehran

Click link below to view.

https://twitter.com/alihashem_tv/status/1214756252749877250


Viking

[Eric J (Viking)]

Update from Jim Stone..

Jim Stone, Freelance Journalist

CONFIRMED: THE U.S. SHOT DOWN A UKRANIAN AIRLINER LEAVING TEHRAN AIRPORT

After Iran launched missiles at U.S. bases in Iraq, the U.S. declared Iran to be a "no fly zone" and 45 minutes into this, a Ukranian airliner lost transponder signal six miles after take off from Tehran air port and simply vanished, with no recorded anomalies in flight speed or altitude. Confirmed crashed. This means a weapons system likely downed the jet because it was flying perfectly normal and then POOF.

Viking

[Iloveyou]

Trump on Twitter:

”All is well! Missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq. Assessment of casualties & damages taking place now. So far, so good! We have the most powerful and well equipped military anywhere in the world, by far! I will be making a statement tomorrow morning”.

So just keep cool, people. All is well. We‘re only dominated by icecold, heartless robots chasing their mindless government / military minions around.

[shaberon]

The U. S. grounded any of their own civilian flights through it; they cannot put a "no fly zone" in Iran.

If weaponized, I would think Iran would be anxious to say it was shot. It's a confirmed 100% fatality rate, that's all so for. The spokesman (https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/08/615629/Iran-Ukraine-plane) says the victims were mostly Iranians.

Strange timing, but credit is probably due to Boeing.

[shaberon]

Iran (https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13981018000275) estimates they killed 80 and wounded 200 U. S. Army personnel.

It was a direct reprisal against the source of attack on Soleimani at the same time. They say many more than six missiles were not stopped:

Early reports said the radar systems and missile defense shields in Ein Al-Assad have failed to operate and intercept the Iranian missiles. Unofficial reports said the US army's central radar systems at Ein Al-Assad had been jammed by electronic warfare.

[Bill Ryan]

1214598750674571267
https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1214598750674571267
(https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1214598750674571267)
1214599490335911936
https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1214599490335911936

[ExomatrixTV]

Iran Attacks US Bases: War Hawks Cheer/ Trump to Make Statement
xb6zDmMQyzY

[Tintin]

Update

I wonder if insiders sold Boeing stock short earlier today?



A good question.

According to Craig Murray, in this post (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/01/a-window-for-peace/) today, and I quote:



"It is also worth noting the 2.8% rise in the Lockheed share price in the 24 hours immediately before the Soleimani assassination, outperforming the Dow about three times. That would bear investigation. Arms manufacturers and oil stocks have soared this last few days – and remember that nowadays the vast bulk of financial transactions are bets on the margins of movement, so vast fortunes will have been made out of all this."

Nothing new here of course, but, serves as a reminder all the same. I might add that the value of gold stock has also soared.

On the Iranian response
I am in agreement with the general thrust of Craig's argument in that article (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/01/a-window-for-peace/) where there may be cause for optimism, however tenuous it may be at present.

There can be little doubt that Iran's response was indeed a measured one given the need to at least culturally address the assassination.

Many an excellent point has been articulated very well on this thread - thanks to all, you know who you are - that there is every reason to suspect that Trump has been politically cornered to some extent, and, that if a more hawkish CEO/President had been in the driving seat, that this would have escalated very much more quickly than evidenced so far.

The situation still has the potential to remain fraught for some time yet, but, remaining as un-hysterical as possible, for now, may be the most sensible approach to take.

On the Boeing 'crash'/sabotage
On the face of it and remembering that the powers that are never do coincidences an immediate hunch might be that an antagonistic actor, for example Israel, could well have been behind that. That is admittedly conjecture, but, may have some legs.

[Chester]

On the Boeing 'crash'/sabotage
On the face of it and remembering that the powers that are never do coincidences an immediate hunch might be that an antagonistic actor, for example Israel, could well have been behind that. That is admittedly conjecture, but, may have some legs.

My list:

#1 - Though I don't believe in coincidences, it is within the possibility set that this was an accident. But there's a complication arising. Iran, so far, is refusing to send the black boxes to Boeing (the plane manufacturer). Who could blame them? Boeing is a US company. They have a "buyable" argument not to trust Boeing. But I can see another reason not to send the black boxes. And that is if #3 is in play...

#2 - The US and/or a US proxy using a technology that has never (yet) been used and may be hard to prove - done to send a message. Understand, I add to this "messaging" the fact that simultaneously several earthquakes also occurred in Iran (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=earthquakes+in+Iran), one near a nuclear plant. Another "coincidence?"

#3 - Iran did it themselves. Don't count this out as an act by Iran. Iran may have suspected some of the plane occupants were 'enemies of the state' and wanted to send a message to one or more spy agencies. They may have considered several factors including a perceived "messaging win" to blame the US (or Israel or Saudi Arabia). Sometimes two or three birds can be killed with one stone.

[Tintin]

The Talpiot Program: The key to understand Israel's power.
Unit 8200

I love you all. Blessings :heart:

Short video (2min31sec) about Israel’s Intel Arc Processor presented by Brendon O’Connell:
bqy-AUb5hWw

Thanks for that contribution alexius.

Yes, and as a related piece of interesting viewing very closely interlinked to this ongoing situation, this very well made documentary:

Zero Days Unit8200 (Talpiot Program) - 2016.
Running time: 1:53:51


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TmklVM6U0g

[Gracy]

1214598750674571267
https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1214598750674571267
(https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1214598750674571267)
1214599490335911936
https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1214599490335911936

I did some digging on the author of that tweet, David Reaboi, and came across some interesting results.

Reaboi is "Vice President for Strategic Communications at the Center for Security Policy", a Washington D.C. based think tank. I found it interesting that he coordinates messaging, here is his page there:
https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/author/imp_david_reaboi/

Now heres where it gets interesting. It looks like CSP (Center for Security Policy) is, surprise surprise, a neoconservative think tank, with such prominent neocon members from Bush's Iraq War 2 era as founder Frank Gaffney, and others:

Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney and John Bolton.
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Center_for_Security_Policy#Center_staff

Here's another interesting connection. Reaboi is also site founder of a group called Iran Truth (IranTruth.org). Here's a page that shows the tyoes of articles written there. Anything BUT down the middle investigative journalism:
https://irantruth.org/tag/ad/

A caption of one of his pieces, obviously not a fan or the Iran Deal:

Visit Iran: America’s Newest Ally


A deal that strengthens the theocratic regime in Tehran makes us complicit in its crimes against women, homosexuals and political prisoners.

Here's yet another interesting tidbit. A piece focused on Reaboi from yet another Iran regime change oriented group:
https://english.mojahedin.org/newsen/35295/campaign-launches-to-educate-americans-about-deal-with-iran

Who is the group the author is writing on behalf of? I didn't recognize the "People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran" (PMOI) on the cover page, but upon clicking the author's name it all became very clear, and quite familiar:

It's actually (PMOI/MEK). MEK ring any bells?
https://english.mojahedin.org/a/098ec0f8-87eb-4227-9d24-80029cb617ea

Which brought me full circle, back to the initial article I came across in starting this lil odyssey. An Iran regime change group called "California Society for Democracy in Iran". Snips from the piece:


The participants called for tougher sanctions on Tehran, underscoring that the only solution for the Iran crisis is a regime change by Iranian people and the organized resistance. They expressed support for the 10-point plan articulated by Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the Iranian resistance's President-elect.

Remind anybody of CIA backed Juan Guido in Venezuela?


The convention urged the Obama administration to uphold the US commitment to safety and security of thousands of Iranian dissidents at Liberty, members of the principal Iranian opposition movement the Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/MEK), through returning them to Ashraf, their home of 26 years.

And there we have (PMOI/MEK), I had missed that first time around.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/california-society-for-democracy-in-iran-house-members-reject-myth-of-rouhanis-moderation-call-for-tougher-sanctions-urge-us-to-ensure-safety-and-security-of-iranian-dissidents-in-iraq-and-their-return-to-ashraf-220145771.html

So who is (PMOI/MEK)? It's a complex history, and a violent history, but their overall goal for decades has been regime change in Iran. Check them out.

Bottom line is we need to be mindful of who we are listening to, and what their agendas might be.

[Iyakum]

A question I'm asking myself.

Iran is unable to attack the US from Iran, the US is too far away for that. But Iran could go on to do pinpricks on US military facilities, as the rocket attacks yesterday proved. Now what's Trump's target? Why doesn't he pull the troops out of Iraq? Can it be that Trump wants the death of Soleymani to keep Iran from attacking US targets in Iraq?

If my assumption is correct ... (which need not be). Then it could be that Trump will not withdraw the US troops. Trump would further provoke Iran to attack US targets in Iraq. Sometime or somehow Iraq will have to answer that. If I interpret the situation correctly, Israel's closest ally would be Iran's next target. So the provocation remains. The answer will follow, Trump, Netanyahu and possibly Iraq who has no choice but to answer it, all go to war together against Iran, ...

I suspect that Trump and the United States will not attack Iran on their own. I don't know if the US is militarily strong enough to attack and hold Iran on its own. Because if this should happen, a change of power will naturally also be sought. Because the EU will certainly not take part in the war. So Trump has no choice but to provoke the mullahs. He wants to replace Iran and the mullahs' regime. But for that he needs allies who are already on the way.

As I said, that's just a guess. Provocations are part of war games like the weapons and soldiers who have to play along ... unfortunately.

[silvanelf]

On the Boeing 'crash'/sabotage
On the face of it and remembering that the powers that are never do coincidences an immediate hunch might be that an antagonistic actor, for example Israel, could well have been behind that. That is admittedly conjecture, but, may have some legs.


Some more details -- the emphasis is mine:


Hours after Iran had launched the missiles a Ukrainian airliner crashed three minutes after it had taken off from Tehran airport. All 176 people on board died. The passengers were mostly from Iran, Canada and the Ukraine. The airplane was a three years old Boeing 737-800 NG operated by Ukrainian International Airlines, the country's flag carrier.

Video shows the burning airliner coming down on a glide path. Photos from the crash side show shrapnel like impacts on the fuselage. The evidence is consistent with an uncontained turbine disc rupture but other potential causes can no be ruled out. The incident will be investigated like all other airliner crashes.

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/01/irans-missile-launch-against-two-us-bases-in-iraq-calls-trumps-bluff.html#more

[edina]

Bottom line is we need to be mindful of who we are listening to, and what their agendas might be.Does this now mean that the many, many people who are expressing the viewpoint of the woman in the tweets are no longer legitimate?

And therefore ought to be dismissed out of hand?

Does this also apply to the women from My Stealthy Freedom?

Iran has claimed that they too, are MEK, and that is the reason they are beaten, sent to prison, and treated as terrorists.

There's been a point of view shared in this thread by Elijah J. Magnier, who self identifies with what he calls "The Axis of Resistance". (What the Freedom Fighters of Iran, and other ME countries, call the "mullahs regime".)

Many people who read Moon of Alabama also follow Elijah and are informed by his point of view.

That's how I discovered him, in the comments section of Moon of Alabama. His blog posts are very insightful to the mindset of the people who consider themselves part of the Axis of Resistance.

The logic, to understand and take into account the bias of people when considering the overall picture applies to all sources, in my opinion.

It's an educational process to learn situational awareness, when looking at information.

There have been so many people expressing the woman's point of view.

And have been expressing it since the 80's.

I feel it's an important voice to hear, and THANK YOU Bill, for sharing those tweets.

[T Smith]

Below is President Trump's address to the nation. This suggests to me Iran's response was theater, that the United States will not retaliate (other than ramping up sanctions), and neither party wants to escalate hot-war tensions.

LLTDTVEqOXo

[Satori]

Below is President Trump's address to the nation. This suggests to me Iran's response was theater, that the United States will not retaliate (other than ramping up sanctions), and neither party wants to escalate hot-war tensions.


https://www.cbsnews.com/video/special-report-trump-addresses-u-s-strike-that-killed-top-iran-general/

The video is dated 1/3/2020 and is not the address Trump gave to the Nation today.

[edina]

Today's address is posted on Trump's twitter feed, https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1214946620053184513

It hasn't been posted in YouTube video on the White House YT channel yet.

President Trump Delivers Remarks (https://youtu.be/LLTDTVEqOXo)

I feel T Smith's comments probably still apply, most likely he heard today's address but inadvertently posted a previous one here.

(Oops, already corrected within T Smith's post)

Please feel free to delete this one, it's redundant.

[T Smith]

Below is President Trump's address to the nation. This suggests to me Iran's response was theater, that the United States will not retaliate (other than ramping up sanctions), and neither party wants to escalate hot-war tensions.


https://www.cbsnews.com/video/special-report-trump-addresses-u-s-strike-that-killed-top-iran-general/

The video is dated 1/3/2020 and is not the address Trump gave to the Nation today.

Noted, and thank you; I inserted the correct video...

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Yep. My comments apply to the address today, 1/8. I just clicked on the wrong video and inserted. I made the changes above as well. Thanks Edina!

[Gracy]

Hi edina.

Well first off, I can only speak to the people in this one tweet. The author of that tweet (David Reabol) is up to his eyebrows in groups dedicated to Iranian regime change, and I simply pointed that fact out.

Take it for what you will in that single case.

Are there others? I would certainly imagine so, so I went pecking around again. The very next group you laid out for us all to have a look at was "My Stealthy Freedom". Sounds innocuous enough, and it mentions freedom in the title so what could possibly be the problem?

"My Stealthy Freedom", championed by a parent group called National Democratic Institute (NDI).


Masih Alinejad, Women’s Rights Activist, Author and Journalist (Iran), who is the founder of the ‘My Stealthy Freedom’ campaign in Iran to resist compulsory wearing of the hijab.
https://www.ndi.org/our-stories/ndis-35-anniversary-gala-reaffirms-importance-democracy


So (NDI), with Mr. and Mrs. Pro Establishment themselves Joe and Mika there as the head celebs. Who is "National Democratic Institute" (NDI)?


In 2005, Venezuelanalysis.com reported an interview with former CIA operative Philip Agee[1] In the interview, Agee described some of the background of how he understood the purpose behind the establishment of agencies such as the NDI.

According to Agee, the CIA had in the past supported "brutal military dictatorships in all of the Cono Sur [Southern Cone]—Uruguay, Argentina, Paraguay, Brazil, and of course, in Chile with Pinochet". However a "process of new thinking began in the upper echelons of the makers of US foreign policy, the new thinking being that these military dictatorships, with all the repression and the disappearances and death squads and so forth, might not be the best way to preserve US interests in Latin America, or other areas for that matter".

Agee goes on to claim that the "new thinking was that the preservation of US interests could better be achieved through the election of democratic governments formed by political elites who identify with the political class in the United States". These were not the popular forces, but the traditional political classes in Latin America, such as the ‘Oligarchies.’

Agee continues by saying "So the new American program, which became known as “Project Democracy,” was adopted and United States policy would seek to promote free, fair, transparent democratic elections but in such a way that it would assure that power went to the elites and not to the people".
https://powerbase.info/index.php/National_Democratic_Institute_for_International_Affairs#History

This group runs shoulder to shoulder with another similar group,
"International Republican Institute" (IRI):


The International Republican Insitute (IRI) is one of the components of the National Endowment for Democracy by which it seeks to influence political outcomes and civic society in lesser developed countries around the world[1]. Its efforts are to channel politics and civic society to promote a neoliberal economic and political model; NED/IRI also engage in activities previously performed by the CIA.[2] IRI is mainly funded by U.S. State Department, U.S. Agency for International Development and the National Endowment for Democracy.[3] IRI is loosely affiliated to the Republican party – which doesn’t provide any of its funding.[4]
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index. php/International_Republican_Institute

In turn, there is also another group running shoulder to shoulder with this former two, maybe we all will recognize them better by their recent meddling around in Venezuela. (I'm quite sure Hervé
would from his extensive research into that one)

"National Endowment for Democracy" (NED):

ORIGINS

In the aftermath of World War II, faced with threats to our democratic allies and without any mechanism to channel political assistance, U.S. policy makers resorted to covert means, secretly sending advisers, equipment, and funds to support newspapers and parties under siege in Europe. When it was revealed in the late 1960’s that some American PVO’s were receiving covert funding from the CIA to wage the battle of ideas at international forums, the Johnson Administration concluded that such funding should cease, recommending establishment of “a public-private mechanism” to fund overseas activities openly.

On Capitol Hill, Congressman Dante Fascell (D, FL) introduced a bill in April, 1967 to create an Institute of International Affairs, an initiative that would authorize overt funding for programs to promote democratic values. Although the bill did not succeed, it helped lead to discussions within the Administration and on Capitol Hill concerning how to develop new approaches to the ideological competition then taking place between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.
https://www.ned.org/about/history/

Might we see a trend with these three sister groups? All taking over for former CIA operations, taking these operations from covert, to overt.

How do we know for sure these groups are intimately connected?


NED, NDI, IRI, CIPE AND SOLIDARITY CENTER WELCOME INCREASED FUNDING FROM CONGRESS

NED and our four core grantees are deeply gratified that the U.S. Congress has shown strong bipartisan support for our work with a substantial increase in NED’s annual appropriation.
https://www.ned.org/

Now to be clear this doesn't necessarily mean everyone associated with these groups a bad actor, no more than it necessarily means every intelligence operative is a bad actor.

Even nefarious groups have good people, and also good people can easily get caught up in things they don't understand, or even want to understand because said group is supporting their efforts, but don't you think it's important to at least be aware of such covert operations operating under the guise of freedom and democracy, right under our very noses?

And how they use people, media, social media, and much much more, to further their aims?

[edina]

Am I to take it then, that you feel we ought to be dismissive of what everyday people on the street are expressing.

People are saying the same of the Hong Kong protests, calling it a color revolution.

And the same is said of the French Yellow Vest's protests.

I think my point is that anyone's point of view can be debunked or tied in some manner to the CIA, or some other "nefarious" organization.

Does that make the experiences that people are describing any less valid?

One of the ways I thought of to help me to discern in this environment of the "fog" of information war, because it's happening in all directions from many factions, is I look to see what and how the Western media covers it.

The protests supported by Western media are probably more likely to be what the status quo, controlling elite, George Soros, Open Society organization paid for protests want the people to see.

The ones not covered by Western media, or covered in a negative light, may be more genuine.

What's genuine here and what's not?

I think this is going to be the crises of the everyday person on the street in coming months and years.

Did Iran shut down all outside communication during the recent protests?

Were people killed, during that process? (About 1500 people killed, the media is not covering it.)

Are women beaten and imprisoned because they have the audacity to chose NOT to wear a hijab, in Iran?

It's probably also helpful for people to get a better sense of the long history of the situation?

There are a lot of "experts" here, maybe their information can be helpful in unpacking the enormity of it all.

[Bluegreen]

Re: Posts #163 - #171

This is some good work Gracy
Your voice and respect for others are appreciated
edina - same thing
Thank you for posting

[mountain_jim]

I have not had time to listen to speech - did he really say all this?

(and I welcome fact checking on his claims but I remember the pallets of cash quite well - also saw videos where pallets were stored in Red Cross warehouses later.)

I've always wondered about those pallets of cash and expect more Obama-corruption-related information to come out related to that at some point.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/01/trump-goes-there-the-missiles-fired-last-night-at-us-were-paid-for-by-the-funds-given-to-iran-by-the-obama-administration-video/




President Trump addressed the nation Wednesday morning following the Iranian missile attacks that hit US facilities in Iraq.

The President called out Barack Obama for the sham nuke deal that gave Iran $150 billion.

Trump also blasted Obama for the additional $1.8 billion in cash that he delivered to Iran in unmarked cargo planes on wooden pallets.

President Trump said the missiles that were fired last night were funded by the Obama Administration.

The garbage nuke deal wasn’t worth the paper is was written on (Obama never required Iranian leaders to sign the nuke deal).

The Obama Admin admitted that the Iran nuke deal wasn’t “an executive agreement” or even a “signed document.”

The Iranians laughed at Obama and fired off ballistic missiles many times breaching the so-called nuke deal.

Iran shipped 30 tons of yellow cake (uranium ore) to a facility in Isfahan last January, which if enriched could provide material to make atomic bombs.

[shaberon]

The casualty reports were probably saber rattling.

This, however, from NPR, represents what happened to at least five buildings at Ain al Asad:

https://www.almasdarnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/photo_2020-01-08_21-19-18-1080x608.jpg




As for the plane, at first:

Kashani, the public relations official at Imam Khomeini International Airport, said the crash had not affected traffic at the port and that all other flights were taking place according to schedule.

But by this point most of the world is voluntarily avoiding the region.

[Chester]

Looks like it is all simmering down. If so, this will go down as a Trump positive for a majority of those who go out and vote in 300 days. I, personally, will only be pleased if soon there's a plan for withdrawal of troops but I am also a realist and know this will depend on several parties feeling comfortable that Iraq (and not Iran) will decide Iraq's destiny.

[edina]

Looks like it is all simmering down. If so, this will go down as a Trump positive for a majority of those who go out and vote in 300 days. I, personally, will only be pleased if soon there's a plan for withdrawal of troops but I am also a realist and know this will depend on several parties feeling comfortable that Iraq (and not Iran) will decide Iraq's destiny.

I would like to include that Iran doesn't get weaponized nuclear technology.

I feel people underestimate how dangerous that would be.

If Trump is doing what I think he is doing, all of this, plus the freedom for the Iranian people and stability in the region may be within reach.

[apokalypse]

TG3hw1fNQJA

Ben is spot on comes to Iran thing, i thought there gonna be a war and middle east topic are not my thing but he said days ago and research for myself Iran doesn't want go to war also Trump aswell, media overhype this **** and they want a war.

there's a theory go around Iran want to kill Sole guy for various reason...

[shaberon]

Looks like it is all simmering down. If so, this will go down as a Trump positive for a majority of those who go out and vote in 300 days. I, personally, will only be pleased if soon there's a plan for withdrawal of troops but I am also a realist and know this will depend on several parties feeling comfortable that Iraq (and not Iran) will decide Iraq's destiny.

Yeah, the "moment" seems to have gone by; I doubt any side really wants open widescale conflict.

The more reliable reports seem to be saying the air bases were given enough warning that everyone could go in the bomb shelter.

The thing is they have shown pretty accurate destruction, at range, at either a speed that is too fast, or, with their own jamming equipment, and air defense failed to do anything, with advance notice. Two of twenty-two missiles failed to detonate, but that still makes 20/22 hits at the two sites.

Since they are prepared to use this, it seems to me that military pressure is not exactly diminishing. Apparently Baghdad HQ is now in Kuwait. One of the Syrian posts was abandoned.

The Syrian adventure showed the "intelligence war" or "Spring conflict" no longer works, and this latest exchange makes "show of force" take a serious beating. I am not sure what this means to voters, but, it is not a grand future for Unipolar Dominance.

[ExomatrixTV]

1215117046272253952

[ExomatrixTV]

LARA LOGAN: Mainstream Media Coverage of Iran Conflict, Qassem Soleimani Lacks Context:
fifIHY5zi38

[GMB1961]

And here I was watching my country burn to the ground over the Christmas period hoping beyond hope that maybe this 2020 year would be different than previous years and a level of raised consciousness would finally replace the need to "kill or be killed" and it would seem that us and the planet we live on are still in its infancy in regards to being able to live together as one ( John Lennon).
Imagine that!

[aceninja]

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1212934206986293248

America just declared war on Iran.

We shall see if they accept.

So much for Trump being the anti war anti imperialism candidate.

The people who look the other way on this war mongering disgust me.

Welcome to the new year.

Hello! I just wanted to shed light on an underlying issue that most people seem to be ignoring / unaware of.

Iran and the US have been fighting via proxy for years now.

I believe the threat from North Korea (Christmas Gift) was a misdirect from the attack Iran was already planning on New Year's Eve. North Korea, Iran, Russia, and China are all coordinated against the US and its allies. Iran could have not invaded that US embassy in Baghdad, Iraq and they knew the US would respond to such a provocation.

I know people like to turn America into a punching bag for any conflict anywhere in the world, but the truth is, US only has bases in countries where people want the US to have bases. Trust me, the people of the US would rather be isolationists again, but there are people who care about getting involved in conflicts because the US military has the power to change the tide of conflict. The country gets morally guilted for inaction like in Syria, and gets dragged into conflicts that sometimes do not benefit it. If the US had no need to do business in the middle east, there would be no need to use military in order to secure its interests in oil and natural resources.

Fortunately, renewable energy, electric vehicles, and Canadian tar sands have dramatically reduced US dependence on the middle east for crude oil, which is actually bad for business in the middle east. I believe they don't actually care about their own people, but they care more about appeasing them to stay in power so they can continue to profit.

Here's the thing, the ruling class there actually has financial interest in conflict. The US benefits because oil is purchased in US dollars. The UN's law for proportionate military response actually encourages these never ending wars, but it also prevents us from destroying the planet with war.

The US is the world's reserve currency which keeps funds flowing, and the oil cartels in the middle east has oil which is purchased in US dollars. This is a symbiotic relationship that allows for a perpetual war. When electric vehicles become ubiquitous, dependence on oil in the middle east cartels will be virtually eliminated, thus breaking the cycle. This can also lead to war as well, but we'll see.

Ironically, Iran wants to wipe Israel (not the biggest fan of them either) off the map which is pretty aggressive, so they are no saints either. They have proxy militias that fight for their interests so they have plausible deniability.

Back to Trump: I am NOT a Trump supporter for a variety of reasons, but when you are a leader of people armed with the knowledge that someone is actively planning to kill the people you lead you are faced with a moral dilemma: Do I do nothing to prevent my people from dying, or do I preemptively attack this person before they can do me harm? If I were in his shoes I would have made the same call.

Why? Is it more merciful to shed the blood of 1-3 people today or respond after 100 of my people are killed tomorrow, which will lead to me having to shed the blood of hundreds more the day after that? This is one of those scenarios where there is no good option and you have to pick the least worst option.

The middle east has been in conflict with itself long before the US ever existed. In fact, the Persians and Iran are the same people. When Iran/Persia had a conquesting empire in 499 BC they tried to conquer the world and almost succeeded. Xerxes had his work cut out for him when he tried to conquer Greece.

Even if the US pulled out of the middle east entirely, it will be guilted into helping various sectarian groups fight in civil wars which it has no interest in (like Syria)... If the US left entirely, it gets blamed for the instability afterwards. We were actually criticized for being isolationists at the beginning of WWI. America was forced into using the threat of offense as a defensive measure.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/03/world-war-i-american-isolationism-turned-intervention-1917/

[Iyakum]

This may complicate matters:
1214756874324606977
https://twitter.com/NewsBreaking/status/1214756874324606977

It's Ukrainian. 180 passengers on board. Confirmed by AP
Iran state TV says Ukrainian airplane crashes near Tehran (https://apnews.com/2a253e68d45381f16b89edc5cc45bba1?utm_medium=AP&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter)

The AP article is claiming is was mechanical difficulties, but local reports are saying it was accidentally shot down.

And in case people missed this:
1214736614217469953
https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/1214736614217469953

My cousin sent it to me. I thought it would be appropriate to know where people came from. Anyway, they died and that shouldn't have happened. Murder innocent people. Whatever the reason for that. Whether it was a passenger who didn't like anyone or a politically motivated act. You could have done it in a different way. I'm sure not all passengers were spies or terrorists ...

[Chester]

Looks like it is all simmering down. If so, this will go down as a Trump positive for a majority of those who go out and vote in 300 days. I, personally, will only be pleased if soon there's a plan for withdrawal of troops but I am also a realist and know this will depend on several parties feeling comfortable that Iraq (and not Iran) will decide Iraq's destiny.

I would like to include that Iran doesn't get weaponized nuclear technology.

I feel people underestimate how dangerous that would be.

If Trump is doing what I think he is doing, all of this, plus the freedom for the Iranian people and stability in the region may be within reach.

I can't imagine a rational and informed human being not having concerns that any country whose operational leadership is fundamentally motivated by an eschatological world view and obtains the power to bring an apocalypse to the world would restrain themselves from so doing. It is hard to argue that Iran, if they obtain nuclear weapons isn't a realistic (and serious) threat to use them. I have no doubt the Trump regime would act before Iran obtains such and I also think Ayatollah Khomeini understands this. Note, they may already have one or more nukes and there's a remote possibility the spy agencies can't comfortably confirm such. There are nor certainties, just probabilities.

This will be a tricky next 10 months. Iran is backed into a corner. They could accelerate their program and have a nuke, before the election. If Trump would authorize taking out their nuke facilities (which would be betting on a certainty they know them all and can succeed), he and his team would need to be able to "prove well enough" their assumption which is also tricky. In part because to do so reveals elements of their spy methods and technologies which they don't want to do... but if he acts before the election, he risks being voted out.

All the above is games that the top tier type two humans are allowed to play and they do so at our peril.

[Chester]

Here's a map you can see on Ron Paul's facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/RonPaulInstitute/posts/us-bases-around-iran-how-dare-iran-threaten-us-by-having-their-country-so-close-/2030844410262838/) (do not assume I agree with all or even some of Ron Paul's positions on any of this... I prefer to maintain my own, independent opinions knowing I am barely above spectator level and thus vastly unknowledgeable).

The map shows US bases in close proximity to Iran -

42244

[edina]

This may complicate matters:
1214756874324606977
https://twitter.com/NewsBreaking/status/1214756874324606977

It's Ukrainian. 180 passengers on board. Confirmed by AP
Iran state TV says Ukrainian airplane crashes near Tehran (https://apnews.com/2a253e68d45381f16b89edc5cc45bba1?utm_medium=AP&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter)

The AP article is claiming is was mechanical difficulties, but local reports are saying it was accidentally shot down.

And in case people missed this:
1214736614217469953
https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/1214736614217469953

My cousin sent it to me. I thought it would be appropriate to know where people came from. Anyway, they died and that shouldn't have happened. Murder innocent people. Whatever the reason for that. Whether it was a passenger who didn't like anyone or a politically motivated act. You could have done it in a different way. I'm sure not all passengers were spies or terrorists ...

Yesterday I wondered if someone would come up with a manifest for the Ukrainian downed plane.

This is something the Anons typically do, to dig on who may be a person of interest on the plane.

Crowd-researching.... very effective.

I shared links to that manifest here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?100318-The-Qanon-posts-and-associated-US-political-analysis&p=1330612&viewfull=1#post1330612).

If anything of interest shows up I'll update that comment.

I think there were also children on that flight.

My heart goes to the people who died and their loved ones.

Side note: It's uncanny that it was Ukrainian. Also uncanny, that I was recently remote viewed by someone that I was able to track back to Ukraine. The only reason I can figure that someone from the Ukraine would try to
1. Remote View me
2. try to remote influence me

Is because I've mentioned a couple of times in this public thread that I feel there is a connection between what's happening in Ukraine, and what's happening in Iran.

I apologize, it's somewhat nebulous in my mind right now, (downside/upside of how an INFJ brain processes information).

mgray's column (https://grayseconomy.com/2020/01/08/ukraine-airline-crashes-outside-tehran-176-lost/) also raises similar thoughts. A primary skill in developing research skills is the art/science of formulating questions.

I thought this one was particularly helpful.


My big question is this. If a missile took down the flight, then did the Iran arms used come out of the Ukraine some three years ago?

The similar question I've been asking myself is "Did the uranium sold to Rosatom (https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/358339-uranium-one-deal-led-to-some-exports-to-europe-memos-show) (Russia) go through Ukraine to Iran, to be used specifically for nuclear weapons?"

Soliemani was evidently working with the past administration to clean up the Benghazi gun-running deal (http://www.kentimmerman.com/darkforces.htm). Was he also related to the movement of the US sold uranium?

(And note that when Iran purportedly threatened (https://twitter.com/Raman_Ghavami/status/993932711315329025) to reveal who in the past administration, DC operatives, and I think EU operatives , received bribes to enrich themselves in exchange for paying certain factions within Iran to build nuclear weapons (https://www.csis.org/analysis/irans-nuclear-missile-delivery-capability) (black sites); who made visits to the region?)

I suspect a similar model (endless wars business model) applies to North Korea.

******

Tehran takes new step toward building a nuclear weapon, Arab News (https://www.arabnews.com/node/1550906/middle-east) (7 Sep 2019)

The Obama Administration’s Uranium One Scandal (https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/10/uranium-one-deal-obama-administration-doj-hillary-clinton-racketeering/) (National Review) 21 Oct 2017

[Chester]

My overall opinion (echoing Edina's post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109557-The-United-States-kills-Quds-Commander-Qasem-Soleimani&p=1330593&viewfull=1#post1330593)) - The big one is the nukes. It's so big it is really the only one. But what the US did with the Solomaine takeout as things stand now assists the US in better positioning itself to act upon the perceived threat. Here's what was accomplished.

Besides the nuke threat being highlighted, the US has made it clear that if Iran continues to sponsor (at their state level) terrorism, if Iran uses ballistic missiles (as it has) and continues to hold US citizens hostage as it is doing, Trump will act.

Another overlooked "win" from the Trump POV is that the Iran Nuke deal is officially done as Iran has officially pulled out. This accomplished taking China, Russia, the UK, France and Germany out of the deal. No more deal, "thank you, Iran... we never bought that you were honoring it anyways and remember the sunset clause only three years away anyways..." as Trump and his team might be thinking.

In addition, by Trump calling on NATO to unite in regards to all that has just happened and the perceived threat of Iran, whether he obtains the support of NATO nations as that may relate to the new "no deal" scenario and future actions the US may push, whether or not one or more nations join in he has made the case he asked for a united counter weight to the perceived threat of Iran.

An additional factor is what so many people appear to overlook and you will never hear it mentioned in the 'compromised' legacy media. And that is the incredible advancements in espionage tech and war tech in the hands of the US military (and Trump and perhaps close US allies such as the UK and other 'five-eyes' nations) which means that the US can engage in threat deterrence and threat takeout without "boots on the ground." In fact, I could see the development of the perception that limited usage of such can also accomplish Trump's goal in massive "boots on the ground" reduction in much of this region. The downside (as is surely the case with the Solomaine takeout) is that when actions expose their usage, their existence is revealed.

If Trump is re-elected, the world five years down the road may be far different than otherwise, and the theocratic dictatorship in Iran knows this and Kim Jong-il (and China, Russia and India) is watching it all closely as is the rest of the world.

Indeed, interesting times.

[Iyakum]

@sammy,

I agree with you, in many of your ways of thinking there is true logic behind it, that's a fact. It could also be a fact that Iran will somehow get hold of nuclear weapons of any kind. However, we will probably not find out from whom at this early stage. But it could be that it gets to Iran by road.

Everything repeats itself over and over again. Only a few small changes are necessary to portray Iran as an axis of evil to the rest of the world. If Iran does not expose its nuclear program or even continue to do so, it is evidence for Trump that an attack is justified.

If I got that right, then both the US army and the Russians have new weapon technologies that they want to test. Unfortunately, I do not know whether Israel is being served with it. So war will probably be inevitable. I think I remember that during the third Gulf War, Bush had no evidence that Iraq had B-C weapons. Nevertheless, Iraq was declared the former ally of the United States as an enemy.

It is always the same game that is played. Each president of the United States leaves a small legacy of whatever kind to the other. Letter form or in a book full of notes, it doesn't matter. The fact is that Trump also received such information. Only in his case is it questionable whether Barack Obama has given him such information. I think more of the predecessor George W Bush. Bush is perfect for this and as far as we know there has already been contact with Bush or vice versa.

On the one hand, it is very sad that this is done. On the other hand, we know that it has always been this way since the beginning of the USA and will remain so. Only in the case of Trump did someone use the gaps to expose him. Whoever was, or still is, knows exactly what he is doing.

It is written in the stars whether Trump will be re-elected for a second term. But if not Trump then who? ? Obama is out of order, and the other candidates, well, the vulture knows whether they have what it takes to lead the United States. There is chaos, mistakes have been made, some mistakes. Whether Trump was misdirected on purpose could be the question of who it was. What would be missing now would be further attacks by Iran on US facilities and then the US response. Then we'll see what happens.

[Chester]

Does anyone believe the US would not have ended up in full blown war with Iran well before today if the 2016 election outcome had been different?

mlz3-OzcExI

Yet a significantly large portion of humanity allows themselves to be so consumed with hatred for Trump, they will never allow themselves to consider how critical the choice was in 2016 as to the world situation as it stands today.

Yet, and in my opinion, Trump fans the flames of this hatred and knows it.

As much as I commented in this thread as events evolved, if things stand as they are today, I will reduce my opinion with regards to the degree to which "they" have Trump compromised. As an example, and I emphasize this is just opinion, if the Boltonites and the Netanyahuites had Trump compromised (via such methods as employed by Mossad/CIA blackmail operations), we would not be where we are today. Five days ago I strongly believed they had him compromised. I am now much less certain. Still - we shall see.

I sometimes wonder if Trump intentionally wants to force the US (and the tier two human managers of the US and the world) to chose to make their next vote/choice or (in cases of non-US folks) maintenance of their prevailing political view of the US as either a.) based upon emotionally driven hatred or b.) rational thought. It's really quite incredible to see the world teetering on which way this will go. When I consider the actions I have taken when fueled by my emotions versus actions I took (and sometimes held back) when I allowed all aspects of my being to play a role in my responses, it's clear the latter produces better results, especially when I view those results from the perspectives of others, including myself.

It's almost as if Trump is forcing the world to choose emotional response or otherwise. I am not suggesting that if this is true, it is being done wittingly.

[Chester]

If I were forced to make a bet, I would bet that someone in Iran accidentally shot the plane down or that it was done by "someone" as an operation to pin it on someone in Iran that can be, through the media, "proven" connected with the Ayatollah backed military or proven to be "spies/traitors" against the Ayatollah.

But my bet (regardless of how it is spun) is that the plane was shot down.

[silvanelf]

I can't imagine a rational and informed human being not having concerns that any country whose operational leadership is fundamentally motivated by an eschatological world view and obtains the power to bring an apocalypse to the world would restrain themselves from so doing. It is hard to argue that Iran, if they obtain nuclear weapons isn't a realistic (and serious) threat to use them. [...]


You forgot to mention a few others, for example Pompeo:


Pompeo, Awaiting the Rapture, Pushed Trump to Strike Iranian General Soleimani

The Washington Post has reported that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was the main force that pushed Trump into assassinating Iranian Major General Soleimani. Pompeo, according to a New York Times reporter, had a fixation with a bible passage about Queen Esther protecting Israel from Iran. Pompeo’s extreme hostility towards Iran is motivated by his extreme religious beliefs.



In November, Mr. Pompeo told a reporter (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/26/magazine/mike-pompeo-translates-trump.html) for The New York Times Magazine that the Bible “informs everything I do.” The reporter noticed an open Bible in his office, with a Swiss Army knife marking his place at the end of the book of Queen Esther.

Mike Pompeo is a conservative evangelical Christian who believes in the rapture and that God is working through Trump and himself.

-- snip --

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/1/5/1909619/-Pompeo-Awaiting-the-Rapture-Pushed-Trump-to-Strike-Iranian-General-Soleimani

[Praxis]

I think it is interesting that any critique of the administration and policies is met with something along the lines of

"you are so biased against trump" or "you have trump derangement syndrome"

I find this to be a trap and a red herring. Many of the trump supporters, both overt and covert, will try to force you into this mode.

It is something like reverse ad-hominem. They are trying to make you talk about his personality and him instead of the things he is doing with the office of the president.

Do not fall for this bait. Stay focused on policies(like not releasing the JFK info and not withdrawing from occupations or closing guantanamo bay.)

The reason they try to force the debate about his personality is because it is difficult to defending holding families in cages and occupying countries for decades.

[Chester]

If I were forced to make a bet, I would bet that someone in Iran accidentally shot the plane down or that it was done by "someone" as an operation to pin it on someone in Iran that can be, through the media, "proven" connected with the Ayatollah backed military or proven to be "spies/traitors" against the Ayatollah.

But my bet (regardless of how it is spun) is that the plane was shot down.

Interesting... BREAKING NEWS -

Mullahs' Mistake

Jet crash that killed 176 caused by errant Iranian missile amid attack on US military: Pentagon

Ukrainian airplane shot down by mistake by Iranian anti-aircraft missile, Pentagon officials believe (https://www.foxnews.com/world/ukrainian-airplane-shot-down-by-mistake-by-iranian-anti-aircraft-missile-pentagon-officials-believe)

If true, no wonder Iran won't turn over the black boxes. Note I emphasize "If true." Could just be propoganda.


Officials said U.S. intelligence increasingly points at the airliner being accidentally struck by a Russian-made missile, killing all 176 people on board the flight, just hours after Iran fired more than a dozen ballistic missiles targeting two military bases housing American and coalition troops.

[Chester]

I can't imagine a rational and informed human being not having concerns that any country whose operational leadership is fundamentally motivated by an eschatological world view and obtains the power to bring an apocalypse to the world would restrain themselves from so doing. It is hard to argue that Iran, if they obtain nuclear weapons isn't a realistic (and serious) threat to use them. [...]


You forgot to mention a few others, for example Pompeo:


Yep... yet he hasn't gotten his way as of now, thankfully.

[edina]

If I were forced to make a bet, I would bet that someone in Iran accidentally shot the plane down or that it was done by "someone" as an operation to pin it on someone in Iran that can be, through the media, "proven" connected with the Ayatollah backed military or proven to be "spies/traitors" against the Ayatollah.

But my bet (regardless of how it is spun) is that the plane was shot down.

Interesting... BREAKING NEWS -

Mullahs' Mistake

Jet crash that killed 176 caused by errant Iranian missile amid attack on US military: Pentagon

Ukrainian airplane shot down by mistake by Iranian anti-aircraft missile, Pentagon officials believe (https://www.foxnews.com/world/ukrainian-airplane-shot-down-by-mistake-by-iranian-anti-aircraft-missile-pentagon-officials-believe)

If true, no wonder Iran won't turn over the black boxes. Note I emphasize "If true." Could just be propoganda.


Officials said U.S. intelligence increasingly points at the airliner being accidentally struck by a Russian-made missile, killing all 176 people on board the flight, just hours after Iran fired more than a dozen ballistic missiles targeting two military bases housing American and coalition troops.

I agree on the qualification of "if true".

My understanding was the air space around Tehran was shut down during the missile launches, precisely to avoid such a mishap.

[edina]

I think it is interesting that any critique of the administration and policies is met with something along the lines of

"you are so biased against trump" or "you have trump derangement syndrome"

I find this to be a trap and a red herring. Many of the trump supporters, both overt and covert, will try to force you into this mode.

It is something like reverse ad-hominem. They are trying to make you talk about his personality and him instead of the things he is doing with the office of the president.

Do not fall for this bait. Stay focused on policies(like not releasing the JFK info and not withdrawing from occupations or closing guantanamo bay.)

The reason they try to force the debate about his personality is because it is difficult to defending holding families in cages and occupying countries for decades.

Praxis, I understand your concerns.

And I've noticed it happens from many political directions, messenger over message, and personality over policy, emotion over reason, ect...

And this is amplified, magnified and agitated in the present media/cultural environment.

If this is going to be shifted, it has to start with each of us, on a human to human scale.

[ExomatrixTV]

WAR WITH IRAN AVERTED?
hn5yON7UuSE

[silvanelf]

The whole debate about the plane crash in Iran is a mess -- look for yourself:


Canadian PM Trudeau Says Has Intelligence From Multiple Sources That Iran Shot Down Ukraine Jet

The premier added that his government will not rest until it gets "closure, transparency, accountability, and justice" on the accident.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said they have intelligence information from multiple sources that a Ukrainian jet was shot down by an Iranian surface-to-air missile on Wednesday morning, Reuters reported citing the premier's speech at a news conference in Ottawa.



"We have intelligence from multiple sources, including our allies and our own intelligence. The intelligence indicates that the plane was shot down by an Iranian surface to air missile. This may well have been unintentional", Trudeau said.


He, however, did not elaborate on the particulars of the intelligence Canada possesses.

https://sputniknews.com/world/202001091077992020-canadian-pm-trudeau-says-has-intelligence-from-multiple-sources-that-iran-shot-down-ukraine-jet/

On the other hand ... see last tweet below:

1215333189767565312

edit:

Just another article...


Video Captures Alleged Moment Missile Strikes Boeing 737 Over Tehran

With the narrative surrounding the crashed Ukrainian Boeing 737 changing by the minute, shifting away from a initially proposed theory of a technical error and shifting toward speculation the plane was accidentally or not taken down by someone (Iranians? Israelis? CIA?) on the ground, "evidence" is suddenly starting to emerge to validate this latest theory. And so moments ago, an unverified, unconfirmed video has appeared on the Telegram network, purporting to show the moment a missile strikes the Ukrainian flight PS752.

1215366913880141825

[Chester]

It's now looking very likely true that Iran took down the Ukrainian airliner.

[Jayke]

Robert David Steele talks with Benjamin Fulford...interesting perspective:

https://phibetaiota.net/2020/01/ben-fulford-with-robert-steele-iran-wwiii-avoided-1000-years-of-peace-starting-jews-will-be-protected-truth-reconciliation/#more-148349


...imminent world peace, everyone on board except for a tiny handful including the Deep State Zionist core. The assassination of General Soleimani, whether fake or real, is a disaster for the Zionists, WWIII has been averted. US “corporation” appears bankrupt, earthquakes in Puerto Rico (home of the “corporation” are not natural. Zionists killing Christians to try to destabilize the Middle East. Thierry Maysan’s report on assassination threat to Trump from Zionist. Explores possibility that assassination is theater but could be last ditch effort by Zionists and their neo-con sympathezers to start WWIII. Crash of Ukrainian aircraft leaving Tehran could be connected. Attempts to start WWIII failed, headed for 1,000 years of world peace. Is Trump a genius or a Zionist puppet? End result is peace. Jews are protected, safe, there is no threat to anyone, truth & reconciliation are the order of the day.

Robert Steele also mentioned in his video with Fulford a quote that Henry Kissinger gave back in 2012 (https://www.inquisitr.com/349213/henry-kissinger-predicts-in-10-years-there-will-be-no-more-israel/)... “In 10 Years, There Will Be No More Israel”. 2012 is also the same year the Obama administration took the MEK off the terrorist watch list (https://thehill.com/policy/defense/250959-report-clinton-to-pull-iranian-extremist-group-off-state-terror-list-), although it was apparantly Hillary Clinton herself who made the decision.

MEK were the ones funding John Bolton to push regime change in Iran (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/02/iran-mek-cult-terrorist-trump-allies-john-bolton-rudy-giuliani). And as Gracy pointed out earlier, MEK have their fingerprints all over the propoganda outlets painting the assissination of Soleimani as justified.

Has the MEK been funded by Kissinger since they were taken off the terrorist list? As a crucial cog in the Zionist plan to initiate WW3?

Harley Schlanger from LaRouchePac elaborates on Robert Steeles assessment that averting war could lead to world peace if the situation is handled effectively:
Lp8T56RpUXg

[syrwong]

This may complicate matters:
1214756874324606977
https://twitter.com/NewsBreaking/status/1214756874324606977

It's Ukrainian. 180 passengers on board. Confirmed by AP
Iran state TV says Ukrainian airplane crashes near Tehran (https://apnews.com/2a253e68d45381f16b89edc5cc45bba1?utm_medium=AP&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter)

The AP article is claiming is was mechanical difficulties, but local reports are saying it was accidentally shot down.

And in case people missed this:
1214736614217469953
https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/1214736614217469953

My cousin sent it to me. I thought it would be appropriate to know where people came from. Anyway, they died and that shouldn't have happened. Murder innocent people. Whatever the reason for that. Whether it was a passenger who didn't like anyone or a politically motivated act. You could have done it in a different way. I'm sure not all passengers were spies or terrorists ...

It is very hard to imaging Iran would take down a plane in which half the passengers are Iranian. Iran is a deeply religious country which does not believe in developing nuclear weapons, although the western media like to bombard the people with Iran' intention to develop one. It is also not a country which likes to make false flags, because it has not gone to war for centuries. I suppose only belligerent nations use false flags because they have to in order to justify a war. I hope this post balances the sentiment in this thread a little. A video from RT,


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEAp_UouT2Q

[ExomatrixTV]

Did Fox News Host Tucker Carlson Save Us All By Getting Trump To See Important Info?!
QEpPN6nfhaA

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Democrats' Worst Nightmare Has Come True:
m-cpDWOVZEk

[shaberon]

My understanding was the air space around Tehran was shut down during the missile launches, precisely to avoid such a mishap.


The attacks were done around 1.20 a. m., same time as Soleimani was hit. There would not have been a commercial or civilian mishap to happen. Tehran was not the origin of attacks.

The sudden loss of power and lack of distress call are highly suggestive of attack. An on-board bomb could have been placed during the maintenance 48 hours before this flight; or, it could have been hit by anyone with a Manpad or similar device. Since we have flooded the market with portable rockets able to take out low-flying planes, there is no shortage of possible culprits.

Why Iran as a state might have done it is beyond me. It is not a culture of "false flags". It is not interested in nuclear weaponry per se, unless it feels this is the only possible deterrent. It does not need them to eliminate all foreign bases in the region. That is the part that should be taken seriously.

It is also hard to conceive anything sillier than Iran/Soieimani was "definitely going to attack within days", and then provide them a reason to do so, which they did, with no cover-up, and a stated intention to continue. One dirty, underhanded, illegal stupid thing followed by a normal and legal response. Aside from the fact of "small" incidents like this happening all the time, this assassination ranks as perhaps the stupidest, weakest thing I have ever heard of. The claims of casualties or the thing about the red flag might be exaggerated, but, the extreme vulnerability of all the mid-east bases is pretty much proven.

U. S. is already run by an eschatological regime which has used nuclear weapons unnecessarily against a civilian population, only one I can think of that has. Whatever they bleat about who "might" do this is rather frivolous, and if there was one to watch, it would be India v. Pakistan, largely again thanks to British map makers.

[Chester]

Looks definitive now... just access the various news sites regardless of their known biases... meaning their political opposition to each other.

Iran shot the Ukrainian airliner down with a Russian made SA-15 missile. The US is calling it a tragic mistake which is (IMO) likely true. That the US Pentagon officials would emphasize this is indicative that the intentions of the US are committed to deescalation of the tensions between Iran and the US. This suggests the neo-cons are not as "in charge" as some might think (as I surely thought last Friday).

It makes sense RT would try to spin this otherwise (and I don't judge them for it anyways as (IMO) all of these news major and middle tier news agencies are somewhat or fully compromised).

CNN - Video appears to show missile strike as Canada and UK say they have intel Iran shot down Ukrainian plane (https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/09/politics/is-iran-ukraine-plane/index.html)

Hard to dispute the video much less someone like Trudeau (who is no friend of Trump and his administration) publicly stating (https://www.axios.com/iran-plane-crash-ukrainian-investigation-missile-strike-9a38ce58-1d07-4ea7-9ac5-eb15a4d8983c.html) it was, indeed, a missile strike fired from nearby and clearly within Iran.

Found a pure video (without news commentary) - Clear evidence it was a surface to air missile in this video (https://nypost.com/2020/01/09/video-shows-moment-ukrainian-airliner-is-struck-by-missile-over-iran/).

Clear stupidity for Iran to allow their airport to remain open once they launched their missiles at the bases in Iraq.

Russian SA-15s have two modes, manual and automatic. If set on automatic, the missiles would not need a human to decide to launch. Somehow they overlooked shutting down their airport.

[edina]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEAp_UouT2Q

syrwong, thank you for sharing this, and I want to point out that all of these points have been made in this thread, without the rage, cussing, and ire.

*******

btw, I had wanted to thank you for taking the time to translate The first Chinese time traveller on the internet (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109419-The-first-Chinese-time-traveller-on-the-internet), I read that with great interest. I imagine it took you a good while to do the translation. Many points to ponder from that exchange. :) Thanks, much appreciated.

[Iyakum]

I found a passenger list.

Only it seems very strange to me. Only the names of the Iranian passengers have been listed, not those of the other countries and passengers. This amazes me that Ukraine publishes this list that makes no sense, ... On request I can post the passenger list here.

The sad thing is that there were some children among the passengers. The youngest is "Molani Kurdia 2018" one year young ...

[Ernie Nemeth]

Would you find that behavior acceptable from all governments? If they don't like what someone does or thinks, wait till they are traveling , create a shoddy excuse and drone strike them. And if the country where you did it doesn't like it, threaten and bully them as well. This kind of behavior is grandiose and insane.

I hope that was rhetorical but in case it was not...

Of course I find it absolutely reprehensible. And my reply would be: 911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! because that is the justification for this extreme Nazi-esque definition of life and liberty, and the distorted ethics to go along with it.

[ExomatrixTV]

MSNBC Fake News Pushed Claim that 30 Americans "Died" In Iran Attacks
4D8n_UAhApA

[Chester]

One of the reasons Trump was able to do what he did (Soleimani) is because of historical precedent -

Flashback: Pelosi Said Obama Did Not Need Authorization to Attack Libya (https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/01/09/flashback-pelosi-said-obama-did-not-need-authorization-to-attack-libya-n2559285)

See the 16 second clip from C-Span 3

There's longer clips available for anyone who wishes for fuller context.

So there will be readers here that conclude I am defending Trump's act and also trying to throw it back in the face of "Democrats." But what I am actually pointing out is that when your have a political dynamic that, for years, has lied, twisted, interpreted anything and everything in ways to justify the actions they desire because they perceive those actions will result in desired outcomes, unlike legal precedents that generally establish what is known as case law, you have news outlets that have their own political biases throwing back in the faces of the public, examples (such as the one above) that feature the pure hypocrisy of almost all participants of the US political class.

And that makes all this baloney you see and hear from the media companies the best thing that ever happened to the popcorn industry but little more. IMO Trump understands this and has capitalized on it like no one has done before.

[Iyakum]

Would you find that behavior acceptable from all governments? If they don't like what someone does or thinks, wait till they are traveling , create a shoddy excuse and drone strike them. And if the country where you did it doesn't like it, threaten and bully them as well. This kind of behavior is grandiose and insane.

I hope that was rhetorical but in case it was not...

Of course I find it absolutely reprehensible. And my reply would be: 911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! because that is the justification for this extreme Nazi-esque definition of life and liberty, and the distorted ethics to go along with it.

@ Ernie Nemeth,

I have to fully agree with your contribution that 911 was an inside job. As for the twin towers and the impact, I can't say much about that. But the Pentagon itself was not attacked by a plane, but I think everyone who has dealt with it knows that.

Ok, that Bush then declared the axis of evil was clear. Still, it was an act of aggression against the United States' own people. My idea is that Afghanistan was not only attacked because of Bin Laden. Bin Laden only played the scapegoat here. the real reason is a little further away than Afghanistan. It was Kazakhstan that Bush wanted, the oil wells. But what the Taliban disagreed with. So war, ... while the US is in grief and revenge. It's a good time and at the same time to free the world from Saddam.

A guess that something like that happened at 911 back then, was planned and carried out, I think that is also being used now. The question is whether Trump will act like Bush? There is some evidence that he is not pulling out the US troops. Whether he is deliberately endangering her and whether the rest of the world, especially the US itself, is another question. I only know one thing that Trumps plans to do or that something went wrong. Something he will surely correct. I just hope that there won't be a second 911. Blood for oil ...!?!

[Chester]

Trudeau has left the door open to blaming the US for the Iranian shoot down of the Ukranian airliner. Of course, he is vague in what he is suggesting leaving room for all sorts of speculation:

Pro "hawk" CIA types somehow pulled it off. This is a 1%er (my rule is that any specific selection within a possibility set should receive a minimum of 1% chance if listed).

Though the shoot down was a mistake, it's the fault of Trump's act (taking out Soleimani) that the accident occurred. I make this one 98%.

The shoot down was intentional so as to achieve world condemnation of the US's overall mid east presence coupling that with a coordinated reaction from Iraq (which just emerged) using the Iran missile strike as the example for supporting the reason the US must leave Iraq. 1% just because it is possible.

I wish the US would wind down all of this "presence" stuff around the world. I am a fantacist and know my wish is less than 1% likely. Still, I state my wish.

[Ernie Nemeth]

What I meant was that the world changed that day and it has not been the same place since. Everything that has happened since 911 could not have happened without it. Imagine someone asking you to take off your shoes, empty your water bottle, get groped, get X-rayed, get profiled and singled out for a full body scan, get cavity searched, every time you got on a plane back in the '90s. There would have been hell to pay. No one would have accepted it as a matter of course like today.

Nor would we have allowed the five regional wars in the middle east. It could not have been justified. And in this climate of fear and paranoia Nazi-inspired (literally) behavior and ideology was easily assimilated by everyone, most without ever noticing what was actually happening. Drones and cruise missiles and real-time war footage right down to following bombs to their targets made good TV viewing and boosted ratings.

Taking out foreign nationals is just another little totalitarian tiptoe towards total civilian domination. And if a US citizen just happens to become a target, well, we do it to foreigners, why not our own?

It is in our minds, this terrorist propaganda, and has us all seeing ghosts. We can accept a lot of dirty deeds in the name of the scourge that is terrorism in any of its forms - including foreign intervention and meddling, at which the USA is master and in a class by themselves.

I'm surprised Homeland security isn't called Fatherland security, but I guess that would have been too obvious...

[Praxis]

I think it is interesting that any critique of the administration and policies is met with something along the lines of

"you are so biased against trump" or "you have trump derangement syndrome"

I find this to be a trap and a red herring. Many of the trump supporters, both overt and covert, will try to force you into this mode.

It is something like reverse ad-hominem. They are trying to make you talk about his personality and him instead of the things he is doing with the office of the president.

Do not fall for this bait. Stay focused on policies(like not releasing the JFK info and not withdrawing from occupations or closing guantanamo bay.)

The reason they try to force the debate about his personality is because it is difficult to defending holding families in cages and occupying countries for decades.

Praxis, I understand your concerns.

And I've noticed it happens from many political directions, messenger over message, and personality over policy, emotion over reason, ect...

And this is amplified, magnified and agitated in the present media/cultural environment.

If this is going to be shifted, it has to start with each of us, on a human to human scale.

Completely agree.

It is why I come so hard at the people around here. I feel very shocked that the people around here are NOT very pro peace.

If you support any president really since Reagan, then you support a war criminal. Full stop.

If you go back and look at my critiques starting from the beginning of the admin, I have been very focused on certain issues. The occupations of Iraq Afghanistan and Cuba have been right at the top.

Well, On guantanamo bay, which nobody is discussing except me, trump actually started it up and sending more people there, or at least publicly expressed this desire.

This is wrong on so many levels. If you support trump. You are supporting this policy. FULL STOP. You might also be supporting trump because you happen to like his tax brakes or something but it does also mean you support holding people indefinitely without trial, just like Obama, just like Bush.

[Chester]

@johncardillo
.@SpeakerPelosi
on executive military action when Obama was POTUS,

Reporter: “Madame Leader you’re saying that the president did not need authorization initially, and still does not need any authorization from Congress on Libya?”

Pelosi: “Yes”
https://twitter.com/johncardillo/status/1215478967026749440

that is Bull**** and this make me hate Dems even more along with people who outrage over Trump but not Obama especially Bush....people need to get that **** out of their head left vs right.

Yes, they all do it. Trump seems to have noticed it, saw it doesn't make any difference what clowns say and most importantly, how the media spins it. He can make all sorts of "mistakes" (intentional or not) and all most people care about is their own reality experience and how their lives are better or worse for it and what risks they think are real in giving him 4 more years. The key will be holding the senate.

I don't think these last few decades marks the end of civil, political operations... I think it only marks the exposure its all been "for show." Comedians have been good at exposing this but the actual actors always presented a facade until the 2016 presidential election (and run-up), at least this is what I see and how I interpret it.

[apokalypse]

@johncardillo
.@SpeakerPelosi
on executive military action when Obama was POTUS,

Reporter: “Madame Leader you’re saying that the president did not need authorization initially, and still does not need any authorization from Congress on Libya?”

Pelosi: “Yes”
https://twitter.com/johncardillo/status/1215478967026749440

that is Bull**** and this make me hate Dems even more along with people who outrage over Trump but not Obama especially Bush....people need to get that **** out of their head left vs right.

[Tintin]

I found a passenger list.

... On request I can post the passenger list here.

..

Yes, please do :highfive:

[Tintin]

Well, for what it's worth - a reasonable amount I wager - the investigation could take as long as one month to complete.

They haven't yet really got to grips with the black box recordings, so, mainstream media "rush to judgements" (translated as spin/PR) really ought to be treated as such and some patience employed between now and whatever does come to light.

[from the Guardian's rolling feed today]:



Iran continues to deny the assessments of western intelligence agencies that its force shot down the Ukrainian passenger jet in the tense early hours on Wednesday morning.

Ali Abedzadeh, the head of Iran’s Civil Aviation Organisation, said overnight:

“At the time this plane was in the air, there were several other internal and international flights flying at 8000 feet and the suggestion it was targeted by a missile cannot be correct.”

Flight records show there was some domestic traffic around the same time at the Mehrabad Airport, about 35km north-east of Imam Khomeini International airport.

Flight records available online show there were no other flights landing or taking off from Imam Khomeini International airport around the same as the Ukrainian plane was in flight.

Hassan Rezaeifar, the head of the committee that oversees aviation accidents in Iran, said “nowhere in the world” would it be possible to determine the cause of a crash this soon. “Not only haven’t we found evidence to prove the claim [of a missile strike] but we’ve found evidence to reject it,” he said, likely referring to claims by Iranian investigators that the Ukrainian flight attempted to turn around and return to the airport before it went down.

He said he was open to international involvement in the probe, including American, but added - likely in reference to sanctions that prevent US involvement with Iran - that they “should get the authority from their Senate”.


And, here:



Iranian officials gave a press conference on Friday giving more details of their investigation and continuing to rebuff allegations the Ukrainian aircraft was shot down. “If [intelligence agencies] have findings with scientific support they should show this to the world,” Ali Abedzadeh, the head of Iran’s Civil Aviation Organisation, told reporters.

He said he had watched a video clip purporting to show the plane being hit by a missile before crashing to the ground but said “this cannot be confirmed from a scientific perspective”.

He said the pilot had been in contact with the control tower two minutes before the accident, asking if he could ascend to 26,000 feet. After the fire broke out, the crew would have been consumed with “saving the plane”, he said, and so would not have been able to communicate further to explain what had gone wrong.

“We have to look for the cause of the fire,” Abedzadeh said.

Hassan Rezaeifar, the head of the committee that oversees aviation accidents in Iran, said that contrary to earlier claims that the black boxes appeared to have been damaged by the crash, both appeared to be intact.

“We prefer to extract the data and download the data inside the country,” he said. “But if we come to the conclusion that the data may be damaged then we will carry out the process [overseas].”

Investigators would attempt to extract and analyse the black box data on Friday, he added, but said the findings might take one or two months to be released.

[Iyakum]

42248

I found a passenger list.

... On request I can post the passenger list here.

..

Yes, please do :highfive:

As you wish the passengerlist of flight PS-752 just download it or save it.

Sorry this is the right one...

[Chester]

Almost always, most people make up their minds pretty fast.

Here's what most westerners at least are told -

The detailed evidence "reported" to most western news agencies that come from the US Pentagon nail Iran.

The same claim is being supported by officials (including Trudeau) pointing to their own intelligence gathering capabilities (including communication intercepts).


Highlighting the refusal of Iran to provide the black boxes.

The claim of Iran that the boxes are "damaged" and are rendered technically inaccessible.

The initial refusal of Iran to allow any third part into the crash site.

The reports of bulldozers doing whatever (implication - hiding/destroying potential evidence of a missile or two).

The rapid emergence of a (convenient) video purported to be 'real' showing one (or two) missiles coming from an angle of about 30 degrees above horizontal and slamming into a plane.

The conclusion by most of the public that if Iran did, indeed, (accidentally or worse, intentionally) shoot the plane down, that Iran would deny it and try every way possible to spin it that way and try every way they can to prevent "smoking gun" type proof from getting out.

For all the above, most in the western world who lean to Trump's taking out of Soleimani and the fallout that has so far happened, will lay it all at Iran's feet.

Those who hate Trump blame Trump - that's simple to understand.

Then there are the so-called "independents." And based on all the points above, I make odds more independents lean to blaming Iran than Trump. Having said that, I would imagine the entirety of the US middle east foreign policy as enacted over decades has lost most of any support independents may have held for such activity. My hope is that this is the case and that the US gets out sooner than otherwise.

[mountain_jim]

A little recent history reminder

1215637916455706625

[Gracy]

Re the downed plane.

For starters this post is traveling down the road of JPF type of "high octane speculation", be that as it may.

From the very get go I've not been able to help but wonder


aren't the Iranians a little more sophisticated than this? They had ample time to prepare, coordinate, and get all their ducks in a row, it can't have been like firing from the hip in the heat of battle where friendly fire dwells like rusty nails dwell in wood.

What if U.S. special forces have new technologies to play with that can blend right in with such a situation, bring down a jet, and have the evidence give all appearances that someone else did it, perhaps even showing that the adversary shot himself in the foot so to speak.

Wouldn't that be a neat lil trick while leaving the adversary scratching their heads as to not only HOW something like this could have possibly happened, but how stupid and bungling it makes them appear to the outside world looking in?

Just a thought.

[Kryztian]

(I'm not a big fan of the Washington Post, but Jim Webb is a truly great man who has served his country and is for intelligent use of military force for defense purposes only.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html

Opinions
When did it become acceptable to kill a top leader of a country we aren’t even at war with?

By Jim Webb
Jan. 9, 2020 at 5:55 p.m. EST

Jim Webb, a Democrat from Virginia, served in the U.S. Senate from 2007 to 2013 and was secretary of the Navy under President Ronald Reagan from 1987 to 1988.


Strongly held views are unlikely to change regarding the morality and tactical wisdom of President Trump’s decision to kill Iranian Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani as he traveled on a road outside the Baghdad airport after having arrived on a commercial flight. But the debate regarding the long-term impact of this act on America’s place in the world, and the potential vulnerability of U.S. government officials to similar reprisals, has just begun.

How did it become acceptable to assassinate one of the top military officers of a country with whom we are not formally at war during a public visit to a third country that had no opposition to his presence? And what precedent has this assassination established on the acceptable conduct of nation-states toward military leaders of countries with which we might have strong disagreement short of actual war — or for their future actions toward our own people?

With respect to Iran, unfortunately, this is hardly a new issue.

In 2007, the Senate passed a non-binding resolution calling on the George W. Bush administration to categorize Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as an international terrorist organization. I opposed this proposal based on the irrefutable fact that the organization was an inseparable arm of the Iranian government. The Revolutionary Guards are not independent actors like al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. They are part of the Iranian government’s formal military structure, with an estimated strength of more than 150,000 members. It is legally and logically impossible to define one part of a national government as an international terrorist organization without applying the term to that entire government.

Definitions define conduct. If terrorist organizations are actively involved against us, we attack them. But a terrorist organization is by definition a nongovernmental entity that operates along the creases of national sovereignties and international law. The Revolutionary Guards are a part of the Iranian government. If they are attacking us, they are not a terrorist organization. They’re an attacking army.

The 2007 proposal did not succeed. But last April the State Department unilaterally designated the Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist entity. Although more than 60 organizations are listed in this category, this is the only time our government has ever identified an element of a nation-state as a terrorist organization. And the designation was by many accounts made despite the opposition of the CIA and the Defense Department.

Which leads us to Soleimani.

The assassination of the most well-known military commander of a country with which we are not formally at war during his visit to a third country that had not opposed his presence invites a lax moral justification for a plethora of retaliatory measures — and not only from Iran. It also holds the possibility of more deeply entrenching the U.S. military in a region that most Americans would very much prefer to deal with from a more maneuverable distance.

No thinking American would support Soleimani’s conduct. But it is also indisputable that his activities were carried out as part of his military duties. His harm to American military units was through his role as an enabler and adviser to third-country forces. This, frankly, is a reality of war.

I fought as a Marine in Vietnam. We had similar problems throughout the Vietnam War because of Vietnam’s propinquity to China, which along with the Soviet Union provided continuous support to the North Vietnamese, including most of the weapons used against us on the battlefield. China was then a rogue state with nuclear weapons. Its leaders continually spouted anti-U.S. rhetoric. Yet we did not assassinate its military leaders for rendering tactical advice or logistical assistance. We fought the war that was in front of us, and we created the conditions in which we engaged China aggressively through diplomatic, economic and other means.

Now, despite Trump’s previous assertions that he wants to dramatically reduce the United States’ footprint in the Middle East, it seems clear that he has been seduced into making unwise announcements similar to the rhetoric used by his immediate predecessors of both parties. Their blunders — in Iraq, Libya and Syria — destabilized the region and distracted the United States from its greatest long-term challenge: China’s military and economic expansion throughout the world.

At a time when our political debates have come to resemble Kardashian-like ego squabbles, the United States desperately needs common-sense leadership in its foreign policy. This is not a failure of the executive branch alone; it is the result of a breakdown in our entire foreign policy establishment, from the executive branch to the legislative branch and even to many of our once-revered think tanks. If partisanship in foreign policy should end at the water’s edge, then such policies should be forged through respectful, bipartisan debate.

The first such debate should focus on the administration’s unilateral decision to label an entire element of a foreign government an international terrorist organization. If Congress wishes to hold Iran to such a standard, it should then formally authorize the use of force against Iran’s government. The failure of congressional leadership to make these kinds of decisions is an example of why our foreign policy has become so militarized, and of how weak and even irrelevant Congress has allowed itself to become in the eyes of our citizens.

[Chester]

Re the downed plane.

For starters this post is traveling down the road of JPF type of "high octane speculation", be that as it may.

From the very get go I've not been able to help but wonder


aren't the Iranians a little more sophisticated than this? They had ample time to prepare, coordinate, and get all their ducks in a row, it can't have been like firing from the hip in the heat of battle where friendly fire dwells like rusty nails dwell in wood.

What if U.S. special forces have new technologies to play with that can blend right in with such a situation, bring down a jet, and have the evidence give all appearances that someone else did it, perhaps even showing that the adversary shot himself in the foot so to speak.

Wouldn't that be a neat lil trick while leaving the adversary scratching their heads as to not only HOW something like this could have possibly happened, but how stupid and bungling it makes them appear to the outside world looking in?

Just a thought.

And was on my list of speculations...

[Chester]

and as for - When did it become acceptable to kill a top leader of a country we aren’t even at war with?

Who's "we?"

Could the question be asked of any "we?"

If so, could the question be asked of Hezbollah who assassinated the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Rafic Hariri?

Could it then be pointed out that Iran is and has been a major supporter of Hezbollah? Could it be pointed out that Soleimani helped (https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-dangers-posed-by-the-killing-of-qassem-suleimani) with this assassination?


What's my point? Looks like it isn't a matter of being or not being "acceptable." Looks like something else to me. Looks like "what can be done and gotten away with" is all that matters to the current batch of humans on this planet.

[T Smith]

It is very hard to imaging Iran would take down a plane in which half the passengers are Iranian. Iran is a deeply religious country which does not believe in developing nuclear weapons, although the western media like to bombard the people with Iran' intention to develop one. It is also not a country which likes to make false flags, because it has not gone to war for centuries. I suppose only belligerent nations use false flags because they have to in order to justify a war. I hope this post balances the sentiment in this thread a little. A video from RT,



Yes. This is exactly why the mostly likely scenario is the downed plane was an accident. Sometimes you just trip over your shoelaces; there are no ulterior motives or 4-d chess objectives. If I'm not mistaken, computer algorythms allocated the airspace in which the plane was flying as a war zone. The plane was probably (mistakenly) in the wrong place at the wrong time and mistaken as a hostile projectile and taken down. This, of course, is just my opinion, but seems to be the most logical explanation given the facts.

BTW, somewhere in this thread someone suggested Iran wasn't allowing any investigators to the crash site; it has been reported, at least here in the States, that Iran would allow a neutral country to the crash site, e.g. Ukraine or Canada, just not the United States (whom they don't trust). Don't blame them on that account. The point is, Iran isn't being completely uncooperative.

It is also important for people to understand that people who use the term "United States" shouldn't necessarily equate USA with "President Trump" and/or his Administration's policies. The United States government is a colossal bureaucracy, entrenched with factions of Deep State actors, most of which are at war with Donald Trump and his policies, and/or are eager and ready to obfuscate any facts that ultimately run up the flag pole to the White House.

I was never overly concerned that Trump was compromised as much as I was (and still am) concerned that he is surrounded by disingenuous intelligence operatives that might provide him with false or misleading information. A captain can only be as good the people surrounding him and running the ship. Most of those officers/actors are pro-war, anti-Trump.

[edina]

It's been updated a few minutes ago, but I first read this last night.

U.S. to join probe of Ukrainian jet disaster that killed 176 (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-crash-investigation/u-s-to-join-probe-of-ukrainian-jet-disaster-that-killed-176-idUSKBN1Z82SE)


PARIS (Reuters) - The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has accepted an invitation from Iran to take part in its investigation into the crash of a Ukrainian airplane in Tehran, the agency confirmed late on Thursday.
The NTSB said in a statement its Response Operations Center had received formal notification from Iran of Wednesday’s crash of the Boeing 737-800 that killed all 176 on board. “The NTSB has designated an accredited representative to the investigation of the crash,” the agency said.

The NTSB confirmed it would take part in the probe after an Iranian official told Reuters of the agreement.

“The NTSB has replied to our chief investigator and has announced an accredited representative,” Farhad Parvaresh, Iran’s representative at the International Civil Aviation Organization, part of the United Nations, told Reuters.

A person briefed on the matter said it was unclear what if anything its representative would be able to do under U.S. sanctions. NTSB said in its statement it “continues to monitor the situation surrounding the crash and evaluate its level of participation in the investigation.”

The United States is allowed to take part under global rules since the Boeing (BA.N) 737-800NG jet was designed and built there.

Canada, which had dozens of passengers onboard, has also assigned an expert, while a team from Ukraine held discussions in Tehran on Thursday, Parvaresh said in a telephone interview.

Iran is ready to provide consular facilities and visas for accredited investigators, he added.

Sweden and Afghanistan, which had some passengers on board, have also been notified. France may also be involved as it was one of the countries where the engines were made, Parvaresh said.

He denied U.S. and Canadian claims that the jet had been shot down accidentally and said Iran was committed to a full and transparent investigation for the accident, adding it was too early to speculate on the cause.

“As Iranians we feel this tragedy and disaster for us and for the families,” Parvaresh said, expressing condolences to the relatives of the people who died.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said earlier the jet was probably brought down by an accidental Iranian missile strike, citing intelligence from Canadian and other sources.

The U.S. government believes Iran shot down the plane by mistake, three U.S. officials told Reuters.
The Ukraine International Airlines flight to Kiev from Tehran crashed hours after Iran fired ballistic missiles at two U.S. military bases in Iraq.

Parvaresh said expert testimony indicated that the aircraft could not have been hit by a missile and that it was important to keep the crash investigation non-political.

“I think we should keep this purely technical and not confuse it with political tensions in the region. We should leave it to experts to investigate and make their report.”

[silvanelf]

and as for - When did it become acceptable to kill a top leader of a country we aren’t even at war with?

Who's "we?"

Could the question be asked of any "we?"

If so, could the question be asked of Hezbollah who assassinated the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Rafic Hariri?

That's a loaded question -- the wording should be:


"could the question be asked of those who assassinated the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Rafic Hariri?"

In other words, first of all you should ask whether Hezbollah was responsible for the assassination of Rafic Hariri in 2005. If you have no doubt about that implied assumption, then you are pretty naive.

[AutumnW]

Why believe anything coming out about Iran from the Western press. Most of it is pure propaganda.

[Chester]

and as for - When did it become acceptable to kill a top leader of a country we aren’t even at war with?

Who's "we?"

Could the question be asked of any "we?"

If so, could the question be asked of Hezbollah who assassinated the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Rafic Hariri?

That's a loaded question -- the wording should be:


"could the question be asked of those who assassinated the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Rafic Hariri?"

In other words, first of all you should ask whether Hezbollah was responsible for the assassination of Rafic Hariri in 2005. If you have no doubt about that implied assumption, then you are pretty naive.

Agree... it should have said "of those" and left out the assumption (and "accepted narrative") of Hezbollah.

I have doubt... On my list of suspects is Col. Wissam al Hassan, the head of Lebanese Intelligence at that time.

[Chester]

Why believe anything coming out about Iran from the Western press. Most of it is pure propaganda.

I wouldn't necessarily believe it, but when press sympathetic to the Mullah regime in Iran matches the Western press, I raise the odds it has some or much truth to it.

[Pam]

It's been updated a few minutes ago, but I first read this last night.

U.S. to join probe of Ukrainian jet disaster that killed 176 (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-crash-investigation/u-s-to-join-probe-of-ukrainian-jet-disaster-that-killed-176-idUSKBN1Z82SE)


PARIS (Reuters) - The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has accepted an invitation from Iran to take part in its investigation into the crash of a Ukrainian airplane in Tehran, the agency confirmed late on Thursday.
The NTSB said in a statement its Response Operations Center had received formal notification from Iran of Wednesday’s crash of the Boeing 737-800 that killed all 176 on board. “The NTSB has designated an accredited representative to the investigation of the crash,” the agency said.

The NTSB confirmed it would take part in the probe after an Iranian official told Reuters of the agreement.

“The NTSB has replied to our chief investigator and has announced an accredited representative,” Farhad Parvaresh, Iran’s representative at the International Civil Aviation Organization, part of the United Nations, told Reuters.

A person briefed on the matter said it was unclear what if anything its representative would be able to do under U.S. sanctions. NTSB said in its statement it “continues to monitor the situation surrounding the crash and evaluate its level of participation in the investigation.”

The United States is allowed to take part under global rules since the Boeing (BA.N) 737-800NG jet was designed and built there.

Canada, which had dozens of passengers onboard, has also assigned an expert, while a team from Ukraine held discussions in Tehran on Thursday, Parvaresh said in a telephone interview.

Iran is ready to provide consular facilities and visas for accredited investigators, he added.

Sweden and Afghanistan, which had some passengers on board, have also been notified. France may also be involved as it was one of the countries where the engines were made, Parvaresh said.

He denied U.S. and Canadian claims that the jet had been shot down accidentally and said Iran was committed to a full and transparent investigation for the accident, adding it was too early to speculate on the cause.

“As Iranians we feel this tragedy and disaster for us and for the families,” Parvaresh said, expressing condolences to the relatives of the people who died.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said earlier the jet was probably brought down by an accidental Iranian missile strike, citing intelligence from Canadian and other sources.

The U.S. government believes Iran shot down the plane by mistake, three U.S. officials told Reuters.
The Ukraine International Airlines flight to Kiev from Tehran crashed hours after Iran fired ballistic missiles at two U.S. military bases in Iraq.

Parvaresh said expert testimony indicated that the aircraft could not have been hit by a missile and that it was important to keep the crash investigation non-political.

“I think we should keep this purely technical and not confuse it with political tensions in the region. We should leave it to experts to investigate and make their report.”


So the US will join the probe of the Ukrainian disaster? Isn't that a bit like asking the fox to watch the hen house? That seems ridiculous to me or maybe just another antagonistic poke at Iran?

[Chester]

The US wouldn't be invited in if Iran didn't think they had "it" cleaned up. They've had two days to comb over the entire crash debris area.

[edina]

It's been updated a few minutes ago, but I first read this last night.

U.S. to join probe of Ukrainian jet disaster that killed 176 (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-crash-investigation/u-s-to-join-probe-of-ukrainian-jet-disaster-that-killed-176-idUSKBN1Z82SE)


PARIS (Reuters) - The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has accepted an invitation from Iran to take part in its investigation into the crash of a Ukrainian airplane in Tehran, the agency confirmed late on Thursday.
The NTSB said in a statement its Response Operations Center had received formal notification from Iran of Wednesday’s crash of the Boeing 737-800 that killed all 176 on board. “The NTSB has designated an accredited representative to the investigation of the crash,” the agency said.


So the US will join the probe of the Ukrainian disaster? Isn't that a bit like asking the fox to watch the hen house? That seems ridiculous to me or maybe just another antagonistic poke at Iran?

I'm not sure how that can be an antagonistic poke at Iran, if Iran were the ones who invited the US to join the investigation?

[AutumnW]

from Global Research:



The complete (translated) words of Abdul-Mahdi’s speech to parliament:

This is why I visited China and signed an important agreement with them to undertake the construction instead. Upon my return, Trump called me to ask me to reject this agreement. When I refused, he threatened to unleash huge demonstrations against me that would end my premiership.

Huge demonstrations against me duly materialized and Trump called again to threaten that if I did not comply with his demands, then he would have Marine snipers on tall buildings target protesters and security personnel alike in order to pressure me.

I refused again and handed in my resignation. To this day the Americans insist on us rescinding our deal with the Chinese.

After this, when our Minister of Defense publicly stated that a third party was targeting both protestors and security personnel alike (just as Trump had threatened he would do), I received a new call from Trump threatening to kill both me and the Minister of Defense if we kept on talking about this “third party”.

Nobody imagined that the threat was to be applied to General Soleimani, but it was difficult for Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi to reveal the weekslong backstory behind the terrorist attack.

I was supposed to meet him [Soleimani] later in the morning when he was killed. He came to deliver a message from Iran in response to the message we had delivered to the Iranians from the Saudis.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/deeper-story-behind-assassination-soleimani/5700117

[edina]

The US wouldn't be invited in if Iran didn't think they had "it" cleaned up. They've had two days to comb over the entire crash debris area.

Maybe, maybe not? :)

The counter intel person I mentioned in this comment (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109557-The-United-States-kills-Quds-Commander-Qasem-Soleimani&p=1330664&viewfull=1#post1330664) talked about how there had been a spike in radio chatter in Iran just prior to the plane exploding.

I've checked back few times to see if she has anything worth noting from vetting. I get a sense that she feels a need to be cautious and has turned information over to the appropriate authorities.

So, I think there will not be anything more to share from that direction.

I think maybe I should explain, the reason why I am tracking that in the Q thread, instead of here in this thread, is because I wanted to talk about it in the context of information from the Q posts and my understanding is that would not be appropriate to do in this thread.

Some people feel okay looking there, and others don't. I linked it in my comment along with the manifest links for people who were okay with it.

Thanks Iyakum for sharing a downloadable version of the manifest here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109557-The-United-States-kills-Quds-Commander-Qasem-Soleimani&p=1330816&viewfull=1#post1330816).

I'm feeling spread a little thin right now, so I'm going to go back to focusing primarily on the Q thread.

[Jayke]

Reza Marashi from https://iranian.com/

Unable to embed but well worth clicking through to listen to the podcast. By far the most level-headed and insightful analysis of the Iran situation I’ve heard to date.

https://iranian.com/2020/01/09/america-and-iran-almost-go-to-war-podcast-episode-4
(https://iranian.com/2020/01/09/america-and-iran-almost-go-to-war-podcast-episode-4/)

From Bill: here's the MP3. :thumbsup:
https://buzzsprout.com/723294/2447726-america-and-iran-almost-go-to-war-episode-4.mp3
Episode Description: This week, Reza gives the people a special episode dedicated to breaking down the Trump Administration killing Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani, why doing so was a bad idea, and the thinking behind Iran’s response going forward. Amir Handjani, Board Member at the Atlantic Council and Security Fellow with the Truman National Security Project, chats with Reza about Trump’s decision to kill a senior foreign government official in broad daylight, its impact inside and outside of Iran, and where U.S.-Iran relations might go from here.

About Reza Marashi: With 15 years of experience working in both the U.S. government and Washington DC think tank world, Reza Marashi breaks down American foreign policy, the lack of diplomatic engagement and military restraint that is guiding it, the cast of characters that are making this unsustainable problem worse, and how all of this is firmly not in the national interest of the United States.

[shaberon]

Iran admits culpability (https://www.rt.com/news/477994-zarif-iran-plane-us-adventurism/) in downing this plane.

[onawah]

Trump Reportedly Tried to Kill Another Top Iranian Commander on Same Day as Soleimani
by Jake Johnson, staff writer Common Dreams
Friday, January 10, 2020

"The Trump administration reportedly tried and failed to assassinate a senior Iranian military official in Yemen on the same day it killed Gen. Qasem Soleimani with a drone strike in Baghdad last week, nearly sparking a full-blown regional war.

The Washington Post reported Friday that U.S. forces carried out a "top secret mission" targeting Abdul Reza Shahlai, a high-level commander of Iran's Quds Force. According to the Post, the U.S. launched a strike against Shahlai in Yemen but it was unsuccessful for unknown reasons.

According to the Post:

The Trump administration views Shahlai as a particularly potent adversary.

The State Department offered a $15 million reward last month for information leading to Shahlai and the disruption of [the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps'] financial mechanisms. The announcement said that Shahlai is based in Yemen and has a "long history of involvement in attacks targeting the U.S. and our allies, including in the 2011 plot against the Saudi ambassador" at an Italian restaurant in Washington.

Critics said the Post reporting undermines the Trump administration's claim that it assassinated Soleimani due to an "imminent threat" to American interests—and indicates the general's killing was part of what was meant to be a far more sweeping effort to damage the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

"This suggests a mission with a longer planning horizon and a larger objective, and it really does call into question why there was an attempt to explain this publicly on the basis of an imminent threat," Suzanne Maloney, an Iran scholar at the Brookings Institution think tank, told the Post.


Alex Emmons
✔
@AlexEmmons
If this operation had succeeded, how was this administration going to claim that an IRGC commander in Yemen of all places - was an "imminent" threat to Americans?https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/on-the-day-us-forces-killed-soleimani-they-launched-another-secret-operation-targeting-a-senior-iranian-official-in-yemen/2020/01/10/60f86dbc-3245-11ea-898f-eb846b7e9feb_story.html …

8
11:40 AM - Jan 10, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
See Alex Emmons's other Tweets




Tommy Vietor
✔
@TVietor08
Multiple strikes on top IRGC officials is starting a war. These were decapitation strikes. All the claims about an imminent threat are bull**** pretext. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/on-the-day-us-forces-killed-soleimani-they-launched-another-secret-operation-targeting-a-senior-iranian-official-in-yemen/2020/01/10/60f86dbc-3245-11ea-898f-eb846b7e9feb_story.html …

486
11:47 AM - Jan 10, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
154 people are talking about this


The Post reported that the strikes on Soleimani and Shahlai were approved at around the same time but the latter was not disclosed because "it did not go according to plan." One senior official told the Post that Shahlai "may be targeted in the future."

"If we had killed him, we'd be bragging about it that same night," another official told the Post, referring to the night the U.S. assassinated Soleimani.

News of an attempted second U.S. strike comes after legal experts and members of Congress condemned the assassination of Soleimani as a violation of both U.S. and international law. On Thursday night, the House of Representatives passed a War Powers Resolution aimed at barring Trump from taking military action against Iran without congressional approval.

"Congress has not authorized military action against Iran," Matt Duss, foreign policy adviser for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), tweeted in response to the Post story. "This is a completely lawless president."

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a vocal critic of the Trump administration's hawkish Iran policies, said "Congress needs answers" to serious questions raised by the new reporting.

"What was the full extent of the Trump administration's plans to kill Iranian officials?" Khanna tweeted. "How does the attempted killing in Yemen have anything to do with an imminent threat?" "

[shaberon]

Here is some direct response from the assassination. Two days ago, Iranian proxies were seen pouring in to Abu Kamal (https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/iranian-backed-forces-increase-presence-along-syria-iraq-border/) near the Iraq-Syria border. Through this area, there have been increasing drone attacks by Israel.

As of now, the buildup has been hit hard by unidentified warplanes (https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/unknown-warplanes-targeted-iranian-forces-in-syria-from-iraq-media/) in Iraqi airspace. Some are quick to accuse Israel (https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/10/615819/Israel-attack-syria-hashd). This has been rather damaging (https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/powerful-blasts-rock-syria-iraq-border-after-warplanes-strike-iranian-forces/).

Since Israel does the same thing from Lebanon, it would not be too surprising if they were responsible. If so, Iran may not be able to legally retaliate, since it is a private militia. I am not really sure if there is any way they can legally attack Israel the way they say they would like to.

Of course, certain parties can attack whomever they want, but if you are Iran, the "world" might use it against you.

If they admit to whatever happened to the Ukranian plane within a few days, that is a lot more transparent than the one that happened in the Ukraine itself under similar circumstances.

[Iyakum]

Quiet, quiet, secret, at some point and always the target that was previously agreed with the USA. A target that may be unknown to us. But it poses a real threat to the Usa and Israel. They are small pinpricks that are carried out by Israel. But even the smallest pinpricks are painful.

I also think Iran will not be able to take legal revenge. Fighter jets that don't have any IDs ... that will be difficult and I don't think it's surprising. The United States doesn't respond, why should they? Israel can do whatever it wants since no one could hold Israel accountable. So leave it at once, it wouldn't work. So the Israelis can do anything they like.

But what would happen if someone or a country was able to prove that Israel was behind an X attack? Then what would be? Would the countries that are anti-Israel join Iran? It seems that the Saudis as well as the UAE are slowly approaching Israel, but that is still not under wraps, or what do you think?

[ExomatrixTV]

Tucker Carlson Literally Saved The World TWICE Now, Convincing Trump NO WAR:
y4NyiUnwFGY

[Praxis]

For the record, the peace loving President of the United States Rejected the demand of the Iraqi people that we stop occupying their country.

For the record, The peace loving trump had to be talked into peace by Tucker ****ing Carlson.

[Gracy]

For the record, the peace loving President of the United States Rejected the demand of the Iraqi people that we stop occupying their country.

For the record, The peace loving trump had to be talked into peace by Tucker ****ing Carlson.

It's all part of the plan. :wink:


42262

[Bluegreen]

wow gracy may
that was mean

[Praxis]

wow gracy may
that was mean


I believe that holding people in Guantanamo Bay without trial is mean.

Separating families and holding them in cages at the border for seeking a better life is mean.

Occupying two countries for almost 20 and 18 years respectively is mean.

Wasting billions of dollars on war is mean.

Signing an executive order limiting free speech ( saying anti BDS things are bad).

Taking away food stamps from people is mean.

Supporting all these aforementioned policies is mean

[ExomatrixTV]

Trump reveals new details on imminent threat from Soleimani:
oEeDJsmvKxs

[Gracy]

wow gracy may
that was mean

Why was that mean? Sarcastic? Yes, guilty as charged.

Mean? Sorry Bluegreen I'm not seeing it considering all the master 5D chess player rhetoric for this pres that my post is based on. To me its no different than razzing the old meme that Barry O was a behind the scenes secret lightworker, just biding his time until it would be safe to expose his true self to the world.

[Chester]

Iranian protesters take to streets after Tehran admits Ukrainian plane was shot down unintentionally in fear of US aggression

read here (https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/11/middleeast/iran-shot-down-ukrainian-plane/index.html) [link corrected, thank you, Gracy May]

[Jayke]

There was chatter last June (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?107391-Explosions-hit-two-large-oil-tankers-in-Sea-of-Oman&p=1297018&viewfull=1#post1297018) that China was sharing technology with Iran that was 'beyond American capabilities'.

A series of articles recently have elaborated on what some of those technologies might be.

===========

https://journal-neo.org/2020/01/11/new-facts-change-everything-the-sickening-truth-about-why-iran-schooled-america/






New Facts Change Everything, the Sickening Truth About Why Iran “Schooled” America by Gordon Duff

...

...It is also clear that Trump’s hubris in his wild threats against Iraq and his willingness to murder the foremost military leader in the war on terror is based on what American author and former CIA officer Robert David Steele calls the “Cult of West Point Class of 1986”and Politico calls the “West Point Mafia.”

Steele postulates that this single class, a collection of “bad apples” as it were, has pushed Trump toward one failed endeavor after another. From Stratfor:

“Since graduating from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1986, the careers of Mike Pompeo, Ulrich Brechbuhl, Brian Bulatao, Mark Esper, David Urban and Mark Green have periodically intersected. Now they have converged in the Trump administration.”

These are the geniuses that told Trump Iran had only old Soviet “scud” type missiles, with liquid fuel, no guidance and poor reliability. Of course, none have actual military experience other than as “place holders” and “seat warmers.”

Then the surprise came, Iran’s missiles rained down on al Asad Air Base, easily pushing past America’s Patriot missile defense system, “0” hit. Worse still, the highly advanced solid fuel missiles from Iraq hit within not yards but within 10 feet of targets, actually much closer than that.

Similarly, when missiles plowed into the “consular” facilities, really weapons warehouses, at Erbil International Airport, in the Kurdish region of Northern Iraq, the US denied any hits claiming to have shot down two of three missiles and the other a “wide miss.”

Then, as is so often the case, American military personnel billeted in the apartment buildings just south of the facility uploaded their video to YouTube.

Three missiles, thee direct hits, dramatic explosions, which the Americans seemed to enjoy immensely.

We now enter a new world, not just one with America “schooled” but with America’s actual role exposed, occupier, terrorist and thief.
============

Pepe Escobar has a source close to the Qatari royal family who gives a little detail on how the Patriot missile defense system can easily be bypassed.

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


https://larouchepub.com/pr/2020/200108_deescalate.html





Pepe Escobar Reports on Trump’s Intention to De-escalate Iran Conflict

Jan. 8, 2020 (EIRNS)—Brazilian journalist Pepe Escobar, Asia Times’ geopolitical analyst, reports today in Consortium News on a response sent from a “top U.S. intel source” to whom Escobar had posed “a detailed question.” The source, he said, was close to the Qatari royal family, and responded that President Donald Trump sent a message to Tehran via the emir of Qatar that there would be de-escalation if Tehran came up with a “proportional response.” Escobar notes that Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif’s tweet following the missile attack this morning stated: “Iran took & concluded proportionate measures in self-defense under Article 51 of UN Charter.”

Escobar’s source otherwise said: “It is most unlikely Trump will escalate at this point, and this could provide him with the opportunity to leave the Middle East except for the Gulf States. Trump wants to get out. The fact that Israel would be hit next by Iran ... will probably cause them to pull back, and not order Trump to bomb Iran itself.

“DEBKA-Mossad acknowledged that Iran’s offensive missiles cannot be defended against. Its secret is that it hugs the ground going underneath the radar screens. ... What is amazing is that Iraq has allowed U.S. troops into their country at all after seeing over a million of their people murdered by the U.S. if we include the 500,000 dead children....”

The source also questioned why the Patriot missile defense systems on the U.S. bases were not used.

Escobar added:

“Judd Deere, the deputy press secretary of the White House, confirmed on Tuesday night what I had learned earlier from another source. The White House said Trump, in a phone call, thanked Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani for ‘Qatar’s partnership with the United States,’ and they discussed Iraq and Iran....

“Details are still sparse, but there’s ultra-high level, back-room diplomacy going on, especially between Iran and Russia, with China discreet, but on full alert.”
=================

Robert David Steele mentions some of the other capabilities the Iranians might possess, which most likely would've been provided by the Russians.

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


https://phibetaiota.net/2020/01/robert-steele-iran-played-by-ltgen-paul-van-riper-usmc-beat-the-****-out-of-the-usa-in-2002-today-they-are-if-anything-vastly-more-capable/





Robert Steele: Iran (Played by LtGen Paul Van Riper, USMC) Beat the **** Out of the USA in 2002 — Today They Are, If Anything, Vastly More Capable

hen there is the whole matter of electromagnetic and satellite vulnerabily, as well as rear area headquarters (I can cripple MacDill AFB in one night, it will take them weeks if not months to recover — the forward area HQS in the Middle East are even more vulnerable).

This is not a game. Electromagnetically the USA has been a loser since the 1980’s and that is not going to change anytime soon. Apart from military-related capabilities (satellites, exposed weapons and mobility electronics) it would be a simple matter for Iran to take down the USA’s “Just in Time” logistics system as well as financial, communications, and power systems. I and others have been sounding this alarm since 1990.

Then of course you have those pesky bio-hazards which we are NOT ready for. These will be more about panic rather than death, but in extremis Iran is perfectly capable of wiping out both people and animals with a pandemic.

Col Dr. Doug Macgregor has written the definitive book on how wars are won or lost decades before they are fought:

Review: Margin of Victory – Five Battles that Changed the Face of Modern War

And now, with a tip of the hat to Veterans Today, here is the kicker: a man I worked for, LtGen Paul Van Riper, playing Iran, destroyed — DESTROYED — the entire US military in a wargame in 2002 that was “rigged” before and after the fact to pretend the US military was “invincible”, but there is no denying the facts. Iran as played by LtGen Van Riper kicked our ass. Today, between supersonic missiles and electronmagnetic neutralization of US weapons systems (including premature self-destruction of US nuclear missiles), this is not a war we can win.

Southfront: US Wargame shows Iran winning, beating all US forces with relative ease (https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/01/11/southfront-us-wargame-shows-iran-winning-beating-all-us-forces-with-relative-ease/)

I believe that President Donald Trump has been lied to at every level (strategic, operational, tactical, and technical. I believe that the Secretaries of State and Defense, and the Director of the CIA, work for Israel and the Deep State and are in betrayal of the President and the public trust. I believe the President has no alternative but to fire all three of these individuals and negotiate a phased withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, respecting their sovereignty.


===========

The 7 minute Southfront war simulation video from the linked article above:

9IQb4BXOQK0

US exercise kills 20,000 Americans, 19 ships during first 15 minutes

The United States and Iran are balancing on the edge of a fully-fledged open military conflict, with many claiming that President Donald Trump had to respond militarily to the Iranian retaliatory missile strike on US military bases in Iraq. However, they have forgotten that in 2002 the Pentagon already ran a colossal wargame designed to simulate a war with Iran – and the US lost heavily.

Millennium Challenge 2002 was a $235 million USD military exercise that involved elements of all the U.S. armed forces, with over 13,500 personnel engaging in the most realistic wargames held up until that time. Almost immediately following the invasion of Afghanistan and ahead of the 2003 launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom, the exercise was clearly meant to test the Pentagon’s new vision of waging war against a Middle Eastern enemy. The enemy that the OPFOR (opposition force) was modeled after was in fact the nation of Iran.