Sunday, August 1, 2010

Webster Tarpley: Obama Preparing to Bomb Iran

Tuesday, August 3rd, 9-10 a.m. Pacific (noon-1 pm Eastern) on http://NoLiesRadio.org, to be archived here a few hours after broadcast...

Webster Tarpley, author of 9/11 Synthetic Terror, Obama: The Unauthorized Biography, Surviving the Cataclysm, and much more will discuss his critically important new article Obama Is Preparing to Bomb Iran.

Tarpley isn't the only one warning that the neocons (read Zionist dual-citizen fanatics) are back in the saddle and about to lead the US off a cliff.

Here are some other important recent articles on the same topic:


The Real Aim of Israel’s Bomb Iran Campaign

By Gareth Porter

July 30, 2010 "Information Clearing House" -- Reuel Marc Gerecht's screed justifying an Israeli bombing attack on Iran coincides with the opening of the new Israel lobby campaign marked by the introduction of House Resolution 1553 expressing full support for such an Israeli attack.

What is important to understand about this campaign is that the aim of Gerecht and of the right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu is to support an attack by Israel so that the United States can be drawn into direct, full-scale war with Iran.

That has long been the Israeli strategy for Iran, because Israel cannot fight a war with Iran without full U.S. involvement. Israel needs to know that the United States will finish the war that Israel wants to start... (full article here)

By Ruqayyah Shamseddine

Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” - George Orwell

On July 22nd a House Resolution was proposed by 47 US Representatives – led by Rep. Louis Buller Gohmert, Republican Representative from Texas’s 1st congressional district; House Resolution 1553... (full article here)


THE HIDDEN FACE OF SANCTIONS

By Dr. Alan Sabrosky* (who will soon be returning to my show to follow up on his groundbreaking "Israel did 9/11 and the US military knows it" appearance a few months ago -KB)

The sanctions imposed recently against Iran by the United Nations, and later separately by the US Congress, have one thing in common. Both were driven by the US at the instigation of Israel.

But they are also, I believe, generally misunderstood. Sanctions are normally intended to alter the behavior of the country being sanctioned — to punish it for what it is doing, to keep it from continuing practices or policies others find objectionable, or both.

And overtly, that is the function of these sanctions. But that is not their actual purpose.

Now, I do not know whether Iran’s government has a hidden military agenda to its nuclear program. Given Israel’s own nuclear capabilities, and the very different fates of Iraq (which had no nuclear weapons) and North Korea (which did), any sensible country anywhere on Israel’s enemies list — which is by extension today America’s target list — would acquire a deliverable nuclear capability by any means whatsoever as soon as possible.

But the reality is to see sanctions against Iran in the same light as inspections for the non-existent WMDs (weapons of mass destruction) in Iraq in 2002-2003. In those days, the US and its close partners kept insisting that Iraq had WMDs when none of the inspectors on the ground, including the US representatives, found or believed it had.

Yet the claims persisted, and the purpose was to condition the US public for a war that need never have happened, except for Israel and its partisans in the US. And they succeeded. Americans generally believed the false claims, generally supported the war against Iraq, and whatever disenchantment occurred took place only because the war and the subsequent occupation did not proceed as smoothly as its architects had intended.

This is the pattern being repeated against Iran. The real purpose of sanctions is not to affect the policies of the Iranian government, because nothing it does will affect the sanctions. It is to prepare the US public for an attack against Iran, almost certainly in conjunction with Israel, to destroy Israel’s last remaining competitor in the region and to provide a cover for Israel’s expulsion of the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, into Jordan and the Sinai respectively.

So it would be unwise either to disregard sanctions or to try to accommodate them. The only sensible response, I believe, for Iran and its friends is to put in place something that the US would not dare to attack. That inevitably means something with or from China or India, especially the former, no matter what the cost — because anything expended to preclude a US-Israeli strike would be far cheaper than enduring that strike and its aftermath, even if the region then exploded in America’s face. Watching an enemy suffer is fine, but not at that price


*Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D, University of Michigan) is a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran and a graduate of the US Army War College

3 comments:

  1. Clinton has lost her mind (assuming she ever had one to begin with). This excerpt from Global Research regarding her latest "tour de saber rattle."

    "During her trips last month to nine nations from the Baltic Sea to the South China Sea, especially during her stays in Georgia and Vietnam, Clinton reiterated in no equivocal terms that the U.S. recognizes no spheres of influence by any other nation anywhere in the world, including ones by Russia and China on their borders and in their immediate neighborhoods [3], and that Washington reserves the exclusive right to intervene in regional conflicts around the world and to "internationalize" them when and how it sees fit."

    Source: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20517


    Our Secretary of State behaves like a teenage boy with too much testosterone and has become a liability. In her zeal to impress the male leaders of the world on just how Butch she is, she has over-acted the part and is seen as a pathetic joke on the world's stage. I don't think anyone takes her seriously. So much for the "change" people voted for. I bet Obama wishes he had a "do-over."

    I wonder how Clinton would feel if a Russian equivalent to Billary Clinton said similar things while in Cuba or Siberia while gazing toward Florida or Alaska. Her big mouth spews provocation every time she opens it. What a joke this country has become. The choices we peasants are given at the polls is tantamount to voting for either Charles Manson in a three-piece suit, or David Berkowitz (Son of Sam) in a London Fog and fedora. Either way, the elected will come with bloody hands combined with mental retardation as character defects (batteries not included).

    The Democrats grade: "F"
    The Republicans grade: "F-"
    The People's grade: "D-"

    Honestly, if this country does not change course and if we don't elect a person like a modern-day Jhomas Jefferson, the curtain will be lowered on this play before the denouement and we will all be sitting in the dark waiting for catharsis, and that actress will have already left the theatre.


    As I heard a man say as he resumed consciousness after being knocked out by a punch, "what the hell happened?"

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://www.cubanews .ain.cu/2010/ 0807fidel- calls-on- the-world- to-persuade- obama-not- to-unleash- war.htm

    Fidel Castro Calls on the World to Persuade Obama Not to Unleash a War

    HAVANA, Cuba, Aug 7 (acn) The Commander in Chief Fidel Castro said today that he hopes that US President Barack Obama will not order an attack on Iran “if we all persuade him not to.”

    ReplyDelete
  3. The world is and always has been ruled by those whose love of power has always ended up in wars.History is littered with not hundreds, but thousands of wars that have affected all of mankind. From tribal clashes on tiny atolls, to the great continents of our world, man has butchered his fellow man for reasons without number. To think that man will now stop because he has nuclear weapons is naive in the extreme, to try and analyze this or that reason or promote some "solution" to mans warlike behaviour is living in a disney world of ones own making. Man is a self destruct junkie, I have all the evidence in the world, in fact I have thousands of years of historical human warlike evidence to back me up, what do you have? Does it matter that it is Obama, or Clinton, or Iran, it used to be Hitler, or was it Napoleon, or, or. Only the names change, the end result is the same. The future is already dictated by our past, history does not lie, it is not prejudiced, it has no political or religious ideology influencing it,it is the most reliable source of truth in a duplicitious and corrupt world. So when I say that history is littered with War, War, and more War, leading to World War one, then World War Two, is it reasonable to conclude that World War Three is a foregone conclusion. Convince me otherwise!

    ReplyDelete