RSS Feed
January 11th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda 
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 9, 2012
War in the Middle East now appears imminent as the United States, Britain, the European Union, and Israel put the finishing touches on an embargo on Iran – a de facto declaration of war – and warships steam toward the Persian Gulf.
Consider the following recent developments:
U.S.-Israeli War Game in Persian Gulf
On Friday, the U.S. and Israel announced they plan a massive military exercise in the Persian Gulf in an attempt to confront Iran.
The exercise, dubbed “Austere Challenge 12,” will include the participation of thousands of U.S. and Israeli soldiers and will test multiple air defense systems against incoming missiles and rockets.
On January 2, during its last military exercise, Iran tested its Qader missile, a long-range sea-to-shore missile, and the surface-to-surface Nour missile. The Nour is an “advanced radar-evading, target-seeking, guided and controlled missile and can easily find its target and destroy it,” IRNA reported, quoting 2nd Adm. Seyed Mahmoud Musavi.
Iran Announces New War Game
Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi, naval commander for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, said on Friday Iran will conduct a second military exercise in the Persian Gulf in February. He said the drill would be “different compared to previous exercises held by the IRGC” but provided no additional details.
Iran also launched a military maneuver near its border with Afghanistan on Saturday. Mohammad Pakpour, commander of the Revolutionary Guards’ ground forces, said the “Martyrs of Unity” exercises are “aimed at boosting security along the Iranian borders,” Fars reported.
- A d v e r t i s e m e n t
British Warships Sent
On Saturday, the British Royal Navy annoucned it is sending its most advanced warship to the Persian Gulf. The HMS Daring is a Type 45 destroyer that has the world’s most sophisticated naval radar.
Earlier in the week, British Defense Secretary Philip Hammond warned Iran against blocking the strait after Iran said it would take action if the United States sailed an aircraft carrier through the waterway following an Iranian 10-day military exercise designed to demonstrate its ability to close down the strategic oil passage.
French and Russian Warships Off Syria
The Israeli intelligence asset DEBKAfile reports today that the Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov anchored at Syria’s Tartus port on the Mediterranean on Sunday and arrived with the destroyer Admiral Chabanenko and frigate Yaroslav Mudry.
“To counter this movement, France consigned an air defense destroyer Forbin to the waters off Tartus,” DEBKAfile claims.
Reflecting Israel’s propaganda line on Iran and Syria, DEBKAfile claims that its “military sources report the constant escalation of military tension around Iran and Syria in recent days as not just stemming from the rapid advances Iran is making toward production of a nuclear weapon, but from fears in the West and Israel that Tehran and Damascus are in step over their military plans for the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean sectors.”
Ron Paul: Sanctions First Step Toward War
On Sunday, presidential candidate Ron Paul said the increasingly severe sanctions imposed on Iran in response to its unsubstantiated nuclear weapons program are steps that will eventually lead to war.
“Sanctions were the first step in our wars against Iraq and Libya, and now more sanctions planned against Syria and Iran are leading down the same destructive path,” he warned.
Iran is “planning to be bombed” and would understandably make the necessary arrangements to counter the threat, even though there is “no evidence whatsoever” that they have enriched weapons grade uranium, Paul noted.
He also pointed out that the United States government directly intervened in Iran’s internal affairs when the CIA overthrew the democratically elected leader Mohammad Mosaddeq and installed the Shah in 1953.
Oil Prices Rising Along with Tensions
Oil prices are beginning to climb as the United States and Iran prepare for war. Brent North Sea crude for delivery in February climbed 14 cents to $113.20 a barrel in London on Monday. Continued saber-rattling on both sides have forced oil prices to eight-month highs above the 100 dollars per barrel mark.
In addition to shocking world oil prices, the anticipated attack and Iran after a possible closure of the Strait of Hormuz would dramatically impact the global trade in goods. “If for any reason the strait were closed it would have a huge impact on the economy in the Middle East and would cause a systematic restructuring of flows of goods around the world,” John Manners-Bell, who used to manage European marketing at United Parcel Service Inc., told Bloomberg.
Iranian Missile Base Propaganda
Now that Iran’s Ahmadinejad is visiting Latin America, the discredited rumor that Iran is building intermediate-range missile launch pads at a base on the Paraguaná Peninsula in Venezuela has resurfaced. It was initially floated by the German newspaper Die Welt and subsequently boosted by the Jerusalem Post, a documented neocon propaganda operation. The Post posted the story last May.
The story brings to mind the Cuban Missile Crisis in October of 1962.
According to the Die Welt story, the Iranians paid tens of millions in cash for the base that would be used to fire missiles into the United States after Iran is attacked. It was reported that the Revolutionary Guard-controlled engineering group Khatam al-Anbia is helping build the site.
“From Caracas to Miami is about 1,300 miles, maybe a couple hundred more than from the Peninsula – possibly within the range of Iran’s Ashoura medium-range ballistic missile that can cover a distance of over 1,200 miles,” Robert Johnson wrote for Business Insider last week as the story resurfaced on word of Ahmadinejad’s trip.
Business Insider also reported on a paper produced by latlongpacific that includes coordinates for a possible location and “details on the base and missiles that Iran would likely park there, including the Ghadr-100A with a possible range of 3,000 km or about 1,800 miles,” Johnson writes.
“We have no evidence to support this claim and therefore no reason to believe the assertions made in the article are credible,” the State Department said in response to the story.
164 Responses to “Alert: Iran Crisis Headed for World War III”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Posted in 
Tags: 
Folks,
We are headed for a total collapse . Our Government won’t stop until we are in martial law and fema camps. Look around , can you feel it? Something’s coming and it ain’t good.
This year will be the end of our way of life . Get ready , Love and live while you can .
I’d take an EMP pulse and total government collapse over the martial law and FEMA camps. At least with an EMP most Americans will have a chance to start over. And we all know there’s plenty of good Americans who can do just that. Form a new government — and they will have assistance from other good countries which are now considered the enemy, but in fact never have wanted to be America’s enemy.
Every night I pray for this. Maybe it will happen this way. I don’t know. But one can wish.
Wait a minute……. What happened to the russians and where they stand in all of this?? Were we not given a warning from russia not to do this sh*t? They were suppose to have war ships moving into the area awhile back. We backed down a step a two, now this?? WTF is going on here????
Any idiot can make a youtube video claim anything they want.
Israel’s Mossad came up with, and pushed, the lie on America and the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
Israel’s Mossad is now pushing their BIG LIE, which they manufactured, that Iran’s Ahmadinajad claimed Iran, “WOULD WIPE ISRAEL OFF THE MAP.”
Many news sources repeated the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting statement by Ahmadinejad that “Israel must be wiped off the map”, an English idiom which means to “cause a place to stop existing”, or to “obliterate totally”, or “destroy completely”.
Ahmadinejad’s phrase was “بايد از صفحه روزگار محو شود” according to the text published on the President’s Office’s website.
The translation presented by the official Islamic Republic News Agency has been challenged by Arash Norouzi, who says the statement “wiped off the map” was never made and that Ahmadinejad did not refer to the nation or land mass of Israel, but to the “regime occupying Jerusalem”. Norouzi translated the original Persian to English, with the result, “the Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.” Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History, agrees that Ahmadinejad’s statement should be translated as, “the Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad). According to Cole, “Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ because no such idiom exists in Persian.” Instead, “he did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse.” The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translated the phrase similarly, as “this regime” must be “eliminated from the pages of history.”
Interesting article I found the other day…
From the July/August 2011 issue:
What Would War with Iran Look Like?
JEFFREY WHITE
The debate over what to do about an Iranian Islamist regime apparently bent on acquiring nuclear weapons has been on or near our front burner for at least six years, and is now almost a settled feature of the policy landscape. There is general agreement in the United States on two points. First, an Iranian nuclear weapons capability is “unacceptable”, as both the Bush and Obama Administrations have put it; and second, we prefer getting to an acceptable outcome without using force. The debate gets testy when we consider that means short of force, such as sanctions and covert technical sabotage, might not work.
It may be too simple to reduce the argument to just two sides—those who fear the regime’s acquisition of nuclear weapons more than the consequences of a war to prevent it, and those who fear the consequences of a war above all else—but in this case simplicity has the virtue of capturing the essence as observers ponder which set of unpalatable risks they would rather run. What is remarkable, though hardly surprising, is that the two sides usually put forth very different assessments of what using force would entail. Those who fear Iranian nukes above all else tend to minimize the risks of using force, while those who fear war tend to exaggerate them. Neither side, however, has persuasively spelled out the reasons for their assessment, leading one to suspect that much of the argument rests on less than rigorous analysis.
What would an honest assessment of the risks of military conflict with Iran look like? How should we think about it? These are difficult questions even for those who are not partisans of one side or the other. Wars are notorious for yielding unintended and unexpected consequences; for reasons explained below, a war against Iran is even harder than usual to bound analytically.
Complexity, Uncertainty and War
Our first consideration in analyzing the likely course of war with Iran is that a U.S.-led attack would be merely the first phase of a war, the opening act of an extended drama whose scenes would unfold, not according to any script, but to an emergent logic of its own. Given the political context in which military engagement would rest, even a minor attack would likely become a major test of strength involving not only the United States and Iran but also a host of allies and associates. It is therefore disingenuous to try to frame military action against Iran as a simple “raid” or even a broader “operation.” We are talking here about war, with attendant potential high costs to all combatants in terms of military casualties, civilian damage and economic disruption.
Rest of the article is at w w w.the-american-interest.com/article-bd.cfm?piece=982