| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 10:36:49 AM | I guess we can all sense that the US admin wants to take down the Iranian government....for whatever reason. Their language is very familiar, with threats of smoking guns in the form of mushroom clouds, Iranian weapons supposably killing Marines in Iraq and so on.
Who knows why they haven't upped the stakes already. Maybe this one requires some serious thought, what with the involvement of Russia/China in the region and fooling the American/UK/worlds public isn't quiet as easy the second time around.
So how would they do it? How would they convince everyone that Iran is such a serious threat to world security to warrant another invasion. What possible 'false flag' could they come up with? | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 10:48:04 AM | This is an easy one... The Bush's and their friends will accuse them of using natural plants for medicine instead of buying their drugs from a doctor. Then the cops can get a no-knock warrent and kick in their doors.. Natural is bad.. only drug companies have a right to sell anything because the big buisness need the money.. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 10:48:30 AM | The U.S. will never go in, but it will keep up the pressure. The Pressure is creating social change, which is already happening in that country. It's the repressive government that wants Nuclear weapons that is the danger. Not the people.
If Iran gets the Bomb, you can be assured that the president of Iran will keep his promise and strike at Israel. "Wipe Israel off the map"
When that happens, and it will if they get the "bomb", all hell will break loose. Because you can be assured that if Israel is struck with an atomic bomb, they will strike back and wipe out the aggressors. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 11:12:02 AM | To go with the supposed threats of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. His comments were taken way out of context and he was referring to the artificial state of Israel created by the British and Americans after the second world war...on Palestinian land.....He was merely speaking about the injustice of this act towards the Palestinians.....He never threatened to kill Jews so please don't listen to propaganda.
Secondly, who the hell are we to stop another nation gaining the same technology we have simple because we don't like their politics? Who gives us the right?
But anyway, that's not what was asked. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 11:38:04 AM | | i am thinking another "terrorist attack" is coming. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 11:51:53 AM | attack Iran?
nah, let's just build up the military around them, make them wonder if we will ever attack. Do some covert work, some sabotaging. Make Iran spend their national treasure on the military instead of something else
they use the bomb once and Iran will be one big parking lot.
I don't think Iran getting the bomb is the real reason the US would ever bomb Iran. More like Iran trying to get the world to stop using the dollar for oil exchanges. The US dollar will probably be worthless if that happens and the Federal Reserve would be out of business and power. And we all know who really runs the USA. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 12:07:08 PM | Well... let's see...
If McCain gets in...he's already stated he will keep the Military strong just in case it becomes absolutely necessary for the sake of American lives.
If Clinton were to get in (looks like she won't get the Dem. nom. though), she has stated she'd have no problem bombing Iran - agreeing with Bush. Some think McCain agrees with Bush on this..but, McCain's position is quite different.
If Obama gets in, he wants to sit and chit chat with Iran. This position I fear the most. It was during a 'chat session' that Pearl Harbor was bombed. Second in line of fear is the position of Clinton/Bush.
McCain's makes the most sense...just IMHO. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 12:09:41 PM | jedi,
Incorrect context of Hillary's statement. And personally, I'd rather chat than start an unjust war. McCain is just more of GWBs falied policies. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 12:39:10 PM | who says anybody is going to get in next January? Something really really big will need to happen for the US to to attack Iran, like a nuclear bomb going off in the USA or a US military base or a US carrier to be sunk off Iran. After that happens martial law will probably be declared in the US and the elections will be suspended and guess who remains in power?
By the way, the US Navy already has sunk a large US carrier in a test, albeit a decommissioned US Navy ship, the USS America, off the east coast of the USA in 2005. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 2:11:23 PM | By the way, the US Navy already has sunk a large US carrier in a test, albeit a decommissioned US Navy ship, the USS America, off the east coast of the USA in 2005
Um timj that's not the first ship to be made into an artificial reef, just the biggest. That is a normal thing for ships that either the Navy doesn't need and wouldn't sell to another country. There have been other carriers sunk prior to the America. That particular ship was quite old and obsolete compared to the modern nuclear ships. I am quite sure the Navy didn't need to "test" anything. They already knew how to sink a ship long before the America was scuttled. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 2:30:13 PM | | They probably just don't want to make it as rediculously obvious as that whole 911 lie . | |
|
timj82
| Joined: 5/19/2008 Msg: 12 | |
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 2:49:32 PM | the USS America (CV-66) lies some 16,860 Feet below the surface of the sea now. Much too deep for reef formation.
Message from NAVSEA, May 16, 2005
"On 14 May at approximately 1130 am EDT, a solemn moment of silence was held as the aircraft carrier ex-America slipped quietly beneath the waves. The data collected during the 25 days at sea from these test events will be of great value to Navy engineers and designers to improve the design and survivability of the nation's future aircraft carrier fleet.
http://www.cvn78.com/page26/page26.html
Not that there was anything wrong with the US Navy using the USS America as a testbed to test the design and survivability of the nation's future aircraft carrier fleet although the scrap metal value of the ship probably was in the millions of dollars, not to mention there may have been some environmental costs that were eliminated in not having to scrap the ship | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 3:07:39 PM | AMEN brother.....you hit the nail on the head...we live in a world of diminishing resources....and we got a shitty love affair with OIL....that is what this is all about.. did you know the new world trade center is not being built in USA?>..why is that?
Interesting that shaddy developers....will bypass regulatory bodies...and have their building mysterysly burn to the ground.....hmmmm.....food for thought | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/30/2008 11:10:58 PM | I've been mulling this over since it occured to me and I've come up with a very simple senerio that might be viable as it satifies all the criteria needed to wage war on Iran, with the worlds approval.
It can't be an attack on US soil as the admin must have learnt a few lessons from thier last false flag and it would leave them with a lot of egg on their face in light of the hundreds of billions spent on the new national defense system.
It can't be an attack on Israel as that would be too obvious.
An attack on a large US navy ship in the gulf with a dirty bomb is very 'doable' especially as US/UK special forces pretty much have the run of the Southern Iranian desert. We would even probably see satellite pictures of the launch of this dirty bomb FROM Iran. The trouble with this is that the ship would have to sink so we wouldn't get enough pictures of death and distruction to satify the required public outrage.
No, much better for the target to be on land where we could see teams of troops wearing anti-radiation suits recovering the victims. Where the full horror could be captured on the nightly news. But what would be the best target? It wouldn't be US troops in Baghdad, Iran has too many alliances with certain groups there and dirty bombs are indiscriminate. The perfect target would be the 5,000 British forces stationed outside Basra, maybe that's why they really have been moved there.
It would occur within a few days of another of Mahmoud Ahmadinejads infamous rallying speaches when the prevailing winds are westerlies, towards Israel.
Before we know it, Iran would be taken apart from the sky, long before anyone asked why the Iranian government would do such a thing, bringing on thier ultimate distruction. The price of oil would go up ten fold over night, keeping the masses at home, sat by their TV and angry.
Yup, if you ask me, thats a pretty good plan.....Scary as hell but who knows what the US admin is capable of?. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/31/2008 1:02:17 AM |
f Iran gets the Bomb, you can be assured that the president of Iran will keep his promise and strike at Israel. "Wipe Israel off the map"
1) First of all, you'll have to get the right quote. You won't do that if you are listening to information provided by MEMRI and CAMERA.
Don't know who those two organizations are ? You should.
2) Iran fully realizes that Israel has a rather substantial inventory of nukes. Some of them are in Israel's Dolphin class submarines - and they will be launched if Israel is attacked. That's pretty much the only reason Israel HAS those subs, except for some other smaller intelligence needs. The principle of MAD works as well there, as it does in the West.
Iran doesn't have the means to stop that counter-strike. Israel has a limited means (Patriot missiles, and Israeli ones) to perhaps stop a first strike, or at least limit it.
3) Nuking Israel will kill a lot of people - including Palestinians, who are Sunni. The Sunni world will certainly consider this an act of war, and Iran also knows this. Saudi Arabia, who I am convinced has nukes and the missiles to deliver them, would probably decide to use them.
As for false flags, I'm more worried about one of those Iranian high speed smuggling boats being wrongly ID'd as a suicide bomber/terrorist attack on a US ship. They have quite a few of them, and they are doing something that's illegal - smuggling. This means they are, by definition, acting in a covert stealthy manner anyway. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/31/2008 8:35:47 AM | | "for every hundred that are striking at the branches of evil there may be only one striking at the root."Thoreau | |
|
timj82
| Joined: 5/19/2008 Msg: 17 | |
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/31/2008 5:07:51 PM | one scenario could be the US or Israeli operatives slip a stolen Russian nuke into Iran and have it conveniently explode there, and claim it exploded accidentally.
Then the West could say Iran had nuclear bomb intent afterall and to get it Iran even went to the extent of buying a stolen Russian nuke bomb on the black market. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/31/2008 5:37:23 PM | Ok,, Mguy,, here is your full quote from the President of Iran. It's actually even better.
"the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world."
Your reading to much Neville Chamberlain. The rise of Hitler and the holocaust that followed, should be a wake up call to those that study history, that you can't ignore the threats of tyrants, especially those that want atomic weapons.
Your argument that Iran wouldn't strike Israel, because it would kill Muslims isn't based on current fact. Remember, they would die martyrs.
The men would get the 73 virgins. The women. Well, i'm not sure how many virgins they get. Maybe they all turn lesbian and get lesbian virgins. Do you know?
I'll wait while you google it. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/31/2008 10:30:43 PM |
Ok,, Mguy,, here is your full quote from the President of Iran. It's actually even better.
Still wrong.
THE ACTUAL QUOTE:
So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi:
"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."
That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word "Regime", pronounced just like the English word with an extra "eh" sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase "rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods" (regime occupying Jerusalem).
So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh", is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel".
THE PROOF: The full quote translated directly to English:
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".
Word by word translation: Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
Here is the full transcript of the speech in farsi, archived on Ahmadinejad's web site www.president.ir/farsi/ahmadinejad/speeches/1384/aban-84/840804sahyonizm.htm
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4527
Now, place that quote in context :
THE SPEECH AND CONTEXT:
While the false "wiped off the map" extract has been repeated infinitely without verification, Ahmadinejad's actual speech itself has been almost entirely ignored. Given the importance placed on the "map" comment, it would be sensible to present his words in their full context to get a fuller understanding of his position. In fact, by looking at the entire speech, there is a clear, logical trajectory leading up to his call for a "world without Zionism". One may disagree with his reasoning, but critical appraisals are infeasible without first knowing what that reasoning is.
In his speech, Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West's apparatus of political oppression against Muslims. He says the "Zionist regime" was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure domination of the region and its assets. Palestine, he insists, is the frontline of the Islamic world's struggle with American hegemony, and its fate will have repercussions for the entire Middle East.
Ahmadinejad acknowledges that the removal of America's powerful grip on the region via the Zionists may seem unimaginable to some, but reminds the audience that, as Khomeini predicted, other seemingly invincible empires have disappeared and now only exist in history books. He then proceeds to list three such regimes that have collapsed, crumbled or vanished, all within the last 30 years:
(1) The Shah of Iran- the U.S. installed monarch
(2) The Soviet Union
(3) Iran's former arch-enemy, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein In the first and third examples, Ahmadinejad prefaces their mention with Khomeini's own words foretelling that individual regime's demise. He concludes by referring to Khomeini's unfulfilled wish: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time. This statement is very wise". This is the passage that has been isolated, twisted and distorted so famously. By measure of comparison, Ahmadinejad would seem to be calling for regime change, not war.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4527
And again, one must look at Iran, and Ahmadinejad's position within it. I did a thread on the fact that he's losing power right now, and the REAL leader of Iran, the Ayatollah isn't backing him strongly.
He can't even get some reforms he wants passed.
As for Palestinians dying as martyrs in an Iranian attack on Israel, you again totally misunderstand the reality of Islam, and the division on the Sunnis and Shi'ites. A Shi'ite nuke, that kills God knows how many Sunni Muslims, isn't going to be taken as anything other than murder.
. There are an estimated 130 to 190 million Shi'ites, 10-15% of the world's Muslims.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi'a
In the coming years, Shiites and Sunnis will compete over power, first in Iraq but ultimately across the entire region," Mr. Nasr writes in his new book, "The Shia Revival: How Conflicts Within Islam Will Shape the Future," published by W.W. Norton & Co. "The overall Sunni-Shiite conflict will play a large role in defining the Middle East as a whole and shaping its relations with the outside world."
For the U.S., the Sunni-Shiite divide is fraught with challenges -- and opportunities. By creating in Iraq the first Shiite-led state in the Arab world since the rise of Islam (Iran is mostly ethnic Persian), the U.S. ignited aspirations among some 150 million Shiites in the region, Mr. Nasr says. Many live under Sunni rule, such as in Saudi Arabia, where they have long been persecuted. Yet U.S. foreign policy still operates under the "old paradigm" of Sunni dominance, he contends.
Take the current crisis in Lebanon. The U.S. has long relied on its traditional Sunni Arab allies -- Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia -- to keep the Arab-Israeli conflict in check. But now the Sunni axis is failing, says Mr. Nasr, because these nations are incapable of containing a resurgent Iran and its radical clients on the front lines against Israel -- Hezbollah and the Palestinian group Hamas.
http://www.firewithfire.info/2006/08/shiite-and-sunni-struggle.html
So again a failure to understand the relative powerlessness of Iran, coupled with an invasion that did indeed create the first Arab Shi'ite state in the history of Islam, is where this all begins.
That invasion empowered local Shi'ite communities in the surrounding Sunni Arab states.
Iran only has power in nation states where large numbers of Shi'ites live. That, and only that, is their base.
They are not only allied against the US and Israel - but also against every Sunni Arab state in the world, which is every one except Iraq.
Unless you understand this, and until you understand this, you cannot and will not understand what's occurring in the world today. | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/31/2008 10:51:18 PM | "The U.S. will never go in"
Today two trains passed through my city, each carrying 200 tanks. There may have been more -- I saw two. They were heading east. How many tanks do you think are needed to occupy Iran? | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 5/31/2008 11:35:25 PM | I think it's best if we use an analogy to understand Iran's position with regard to Israel.
Imagine if the rich guy at the top of the hill insisted on housing a few friends of his in a tent at the bottom of your garden. He does this without your permission purely because these friends have had a hard time and he feels guilty.
Now imagine if this rich guy takes over the houses on either side of you, killing the tenants then moves in more of his friends who like playing with guns and are always reminding you that they don't like you very much. Not only that, but this guy then tells you that if you even think about buying a gun to defend yourself, he'll take over your home and kill you........and he's convinced the rest of the neighbourhood to treat you like an outcast so you can only get jobs that pay minimum wage and struggle to feed your family.
Seriously, how would you feel? | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 6/1/2008 6:46:47 AM | | Its simple, it isnt a false flag...just people that have no idea what they are talking about because they have never witnessed the area, or people themselfs..just know what they know from a lying media, will think its a false flag | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 6/1/2008 9:52:27 AM | BearHeartUK and Athena38 you two make the most sense in your analogies.
It’s very unfortunate that the majority (at least those that have a say), of Americans will not be able to “see” it through your very correct mind’s eye.
I guess Leonard Nimoy was thinking of you two when he said “live long and prosper”.
 | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 6/1/2008 10:13:30 AM | | there was no 911 lie bestguyever so get over it already.I declare if it don't seem to me as if some r throwing that up now in a brainwashing attempt lol.I know that sounds ridiculus right? | |
|
| The next false flag. Posted: 6/1/2008 1:20:14 PM | | Lets see... we've had the reichstag fire, the attack from Poland, I suppose we'll have to recommission the USS LIBERTY and really sink it this time. | |
|