Halper: Israel may attack Iran so that we won’t hear the word ‘Palestinian’ for another 5 years

on 106 Comments

Israel may well attack Iran in an effort to distract the world from the Palestinian issue, Jeff Halper of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions said last Saturday in New York.

“There’s a very real possibility that Israel will attack Iran,” he said. At a time when there is tremendous international pressure on Israel to end the occupation and even the U.S. discourse is beginning to shift on Israel, an Iran attack would be the “ultimate deflection… it would deflect everything.”

“It’s a delaying thing. You won’t hear the word Palestinian for another five years,” Halper said. And Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, government ministers from rightwing and centrist parties, could work together on the effort, seamlessly. 

The Minnesota born activist, who has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, spoke at the Tree of Life conference on the conflict at Advent Lutheran Church on the Upper West Side. And Halper spoke frankly of the American interest and of the issue of dual loyalty.

“I don’t want to become all jingoistic,” he said, but there are real questions of where AIPAC is leading the US that should be in the conversation politically: “You’re an American member of Congress not an Israeli member.”

At the beginning of his term, Obama was talking the national-interest talk: “Resolving this issue is in the vital national interest of the United States.” Halper said that Ronald Reagan played the same card when he sold the AWACs airplanes to Saudi Arabia in the 1980s– it’s not in Israel’s interest but it’s in the American interest.

And when the issue is framed in that manner, most American Jews are going to fall into line “150 percent.” Even AIPAC supporters’ greatest fear is that they are going to be seen to have dual loyalties because there is a “conflict between the interests of Israel and the United States,” Halper said, and that cleavage ought to be stated now.

That has been Palestinian Prime Minister Abbas’s achievement in going to the U.N.: U.S. support for Israel is “really beginning to bring the United States down,” in the eyes of the world. Obama’s speech before the General Assembly in September was met by “stony silence;” he has “alienated the entire audience.” 

(Ron Paul subliminal advertising moment)

Halper also said that the two state solution is no longer viable, and that one great outcome of the U.N. process is that 140 members of the General Aseembly are likely to vote for a Palestinian state, and then send their ambassadors to Jerusalem. And then if Palestinians march on a checkpoint, and if one Palestinian is shot, it would “absolutely be a war crme,” in the eyes of the world.

The Tree of Life conference will continue this weekend in Old Lyme, CT. See Ashley Bates, Mark Braverman, Daoud Nasser, Laila El Haddad and Adam Horowitz among others…

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

106 Responses

  1. Chaos4700
    November 2, 2011, 10:09 am

    If Israel drags us into a war with Iran (and if Israel attacks Iran, we will end up right there beside them) they will have permanently destroyed American power abroad. Europe will not be joining our private little war and this will make globalist economics an anomaly in the history books.

    Israel has caused the United States to fall on our own sword. I honestly never expected we would be bleeding so soon and so much from this situation. I guess I sort of figured we’d turn around after it became clear we were being asked to commit nationally suicidal policies… but apparently I was mistaken about how much control AIPAC really has.


    • Kathleen
      November 2, 2011, 10:19 am

      Iran will not take an Israeli attack lying down. Israel seems to be on a suicide mission and clearly willing to take the US with it.

      Important piece up over at Race for Iran. Great discussion about Iran. Israel’s alleged plan to attack.
      Since the Obama Administration first announced its charges of Iranian government involvement in a plot to assassinate Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States, a growing number of Western journalists and commentators have suggested that, whatever their merits, the allegations have upped the “pressure” on an increasingly fragile Iranian political order. Some hold that the purported Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador is itself an “act of desperation” by a country already reeling under tighter sanctions. Others assert that heightened pressure by the United States over the alleged plot has exacerbated tensions between Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad; still others claim it has sparked deepening “divisions” within the Iranian political class over how Tehran should respond. Even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has gotten into the act, with her recent observations on Voice of America’s Farsi-language service that “we’re not quite sure who makes decisions anymore inside of Iran”. (Although she does seem quite sure that the Islamic Republic is becoming “a military dictatorship”.)

      • James
        November 2, 2011, 12:37 pm

        kathleen, i agree with your comment “Israel seems to be on a suicide mission and clearly willing to take the US with it.”

        regarding hilarys comment in the usa propaganda rag (voa) – i would like to counter ‘ we’re not quite sure who makes decision anymore inside of the usa’ given the usa’s vote at unesco.. (although we’re quite sure the usa no longer master of its own direction )..

      • Taxi
        November 3, 2011, 3:40 am

        What will Hilary say about an attack on Iran?

        ‘We came, we saw, we died.’

    • seafoid
      November 2, 2011, 10:33 am


      “The commotion regarding Iran was sparked by journalist Nahum Barnea’s column in Yedioth Ahronoth last Friday. Barnea’s concerned tone and his editors’ decision to run the column under the main headline (“Atomic Pressure” ) repositioned the debate on Iran from closed rooms to the media’s front pages. Reporters could suddenly ask the prime minister and defense minister whether they intend to attack Iran in the near future and the political scene went haywire. ”

      I think further evidence of the collapse of US power in the region is inevitable. Israel has run out of options.

  2. eljay
    November 2, 2011, 10:12 am

    “Ils sont fous, ces Israéliens!” (w/ apologies to Goscinny & Uderzo)

    Israel Considers Pre-Emptive Attack On Iran

  3. seafoid
    November 2, 2011, 10:12 am

    Halper is in awe of the Israeli machine. Of course you would be too if you
    spent your days fighting home demolitions. But he is wrong.
    Israel can’t move the needle on Iran


    “If anyone can save Israel from catastrophe it is the Israel Air Force commander. All Maj. Gen. Ido Nechushtan has to do is whisper to the prime minister and defense minister that an Air Force attack on Iran cannot achieve its goals. The force’s airplanes can reach Iran and even drop bombs, he must tell them, but ultimately the operation will not destroy the Iranian nuclear program. At best it will be delay the program by a few months”

    None of these big picture Israeli ops has ever worked. the 1982 invasion of Lebanon was supposed to wipe the Palestinians off the political stage forever. the Iraq war was supposed to trigger a Clean Break that would turn the Palestinians off. How is that working out ? Even 1967 is still toxic

    • Dan Crowther
      November 2, 2011, 10:53 am

      I am in agreement with Seafoid here ( per usual).

      Militarily, they lack the capacity to strike a death blow to Iran’s nuclear project – and they can in no way sustain an extended mass call up of reservists, which undoubtedly would be required.

      Furthermore, the Israeli commanders saw what happened to the IDF ground forces in Lebanon, and so did the rest of the world. Any attack on Iran would also include corresponding action by the IDF in the occupied territories, Gaza, southern Lebanon and in the Med. So, you would end up with the Air Force, Army and Navy all working on disparate goals and objectives and in different theaters; it seems like the big brains among the Israeli planners are banking on US intervention, otherwise they would be toast in very short order. Thats quite a gamble, I’m not sure they are willing roll those dice

      • seafoid
        November 2, 2011, 12:06 pm

        US intervention ? Don’t make me laugh.

        “Gen Stanley McChrystal, who commanded America and its Nato allies in 2009-10, said that even after a decade, the US still lacks the knowledge to bring the conflict to a successful end.
        He argued that the US entered Afghanistan with too little knowledge of Afghan culture. “We didn’t know enough and we still don’t know enough,” he said. ”


        “America and Britain invaded Afghanistan 10 years ago, for reasons which were understandable, to wage a short war that was unavoidable. We stayed, through all the twists and turns imposed by events and by the incoherence of our own changing policies, for reasons which have become less and less understandable. The short war has become a long war which even now we do not know how to end. The ambition to remake Afghanistan on the western model has been silently discarded.”

        “American estimates from Brown University are that some $3.7 trillion will have been spent avenging the 9/11 deaths. Whether this spending has prevented another terror attack, whether that would be value for money, or whether the whole venture has been little more than a cruel exercise in vanity, machismo and greed can never be answered, though Bin Laden himself was dealt with quite cheaply. All we know for sure is that revenge has not been sweet, just very expensive.
        The irony of this great folly is that its chief beneficiaries are likely to be those who lost the cold war, Russia and China. As the west’s leaders struggle to rescue embattled armies and embattled economies from morasses of their own creation, they have left their old foes laughing with glee. Democracy has snatched defeat from the arms of victory – without a shred of a reason.”

      • Chu
        November 2, 2011, 12:27 pm

        “dont make me laugh.”
        I have to agree. After the last decade, the US can be of no help to Israel and it’s greedy apartheid scheming.
        The US military maintains at 40,000 troops in the region, but it’s clear they are only a placeholder. The Clean Break strategy has been a flop. Israel leaders will just have to make peace, but they are incapable racists who will eventually be flushed out.

      • Dan Crowther
        November 2, 2011, 12:29 pm


        You don’t view the Israeli’s as acting under the assumption that they are “too big to fail?” – I am not saying the US would intervene, just that the Israeli’s act as if it is a guarantee…..

        There are few places where the idea of attacking Iran is less popular than in the upper echelons of US military planning; personally, I dont see the US getting involved, beyond maybe weapons sales and a greater naval presence in the Gulf; but again, I think the Israeli’s have a different impression

      • Dan Crowther
        November 2, 2011, 12:50 pm

        This was on Max Blumenthal’s twitter today —


        From the article:

        The United States would be able to shorten the war if it were to join it alongside Israel. Vered does not observe American willingness to do so. He predicts the possibility of pressure in the opposite direction, by the US on Israel.

      • seafoid
        November 2, 2011, 1:42 pm

        “The United States would be able to shorten the war if it were to join it alongside Israel.”

        Sure. Afghanistan was supposed to be over by Christmas 2001
        War is failure.

      • Dan Crowther
        November 2, 2011, 1:56 pm

        Agreed. No question.

      • American
        November 2, 2011, 6:18 pm

        The military hierarchy at the time of Iraq Dan, was also against the invasion of Iraq and Afghan. Remember Powell’s break it, own it and the several US commanders who got in very hot water for speaking our against it and eventually got phased out of their positions.

        If the Prez orders it the military will do it, I don’t see any commanders still in that will risk their careers and go public against it. A lot of former ones but not current ones.

      • seafoid
        November 2, 2011, 6:30 pm


        The Taliban gave safe haven to Al Qaeda, which allowed terrorists to plan and carry out attacks around the world. That is why the United Nations authorised a NATO/ISAF-led military intervention. Getting rid of the Taliban regime and Al Qaeda was only the first part of the job. The second is to make sure they cannot return

        and how is that working out ?

      • Dan Crowther
        November 2, 2011, 9:21 pm


        I realize that, I was an active duty Marine at the time – I was pretty well aware of what some of the brass was saying. And most of the criticism was based on the plans themselves, rather than the idea of invading Iraq.

        The situation with Iran is totally different. in large part due to the current reality in Iraq. The US has just successfully created a client state…….for Iran. But mainly, the military brass can lobby against American military involvement, unlike with Iraq where the run up was more like a sprint.

        Will they do what they are told? yea. But I think they can effect what they are told.

      • American
        November 2, 2011, 10:32 pm

        I hope you are right Dan….I said once the only group that could trump the Israel lobby would be the US Military. But what scares me is in the end the military will follow orders and I have no faith in anyone being able to persuade our batshit crazy congress. These politicans can wrap themselves in the flag and spin like a top but they don’t give a rat’s ass about our military or how many of our boys they sent to be maimed and killed.

      • LeaNder
        November 2, 2011, 12:39 pm

        Militarily, they lack the capacity to strike a death blow to Iran’s nuclear project

        Dan, I am not sure that this is still the case. The capability issue was discussed extensively at Sic Semper Tyrannis/Pat Lang. But not after the news about the new deal.

        When will the US buster bunker bombs arrive, or have they already?

        Also, it may well be that the Saudis would cooperate with Israel.

      • Dan Crowther
        November 2, 2011, 1:10 pm


        Dont get me wrong, they they have the “technical” capacity ( weapons systems etc) although their long range aircraft capacity is very limited – but what they lack is the “redundancy” – in military terms, there has to be a redundant capacity( reserves etc) to ensure completion of objectives.

        The Israeli’s lack the sheer man power and equipment to strafe and bomb Iranian sites past the initial raid. They can bomb nuclear sites for sure, but they would have to have up to the minute intelligence as well as be 100% sure that they are attacking the ONLY Iranian nuclear development sites……thats literally impossible. It would impossible for the US as well, but unlike the Israeli’s, the US has the capacity to “keep em coming” – something the Israeli can’t do.

        I cant see the Saudi’s doing anything to help Israel, other than suppressing their own population.

      • seafoid
        November 2, 2011, 1:43 pm

        If the Saudis join in I expect a Shia uprising in Saudi.

      • Dan Crowther
        November 2, 2011, 1:57 pm

        Exactly, Seafoid.

      • seafoid
        November 2, 2011, 6:32 pm

        The US has the capacity to “keep em coming” but seems to run into problems after this point. Would have got away with Afghanistan if it wasn’t for those pesky tribal Pakistanis.

      • Chaos4700
        November 2, 2011, 6:58 pm

        I expect there are plenty of Sunnis who are disgusted by the House of Saud as well. I think the most polite term I’ve heard is, “Saudi Arabia is the Texas of the Middle East.”

      • Potsherd2
        November 2, 2011, 10:01 pm

        I think a lot of Sunni militants aren’t going to sit quiet if the House of Saud aids the Zionist enemy against a brother Islamic state.

      • ddi
        November 3, 2011, 4:59 am

        Actually many Sunni extremists hate the Shia and actually believe that Iran, the US and Israel are secretly in cahoots, believe it or not.

      • Shingo
        November 3, 2011, 5:05 am

        Actually, many Sunni extremists are on the CIA payroll, if not the Saudi payroll.

      • LeaNder
        November 3, 2011, 7:06 am

        although their long range aircraft capacity is very limited

        That’s something I remember, when the issue was discussed by PL. Saudi Arabia might be of help to top up (off?), that’s why it was on my mind.

        they lack is the “redundancy”

        good point. …

        I don’t think they will attack without US consent, and maybe the whole bomb-bomb-bomb-Iran is nothing more than an elaborate psychops/extortion scheme; with the bunker buster bombs sale a partial success. But what do I know. I hope that they are more sane than their activities look like.

        I cant see the Saudi’s doing anything to help Israel, other than suppressing their own population.

        I have the impression there are slight changes to this scenario past “Arab spring”; at least as far as Iran is concerned.

      • Shingo
        November 2, 2011, 7:03 pm

        I agree too.

        If there were any serious plans to attack Iran, Israel would not be putting it out there like some new ad campaign. This is just more posturing from an Israeli leadership runnign out of ideas and out of options.

      • Chaos4700
        November 2, 2011, 7:18 pm

        The problem, of course, is when you try to “fake” a fire, but shouting fire, and setting something “harmless” on fire to make a lot of smoke… often, you end up with a real fire anyway.

      • Potsherd2
        November 2, 2011, 7:31 pm

        Look at the Israeli press this week. I’ve never seen such war hysteria.

      • Kathleen
        November 2, 2011, 8:14 pm

        “Thats quite a gamble, I’m not sure they are willing roll those dice”

        When your dealing with insanity. Do not put it past them

    • BillM
      November 2, 2011, 12:34 pm

      “All Maj. Gen. Ido Nechushtan has to do is whisper to the prime minister and defense minister that an Air Force attack on Iran cannot achieve its goals.”

      Sounds great, except that the “goals” have very little to do with retarding Iran’s nuclear program (I suspect even Barak and Netanyahu know that an attack would cause Iran to speed the program up) and everything to do with causing political chaos in a war, forcing the US to intervene and distracting from the Palestine issues. The Air Force commander does not get a say in whether the attack can acheive its POLITICAL goals.

    • Patrick
      November 2, 2011, 12:53 pm

      I agree too – it won’t happen. An Israeli attack would be ineffectual, and so Israel needs (and wants) the US to do it. But the US is not about to start another war that would send oil prices sky high and really destroy its already fragile economy.

      • Kathleen
        November 2, 2011, 8:17 pm

        With former weapons Scott Ritter, El Baradei, Bryzinski, Zinni, numerous former middle east analyst etc etc who came out and said the WMD intelligence was seriously questionable. When El baradei came out in March of 2003 and said the Niger Documents were false. The Bush administration still marched this country into Iraq based on a “pack of lies” The truth does not matter. Only their agenda. Will stop at nothing. It does not have to be based on truth or make sense.

  4. Kathleen
    November 2, 2011, 10:21 am

    “Even AIPAC supporters’ greatest fear is that they are going to be seen to have dual loyalties because there is a “conflict between the interests of Israel and the United States,” Halper said, and that cleavage ought to be stated now.”

    “going to be seen” are seen to have dual loyalties…And loyalty to Israel no matter what they do falls into the first position

    Draw the 67 line and mean it. That is what they have to do.

    • seafoid
      November 2, 2011, 12:10 pm

      Israel is running out of road, Kathleen. An attack on Iran is a sign of desperation.

      MF Global entered bankruptcy last week after betting too much on the Eurozone. All of Israel’s recent bets have gone sour. Iran is el Gordo.

      In Mexico they say
      “Esto se va a poner de la chingada,”

      which means “Things are going to get really f*cked now.”

      • Kathleen
        November 2, 2011, 8:18 pm

        And they are desperate.

    • American
      November 2, 2011, 1:26 pm

      ““Even AIPAC supporters’ greatest fear is that they are going to be seen to have dual loyalties because there is a “conflict between the interests of Israel and the United States,” Halper said, and that cleavage ought to be stated now.””

      Walt once said it’s not even ‘dual loyalty” it’s a ‘single loyalty” for the Israel first hierarchy.
      It’s too inexplicable……here we have Israel firsters demanding they not be blamed for doing what they are clearly doing…and out in public yet, where everyone sees it.
      They invoke Jewish scapegoat claim while they literally live out the old canard that Jews aren’t loyal to the countries they live in and operate as a nation within a nation.
      I don’t even know how to describe this orwellian disconnect of theirs, claiming they’re not doing what they’re doing when the whole world sees them doing it. I don’t know if the Israel firsters think the holocaust is a magic wand they can use make other people blind to what they do or what.
      Why in God’s name would the Jews risk everything they have gained in the US….they already know that the Jewish groups will be blamed in the event the US becomes embroiled with Iran because everything said about Iran has been Israel, Israel, Israel, half of everything said in this election’s campaigns has been Israel, Iran and Jewish support even in the main stream press and media…even the non net educated hear Israel, the Jewish State, over and over again regarding Iran and in US elections, they’ve heard every Presidential candidate say he would attack Iran for Israel.
      Where will the Israel firsters be when the blame does fall on the Jewish/ Israel community and any Jewish/Jewish state agendas become anathema to the US public? Which I believe would happen as result of any US involvement in a war primarily for Israel, particulary now. The mouth pieces can subtisute neo for zio all they want, the majority public will see Iran as a war for Israel. Can the AIPAC politicians withstand another draining ,unpopular war?
      The only way I can explain it is the zionist really are so delusional, because of their political control of congress, they think congress would send drones after any Americans who dared to protest or state they, the Jewish lobby or Israel pushed the US into a costly, damaging to America , war for Israel.
      People can think a war would distract Americans from their domestic problems, I don’t think so. I think another war like this would for most Americans be part and parcel of American outrage and discontent and make the OWS protest look like a walk in the park.
      I can’t get any more depressed because I do believe Israel will definitely try to provoke a war with Iran. No one has ever stopped their insanity yet and congress is working out justifications for Isr or USA to make that attack….they are churning out war excuse resolutions every damn week.

      • Frankie P
        November 2, 2011, 7:56 pm


        “They invoke Jewish scapegoat claim while they literally live out the old canard that Jews aren’t loyal to the countries they live in and operate as a nation within a nation.
        I don’t even know how to describe this orwellian disconnect of theirs, claiming they’re not doing what they’re doing when the whole world sees them doing it.”

        Don’t get your knickers in a twist trying to understand why they do it, or how you should describe it, or why they would risk everything…
        If it goes against your fundamental interests, fight it with all you have. Sometimes you just have to accept that some things don’t change, and
        no matter how we may have hope about change, and hope that the world is better and different – a changed place, when faced with the grim reality, we have to work with it and do what we can. When you point out the “conflict between the interests of Israel and the United States,” you will be called an anti-semite. Can you deal with that? It will take courage. When you highlight that cleavage that Halper says ought to be stated now, you will be smeared again, and again. Man, what an ugly feeling, knowing that people may be wondering if you are the “new anti-semitism”, a “hater”, etc. Hunker down, American; it seems that you have the interests of your country at heart; it will take many like you, fighting to resurrect the integrity of your country against a vile, special-interest group that seeks to destroy it.


      • American
        November 2, 2011, 11:32 pm

        “. When you point out the “conflict between the interests of Israel and the United States,” you will be called an anti-semite. Can you deal with that? It will take courage. When you highlight that cleavage that Halper says ought to be stated now, you will be smeared again, and again”

        Oh yeah FPM, I went thru all that when I first started talking about Israel and I/P. I was so naive then I though all I had to do was rationally point out to the Israel first Jews what a mistake they were making in I/P and conflating the US interest with Israel and what they were doing politically in the US and they would see the truth and walk toward the light. LOL That is when I learned just how vicious and crazy the uber zionist are. Now I don’t even try to talk to them except to poke them now and then. I never bothered to even try to talk to the Christian zio zealots, they are even crazier. Every time they start their religious mumbo jumbo about Israel my head explodes.
        Halper said similar to what I said recently– which is quit talking to “The Jews”, the ones I call the in-betweens, the collective community, as if they are 2 year old babies who have to coddled.
        Talk straight truth to them about the fallacy of believing they won’t ever have to make a choice between US interest and Israel interest.
        I use to tell that to the Jewish non hawkish Israel supporters I had friendly relations with on this and most of them would swear the US and Israel interest would never diverge…..which, even when they claimed that I could see it was their ‘wishful’ thinking more than absolute conviction.
        Anyway that’s where we are now in our interest vr Israel and it was bound to happen and it has.
        I think Halper is right that most US Jews would choose the US over Israel, not all, but most, because they know where their ultimate safety and future resides. But I think push is going to have come to shove in some way for them to accept that they can’t make America a second Jewish State subservient to the Israel mother ship.

      • CloakAndDagger
        November 2, 2011, 9:01 pm

        There is a (quite irrational) part of me that actually wants this to happen since that would finally rid us of AIPAC and the zionist death grip on America.

        Of course, that is cutting off my nose to spite my face…

      • annie
        November 2, 2011, 9:06 pm

        don’t count on it

      • Potsherd2
        November 2, 2011, 9:15 pm

        Not your nose. It would be innocent Iranians who’d suffer.

      • CloakAndDagger
        November 2, 2011, 9:20 pm

        That was tongue-in-cheek.

        Nonetheless, as with anything, there is a breaking strain. Americans are starting to wake up. An empty stomach can do wonders for focus and clarity.

        I seriously doubt that the lobby would survive another war-for-Israel. Neither would the US government.

  5. justicewillprevail
    November 2, 2011, 10:28 am

    Like a spoilt, over-indulged child Israel hasn’t a clue what to do when challenged over its brutality except stick to its instinctive reactions developed over the past fifty years: lash out at somebody else. Never mind there is no genuine threat, no evidence of a future one, it is enough to scapegoat them as a fantasy enemy, like Iraq who, if attacked, will somehow solve the internal contradictions Israel is struggling to contain. They could care less how many innocent casualties there will be, or how an Iranian civil war will breed far more terrorism and violence than currently exists. It is so stupid it defies belief that they can even consider it. But their thirst for more violence and aggression instead of facing the reality of a Palestinian state is deeply embedded. The most despicable aspect of their warmongering is that it is very likely that they will sacrifice US and Iranian citizens, but no Israelis in their Dr Strangelove attempt to bring yet more death and destruction to the Middle East and beyond. In a sane world these people would be behind bars, and nowhere near power. They are lunatic fundamentalists with no conscience.

    • pabelmont
      November 2, 2011, 7:18 pm

      Justice WP: “But their thirst for more violence and aggression instead of facing the reality of a Palestinian state is deeply embedded. The most despicable aspect of their warmongering is that it is very likely that they will sacrifice US and Iranian citizens, but no Israelis in their Dr Strangelove attempt to bring yet more death and destruction to the Middle East and beyond.”

      This does seem to be the mentality of the Israeli warrior class. They believe in making horrible war and no accounting of what you or I might call failures will stop them.

      They also believe, not w/o reason, that the kindly old retard, the USA, will enter and try to save their chestnuts. I don’t think we should try to save them. But we might try, because our own political system is so screwed up and also because we have an image of ourselves as macho war-achievers that will not be put to rest even after 10 years of nonsense in Iraq and Afghanistan.

      As someone said above, Russia and China must love every minute of this nonsense.

  6. POA
    November 2, 2011, 10:28 am

    Who can doubt that Israel is capable of such deflections, even if it drags the global community into nuclear conflict?

    It amazes me that we so easily attribute such possible actions to Israel, yet we refuse to exercise any common sense and apply it to 9/11.

    Israel is a danger to the entire global community. Its amazing we rue Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program when this insane little racist sandpit, Israel, has enough nukes to plunge the planet into darkness three times over.

    • Charon
      November 2, 2011, 1:01 pm

      POA, it amazes me too and part of it is credibility. Few here bring it up and others don’t believe it. Perhaps they do believe it and know it is far to unbelievable for the majority to even consider so for credibility sake it isn’t talked about.

      The evidence is circumstantial but common sense should kick in sooner or later. As Carl Cameron said when Fox News (of all people) went over it: “It’s more when they put it all together. A bigger question, they say, is how could they not have known?” He was not indicating anything past foreknowledge but even that is pretty bad.

      Again, this should be common sense given everything we know and accept. At least IMO. I’m not going to force it on anybody but I’m still going to talk about it because it is important to me.

      With I/P many already accept a real conspiracy. Decades of information suppression and lies, US government complacency as a partner in crime, Congressman lobbied and paid by AIPAC donations, etc. That is unbelievable for the majority of people. An AIPAC paid-for Congress relies on circumstantial evidence to prove… but come on. Common sense. Standing ovations to Bibi, anybody?

      Israel’s ‘liberators’ are real actual terrorists who used the same methods as today (King David Hotel bombing for example). State-sponsored terrorism and false flags have either been proven (Lavon Affair), suspected by rational people (USS Liberty), or obvious (Mexican Congress plot, Gaza “Al Qaeda” plot).

      Israel likes to cause diversions or carry out attacks when say Obama is being inaugurated for example. Given the timing of 9/11 and what went on (Ariel Sharon, Gaza disengagement, Second Intifada, failed Camp David summit, etc.) it was a perfect situation for Israel. Even Bibi admit this. It derailed I/P for years and fueled Islamophobia and racism against Arabs in the US. That’s what I believe. I’m thinking for myself and I don’t think it’s crazy. If others do, they are entitled to their own opinion.

      • CloakAndDagger
        November 2, 2011, 9:05 pm

        Excellent post! I agree completely.

    • Charon
      November 2, 2011, 1:33 pm

      Less tl;dr version of what I meant..

      Would/Did Israel benefit? Absolutely

      Has Israel ever done anything like this in the past? Yes, just not on this scale

      Was Israel (mentally) capable of doing such a thing? Absolutely

      Could Israel get away with doing such a thing? In the US? Israel could be eating babies and we’d find a way to defend them

      How could they get away with it without the American public knowing? They’ve gotten away with worse for the past 63 years

      How come the ‘truth’ kooks don’t mention this? Because counter-kooks have poisoned the well with disinfo fairy tales people find far more interesting than reality

      Where would they have gotten the money to pay for this? Ask Donald Rumsfeld. They audited the Pentagon and $2.3 trillion was missing:


      Notice the date on that speech. And Congress recently made a big deal about saving mere billions over the next few years… This doesn’t account for 10 years in inflation. No follow-up because the next day a plane carrying the Pentagon’s money tsar crashed into the area of the Pentagon where the auditors and the evidence was. Wow, what a coincidence, eh?

      Wouldn’t they need people on the Pentagon inside? The Bush admin DoD was crawling with Zionists and Neocons. Michael Chertoff in particular, an Israeli citizen and son of a Mossad sayinam, was responsible for the Patriot Act (he co-wrote it), the DHS (which he later headed), and the cluster tumor-causing TSA machines (which were a client of his, a conflict on interest). Then there are all the Zionists and Neocons who investigated and exploited the aftermath into wars and are now trumpeting for a suicide one with Iran.

      Common sense, IMO

      • CloakAndDagger
        November 2, 2011, 9:31 pm

        There does need to be more open (and bold) discussion of this subject. The guilty will do anything to block out any sunlight on this affair. There is certainly enough evidence to question the official story, but in this day and age, the powerful go free.

    • lysias
      November 2, 2011, 2:21 pm

      The evidence for at the least Israeli foreknowledge of 9/11 is strong.

      But the evidence for U.S. government complicity is a lot stronger.

      And the evidence for Pakistani and Saudi involvement is pretty strong too.

      Why would Israel, Pakistan, and the Saudis all be involved in something if it were not at the behest of the U.S.?

      The CIA has always farmed out most of its intelligence-gathering on the Middle East to foreign intel outfits, including the Mossad. My guess is the Israelis were tracking the 9/11 hijackers because that task had been farmed out to them by the U.S.

    • Kathleen
      November 2, 2011, 8:22 pm

      Norman Finkelstein Israel is a “lunatic state”

  7. annie
    November 2, 2011, 10:37 am

    “It’s a delaying thing…”

    yeah, i think he’s spot on. that’s what this is about. israel will do anything to stop this global pressure over palestine.

  8. eljay
    November 2, 2011, 10:37 am

    >> The most despicable aspect of their warmongering is that it is very likely that they will sacrifice US and Iranian citizens, but no Israelis …

    Israel may not send Israelis off to die, but if Israel attacks Iran, you can be certain that Israelis will die. All because Zio-supremacists can’t get past their sense of superiority, greed, entitlement and (self-)righteousness.

  9. Kathleen
    November 2, 2011, 10:45 am

    this thread over at Huffington Post where Ambassador Ginsberg promotes an attack on Syria is being heavily filtered. Go on over and try to challenge the status quo over there. Messy and a few others who seem to be promoting an attack on Syria. What they choose to filter is so interesting
    SOS From Syria

    • Ellen
      November 2, 2011, 12:42 pm

      All responses to the oft inane postings by the FORMER Ambassador Ginsberg are filtered. I think by the man himself. This is how much time he has.

      Ginsberg was a huge donor to Bill Clinton. With that he was able to buy his Ambassador appointment to MOROCCO! He was a political appointment and an embarrassment to foreign service professionals.

      This is a guy who has a packed resume that tells us nothing really. Like those who bought titles in the past, he bought his Ambassadorship and parades around as an Ambassador, using his title — which is legally acceptable. (But who else does this?)

      He is a AIPAC/JINSA apparatchik working the Israeli PR beat at APCO which works “…to create and implement strategic and tailored solutions designed to advance clients’ objectives.”


    • MRW
      November 2, 2011, 1:36 pm


      One of my favorite reporters is military reporter Trish Schuh. Here is a piece she wrote in 2005 on Syria that applies today, one you will enjoy immensely for the facts she packs in:
      Faking the Case Against Syria
      Mehlis’s Murky Past; US and Isreali Proxies Pushing the Next Neo-Con War

      • Kathleen
        November 2, 2011, 10:38 pm


  10. tod
    November 2, 2011, 11:04 am

    Why would Israel attack Iran?

    I guess you people expect something like the operation in Syria, but I still can’t see how this will help anything.
    First, AFAIK, the Iranian installations are defended unlike the Syrian ones. Second, I seem to remember there are multiple facilities, already operating, so the attack should be on more fronts at once.
    Third, even the slightest failure, like losing a plane or two, would make Israel look like an incompetent fool, instead of a dangerous fool.

    IMHO, Israel knows that it’s only chance against Iran is pushing the big dumb Americans to attack. But I don’t think they can afford it either.

    • RoHa
      November 2, 2011, 8:35 pm

      So you are betting on intelligence and rationality to save the day?

  11. lysias
    November 2, 2011, 11:42 am

    Don’t forget, in a regional war Israel would have an opportunity to practice ethnic cleansing, and at least substantially reduce if not eliminate entirely her Palestinian problem.

    Or so at least they may think.

  12. mikeo
    November 2, 2011, 12:00 pm


    Top story front page of the Guardian here in the UK.

    The effort to “prepare the ground” in the public consciousness continues apace…

    • annie
      November 2, 2011, 12:10 pm

      Washington has been warned by Israel against leaving any military action until it is too late. Western intelligence agencies say Israel will demand that the US act if Jerusalem believes its own military cannot launch successful attacks to stall Iran’s nuclear programme.

      gag me

    • lysias
      November 2, 2011, 2:54 pm

      One senior Whitehall official said Iran had proved “surprisingly resilient” in the face of sanctions, and sophisticated attempts by the west to cripple its nuclear enrichment programme had been less successful than first thought.

      He said Iran appeared to be “newly aggressive, and we are not quite sure why”, citing three recent assassination plots on foreign soil that the intelligence agencies say were coordinated by elements in Tehran.

      A senior Whitehall official actually believes in that story about the Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador?

      • James
        November 2, 2011, 5:07 pm

        they just regurgitate the same bullshit… worked for war in iraq, and they will do the same nonsense now… war means big money for the banks… once again we are at war with the banks and the banks seem to always win..

    • seafoid
      November 2, 2011, 6:40 pm

      Bizarre Israeli video on Guardian site


      Rusbridger is a joke of an editor.

  13. dbroncos
    November 2, 2011, 12:17 pm

    By the end of the year the US will be out of Iraq and allegedly repositioning its troops in Kuwait. This has to affect Israel’s plans to fly over Iraqi airspace as part of any bombing campaign.

    • lysias
      November 2, 2011, 2:14 pm

      As long as U.S. troops are still in Iraq, they’re sitting ducks for an Iranian response to an attack on Iran.

      How do you think the large Shiite majority in Iraq will react to an attack on Iran?

      • seafoid
        November 2, 2011, 6:41 pm

        Presumably they will side with Israel because they hate Hezbollah. Did I get that right?

      • Chaos4700
        November 2, 2011, 6:59 pm

        Now that was funny seafoid! In a morbid sort of way. I guess we don’t need DBG here now.

    • Kathleen
      November 2, 2011, 8:30 pm

      Published 10:27 21.09.09
      Latest update 12:26 21.09.09

      Brzezinski: U.S. should forcibly stop IAF flying over Iraq to reach Iran
      Carter’s ex-security advisor: Israel should be stopped, even at the cost of a ‘Liberty in reverse.’

      By Haaretz Service Tags: Iran Israel news Iran nuclear

      Zbigniew Brzezinski, the former national security adviser to U.S. President Jimmy Carter, said on Sunday that U.S. forces should forcibly prevent the Israel Air Force from reaching Iran to strike its nuclear facilities.

      • Kathleen
        November 2, 2011, 8:34 pm


        October 18, 2009 5:24 PM

        Game Plan: If Israel Strikes Iran First


        (CBS) Expect the unexpected, at a conference of Middle East experts.

        Several hundred spent the weekend at a resort hotel 30 miles northwest of Washington, D.C., forced by cold rain to focus on nothing but Iran and the nearly moribund Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

        At this annual gathering of financial backers of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, joined by diplomats, journalists and analysts, many had expected a feisty debate between proponents and opponents of a military attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

        Instead, the crowd heard experts suggesting the military option is a very realistic one; and a retired U.S. Air Force general said Israel might open fire first – and that the United States would find it wise to join in.

        Gen. Charles Wald, former head of strategic planning and policy for the Air Force who also had been deputy commander at U.S. European Command, said a bombing campaign – while “unpalatable” – could set back Iran’s nuclear work for many years.

        “I don’t think Israel can do it alone,” Wald added. “They have a fantastic military, but not big enough for weeks or months of attacks – hundreds of sorties per day.”

        Wald said the U.S. would not exactly be dragged into air strikes on Iran, but if “our great ally Israel” decided that it “can’t take it anymore” – the prospect of an Iranian nuclear bomb – then “pressure will mount for us to stand by Israel.”

        The general said that after commanding the air portion of the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan, he thought deeply about neighboring Pakistan and the possibility that it might one day use its nuclear arsenal. “I asked my staff to look into what would happen if there were a Pakistani-Indian nuclear exchange. They said there’d be tens of millions of dead at the low end, and 300 million dead at the high end.”

        Wald said he soon discovered what the Pakistani leaders’ reaction to that analysis was: They had not thought of that.

        Wald suggested Iran, Israel and other Middle Eastern nations which were likely to feel compelled to acquire nuclear bombs might also be failing to face facts.

        “In 2003, General Jim Jones [now President Obama’s National Security Adviser] and I sat down with our Strategic Advisory Group for Europe. I couldn’t get anyone interested in talking about Iran. The subject was always Iraq. And now Afghanistan is sucking all the oxygen out of the room.” Wald added that Arab governments along the Persian Gulf, however, have for years had Iran as their main concern.

        Sitting near Wald, a former head of Israel’s military intelligence, retired General Aharon Farkash, agreed that the U.S. Air Force could be far more effective than Israel in crippling Iran’s nuclear program. “The U.S. can destroy the nuclear capacity, and the war would not be long,” Farkash said, though he cautioned that Western intelligence still might not know about all of Iran’s nuclear sites.

        Like other Israelis, Farkash stressed the importance of making Iran believe that U.S. and Israeli threats are real. Harsh sanctions might lead to a decision by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, to stop nuclear enrichment.

        “The Teheran regime doesn’t seek suicide,” said the Israeli, who heads a new high-tech security company. “When they realize we mean business this time, they won’t want to lose their regime.”

        David Makovsky, a senior analyst at the Washington Institute and co-author (with Obama administration official Dennis Ross) of a book on Middle East policy, commented that the generals gave the impression of two different attack philosophies: “The U.S. believes do it huge, and make it overwhelming, while Israel would do what it can because not acting is so much worse.”

        Makovsky asked General Wald to comment on the suggestion by Jimmy Carter’s former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski – in a Daily Beast interview last month – that the U.S. shoot down Israeli warplanes if they try to fly over Iraq to attack Iran.

        “The chance of that,” Wald replied, “is zero – no, less than zero.”

        Earlier Saturday, the same audience heard a former vice president of the Islamic Republic of Iran argue that if his country is attacked, the pro-democracy “Green Movement” would be extinguished. Ata’ollah Mohajerani, who resides in London but is considered close to opposition candidate Mehdi Karoubi, said he strongly supports the reform movement, and considers Ahmadinejad’s reelection illegitimate. But he said a military strike or severe sanctions would serve to strengthen the regime.

        The Iranian politician’s unexpectedly long speech included references to books by Dostoevsky, Kafka, Walt Whitman, Elie Wiesel, and even Britain’s chief rabbi Jonathan Sacks. Mohajerani claimed that any good Muslim would not want nuclear weapons, but he made a point of saying that most of the nations putting pressure on Iran now have their own nuclear arsenals, alleging also that the United States and Israel wanted Iran to have atomic bombs when the late Shah was in power.

      • seafoid
        November 3, 2011, 2:53 am

        “Like other Israelis, Farkash stressed the importance of making Iran believe that U.S. and Israeli threats are real. Harsh sanctions might lead to a decision by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, to stop nuclear enrichment.”


        Bombing the sh*t out of Lebanon turned everyone against Hezbollah , didn’t it?


  14. mikeo
    November 2, 2011, 12:19 pm

    YEAH – tell me about it.

    The MoD has a specific team considering the military options against Iran. The Guardian has been told that planners expect any campaign to be predominantly waged from the air, with some naval involvement, using missiles such as the Tomahawks, which have a range of 800 miles. There are no plans for a ground invasion, but “a small number of special forces” may be needed on the ground, too.

    The RAF could also provide air-to-air refuelling and some surveillance capability, should it be required. British officials say any assistance would be cosmetic: the US could act on its own but would prefer not to.

    The UK – not only America’s poodle, but also its fig-leaf now it seems.

    • RoHa
      November 2, 2011, 8:39 pm

      Don’t forget America’s other poodle. And when it comes to poodling, we can do it just as well as the UK. (Even better at times. Went in to Vietnam. Voted with the US on UNESCO.)

  15. mikeo
    November 2, 2011, 12:30 pm

    Another thing that fucking annoys me Jerusalem believes its own military cannot launch successful attacks to stall Iran’s nuclear programme.

    No it doesn’t TEL AVIV does.

    I wonder if I’m paranoid but that part of it make me suspect this info is fed from Israeli sources.

    Customarily the Guardian uses the correct “Israel believes” or “Tel Aviv believes”.

    • annie
      November 2, 2011, 12:41 pm

      I wonder if I’m paranoid but that part of it make me suspect this info is fed from Israeli sources.

      are you kidding me? of course it is ‘leaked’ by israel, it’s pushed by bicom. i will try to dig up the leaked memo from the ceo of biocom. it’s a trip.

    • annie
      November 2, 2011, 12:53 pm

      here it is. i forgot we front paged it (silly me) Raising money, British Israel lobby brags about sending BBC anchor to Israel and pressing BBC editors to report ‘favourable line’

      A revealing email sent to the wrong folks, published by an English website (after the Daily Mail broke the story) in which the head of the English lobby describes meetings with leading media figures to push the pro-Israel line.

      here’s the thing, the email was leaked a few weeks after the fact and the info being pushed was exactly what was pushed sometimes down to the exact phrasing (as i recall).

      • annie
        November 2, 2011, 12:59 pm

        oh, and look at this from bicom’s website ISRAELI LEADERS WEIGH OPTIONS AGAINST IRANIAN NUCLEAR THREAT

        In recent days there have been increasing reports that Israeli decision-makers have been reassessing Israel’s options against Iran’s nuclear programme. This, according to reports in several news sources, also included the option of a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. The news became public last Friday when the Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot ran a front-page column suggesting that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak were in the midst of a campaign to convince cabinet ministers of the necessity of striking Iran’s nuclear sites. Haaretz this morning, speaking to a senior official, elaborated on the report by indicating that there is a “small advantage” in the cabinet for the opponents of such an attack. The Haaretz report also suggested that recently Netanyahu and Barak had persuaded Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who previously objected to attacking Iran, to support such a move.


        The wording of the IAEA report on 8 November will likely have significant impact on Israel’s decisions its assessment of the need for a military strike against Iran.

        the UN vote for statehood is the 11th as i recall.

      • seafoid
        November 2, 2011, 1:47 pm

        Israel has to change to deal with the new reality in the region. Iran will get those weapons eventually. How can Israel change instead of destroying itself ?

      • Kathleen
        November 2, 2011, 8:27 pm

        Stop building and expanding illegal settlements and illegal housing in E Jerusalem, take down the wall that is not built on the internationally recognized Palestinian land, stop controlling Palestinian water rights, sign the Non Proliferation treaty that Iran signed long ago. You know play fair

      • POA
        November 2, 2011, 8:37 pm

        “……info being pushed was exactly what was pushed sometimes down to the exact phrasing”

        There was a time I was a daily reader of the AIPAC website. During that same period I was a prolific contributer to the TWN comment section, (before Clemons completely sold out, but he was on his way.). Of note, I caught the AIPAC site posting pure unadulterated bullshit, particulartly about the Iranian missile program. After posting about the blatant bullshit, and linking to it, it was removed from the AIPAC website, and not archived. I do not know if my comments were a contributing factor. But point being, I began to notice terms and phrases being used on the AIPAC website that presaged terms and phrases that began to come out of our State Department’s press briefings. “Illicit nuclear weapons program” was one such phrase that appeared on the AIPAC site, only to become the term of choice for our State Department shortly thereafter. Note here, at this link, how it subsequently became a globally popular phrasing…..


        And here is a post at TWN where I brought up AIPAC’s bullshit about an Iranian “ballistic nuclear weapons program”….


        So, YES, Israel DOES frame and control the narrative, and if one pays careful attention and does diligent research, there is ample evidence leading one to conclude that our State Department is actually reading from an Israeli script.

        NOW, at the AIPAC website, today, we find a Syrian/Pakistani nuclear linkage. BOO!!!!

        Your turn, Hillary, your script is on its way.


  16. Les
    November 2, 2011, 12:31 pm

    UK military steps up plans for possible US strike on Iran nuclear facilities


    • American
      November 2, 2011, 1:47 pm

      The thing is –even if a lot of what we hear leaked is just monkey cage rattling to threaten and pressure Iran—when it doesn’t work on Iran and it won’t —then Isr and the US are trapped by their own threats into taking the next step and attacking Iran.

      • Les
        November 2, 2011, 2:08 pm

        The US isn’t just helping Israel to tighten the noose around itself but helping draw the noose around the US as well. Not everyone may be aware of this headline from yesterday, Incoming Kyrgyzstan president says U.S. base will close when lease runs out in 2014.

  17. Chu
    November 2, 2011, 12:43 pm

    This is one of the most ludicrous allies in the history of the world.
    While their Pro-Israel operatives in the US government maneuver
    the political spectrum to release traitor Jonathan Pollard, the US military is
    supposed to have Israel’s back when ever it cries wolf?

    It’s a bad deal for any nation in the world to have to defend a
    neo-colonial quasi-religious state, that has no respect for international

  18. lysias
    November 2, 2011, 1:01 pm

    Ha’aretz: Iran military head warns of ‘heavy damage’ should Israel attack:

    Iran’s military chief warned Wednesday that an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear development sites will come at a heavy price, according to the Iranian ISNA news agency.

    Responding to reports that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been trying to gain a majority in the cabinet for an attack on Iran, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff of Iran’s armed forces, Hassan Firouzabadi, warned both Israel and the U.S. against such a move.

    . . .

    Haaretz reported Wednesday that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak have been trying to push for an Israeli attack on Iran in the cabinet. They recently persuaded Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who previously objected to attacking Iran, to support such a move.

    Who would have thought Lieberman would have been relatively sane, or at least less insane?

    • annie
      November 2, 2011, 1:07 pm

      They recently persuaded Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who previously objected to attacking Iran, to support such a move.

      oh please. i don’t believe that for a second.

  19. HarryLaw
    November 2, 2011, 1:27 pm

    I cannot see an Israeli attack on Iran,war games have envisaged US strikes on multiple targets all over Iran for many weeks in order to blunt a fierce Iranian response. All Iran has to do is close the straights to tanker traffic for a few weeks for economic chaos in world markets, then the long war would begin,any sane person should think twice about taking on an enemy the size of Iran whose soldiers bring their shrouds to the battlefield.Remember the Zogby opinion poll throughout the middle east a few weeks ago which found a majority of those polled thought a nuclear armed Iran would be a good thing for the middle east, the dictators in Saudi Arabia and the gulf are afraid of course, for their own crowns.

    • lysias
      November 2, 2011, 2:09 pm

      If they want to keep their crowns, getting involved in a major war is the last thing they should want.

      Look at what happened to the monarchs during the First World War. And to some of the few who were left after that during and immediately after the Second World War.

  20. ToivoS
    November 2, 2011, 4:23 pm

    larry Derfner at 972mag
    makes a good argument that Israel will NOT attack Iran. Apparently there is over-whelming opposition coming from inside the Israeli defense and intelligence establishments.

    Of course, Israel will be working over time to get the US to do it for them. It seems very unlikely that they will succeed.

    • Chaos4700
      November 2, 2011, 7:00 pm

      Israel has done self-destructive things before, assuming (and to this point, enjoying) Uncle Sam’s safety net. If Bibi wants war with Iran, war with Iran is what he will make, and I doubt very much anyone else in Israel will stop him.

  21. Bandolero
    November 2, 2011, 7:07 pm

    I strongly disagree with Jeff Halper. Israel will not go to war with Iran. It would simply ruin Israel.

    But what Israel may well try to do is to make someone else go to war with Iran. As a distraction from the Palestinian issue that could be serving as well as the Iraq/Iran war 1980 or 9/11 and the wars that followed did serve that purpose.

    So, the question is: who might be silly enough – probably after a false flag attack to kickstart it – to wage war for Israels interest and ruin his country by that?

    Saudis? They are quite busy on the arab peninsula, they have shia on their oil fields, more shia in Bahrain, and an insurgency in Yemen. They won’t attack Iran, they are too busy, and they know, they would ruin their country by attacking Iran.

    But hav a look at this:

    “… The Ministry of Defence believes the US may decide to fast-forward plans for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. British officials say that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive, UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within the coalition government…”



    So, after waging war against Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya for the sake of Israel, David from Britain is ready to sacrify his own country even more for the zionist cause.

  22. Kathleen
    November 2, 2011, 8:38 pm

    Check this out

    Report: U.K. preparing for military strike on Iran nuclear facilities
    The Guardian newspaper says U.K. increasingly concerned over Iran’s enrichment program, and is preparing to deploy warships to assist a possible U.S. strike.
    By Haaretz Tags: Iran Iran nuclear Iran threat

    The U.K. is stepping up its preparations for a military strike on Iran, the Guardian newspaper reported on Wednesday. According to the report, the U.K. is increasingly concerned over Tehran’s nuclear program, and is preparing to deploy Royal Navy ships in the coming months to assist a possible U.S. attack on key facilities in Iran.

    The paper cited senior officials who said they believed Iran had regained its technological capabilities which were severely damaged in a cyber-attack last year. Iran said the Stuxnet worm infected personal computers of employees at the Bushehr plant, but not the plant’s main systems. The New York Times reported last January that the worm was a joint Israeli-U.S. effort to undermine Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

    • Kathleen
      November 2, 2011, 8:38 pm

      Thurs Nov 3

    • Shingo
      November 2, 2011, 9:26 pm

      Isn’t it amazing how Israelis supoprters alwasy insist that the Palestinians remounce violence, while remaining silent as ISrale goes around looking for wars to start?

  23. Kathleen
    November 2, 2011, 8:40 pm

    UK military steps up plans for Iran attack amid fresh nuclear fears

    British officials consider contingency options to back up a possible US action as fears mount over Tehran’s capability

  24. dumvitaestspesest
    November 2, 2011, 8:55 pm

    The so called, “Elite”,complains for a long while that there are too many people on the planet Earth. They think that a major reduction of the population is needed.
    War is one of the very effective ways of getting rid of a sufficient number of people, in a fairly short time.
    Kind of a wholesale, massive death production versus retail sale that just happens naturally every day.
    Those ,who are on top, who make major decisions, who have money and power, are very dangerous, very determined psychopaths, who do not have a respect for life of any, any ,average person.
    People do need to realise that. In a way, we all are in great danger.

  25. eljay
    November 3, 2011, 7:50 am

    The utter hypocrisy and immorality of Western leaders (and a good many Western citizens) disgusts me. We wax eloquent about peace, justice and the right of self-defence…and then deny it to others as we viciously attack, bombard, destroy and kill.

    So much for “live #AND# let live!”

  26. Am_America
    November 3, 2011, 11:44 am

    This isn’t going to calm anyone’s nerves:

    Islamic Jihad: We don’t expect truce with Israel to hold

    “We are proud and honored to say that the Islamic Republic of Iran gives us support and help,” spokesman for group’s armed wing boasts.


    • Taxi
      November 3, 2011, 12:07 pm

      So frigging what you silly fearmonger Am_israel?!

      We supply the criminal Apartheid colonialist israel with COPIOUS amounts of armory too!

      SO WHAT?!

    • Shingo
      November 3, 2011, 7:22 pm

      Islamic Jihad: We don’t expect truce with Israel to hold

      No one does because Israel are bound to break it, like they always do.

  27. midnightschild
    November 4, 2011, 12:18 am

    Evidently Obama has become the new “Cheyney” as a war monger. Hopefully someone will ask Obama to show proof of Iran’s nuclear weapons, or perhaps Hillary can answer that one. Does Obama really believe the people in the US want him to start another war? we heard his UN speech, where he got his badge of honor from Netanyahu, but going into another war to appease Israel is really pushing it. Hopefully the Brits are also tired of a government that will follow the US into another hellish war. Has anyone wondered what the nuclear fallout will be like if the US, Israel , and Britain bomb all their nuclear facilities? Would the President, Netanyahu, and the British Prime Minister be held as war criminals if no nukes are found in Iran, just so many dead civilians? I hope a reporter will ask these questions either at a White House briefing or ask the State department. We are going down the same road as we did in Iraq, only this time our soldiers in Afghanistan may be fighting Iranians as well.

Leave a Reply