AIPAC/Neocons Use Alleged Assassination Plot To Push For War With Iran (for Israel)

Neocons Use Alleged Assassination Plot To Push For War With Iran (for Israel):

US Hawks Behind Iraq War Rally for Strikes Against Iran

The Neocons are Coming (pushing Iran war!):

Petraeus’s CIA Fuels Iran Murder Plot (see comments at bottom of as well!):

“Israel & Saudi Arabia Are Much More Dangerous Enemies To The US Than The Iranians Are!” says former CIA Bin Laden unit head Michael Scheuer (he mentioned that ‘Neocon John’ McCain is owned by the Israelis!): 

Mike Scheuer actually says (in following youtube that I linked to in the prior email send) that the Congress (to include John Mccain) is owned by the Israelis (via AIPAC and the neocons!):
Pakistan the next American enemy (Former CIA Bin Laden unit head Mike Scheuer interviewed):

Is alleged Iranian plot a “provocation by an outside agency”? asks Guardian

Americans believe red herring– Iran is Enemy #1. Why?

Stephen Sniegoski wrote:
Neocon Bill Kristol advocates war on Iran. “It’s long since been time for the United States to speak to this regime in the language it understands—force.”

Bill Kristol: ‘We need to hear’ that Obama has gone to war on Iran

 Neocons’ Goal: Iran by Way of Libya

Stephen Sniegoski wrote:

Raimondo includes a consideration of a possible Israeli connection to the bizarre plot:

AIPAC front Washington Institute of Near East Policy (WINEP) calling for tough US response to fake Iran plot. Israel yearns for US attack on Iran

Some analysts skeptical of alleged Iranian plot:

 Fmr. diplomat: Iran plot makes no sense

Coming Israeli attack on Iran which would draw US into war with Iran as well:

US Begins Huge Military Maneuvers Aimed at Iran

5 Responses to “AIPAC/Neocons Use Alleged Assassination Plot To Push For War With Iran (for Israel)”

  • Patriot says:

    From: “Dick Blakney”
    Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:56:24 PM
    Subject: Iran Update (steps toward war?)

    To Network Promoting Peace with Iran,

    I appeal to you to read these posts, particularly the last one.

    Dick Blakney

    Panetta Warns Israel Of Taking Unilateral Military Action Against Iran, Think Progress, By Ali Gharib, Oct 4, 2011 “But Defense Secretary Leon Panetta threw cold water on the idea of an Israeli military strike on Iran during a trip to Israel yesterday. At a joint press conference with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Panetta signaled that the U.S. didn’t want to see a surprise strike by Israel: “I think the most effective way to deal with Iran is not on a unilateral basis,” he said in response to a question. Panetta went on to say that, like Israel, the U.S. sees the Iranian nuclear program as a priority, but that countries should work “together” to address it: …his calls for Israel to “work together” were understood within the government as carrying an underlying message that since Israel can only really rely on the US, it will not be able to surprise it with unilateral military action against Iran.”

    U.S. Accuses Iranians of Plotting to Kill Saudi Envoy, New York Times, CHARLIE SAVAGE and SCOTT SHANE, October 11, 2011: “WASHINGTON — The United States on Tuesday accused Iranian officials of plotting to murder Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States in a bizarre scheme involving an Iranian-American used-car salesman who believed he was hiring assassins from a Mexican drug cartel for $1.5 million.”

    Iran’s Letter to U.N. on U.S. Allegations, WSJ Blog, October 11, 2011: Mohammad Khazaee, Iran’s U.N. ambassador, wrote the U.N. secretary general “to express our outrage” over the allegations, calling them “politically motivated”: “The Islamic Republic of Iran strongly and categorically rejects these fabricated and baseless allegations, based on the suspicious claims by an individual. Any country could accuse other countries through fabrication of such stories.”

    Ex-CIA warns US ‘dangerously wrong’ on Iran, ABC News, Updated October 12, 2011
    The former intelligence analyst, Robert Baer, joins The World Today and warns the Obama administration to step back from blaming Iran for the foiled assassination plot against the Saudi ambassador in Washington. The former CIA case agent says the attack doesn’t appear to have been planned by Iran, and that the US may have got its assessment dangerously wrong. He says the US must open a direct diplomatic channel with the Iranian regime .. or risk igniting an uncontrollable war.

    Questions over Alleged Islamic Republic Assassination Plot in US, by MUHAMMAD SAHIMI in Los Angeles 12 Oct 2011: “
    “From motive to method, elements of purported plan don’t readily add up. . The question now is: can the claim possibly be true? … I am highly skeptical about the entire episode. In fact, the more I learn about the claim and the indictment, the more I think this may be a classic case of entrapment on the part of the FBI/DEA agents … What would the hardliners have gained, had they succeeded? … although the IRI has carried out assassination operations beyond Iranian borders, … they have targeted Iranian dissidents. The IRI ended its foreign assassinations in the mid-1990s. … I find that the IRI was involved in the plot highly unlikely.”

    Questions Surround Alleged Terror Plot,, by Shayan Ghajar, October 12th, 2011 Among the questions: “The man claiming to be in the Zetas cartel was apparently a paid informant for federal investigators, a man previously arrested on a narcotics charge who began collaboration with law enforcement to avoid incarceration. … The largest question about the alleged terror plot is what would Iran or the IRGC’s Quds Force stand to gain by bombing the ambassadors of two unfriendly states in the capital of a third? As many American legislators have noted, had the plotted attack succeeded, it could have constituted an act of war against the United States. Saudi Arabia and Israel may also have considered it an act of war, had their ambassadors been attacked. … Iran would be risking World War Three to assassinate two ambassadors, and gaining no strategic advantage to speak of. … (C)ontrary to the simplistic and ineffective methods carried out in the assassination plot, the Quds Force have long been described as extremely sophisticated and capable by security and terrorism experts. … Until more information comes to light, the precise nature and origin of Arbabsiar’s plot remains questionable.”

    The “Come To Jesus” Moment In US-Iran Relations, Reza Marashi and Trita Parsi, Huffington Post, 10/12/11: “ … There are still many details about the case that we don’t know, but this crucial point is already on the verge of irrelevance. In Washington, allowing for time to collect all the facts rarely happens. And when it comes to politically toxic issues like Iran, it almost certainly will not happen. … (Y)ou don’t send the Attorney General there unless you have irrefutable evidence (which was not presented at the press conference), or if you seek to leverage this as fodder for further escalation. … (C)ontainment with Iran is not a stable policy. On the contrary, it’s a policy that keeps both sides perpetually teetering on the verge of war. Containment with the Soviet Union proved to be stable for two key reasons. First, because even at the height of the Cold War, Washington and Moscow engaged in direct diplomacy — that is, effective de-escalatory mechanisms were in place. The two countries could effectively communicate with each other and sort out misunderstandings before they escalated into military conflict. … There is no direct communication between the two sides (both recently ignored or rejected each other’s proposals for direct communication). And their domestic political landscapes do not put a premium on restraint; rather, strong domestic constituencies in Washington and Tehran consistently push for escalation. Without serious efforts to defuse a crisis that is steadily spiraling out of control, we are on the precipice of a major war in the region. … The Obama administration must avoid falling further into this trap — particularly if there are Iranian hardliners trying to bait the U.S. into a conflict. This is what we call a real “come to Jesus” moment — some hard decisions on war and peace need to be made, in Washington and Tehran. Unfortunately, given the history and politics involved, all signs are pointing in the wrong direction. It is often forgotten that in crises like this, it takes greater courage to stand for restraint and de-escalation than to opt for war and confrontation.

Leave a Reply