Archive for January, 2012

Iran, perceiving threat from West, willing to attack on U.S. soil, U.S. intelligence report finds

The first step towards going to war is to begin to saturate the public’s consciousness with propaganda. Here we go…  No mention of how neocon Israel first warmonger has considerable influence ( & ) on General Petraeus who is mentioned below as he is now head of the CIA of course! 

U.S. Intelligence Chief: Iranian Leaders More Willing to Attack United States 

The top U.S. intelligence official is claiming senior Iranian leaders could back attacks inside the United States in response to perceived threats against their government’s survival. In prepared testimony for the Senate Intelligence Committee, National Intelligence Director James Clapper said, “Some Iranian officials — probably including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei — have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real, or perceived U.S. actions, that threaten the regime.” Clapper cited the widely questioned U.S. claim of a foiled Iranian assassination plot against the Saudi ambassador to the United States last year. Also giving testimony, CIA Director David Petraeus said U.S.-backed sanctions against Iran are having their desired effect.

David Petraeus, CIA director: “The overall situation is one in which the sanctions have been biting much, much more, literally, in recent weeks than they have until this time. So, I think what we have to see now is, how does that play out, what is the level of popular discontent inside Iran, does that influence the strategic decision making of the Supreme Leader in the regime, keeping in mind that the regime’s paramount goal, in all that they do, is their regime’s survival.”

Iran, perceiving threat from West, willing to attack on U.S. soil, U.S. intelligence report finds

US intelligence: Iran could launch terror attacks on America

Another War on the Cheap:

Ongoing War with Iran:


Zionist Israel firsters at Washington Post (and NY Times as well) at it again for another war for Israel like they were in run-up for Iraq! Journalist Eric Margolis (can hear his response to USS Liberty survivor Phil Tourney via

Via Twitter @EricMargolis US media trumpets so-called #Iran threat to USA. Prelude to war. Same false claims over Iraq 2002-3.


Neocon Warmongers:

Ron Paul vs the Israel 1st Neocon Toadies:

Israel Pushing Iran War:

Putting Israel First

Putting Israel First

Newt Gingrich’s Deep Neocon Ties Drive His Bellicose Middle East Policy

Newt Gingrich’s Deep Neocon Ties Drive His Bellicose Middle East Policy link used in Daily Beast Gingrich article

Adelson and ‘Neocon Newt’ Gingrich:

Who Wants War with Iran?

Who Wants War with Iran?

Avoiding a ‘Dumb War’ With Iran:

Israel pushing Iran war:

Former CIA Bin Laden Unit Head Michael Scheuer: America’s Warmongering Foreign Policy Is ‘Beholden to the Israelis’

Scheuer: America’s Warmongering Foreign Policy Is ‘Beholden to the Israelis’

Former CIA Bin Laden unit head Michael Scheuer: America creates its own enemies

U.S. bombs not strong enough to destroy Iran’s nuclear program

Following from General (Ret) James David who is mentioned on the cover of the third edition of of former Republican Congressman Paul Findley’s ‘They Dare to Speak Out’ about the power/influence of the pro-Israel lobby (AIPAC and similar) on the US political system and media:

James David wrote:

The United States and Israel are the first to accuse other countries of seeking weapons of mass destruction when at the same time are doing the exact thing that they accuse others of doing. If this isn’t a perfect example hypocrisy then what is?
Published 07:30 28.01.12 Latest update 07:30 28.01.12

U.S. bombs not strong enough to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, report says

Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, Defense Secretary Panetta, Pentagon officials say Washington seeking new weapons that would overcome depth of Iranian enrichment facilities, recent fortifications.

By Haaretz Tags: Iran threat Iran nuclear Iran

The United States does not possess conventional armament powerful enough to destroy Iran’s deeply hidden nuclear facilities, U.S. officials told the Wall Street Journal late Friday, with American Defense Secretary Leon Panetta saying Washington was “still trying” to develop more powerful bombs.

Will the U.S. strike Iran’s nuclear program? Join the discussion on’s official Facebook page

Iran Qom nuclear AP A nuclear facility under construction inside a mountain located about 20 miles north northeast of Qom, Iran.
Photo by: AP

Late last year, Bloomberg reported that the U.S. Air Force received new 15-ton bombs capable of destroying deep underground bunkers, ahead of a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear plants.

The bombs, designed to be delivered by B-2 stealth bombers and called Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOP), “will meet requirements for the current operational need,” U.S. Air Force spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Jack Miller said in a statement in November.

However, speaking to the Wall Street Journal on Friday, U.S. officials estimated that even the 15-ton bombs would not be powerful to put a full stop to Iran’s nuclear program, either because of some of the facilities’ depth or their newly added fortifications.

One unnamed officials said Pentagon analysts estimated that currently held conventional bombs would not be effective against Iran’s enrichment plant in Fordo, adding that a tactical nuclear would be the only option if Washington sought to destroy the facility.

“Once things go into the mountain, then really you have to have something that takes the mountain off,” the official told the Wall Street Journal.

Speaking of the uranium enrichment plant in Natanz, one official indicated that the U.S.’ MOPs could suffice, adding, however, that “even that is guesswork.”

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal on Thursday, the U.S. defense secretary referred to the need to develop bombs potent enough to pierce Iran’s defenses, saying: “We’re still trying to develop them,” Mr. Panetta said.

Should Washington decide to use the MOP anyway, Panetta added, it could cause “a lot of damage” to Iran’s hidden facilities, adding, however, that the bunker busters wouldn’t necessarily destroy them outright.

“We’re developing it. I think we’re pretty close, let’s put it that way. But we’re still working at it because these things are not easy to be able to make sure that they will do what we want them to,” Panetta added, saying: “But I’m confident, frankly, that we’re going to have that capability and have it soon.”

Despite questions regarding the MOP’s ability permanently damage Iran’ nuclear facilities, one U.S. security official speaking to the Wall Street Journal said that “the Massive Ordnance Penetrators are by no means the only capability at our disposal to deal with potential nuclear threats in Iran.”

Another official said that the U.S. make up for the MOPs’ current inability by using them in tandem with other guided weapons against a bunker’s entry and exit points—provided, however, that U.S. intelligence is aware of the position of those openings.

New reports about the current American inability to end Iran’s nuclear ambitions with a conventional strike came after, earlier Friday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said that the world must quickly stop Iran from reaching the point where even a “surgical” military strike could not block it from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Amid fears that Israel is nearing a decision to attack Iran’s nuclear program, Barak said tougher international sanctions are needed against Tehran’s oil and banks so that “we all will know early enough whether the Iranians are ready to give up their nuclear weapons program.”

Iran insists its atomic program is only aimed at producing energy and research, but has repeatedly refused to consider giving up its ability to enrich uranium.

“We are determined to prevent Iran from turning nuclear. And even the American president and opinion leaders have said that no option should be removed from the table and Iran should be blocked from turning nuclear,” Barak old reporters during the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum.

“It seems to us to be urgent, because the Iranians are deliberately drifting into what we call an immunity zone where practically no surgical operation could block them,” he said.

Barak called it “a challenge for the whole world” to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran but stopped short of confirming any action that could further stoke Washington’s concern about a possible Israeli military strike.

Robert Fisk: We’ve been here before – and it suits Israel that we never forget ‘Nuclear Iran’

Robert Fisk: We’ve been here before – and it suits Israel that we never forget ‘Nuclear Iran’–and-it-suits-israel-that-we-never-forget-nuclear-iran-6294111.html#

Turning round a story is one of the most difficult tasks in journalism – and rarely more so than in the case of Iran. Iran, the dark revolutionary Islamist menace. Shia Iran, protector and manipulator of World Terror, of Syria and Lebanon and Hamas and Hezbollah. Ahmadinejad, the Mad Caliph. And, of course, Nuclear Iran, preparing to destroy Israel in a mushroom cloud of anti-Semitic hatred, ready to close the Strait of Hormuz – the moment the West’s (or Israel’s) forces attack.

Given the nature of the theocratic regime, the repulsive suppression of its post-election opponents in 2009, not to mention its massive pools of oil, every attempt to inject common sense into the story also has to carry a medical health warning: no, of course Iran is not a nice place. But …

Let’s take the Israeli version which, despite constant proof that Israel’s intelligence services are about as efficient as Syria’s, goes on being trumpeted by its friends in the West, none more subservient than Western journalists. The Israeli President warns us now that Iran is on the cusp of producing a nuclear weapon. Heaven preserve us. Yet we reporters do not mention that Shimon Peres, as Israeli Prime Minister, said exactly the same thing in 1996. That was 16 years ago. And we do not recall that the current Israeli PM, Benjamin Netanyahu, said in 1992 that Iran would have a nuclear bomb by 1999. That would be 13 years ago. Same old story.

In fact, we don’t know that Iran really is building a nuclear weapon. And after Iraq, it’s amazing that the old weapons of mass destruction details are popping with the same frequency as all the poppycock about Saddam’s titanic arsenal. Not to mention the date problem. When did all this start? The Shah. The old boy wanted nuclear power. He even said he wanted a bomb because “the US and the Soviet Union had nuclear bombs” and no one objected. Europeans rushed to supply the dictator’s wish. Siemens – not Russia – built the Bushehr nuclear facility.

And when Ayatollah Khomeini, Scourge of the West, Apostle of Shia Revolution, etc, took over Iran in 1979, he ordered the entire nuclear project to be closed down because it was “the work of the Devil”. Only when Saddam invaded Iran – with our Western encouragement – and started using poison gas against the Iranians (chemical components arriving from the West, of course) was Khomeini persuaded to reopen it.

All this has been deleted from the historical record; it was the black-turbaned mullahs who started the nuclear project, along with the crackpot Ahmadinejad. And Israel might have to destroy this terror-weapon to secure its own survival, to ensure the West’s survival, for democracy, etc, etc.

For Palestinians in the West Bank, Israel is the brutal, colonising, occupying power. But the moment Iran is mentioned, this colonial power turns into a tiny, vulnerable, peaceful state under imminent threat of extinction. Ahmadinejad – here again, I quote Netanyahu – is more dangerous than Hitler. Israel’s own nuclear warheads – all too real and now numbering almost 300 – disappear from the story. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards are helping the Syrian regime destroy its opponents; they might like to – but there is no proof of this.

The trouble is that Iran has won almost all its recent wars without firing a shot. George W and Tony destroyed Iran’s nemesis in Iraq. They killed thousands of the Sunni army whom Iran itself always referred to as “the black Taliban”. And the Gulf Arabs, our “moderate” friends, shiver in their golden mosques as we in the West outline their fate in the event of an Iranian Shia revolution.

No wonder Cameron goes on selling weapons to these preposterous people whose armies, in many cases, could scarcely operate soup kitchens, let alone the billions of dollars of sophisticated kit we flog them under the fearful shadow of Tehran.

Bring on the sanctions. Send in the clowns.


NATO and CIA Covertly Arming Syrian Rebels in Order to Weaken Iran

NATO and CIA Covertly Arming Syrian Rebels in Order to Weaken Iran

NATO vs. Syria (by Philip Giraldi)

Pro-Israel Hawk Celebrates ‘Liberals’ Joining the Topple Assad Argument

Joe Lieberman Calls for Arming the Syrian Opposition

‘US neo-cons seek war on Syria, Iran’

’U.S. pursues policy of divide and conquer’

Russia, China veto U.N. draft backing Arab plan for Syria

We Object! Russia and China veto UN resolution on Syria

Israel Lobby Pushes for US Action Against the Syrian Government: James
Morris Dares to Mention the Taboo History

CrossTalking about Syria on Russia Today (RT) with James Morris

Avoiding a Dumb War with Iran

Neocon Warmongers:

Ron Paul against perpetual wars for Israel in Middle East:

Israel Pushing Iran War:

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Former National Security Advisor, on mistake of Iran war!

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Former National Security Advisor on his book “Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power”

Zbig: Israelis “bought influence” and outmaneuvered Obama

Avoiding a ‘Dumb War’ With Iran:

Israel pushing Iran war:

Avoiding a ‘Dumb War’ With Iran

Avoiding a ‘Dumb War’ With Iran

Posted By Philip Giraldi On January 25, 2012 @ 11:00 pm In Uncategorized | 28 Comments

The media and the punditry have been deliberately misrepresenting facts to persuade the people of the United States to start another war, not unlike in the lead-up to the Iraq fiasco. Since 9/11, hard-liners in the United States have depicted one Muslim country after another as major threats to U.S. security. They have justified attacks on Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, and Afghanistan, and they have endorsed Israel’s military actions against Syria, Gaza, and Lebanon — 10 Muslim countries.

This time around, Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and New Gingrich are all promising to disarm Iran by force. Romney has a neocon-heavy foreign policy team, while Gingrich’s campaign received at least $5 million in financial support from Las Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson, a passionate supporter of Israel. Meanwhile, the White House continues to dither by drawing “red lines” that appear to be more debating points meant to appease the Israelis than substantive policies.

Those arguing for war in Congress, think tanks, and the media have been exploiting a new International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report issued in November 2011, which they interpret to mean that Iran is building a nuclear weapon that poses a major threat to the United States. But the truth is that the IAEA document is essentially political, not factual. It is based on old intelligence assessments made mostly by the United States and Israel using sometimes fabricated information in an attempt to discredit Iran. In reality, the IAEA makes regular inspection visits to Iran’s nuclear facilities and has TV cameras monitoring its sites. While there is legitimate reason to challenge some of Iran’s actions, the nuclear program is not as threatening as many maintain.

Even those who are arguing against the rush to war frequently have succumbed to the propaganda. Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, in a piece titled “Think Before Acting on Iran,” states that “Iran’s leaders are bad guys capable of doing dangerous things” and then goes on to describe “its relentless moves toward acquiring nuclear weapons.” Well, Gelb should be well-informed enough to know that Iran’s leadership is both cautious and pragmatic because it is primarily interested in regime preservation, not in exporting the revolution or converting the world to Shi’ism. He should also be aware that there is no evidence whatsoever that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. Gelb’s lack of connection with objective reality is reflected in his recommendation to openly debate the wisdom of going to war with Iran in a suitable forum like the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

A genuine nuclear expert, Mohamed ElBaradei, a Nobel Peace Prize recipient and former IAEA director-general, said recently, “I don’t believe Iran is a clear and present danger. All I see is the hype about the threat posed by Iran.” And he is not alone in that judgment: All 16 U.S. intelligence agencies concluded “with high confidence” in a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program as of 2003. They reviewed the evidence again in 2009-10 and concluded that there was still no solid evidence that the program had been in any way revived.

It is astonishing that the American people are again being gulled by a replay of the “Iraq WMD threat,” which used false information and sustained innuendo to lead the United States into a war that did not need to be fought. As Philip Zelikow, executive secretary of the 9/11 Commission, said, “The ‘real threat’ from Iraq was not a threat to the United States. The unstated threat was the threat against Israel.” It is not unreasonable to argue that today the formula and rationalization are the same with the Persian threat, if there is one, making it a matter of concern mostly for Israel. And Israel is far from defenseless, with an arsenal of 200 nuclear weapons of its own mounted on ballistic missiles and also on cruise missiles that can be fired from submarines.

But many knowledgeable Israelis actually argue that there is no threat from Iran, even as the politicians in Tel Aviv argue insistently that military action must be taken. Former Mossad head Meir Dagan commented that an air force strike against Iran’s nuclear installations would be “stupid,” a view also endorsed by two other ex-Mossad chiefs, Danny Yatom and Ephraim Halevy. Dagan added his opinion that “any strike against [the civilian program] is an illegal act according to international law.” More recently, the Israeli intelligence community has prepared its own report, similar to the U.S. NIE, which concludes that Iran has not decided to construct a nuclear weapon, leading the country’s defense minister, Ehud Barak, to conclude that the possibility of a war “is very far off.”

Dagan also pointed out another reality that has not escaped some policymakers in Washington and Tel Aviv: bombing Iran would guarantee that the Iranians would decide to go nuclear for self-defense and would certainly lead them to retaliate against Israel through their principal surrogate Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, which is reported to have tens of thousands of rockets and even Scud-type longer-range missiles. If American politicians and Israel’s own political leadership were really concerned about the well-being of Israel, they would be doing everything in their power to stop a new war rather than start one.

And then there is the question of what a sustained bombing campaign by the United States would actually accomplish. Since 2005, the U.S. military and intelligence communities have engaged in a major covert operation to identify and derail Iran’s nuclear program. The Pentagon has studied the Iranian nuclear target and has concluded that it would be futile to attempt to eliminate that program — which is dispersed throughout the country and frequently located underground — through aerial bombing. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and other experts have stated that even a prolonged air attack would only delay any weapons program for a year or two at most. This is identical to the view of leading Israelis.

Washington is already spending as much as the rest of the world combined on national defense and $100 billion per year on Afghanistan alone, which is looking increasingly forlorn. The anti-Iran lobby has been beating the drums for an attack for years, but another Asian war on top of Afghanistan is not in America’s or Israel’s interests, whatever some of Israel’s apologists might claim. The “experts” who claim that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said he would “wipe Israel off the map” have got it wrong. Genuine language specialists have pointed out that the original statement in Farsi actually said that Israel would someday collapse: “The imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time” is the accurate rendition. The imam being referred to is the late Ayatollah Khomeini, making the statement a quote within a quote. It’s wishful thinking perhaps, but far from a threat. The fact is that Iran has not attacked any of its neighbors since the 17th century, when it went to war with the Ottoman Turks, and has never threatened to attack Israel. Nor does Iran threaten the United States in any way.

Presidential candidate Barack Obama promised to open a dialogue to resolve problems with the Iranians, but that pledge has been an empty one. In reality, the United States has spoken to Iranian government officials only once in the past three years, and that encounter lasted less than 45 minutes. Since that time, offers to resolve differences through diplomacy have come several times from the Iranians and have been ignored by both official Washington and the mainstream media. Not talking means that war is the only way to obtain a resolution, which would be a very bad outcome for both sides. Washington still has time to make direct diplomacy work in an attempt to convince all parties to back down from the developing crisis, but serious intent and good-faith negotiations are necessary.

The American military has recently concluded what President Obama once labeled a “dumb war” in Iraq, so it behooves us not to undertake another dumb war against a country that is much larger, better prepared, and three times more populous. Such a conflict would not be containable and would set off a major regional war. Such a war, contrary to what some argue, would not be good for the United States, Iran, or even Israel, and it would make no one safer.

Read more by Philip Giraldi


Israel pushing Iran war:

Who Wants War With Iran?

IDF Officer: ‘Nuclear Iran could deter wars in Gaza, Lebanon’