Citizens Dedicated To Preserving Our Constitutional Republic

ISRAEL PUSHING FOR ATTACK ON IRAN

ISRAEL PUSHING FOR ATTACK ON IRAN

There has been a steady crescendo of demands for military action against Iran designed to beef up public support for an open attack by the US and Israel. This has not stopped covert attacks against Iran. Several months ago US and Israeli intelligence agents blasted Iran's nuclear plants with the Stuxnet virus hoping to corrupt the Siemens industrial computer processes used there. Iranian scientists have been targeted and murdered by foreign agents within Iran. Both of these provocations are acts of war, but Iran didn't take the bait. Switching back to fomenting war sentiments at home, the US falsified an attempted assassination of our Saudi Ambassador and blamed it on Iran. Then a House Committee voted for more sanctions on Iran despite the disastrous effect on civilians when it restricts spare parts and equipment for hospitals, airplanes and infrastructure. The stage is being set for a major war in the Middle East just in time to keep Americans from fully withdrawing from Iraq.

This month Israel successfully test-fired a medium range ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead to send a message to Iran about the consequences of striking back at Israel even if Israel starts the war. China responded by increasing missile technology transfers to Iran. Bill Gertz of the Washington Times reports that "China is continuing to provide advanced missiles and other conventional arms to Iran... China continues to provide Iran with what could be considered advanced conventional weapons.'"

According to the report, which will be made public Nov. 16, China sold $312 million worth of arms to Iran, second only to Russia. But neither nation will back Iran when the Israeli attack comes even after the US enters the fray just as Russia left Iraq hanging despite assurances of support.

The reason is not that Russian doesn't have the will. It is because both Russia and China have a greater strategic interest by allowing the US to play the bully around the world which they will eventually use to justify a future Russian/Chinese attack on the US. The Russians, in particular, have positioned many surveillance sensors through areas where the US engages in military operations. This allows them to eavesdrop on US military communications and tactics--a vital preparation for countering an enemy in wartime. In the Iraq war, it was documented that the Russians successfully tested a new anti-tank projectile which successfully bored a pencil sized hole through one side of an Abrams tank penetrating all armored layers. The US never said anything about this threat, but it leaked out anyway. Soldiers tend to talk about such things.

Israel has long been planning a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear program although the US has been planting disinformation to appear opposed to the strike. The US government leaked various disinformation stories about why Defense Secretary Leon Panetta rushed over to Israel on a recent trip. The media was told that Panetta was there to demand that Israel stop planning to attack Iran. This is utter hogwash. The US is behind it but has to claim the opposite.

According to one source I quoted in the WAB last year, an accidental non-insider got invited to a strategy meeting of globalists in the City of London. There he heard them openly talk about being disappointed that Israel had not yet attacked Iran. This was back in 2004! So these plans have been around for some time. At the time, Israel lacked sufficient public justification for such aggression and was begging off on the assignment.

Subsequently, the US and its allies have been helping to build the case against Iran by exaggerating Iran's nuclear threat--with the exception of the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) which completely reversed itself and claimed Iran gave up its nuclear weapons program.

This was done to give the Bush administration an excuse to stand down its armada of 3 aircraft carriers that were currently in the Gulf awaiting orders to strike Iran in late 2007 or early 2008. Such a strike, without a Gulf of Tonkin justification (US black operations did try to goad Iran into a naval confrontation but Iranian speed boats failed to take the bait) would have created a wave of anti-war sentiment in the US and accrued to the then candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul--the only Republican opposing more wars of intervention--which the PTB couldn't risk. After Paul was sidelined from the manipulated Republican nomination process that gave us the John McCain disaster, the US once again reversed the NIE and Iran suddenly became a threat again. Go figure.

As I proposed last week, I think the strike on Iran will be the excuse that allows the current administration to cancel its final withdrawal from Iraq, which the PTB had no intention of doing on a permanent basis. That may well be why the big propaganda push against Iran is going on right now. Because time is running short to find a war to justify staying in Iraq, the US and Israel are having to sacrifice the element of surprise for the sake of making one last attempt to build popular support.

With the current state of the economy, the American public is not at all in favor of another trillion dollar war in the Middle East--unless, of course, the administration can make it look like we were attacked innocently. I'll talk about how they plan on doing that shortly.

International newspapers are awash in stories about the building consensus for an attack by Israel against Iran. There was a report in the Israeli journal Yediot Ahronot that said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak favor an attack--no surprise there. Another center-Left newspaper in Israel, Haaretz, said that most of Netanyahu's cabinet is now in favor of such an attack, despite the guaranteed retaliation expected. Israel's missile test was a not-so-subtle warning that Israel is planning a much bigger retaliation against Iran than Iran is capable of delivering to Israel.

Britain has admitted it is openly planning to support strikes in Iran. Laura Rozen wrote this for the AP: "PM Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are working to convince other members of Netanyahu's cabinet and Israeli security chiefs that Israel needs to launch a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear program.

"On the one hand, there are mounting rumors of an Israeli move that will change the face of the Middle East [there are thousands of missiles, large and small aimed at Israel from Lebanon, Syria and Egypt. If they were unleashed in barrages as expected, the Israeli Arrow ABM system will be overwhelmed] and possibly seal Israel's fate for generations to come; on the other hand, there is a total absence of any public debate [typical of globalist politicians. They have a hidden agenda and they aren't about to ask for permission to pursue it]. The issue of whether to attack Iran is at the bottom of the Israeli discourse.

"From Israel's perspective, it may feel 'it has little to lose' from carrying out strikes on Iran, in terms of its regional standing, Marc Lynch, a Middle East expert at George Washington University, told Yahoo News Wednesday. 'It sees its strategic position [amid the Arab awakening] as deteriorating. There is no peace process [and that's purposeful as Netanyahu has deliberately poisoned the waters of talks by pushing settlement boundaries and encouraging terror by releasing over a thousand prisoners for one hostage. It didn't help things when Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said he will never recognize a Jewish state and that capturing Gilad Shalit was a 'good thing'].'

"The media reports also come as the UN atomic watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is due to issue a report on Iran's nuclear program Nov. 8. 'The [IAEA] report will almost certainly raise tensions in a region made volatile by this year's Arab revolutions and the turmoil in Syria,' the Guardian's diplomatic editor Julian Borger wrote Wednesday. 'In the absence of a tough new UN security council resolution, the US will face the dilemma of acting militarily without an international mandate, or risk missing Iran's window of vulnerability to attack.'

"In a separate Guardian report on Wednesday it was noted, 'Britain's armed forces are stepping up their contingency planning for potential military action against Iran amid mounting concern about Tehran's nuclear enrichment program. The UK Defense Ministry believes the US may decide to fast-forward plans for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. British officials say that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive, UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within the coalition government.'"

As the Daily Mail reported, "Israel considers Iran its most dangerous threat. It cites Tehran's nuclear program, its ballistic missile development, repeated references by the Iranian leader to Israel's destruction and its support for anti-Israel militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran denies allegations that it aims to produce a bomb, saying its nuclear program is meant only to produce energy for the oil-rich country."

I personally think Iran is trying to produce a nuclear weapon, but this may be quite natural given that globalist powers in the West have long been setting Iran up for destruction and/or control. In fact, US intelligence is the one that started them down this path (dialectic strategy: create new enemies to generate reasons for future intervention) by funneling nuclear weapons plans (flawed) to Iran through the CIA controlled Kahn Nuclear network operating out of Pakistan.

Strategically, this may be one of the reasons why the US government was planning to invade and occupy both Afghanistan and Iraq before the 911 attack--which conveniently provide the never ending excuse for the phony war on terror. As longtime subscribers know, I and others have documented the abundant evidence that the 911 attack could only have been designed and carried out by black elements within our own government, using controlled demolition of the 3 WTC buildings, in concert with terrorist patsies the CIA controlled. Those of you who have not seen the evidence should review the "911 Update" link on my website (www.worldaffairsbrief.com).

Controlling both Afghanistan and Iraq conveniently sandwiches Iran between two huge bases of US/NATO military operations. Even if the US temporarily pulls out of Iraq, the massive US bases will remain under a skeleton crew so that they can be reactivated within days of starting a war with Iran.

Here's my best guess of how this is going to play out: The UN report on Iran's nuclear program will declare that the Iranian program is reaching a dangerous stage. The US will ask the UN for deeper sanction to include gasoline. The hope is to induce Iran to strike out (as did Japan when the British cut off Japanese access to fuel from British colonies. Iran won't lash out, but will begin making defensive military preparations. Israel may distort this to claim offensive moves and begin their long planned air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Israeli jets will evade flying over Lebanon, Syria and Jordan and thread the needle south into the Sea of Aqaba and then turn east into Saudi Arabia which has granted overfly rights. Turkey, to the north of Israel is no longer cooperating with Israel despite the fact that Sen. Susan Collins just returned from a lavish visit to Turkey where she bragged at the American Turkish Council that Turkey still receives over a million dollars a day from US anti-terrorist slush funds.

I believe the Israeli air strike will be conventional, but use several of the special bunker busting bombs the US has recently sent to Israel. The US military has also been shipping tons of supplies to Israel in the last year in anticipation of this coming war.

The Iranians will retaliate against Israel and US bases in Iraq with missile attacks and that will give the US the justification to enter the war. Iran will simultaneously marshal all of its allies in Syria and Lebanon, and perhaps even Egypt, to attack Israel with their barrages of missiles. Although I'm confident the US and Israel will finally come out victorious it will be at a great cost in military hardware and human lives. It will permanently rearrange the balance of power in the region in favor of Israel, but will exacerbate the growing hatred against Israel and the United States as ruthless bullies. Ultimately, it may be this coming war that creates the ill will necessary for the prophesied future battle of Armageddon--which I am not predicting as imminent. There's a world war to come first and it will take out the US as an independent power and harness our remaining military power and citizens to the New World Order. We will have been sold out by our own globalist leaders.