Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts


Go Back   Vanguard News Network Forum > News & Discussion > Uncensored Europe + > United Kingdom
Donate Register Multimedia Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Login

View Poll Results: Is a 9/11 style false-flag attack imminent?
Yes, as a pretext for war with Iran 85 70.25%
No, you are simply paranoid Gerry Fable 13 10.74%
A terrorist attack is likely, by Muslims, not C.I.A/Mossad 23 19.01%
Voters: 121. You may not vote on this poll

 
Thread Display Modes Share
Old January 19th, 2011 #61
bob hayne
Junior Member
 
bob hayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 149
bob hayne
Default

Cool, save a few White girls from rape by muds.


Click image for larger version

Name:	Thumbs up girl.jpg
Views:	11
Size:	106.1 KB
ID:	7029
 
Old January 19th, 2011 #62
Gerry Fable
Gottgläubiger
 
Gerry Fable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,274
Gerry Fable
Default

Quote:
Former CIA Officer -
US Plans Nuclear
Attack On Iran

Aljazeera.net
7-31-5

The United States is developing a nuclear plan to attack military bases in Iran, said Philip Giraldi, a former CIA intelligence officer.

Giraldi said that the U.S. nuclear strike against Iran would take place after a 9/11-style attack on the United States, and that the planned attack would be analogous to the unprovoked invasion of Iraq.

The former CIA officer also said that an attack on the U.S. would serve as the pretext for putting the plan into action.

He noted that some Air Force officers are opposed to the nuclear strike plan "but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections."

Several U.S. officials have indicated that Washington has developed contingency plans to use nuclear arms to attack military targets in Iran and North Korea.

One recent study, released before the election of former Taliban mayor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the presidency on June 23, asserts that the U.S. assault on Iran has already started.

The analysis, prepared by former United Nations nuclear arms inspector Scott Ritter, reveals that the CIA aids Iranian opposition groups.

It also said that the Washington plans to stage military attacks against the Islamic republic with U.S. forces from the neighboring Republic of Azerbaijan.

Analysts say that although the Bush administration intensified its war of words against Iran, the propaganda offensive didn't reach the intensity achieved during the 2002-2003 build-up for the invasion of Iraq.

They say that the U.S. failure in Iraq and the American public's declining support for the invasion have made such a propaganda offensive less viable at this moment.

However, a new attack on the U.S. soil could provoke a large sector of the American public and encourage the Bush administration to launch an attack on Iran.

Since an attack on the U.S. is, according to experts, almost inevitable, the Bush administration would likely be given the justification to attack Iran. Some believe that the Bush administration would not even seek congressional approval and launch the attack on the basis of alleged self-defense.

Analysts say that Iran is considerably stronger than Iraq, and that a U.S. attack on Iran will cause chaos in the Middle East.

The U.S. claims that Iran that it is secretly developing an atomic weapons program and wants to refer its nuclear file to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions.
The Islamic republic denies the U.S. allegations, insisting that its nuclear plans are strictly for the peaceful generation of electricity.

Naturally, Israel would also encourage a U.S. attack on Iran, as it considers Iran a serious threat to its nuclear monopoly in the Middle East.

In late June, the Israeli ambassador to the U.S., Daniel Ayalon, said that Iran must be stopped from making nuclear arms. "The clock is ticking, and time is not on our side," he said.
Moreover, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has reportedly handed the U.S. President W. Bush photographs of Iran's nuclear facilities.
http://www.rense.com/general67/form.htm

I found this on the internet. How genuine it is I can't say. But it backs up my claims made on this thread.
 
Old January 21st, 2011 #63
Gerry Fable
Gottgläubiger
 
Gerry Fable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,274
Gerry Fable
Default

Noam Chomsky talking about Zionist influence in the Whitehouse. Video
 
Old January 24th, 2011 #66
Gerry Fable
Gottgläubiger
 
Gerry Fable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,274
Gerry Fable
Default

THE COMING IRAN WAR.

Last week twelve US warships and at least one Israeli warship passed through the Suez Canal on their way to the Red Sea. Included among the US fleet is the aircraft carrier, USS Harry S Truman. Today we learn that the Israeli Air Force have set up base at a Saudi airfield near Tabuk in north-west Saudi Arabia despite earlier denials from the Saudi government that it had given the Israelis permission to use its airspace to attack Iran. We also learn that American and possibly Israel forces are also gathering at bases in Azerbaijan at the north-west border of Iran.

While Israel’s war against Iran has absolutely nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear weapons program – Iran doesn’t have one and the Israelis and the US are fully aware of that – Israel and the US will need to launch any attack against Iran by first attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities in order to maintain the illusion that the casus belli for the war is, indeed, Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Since many of Iran’s nuclear facilities are in the north-west corner of the country, it should not be surprising that Azerbaijan be used by Israel and the US as a springboard to launch their attack against Iran. However, once the initial attack has been launched, US and Israeli air forces will then likely concentrate on pounding Iranian political and defence institutions for the purpose forcing Iran to capitulate and sue for a peace through the UN which the US will conditionally concede to providing Iran rids itself of President Ahmadinejad and gives up its nuclear program.

But, while the attack on Iran will be seen by the world as the main event, the real purpose for the war will be happening on Israel’s doorstep.

At the same time as Iran is being attacked, Israel, using the excuse of pre-empting retaliation for attacking Iran, will attack both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza and then move to occupy south Lebanon up to the Litani River and the Gaza Strip. Israel will also likely fully occupy the West Bank.


This is the scenario that the US and Israel would prefer to see happen; a quick overwhelming move against all of Israel and America’s enemies that concludes with the defeat of the Iranian regime and, thus, regime change, together with the demise of Hezbollah and Hamas. This then will give the Israelis a free hand in creating a Greater Israel that ultimately includes the Gaza Strip, south Lebanon up to the Litani River, the West Bank and the Golan Heights. It will also provide the US with an even stronger ally in the Middle East and also a neutered enemy.

But can it work the way the Israelis and the US plan?

Invasion of Iran by the US is out of the question, (though the insertion of some special forces is highly likely in order to co-ordinate air strikes). Iran is a vast country that is some three times larger than Iraq. The US, considering its current ground troop commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan would not be able to effectively invade Iran. It would have to rely on an overwhelming aerial bombing campaign in order to prevail.

The instant any attack is launched against Iran, or Hezbollah or Hamas, there will likely be instant retaliation against Israel by at least Hezbollah and possibly Hamas. Both entities would, by this stage, realise that this fight will be to the finish. The fighting therefore will be intense and fearsome and there will be many casualties – mostly, of course, civilians. In a worst case scenario, depending on the intensity of the bombardment of Israel by Hezbollah, Israel may threaten the use of nuclear weapons against Lebanon unless Hezbollah cease their rocket attacks against Israel. Likewise, if Iran retaliates with a rocket attack against Israel, both the US and Israel may threaten the use of nuclear weapons against Iran. In the very worst case scenario, if Iran or Hezbollah used chemical or biological weapons, Israel and /or the US would actually use nuclear weapons with little or no warning in retaliation.

Whatever happens, a war against Iran will have devastating consequences one way or the other and for all sides.

It’s time for the peoples of the world to stand up and be heard before it is too late.
POSTED BY DAMIAN LATAAN AT 1:15 PM
 
Old January 24th, 2011 #67
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

This is from November last year.
Quote:
The drumbeat of an approaching war with Iran reverberates through U.S. diplomatic documents leaked by the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks.

Eighteen months ago, in May 2009, Israel's Defence Minister Ehud Barak, met with a U.S. congressional delegation and insisted the world had just six to 18 months "in which stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons might still be viable."

After that, Mr. Barak said, "any military solution would result in unacceptable collateral damage."

With that deadline fast approaching, time indeed is running out. And, for the first time, the WikiLeaks' trove of stolen U.S. diplomatic cables shows, in unprecedented ways, the growing pressures being put on Washington to find a military solution to Iran's growing nuclear threat.

Before he rushed to New York for emergency medical treatment last week, Saudi King Abdullah repeatedly pressed the United States to attack Iran, at one point urging U.S. officials to "cut off the head of the snake," several diplomatic memos say.

As early as 2006, Abu Dhabi's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, the defence chief of the United Arab Emirates, was urging Washington to take action against Iran "this year or next."

In November last year, King Hamad of Bahrain told U.S. General David Petraeus Iran's nuclear program "must be stopped . . . by whatever means necessary."

According to a February 2010 diplomatic cable, Kuwait's Interior Minister, Jaber Kahled al-Sabah, believes "the U.S. will not be able to avoid a military conflict with Iran, if it is serious in its intention to prevent Tehran from achieving a nuclear weapons capability."

Israel has long threatened military attacks on Iran to derail its nuclear arms program. But it is only now, because of the diplomatic leaks, that Arab states in the Middle East are publicly on the record as having reached the same conclusion.

The implications of this unusual and unintended common cause could see Arab states simply look the other way, if Israel finally decides to launch a preemptive military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

It has been rumoured for months that Saudi Arabia and Jordan have already cut secret deals with Israel to allow Israeli long-range bombers quick and easy access to southern Iran by flying through their air space.

Israeli pilots are also said to have conducted bombing-run drills in the Negev desert against a scale model of Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactor on the Persian Gulf coast.

And two years ago, Israel staged a full dress rehearsal for a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities by flying more than 100 F-16 and F-15 fighters and refueling tanker planes on an exercise over Greece and the eastern Mediterranean.

But, then, as now, U.S. officials have cautioned restraint and pleaded for time to let international sanctions drive Iran to surrender its weapon's program voluntarily.

U.S. Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, has repeatedly tried to defuse the talk of war in the Persian Gulf by saying any strike against Iran will have unpredictable and dangerous consequences.

Experts predict the Middle East would become a fireball.

Iran could launch retaliatory missile strikes on Israel; move to halt international oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz; bombard Saudi oil refineries that produce 25% of the world's energy and incite violence against U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, in addition to unleashing terrorist violence around the world.

Ideally, the Arab states want the United States, not Israel, to launch any attack on Iran. Washington is far more powerful and likely to inflict far more damage on Iran's nuclear program.

But the WikiLeaks documents show U.S. officials believe Israel is capable of staging a raid single-handed.

In February this year, U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates met with French Defence Minister Herve Morin, who asked if Israel could strike Iran without U.S. support.

Mr. Gates replied "that he didn't know if they would be successful, but that Israel could carry out the operation," a memo of the meeting says.

He also added that any strike "would only delay Iranian plans by one to three years, while unifying the Iranian people to be forever embittered against the attacker."

About the same time, when he visited Rome and met with Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, Mr. Gates issued a warning: "Without progress in the next few months, we risk nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, war, prompted by an Israeli strike, or both," he told the Italian.

The result could be earthshaking, he said, predicting "a different world" in four to five years.
Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/wor...uments/3903259
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old January 24th, 2011 #68
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Current travel advice from our Government for those considering going to Iran. A useful insight into what the crack is, whether you're on the side of "they're trying to convince us" or "they are a real threat".

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-...th-africa/iran
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old January 29th, 2011 #69
Gerry Fable
Gottgläubiger
 
Gerry Fable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,274
Gerry Fable
Default

Another video
 
Old January 30th, 2011 #70
Gerry Fable
Gottgläubiger
 
Gerry Fable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,274
Gerry Fable
Default


Quote:
"This stage is the final one (Iran war), the last attack to finish Gaza, and destroy one million and a half Palestinians who have been blocked by the Israelis."


"Israel finally has become the killing arm of American imperialism....Here in Latin America they tried to create an Israeli state. It will never happen here, an imperialist killing arm to assault the Latin American people....Every day, Latin America will be more united and more free."

President Hugo Chevez


It would appear that Hugo Chevez has upset the Zionist elite judging by this short clip. The film attempts to link criminal attacks on Jews as proof of state sponsored anti-Semitism. Not so.
 
Old January 30th, 2011 #72
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

The story is not really relevant *as such* but worth mentioning for the big, bold headline.

Quote:
Egypt protests: The flowering of democracy, or the birth of another Iran?
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...#ixzz1CYAsxsAg

Translation: Remember, folks, just how bad Iran is and how desperately it needs our intervention.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old February 4th, 2011 #76
Gerry Fable
Gottgläubiger
 
Gerry Fable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,274
Gerry Fable
Default

WikiLeaks cables: MI6 warns of new suicide bomb wave


Quote:
MI6 has warned that Britain faces a “unique” threat from a generation of home-grown terrorists who are not on the intelligence services’ “radar”, secret documents have disclosed.
It's going to happen soon. Real soon.
 
Old February 4th, 2011 #77
Gerry Fable
Gottgläubiger
 
Gerry Fable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,274
Gerry Fable
Default

World faces 'nuclear 9/11,' atomic regulator warned

Leaked U.S. diplomatic cables document struggle to block theft and smuggling of nuclear, chemical and biological material

By Heidi Blake And Christopher Hope, Daily Telegraph February 2, 2011

Quote:
Al-Qaida is on the verge of producing radioactive weapons after sourcing nuclear material and recruiting rogue scientists to build "dirty" bombs, according to leaked U.S. diplomatic documents.

A leading atomic regulator has privately warned the world stands on the brink of a "nuclear 9/11."

Security briefings suggest jihadi groups are also close to producing "workable and efficient" biological and chemical weapons that could kill thousands if unleashed in attacks on the West.

Thousands of classified American cables obtained by WikiLeaks and passed to the Daily Telegraph detail the international struggle to stop the spread of weapons-grade nuclear, chemical and biological material around the globe.

At a NATO meeting in 2009, security chiefs briefed member states that al-Qaida was plotting a program of "dirty radioactive IEDs", makeshift nuclear roadside bombs that could be used against western troops in Afghanistan.

As well as causing a large explosion, a "dirty bomb" attack would contaminate the area for many years.

The briefings also state that al-Qaida documents found in Afghanistan in 2007 revealed that "greater advances" had been made in bioterrorism than was previously realized. An Indian national security adviser told American security personnel in June 2008 that terrorists had made a "manifest attempt to get fissile material" and "have the technical competence to manufacture an explosive device beyond a mere dirty bomb".

Alerts about the smuggling of nuclear material, sent to Washington from foreign U.S. embassies, document how criminal and terrorist gangs were trafficking large amounts of highly radioactive material across Europe, Africa and the Middle East.

In one incident in September 2009, two employees at the Rossing Uranium Mine in Namibia smuggled almost half a ton of uranium concentrate powder out of the compound in plastic bags.

Tomihiro Taniguchi, the deputy director general of the IAEA, has privately warned America that the world faces the threat of a "nuclear 9/11" if stores of uranium and plutonium were not secured against terrorists.

Senior British defence officials have raised "deep concerns" that a rogue scientist in the Pakistani nuclear program "could gradually smuggle enough material out to make a weapon", according to a document detailing official talks in London in February 2009.

Agricultural stores of deadly biological pathogens in Pakistan are vulnerable to "extremists" who could use supplies of anthrax, foot and mouth disease and avian flu to develop lethal biological weapons.

Anthrax and other biological agents including smallpox, and avian flu could be sprayed from an aerosol can in a crowded area, security briefings warn.

The security of the world's only two declared smallpox stores in Atlanta and in Novosibirsk, Russia, has repeatedly been called into doubt by "a growing chorus of voices" at meetings of the World Health Assembly documented in the leaked cables.

The alarming disclosures come after U.S. President Barack Obama last year declared nuclear terrorism "the single biggest threat" to international security with the potential to cause "extraordinary loss of life".

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
It would appear the CIA/MOSSAD is planning a nuclear false-flag attack. Remember the missing nukes in the Alan Hart interview? http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php...96&postcount=9
 
Old February 4th, 2011 #78
Gerry Fable
Gottgläubiger
 
Gerry Fable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,274
Gerry Fable
Default




Quote:
Brian Jenkins - The Case of the Missing Suitcase Bombs Commonwealth Club - The Commonwealth Club of California According to a British intelligence report leaked to the press in 2007, al-Qaida operatives are planning a large-scale attack "on par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki."How likely is it that terrorists will develop the capability of such an attack?Jenkins is one of the world's most renowned terrorism experts. He will discuss the realities of a nuclear threat - the motivations, the means and what we should be doing in response - The Commonwealth Club of California
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:17 AM.
Page generated in 0.12803 seconds.