Replay video | Share video | Watch more videos |
Also see here. I agree that we are seeing provocation on many fronts. I disagree that the motive is democratization or religious freedom -- otherwise, we would be at war with Saudi Arabia.
So why this march toward madness? Larisa puts the tale into perspective. I hope she will forgive such lengthy quotes:
The motivations for an Iran strike were laid out as far back as 1992. In classified defense planning guidance -- written for then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney by then-Pentagon staffers I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, World Bank Chief Paul Wolfowitz, and ambassador-nominee to the United Nations Zalmay Khalilzad -- Cheney's aides called for the United States to assume the position of lone superpower and act preemptively to prevent the emergence of even regional competitors.And:
According to an article in The Forward in May 2003, "A budding coalition of conservative hawks, Jewish organizations and Iranian monarchists is pressing the White House to step up American efforts to bring about regime change in Iran. ... Two sources [say] Iran expert Michael Rubin is now working for the Pentagon's 'special plans' office, a small unit set up to gather intelligence on Iraq, but apparently also working on Iran. Previously a researcher at the Washington Institute for Near East policy, Rubin has vocally advocated regime change in Tehran."And:
In early 2002, Ledeen formed the Coalition for Democracy in Iran, along with Morris Amitay, the former executive director of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).Inconveniently enough for the Blame-Israel-for-everything crowd, Israel seems wary of this new war.
In August 2002, Larry Franklin began passing classified information involving United States policy towards Iran to two AIPAC employees and an Israeli diplomat. Franklin pleaded guilty to the charges in October 2005, explaining that he had been hoping to force the US to take a harder line with Iran, but AIPAC and Israel have continued to deny them.
"The response of Iran would be first against Israel, even if Israel is not involved in this activity. This is the first thing you have to understand," said Col. Schlomo Mofaz of Israel's Institute of Counterterrorism. "Second point, I think Israel should not be in the front of a coalition or any kind of activity" against Iran.So what is happening?
Notice how Cheney keeps emerging as the key player here. Does anyone really think that Cheney gives a damn about Zionism or Jews or the return of Jesus or Islamofascism or any of the other religious motivations one hears about?
I think we need to find a third answer, related to but distinct from the two prevailing theories of the current madness. On one side, we have those who blame Zionism for all ills. On the other, we have the traditional lefty mistrust of "American imperialism" and its attendant lust for oil. But this ain't that. This ain't neither of that.
Yes, this is related to those two things -- but some outside force is at play here. We call that force neoconservatism only because we have no better term. We still do not truly know our enemy, its motives, or its methods of achieving power.
As I write these words, I am listening to Arvo Part's Trisagion, which has been described as a depiction of a cleric visiting the wounded on a battlefield in a religious war. It is sad music. Profoundly sad.
10 comments:
sofla said...
It would be an error to think that the Likud or whatever remnants are in Kadima (sp?), and the elements that used to be around Sharon and still are around Bebe Netanyahu, represent the professional Israeli national defense consensus.
That is, if one finds a Mossad leader, or an IDF commander, stating why an Iran attack would be insane and entirely counterproductive to Israel's security interests, that doesn't mean the politicians from the old Likud agree, or are guided in their policy positions by such reasoning.
Israeli politicians of the Sharon/Netanyahu variety are amply on record (in blood curdling terms) calling for the attack on Iran (by the US). I do not believe they have ever amended their position.
Any answer to who really wants war with Iran might start with the membership of the Iran Policy Committee -- perhaps the most hard-line pro-war, pro-MEK group around -- which consists of
Raymond Tanter -- a former National Security Council staffer with apparent links to AIPAC, WINEP, and MEMRI
Neil Livingstone -- a batshit crazy "counter-terrorism" expert who frequently appears as a commentator on tv -- has a dubious history going back to Iran-Contra, where he had connections with Oliver North -- also has links to the American Security Council
Paul Leventhal -- president of the "Nuclear Control Institute," an anti-Iran/Libya/North Korea group which was active immediately after 9/11 in trying to rouse fears of terrorist attacks on nuclear plants
Bruce McColm - former president of the International Republican Institute -- back in 2000, was working for the government of Equatorial Guinea to whitewash its image
Clare M. Lopez -- former CIA officer
James Akins -- was Nixon's ambassador to Saudi Arabia and worrying about the oil running out even then -- allegedly fired for opposing Kissinger's plan to seize the Middle Eastern oil fields -- has close ties to Middle Eastern leaders
Lt. Col. Bill Cowan, USMC (Ret.) -- Fox News analyst and head of wvc3 Group, a consulting firm that helps arms firms obtain government contracts (Carlton Sherwood of "Stolen Honor" is or was a wvc3 vice president)
Major General Paul E. Vallely, USA (Ret.) and Lt. General Thomas McInerney USAF, (Ret.)-- Vallely is one of the originators of the concept of "Mindwar" -- and both of them have enjoyed a cushy counter-terrorism gig as Fox News commentators (curiously enough, their book Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror, had an introduction by Ollie North) -- they were also the source in November 2005 of the (thoroughly debunked) claim that they'd heard Joe Wilson out his own wife in the Fox News green room in 2002
Captain Charles T. "Chuck" Nash, USN (ret.)
Lt. General Edward Rowny, USA (ret.)
I have pushed these names round and round, trying to come up with a common factor. Tanter is the only one with Neocon connections, so that's not a strong element. They don't have oil industry ties either. What most of them *do* have is connections with psyops and propaganda.
These are people who are pushing a certain narrative ("the terrorists are out to get you"), who regularly appear as experts or consultants or tv commentators, and who have connections to various sorts of dirty tricks and disinfo campaigns. And they are using every trick they know to get the rest of us steered in the direction of war with Iran.
That said, though, it still doesn't answer the question of what their ultimate agenda is, or who they're really working for. My best guess is that they've got a secret vision of the 21st century as an era of intensifying conflict over diminishing resources, combined with a Darwinian imperative for the survival of the fittest, and are doing their best to make the US top dog before the rest of the world is even aware of the terms of the battle.
But that's just a guess.
Try Koyaanisqatsi by Philip Glass.
Kim in PA
Gibsons character said "i'm going to pick a fight" not start a fight.
yeah i know its only a word but you do consider yourself a journalist/blogger don't ya and besides the way you go around beating on everyone who believes the gov'mint was involved in 911 a little commupence would be good thing
To Kim in PA:
you posted "Koyaanisqatsi - Life Out of Balance" with soundtrack by Phillip Glass which has nothing to do with the neocons getting ready to invade Iran. The reality is that unless their plans can be derailed, the handwriting on the wall clearly shouts that the Cheney camp is leading this country into a major war with Iran on the pretext that they have nuclear bombs so deeply buried that they cannot be picked up by any kind of surveillance. This was will give Cheney the legal basis to shift this country into a dictatorship and suspend the Constitution/bill of rights and deem any US citizen a military combatant who protests against the policies.
For those interested to know what the heck is Koyaanisqatsi, I looked it up on amazon (have no interest in seeing it, sorry Kim) and here is the description:
Tagline: Life out of balance
Plot Outline A movie with no conventional plot: merely a collection of expertly photographed scenes. Subject matter has a highly environmental theme.
Plot Synopsis: Koyaanisqatsi is a documentary (of sorts). It is also a visual concert of images set to the haunting music of 'Phillip Glass' . While there is no plot in the traditional sense, there is a definate scenario. The film opens on ancient native American cave drawings, while the soundtrack chants "Koyaanisqatsi" which is a Hopi indian term for "life out of balance". The film uses extensive time lapse photography (which speeds images up) and slow motion photography to make comparisons between different types of physical motion. In one of the first examples, we see cloud formations moving (sped up) intercut with a montage of ocean waves (slowed down) and in such a way we are able to see the similarities of movement between these natural forces. This technique of comparison exists throughout the film, and through it we learn more about the world around us. The film progresses from purely natural environments to nature as affected by man, and finally to man's own manmade environment, devoid of nature yet still following the patterns of natural flow as depicted in the beginning of the film, yet in chaos and disarray. Through this the film conveys its key message, which is Koyaanisqatsi: life out of balance; crazy life; life in turmoil; life disintegrating; a state of life that calls for another way of living.
Joseph you are right about the media being paid off to promote this new war because it is next to impossible to get anyone in the media to pay any attention to the growing Iran war storm clouds about to break within the next 6 weeks to 2 months.
the closer Fitzpatrick gets to indicting Cheney and company, the sooner we will be at war with Iran. The war with Iran will give them the power to nullify pending lawsuits, throw out election fraud lawsuits and run this country as a bunch of power hungry, greedy, arrogant Texas/East coast brethen have wanted to run this country decades ago: like a hybrid version of Singapore where freedom of speech is illegal and military police are used to spy upon and keep the civilians in check and enforce that the rank and file live a sort of Mexican squalor life existence: paycheck to paycheck, no affordable health insurance, no social security, working until one drops, decreasing living standards and rising inflation except for the very wealthy who control and are protected from any hardships.
Hey anon @ 2:40: Who made you the hall monitor? Joseph referenced Arvo Part's Trisagion, and I responded to this last part of his post by suggesting Koyaanisqatsi - I thought it was obvious that I referring to the score, but maybe not to some.
So,fuck off. You obviously think in too literal a fashion to comment on what is relevant, i.e. that which "has to do with" anything else. Your cutting and pasting skills appear to be outstanding, though. Bravo.
Kim in PA
Now, now, folks. No need to play the role of Ornery Bastard. That's MY job.
By the way, if you're in the market for a Koyanisqatsi recording, get the 1998 remake. Didja know that Glass has written eight symphonies? One more to go. If, y'know, you believe in curses.
And if you like Part, give "Passio" a try. Severe, spare, mystical and definitely NOT for all tastes.
"Trisagion" really is very sad -- a remarkably apt piece to have running through the headphones while reading about the coming war with Iran. Even Xymphora now apparently admits that it seems likely.
Thanks for the suggestion, Joseph. I'll give it a listen. I need some soul medicine right now.
Kim in PA
Starroute says..
Major General Paul E. Vallely, USA (Ret.) and Lt. General Thomas McInerney USAF, (Ret.)-- Vallely is one of the originators of the concept of "Mindwar" -- and both of them have enjoyed a cushy counter-terrorism gig as Fox News commentators
http://www.xeper.org/maquino/
Michael Aquino
co wrote this book with Vallely. So who is Aquino? Hmm well we who keep track of the deepest darkest elements (and elementals) in our sleuthing do place a lot of "power" in the Satanists that lurk inside the Pentagon. For many years now there has been very aggressive recruiting from the proliferating Satanic cults to infiltrate the military and alongside that is the army of private contractors in black cloaks.
The agenda? Is to destroy democracy, the United States (as it was) and install the same kind of government that Hitler engineered.
Aquino as a "minder" consultant for the Pentagon takes tours with officers into Himmlers castle and teaches them the fine arts of diabilosm
In 1934 the castle was rented by Heinrich Himmler for 1 Reichsmark and its primary role was that of a SS officer's school.The goal was to research the National Socialists ideas and extend them to the racial theories . From 1936 onwards the castle's main purpose was to become a 'cult centre' as well a prestigious centre for SS Generals. From 1940 plans were developed, incorperating the village of Wewelsburg, for a new castle complex centered around the North Tower of the castle. For this a Konzentrationslager was build in Wewelsburg. Of the 3900 prisoners at least 1285 died building the castle or starved to death. In 1943 the building was stopped and the remaining prisoners were transfered to other camps. Two days before the US forces liberated Wevelsburg (2nd april 1945), a special commando of the SS, blew up the castle leaving only the outer walls standing. The rebuilding of the castle began in 1949 and was finished in 1979..
Is there really power in all that spooky stuff? Hmm? why yes, again using the Hitler reference..that's how he entranced half the world or more..including Henry Ford, Lindbergh, Prescott Bush et al.
The beat goes on..what to do? Ask Gandalf..as you hum "As the Saints go marchin in"..then kneel down and pray your heart out because that is what is needed..noting less will do the job.
Starroute raises some interesting questions concerning the hidden agenda behind the information warfare waged upon a gullible American public by the Iran Policy Committee. IPC's members no doubt remember that it was their former boss, the CIA, that installed its backup man Ayatollah Khomeini after CIA-installed Shah Pahlevi lost his grip on Iran in 1979. The short-lived democratic movement between Shah and Khomeini is nearly forgotten. When CIA brought in Khomeini from France, he did a "Ross Perot" on the Iranian people and duped them with Islamic rhetoric, except for the socialists whom he began killing by the tens of thousands. That is why there is a diaspora of Iranian socialists from that time.
During the Iran-Iraq War during the '80s, it was the U.S. that provided AWAC support to Iranian F-4 fighters against Iraqi MIGs. Iraq, a country of 20 million, was too powerful in the air against Iran, a country of 60 million (and the war propagandists want us to believe that Iran is a threat to the U.S. today when they couldn't even threaten an Arab neighbor!).
At any rate, the CIA-installed dictators of Iraq and Iran both benefitted from war, as war is the health of the state. The U.S. benefitted too, especially with Iran - oil flowed to Europe and Japan, the surveillance sites were maintained on the Soviet border, and balance of power was maintained in the Gulf through the Iran-Iraq War.
Further, the Republican form of government that CIA installed in Iran with real power coming from a 12 member council of ayatollahs has proven to be controllable, as controllable as politics in America and Britain, where presidents and prime ministers are selected under the illusion of elections.
The hidden agenda? My guess is that the U.S. wants Iran to go nuclear but doesn't want to upset their Saudis dictators in Arabia. The West will never allow an Arab country to go nuclear (because they can read and understand the Qur'aan's guidance), but as Pakistan has shown, a non-Arab muslim country can be trusted to believe whatever they're told. And since Iran has the third largest Jewsih population in the world after the U.S. and Israel, talk of war is sucker bet.
Post a Comment