Friday, July 15, 2011

Israel Will Bomb Iran This Fall According To Former CIA Official (Watch For New 9-11 False Flag Attack Soon!)

The criminal state of Israel has long wanted their newest war against the peaceful state of Iran to get going.  It has always been their desire to trigger the war, and to get their American slaves fighting and dying for their dream of total hegemony over the entire Middle East. 

Recent events elsewhere in the world have turned the publics' attention away from Iran temporarily, but that may soon change... According to this article that comes from the Huffington Post, at, a former CIA official has come forward and is saying that the criminal state of Israel will launch their long cherished war against Iran this September!  Here is the Huffington Post article for everyone to view:

Former CIA Official: Israel Will Bomb Iran in September

Posted: 7/15/11 04:04 PM ET

A longtime CIA officer who spent 21 years in the Middle East is predicting that Israel will bomb Iran this fall, dragging the United States into another major war and endangering U.S. military and civilian personnel (and other interests) throughout the Middle East and beyond.

Robert Baer made his prediction on the provocative KPFK Los Angeles show Background Briefing, hosted by Ian Masters.

Baer has had a storied career, including a stint in Iraq in the 1990s where he organized opposition to Saddam Hussein. (He was recalled after being accused of trying to organize Saddam's assassination). Upon his retirement, he received a top decoration for meritorious service. Incidentally, George Clooney won an Oscar for playing a character based on Baer in the film Syriana (Baer also wrote the book).

Baer didn't name sources for his prediction of an Israeli attack, but the few he did cite are all Israeli security figures who have publically warned that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are hell-bent on war.
Baer is especially impressed by the unprecedented warning about Netanyahu's plans by former Mossad chief, Meir Dagan. Dagan left the Israeli intelligence agency in September 2010 and two months ago predicted that Israel would attack and that doing so would be "the stupidest thing" he could imagine. According to Haaretz:
When asked about what would happen in the aftermath of an Israeli attack Dagan said that: "It will be followed by a war with Iran. It is the kind of thing where we know how it starts, but not how it will end."
The Iranians have the capability to fire rockets at Israel for a period of months, and Hizbollah could fire tens of thousands of grad rockets and hundreds of long-range missiles, he said.
According to Ben Caspit of Israeli daily Maariv, Dagan's blasts at Israel's political leadership are significant not only because Mossad chiefs, in office or retired, traditionally have kept their lips sealed but also because Dagan is very conservative on security matters. 

Caspit writes that Dagan is "one of the most rightwing militant people ever born here. ... When this man says that the leadership has no vision and is irresponsible, we should stop sleeping soundly at night."

Dagan describes the current Israeli government as "dangerous and irresponsible" and views speaking out against Netanyahu as his patriotic duty. 

And his abhorrence of Netanyahu is not uncommon in the Israeli security establishment. According to Think Progress, citing the Forward newspaper, 12 of the 18 living ex-chiefs of Israel's two security agencies (Mossad and Shin Bet), are "either actively opposing Netanyahu's stances or have spoken out against them." Of the remaining six, two are current ministers in Netanyahu government, leaving a grand total of four out of 18 who independently support the prime minister. 

In short, while Congress dutifully gives Netanyahu 29 standing ovations, the Israelis who know the most about both Netanyahu and Israel's strategic situation think he is a dangerous disaster.

But according to Baer, we ain't seen nothing yet. 

There is almost "near certainty" that Netanyahu is "planning an attack [on Iran] ... and it will probably be in September before the vote on a Palestinian state. And he's also hoping to draw the United States into the conflict," Baer explained.

The Israeli air force would attack "Natanz and other nuclear facilities to degrade their capabilities. The Iranians will strike back where they can: Basra, Baghdad," he said, and even Afghanistan. Then the United States would jump into the fight with attacks on Iranian targets. "Our special forces are already looking at Iranian targets in Iraq and across the border [in Iran] which we would strike. What we're facing here is an escalation, rather than a planned out-and-out's a nightmare scenario. We don't have enough troops in the Middle East to fight a war like that. I think we are looking into the abyss."

Masters asked Baer why the U.S. military is not mobilizing to stop this war from happening. Baer responded that the military is opposed, and so was the civilian head of the military, former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who used his influence to thwart an Israeli attack during the Bush and Obama administrations. But he's gone now and "there is a warning order inside the Pentagon" to prepare for war.

It should be noted that the Iranian regime is quite capable of triggering a war with the United States on its own through some combination of colossal stupidity and sheer hatred. In fact, Baer says, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard would welcome a war. They are "paranoid." They are "worried about ... what's happening to their country economically, in terms of the oil embargo and other sanctions." And they are worried about a population that increasingly despises the regime.
They need an external enemy. Because we are leaving Iraq, it's Israel. But in order to make this threat believable, they would love an attack on their nuclear facilities, love to go to war in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia and Iraq and hit us where they could. Their defense is asymmetrical. We can take out all of their armored units. It's of little difference to them, same with their surface-to-air missile sites. It would make little difference because they would use terrorism. They would do serious damage to our fleet in the Gulf.
Given all that, is it possible that the United States would allow Israel to attack when the president knows "we would be forced" to join the war on Israel's side?

Baer's response: "the President is up for re-election next year" and Israel is "truly out of control."
What happens when you see 100 F-16's approaching Iraq and there is a call to the White House [from Netanyahu] that says "We're going in, we're at war with Iran"? What does the President of the United States do? He has little influence over Bibi Netanyahu. ...We can't stop him. And he knows it.
It's a pretty frightening scenario, made infinitely more so by the fact that top Israelis (who have heard Netanyahu's thinking from Netanyahu himself) also see the future the same way. Those Israelis deserve a world of credit for sounding the warning bell loud enough that we would hear it and do something about it - although it's impossible to know if the people who matter are paying attention.

Actually, only one person matters: the president. If Israel bombed Iran tomorrow, Congress would forget all about partisan differences and run, not walk, to the House and Senate floors to endorse the attack and call for unstinting support for Israel. That is what Congress always does, and will always do so long as the lobby (and the donors it directs) are the key players in making our Middle East policies.

And who knows what Obama would do? So far, he has not exactly distinguished himself when it comes to standing up to Netanyahu.

But an Israeli attack on Iran would be different. It would endanger countless Americans (in the region and here at home, too). It would kill off any economic recovery by causing oil prices to skyrocket. It would engulf us in another Middle East war. And it would threaten the existence of the state of Israel.
This is something the President needs to focus on instead of being forced to nickel and dime with the likes of  Eric Cantor and Mitch McConnell. How incredible that these two, and their right-wing allies, have our government tied in knots in their incessant effort to elevate themselves by destroying the President of the United States. When did Congressional leaders decide that the only thing that matters is not national security -- but their party's fortunes and, mostly, their own? It is sickening.

NTS Notes:   Lets not kid ourselves... The fact is that Israel cannot take on Iran alone, and if they launch this attack on Iran this September, they will automatically demand their slaves in the United States to also declare war against Iran and do the fighting and dying for them!  How sick is that?

I do not even need to remind my own readers that Iran is a peaceful nation that is absolutely a threat to no one.   The reason why Israel wants Iran destroyed is simple... Iran is the last major threat to the sick Jewish nation's quest for total control of the region.  Eliminate Iran, and they will have total dominance over the entire Middle East.   It does not matter to these sick twisted psychos that millions of innocent people will die in the process!

I guarantee also that before Israel launches their attack on Iran, their agents in America will conduct another false flag somewhere in the continental United States along the lines of their 9-11 attack, and this time have the false blame fall on Iran.   That way they will have the gullible people in the United States support their government  in their declaration of war against that innocent nation.  If any "terrorist" attack happens soon, lets make sure that everyone is aware of exactly who the true perpetrators of the crime are!

More to come



Anonymous said...

Not related to the topic of today's post, but I know that topic interests you:

A proven recipe to debunk the Moon landings fiction:

I recently had the following exchange at Mangan's, an alt-right blog which I occasionally follow. I should note that although I am open-minded with respect to "human biodiversity" and like to read from blogs offering a variety of viewpoints, I do not endorse at all the "white supremacist" current that is sometimes underlying the discussions on that blog.

Here are some of the most interesting snippets from an exchange between me ("Anonymous Moon Hoaxer") and "Martin B" (whom I suspect to be a paid shill because I have noticed that he intervenes immediately whenever topics such as 9/11, bin Laden's death, or the Moon landings are brought up - you can judge from that exchange whether I am right or wrong):

Anonymous Moon Hoaxer said...

"Martin B said...

Ph.D. in physics. Work in the "space biz". I guess that makes me a member of the conspiracy, huh?"

Well, that is interesting. It would be nice to see some additional piece of evidence to confirm that you are indeed what you say you are. I'm sure you would say the same if I were to simply state my credentials on this blog without any evidence, no? Fair game.

But, assuming that you are indeed working in the "space biz", perhaps you could tell us why, if NASA was able to send astronauts to the moon in the late 1960s (which I do not believe for a minute, but bear with me here), no one has been able to go to the Moon for 40 years? And please do not tell me that they were not interested in going back - they explicitly said that it was one of their goals in 2004. Why was NASA telling us in 2004 that we might not be able to go back before 2020?

You should be in a good position to know that the technology at our disposal is incommensurably more sophisticated than what we had in the 1960s - or would you care to disconfirm that?

Given your qualifications, how do you explain that since the last Apollo flight allegedly returned from the Moon in 1972, the furthest that any astronaut from any country has traveled from the surface of the Earth is about 400 miles?

Speaking of radiation, you probably know that on June 24, 2005, NASA made this rather remarkable admission: 'NASA's Vision for Space Exploration calls for a return to the Moon as preparation for even longer journeys to Mars and beyond. But there's a potential showstopper: radiation. Space beyond low-Earth orbit is awash with intense radiation from the Sun and from deep galactic sources such as supernovas … Finding a good shield is important.' (

It seems that radiation was still a BIG problem in 2005, doesn't it? Why can't NASA simply use the same design they used in the 1960s if it actually worked?

I will be waiting eagerly for your answers. After all, most of us do not often have the opportunity to converse with a Ph.D. in Physics working in the "space biz"...
7/14/2011 11:41 PM

Anonymous Moon Hoaxer said...

@ Martin B:

Oh, and by the way, I ought to tell you that I would be happy to post your answers elsewhere on the 'Net. After all, why should Mangan's readers be the only ones to benefit from the knowledge of a Ph.D. in physics working in the "space biz"? Besides, it would be good for other people, who may be more qualified than I am, to examine your answers and check their validity for themselves.

So please try to do a good job. You can of course ask for help from your colleagues as well, I have no problems with that...

In the case that you cannot provide satisfactory answers, I may of course post elsewhere the list of questions I submitted here as a quick way to help other people debunk the Moon landing fiction.
7/15/2011 12:29 AM

[post by a third-party commenter omitted]


Anonymous said...

[continued from the previous comment...]

Martin B said...

"Anonymous Moon Hoaxer said...

Well, that is interesting. It would be nice to see some additional piece of evidence to confirm that you are indeed what you say you are. I'm sure you would say the same if I were to simply state my credentials on this blog without any evidence, no? Fair game."

"Fari game"? No. Especially not coming from someone named "Anonymous". No, I will not tell you about me, as I obviously go to some lengths to remain anonymous myself, as do most people on this website, and for obvious reasons.

And you didn't tell me anything about your background or why I should give a tinker's damn about what you say. Nor did you address the first two points I mentioned: 1.) that the length of stay planned was alot longer in Constellation, and 2.) that presumably James Van Allen's opinion on the lethality of space radiation in the late 90s is more relevant to the topic than what he thought in 1959 (if he indeed even said what you quoted). Given that you don't engage in argument - you just ignore what others write - I won't waste any further time arguing with you. You are an idiot, and a particularly dense one at that. I'm sure nothing I say will disabuse you of your ridiculous fantasy, anyway.
7/15/2011 7:04 AM

You can read the rest of the exchange here if you are interested:

Here is a self-proclaimed Ph.D. in physics working in the "space biz", and that's all he could come up with to answer my questions, which are crucial questions to ask to individuals promoting the Moon landing hoax. This is a big deal. When an "expert" cannot answer clearly these questions, you know that the whole edifice is crumbling. As I said somewhere else in the exchange: "No matter who is asking them, these questions directly address some of the most important issues regarding the alleged Moon landings."

He does bring up some minor issues brought up earlier in the exchange, however I would not say that he "won" the argument (you have to read the lead-up to the exchange I quoted to see why), but for the rest all he does is insulting, name-calling, evading the questions - a behavior that he exhibited during most of the exchange. Please note that I specifically informed him that I would be happy to post my list of questions and his answers elsewhere on the 'Net, so we can assume that this is probably the best he could come up with.

I would suggest to anyone interested to keep in mind the list of questions I provided here as a proven method to debunk the alleged Moon landings.

Northerntruthseeker said...

Great comment about the Apollo Moon Hoax...

I do not mind the comment, but I still would like to have a comment about the article at hand...

Yes, I will have some articles coming up about further damning of NASA and the Apollo scam.... In those articles, you can give me further info if you want...

Keep up the fine work by the way..."Anonymous"...

Anonymous said...

The vast majority of this post is stolen word-for-word from Al Jazeera.
I agree with everything written here, but you have to improve your journalistic credibility or some left-wing moron is going to call you out and make you look stupid.

Northerntruthseeker said...

Actually, it has not been stolen as you state.. The context of the article that I link to is embedded within this article with my own comments written around it...

Journalistic integrity??? Gee.... I blush.... I never actually thought of myself as a journalist, but a blogger who only puts in his own two cents worth!