EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- How the US Turned Three Pacifists into Violent Terrorists
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Revealed: How US State Department 'Twists Arms' on Monsanto's Behalf
Popular content
Today's Top News
Panetta: Iran Not Building a Nuclear Weapon
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta appears on CBS' Face the Nation this morning and declared, despite enormous public rhetoric among pundits and many US government officials - not to mention GOP presidential candidates, that Iran is not currently trying to build a nuclear weapon.
General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at left, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta appear on Face the Nation, Jan. 9, 2012 (CBS) The Associated Press reports today:
[Panetta] says Iran is laying the groundwork for making nuclear weapons someday, but is not yet building a bomb and called for continued diplomatic and economic pressure to persuade Tehran not to take that step.
As he has previously, Panetta cautioned against a unilateral strike by Israel against Iran's nuclear facilities, saying the action could trigger Iranian retaliation against U.S. forces in the region.
The comments suggest the White House's assessment of Iran's nuclear strategy has not changed in recent months, despite warnings from advocates of military action that time is running out to prevent Tehran from becoming a nuclear-armed state.
Iran says its nuclear program is only for energy and medical research, and refuses to halt uranium enrichment
And although such comments pair with Iran's insistence that its nuclear program is strictly for domestic non-military purposes, and despite renewed warnings to US-allied Israel not to strike Iran prematurely, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey, who joined Panetta on Face the Nation rattled the US saber without mistake, saying:
he wanted the Iranians to believe that a U.S. military strike could wipe out their nuclear program.
"I absolutely want them to believe that's the case," he said.
Panetta did not rule out launching a pre-emptive strike.
As such threats from both Israel and the United States continue it's little wonder the Iranians would seek to put their nuclear facilities beyond the reach of incoming airstrikes. As Reuters reports:
Iran will in the "near future" start enriching uranium deep inside a mountain, a senior [Iranian] official said.
[...]
A decision by the Islamic Republic to conduct sensitive atomic activities at an underground site - offering better protection against any enemy attacks - could complicate diplomatic efforts to resolve the long-running row peacefully.
Iran has said for months that it is preparing to move its highest-grade uranium refinement work to Fordow, a facility near the Shi'ite Muslim holy city of Qom in central Iran, from its main enrichment plant at Natanz.
Responding to threats by Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz to oil shipments, Panetta did not hesitate to raise the possibility of military intervention yet again. According the Agence France-Presse:
"We made very clear that the United States will not tolerate the blocking of the Straits of Hormuz," Panetta told CBS television. "That's another red line for us and that we will respond to them."
Panetta was seconded by General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who said Iran has the means to close the waterway, through which 20 percent of the world's oil passes.
"But we would take action and reopen the Straits," the general said.
###
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
71 Comments so far
Show AllLet's step back from this. The NYT and Rick Santorum say they are and the Administration (I assume Panetta is representing it) says they aren't? Who can you believe? That's a dumb question.
Does the Obama think this thing is getting out of control in general, or just his control?
It would appear Obama thinks this is getting out of his control, although presidents have limited control to begin with, as JFK found out--not to suggest Obama is anything like JFK (he isn't). But there is tremendous institutional momentum behind sabre rattling and brinksmanship, and war. The interesting thing is, Tehran would be crazy NOT to try to build a nuclear weapon, given the fact that USrael is constantly threatening it with invasion. The constant belligerence, and illegal invasions and summary executions of leaders like Saddam and Khaddafy, provide an object lesson to all countries of the importance of developing their own nuclear weapons and missile programs, so that they can get these predatory nations off their back. Therefore, the US is the greatest single cause of nuclear proliferation today, through its belligerent foreign policy.
"..this thing is getting out of control in general.." -or perhaps the generals are getting out of control? Perhaps again this is all well rehearsed theatre to keep the Iranians guessing?
What is absolutely clear is that it is all about oil and the US dollar. If history repeats as before then as soon as Iran sells oil in a different currency then the US or its alternates will strike. Currently they are being forced into this by the economic sanctions.
It is an interesting correlation that those that acquire nukes don't get invaded e.g. N.Korea whereas those give up that pursuit or never had them e.g. Iraq, Libya are hammered.
Will China allow the US to have another war dictated to them by Israel and destroy the US's ability to repay war debt to China? China imports a large percentage of Iranian oil.
"as soon as Iran sells oil in a different currency then the US or its alternates will strike."
Uh-oh...
from the Fars News Agency 1/7/12:
Speaking to FNA, Tehran's Ambassador to Moscow Seyed Reza Sajjadi said that the proposal for replacing US Dollar with Ruble and Rial was raised by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in a meeting with his Iranian counterpart Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Astana on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) meeting.
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9007275648
Out of control? Sort of. The PNAC juggernaut is still calling the shots, and Obama knows he can't afford to let them run it anymore.
Read up on the Iranian oil Bourse, opened on a small island off their coast in 2008.
"During 2007, Iran asked its petroleum customers to pay in non US dollar currencies."
As the Oil Bourse in Kish is developed through successive stages, the plan is to establish a Petrobourse as a fourth oil market, denominated by the Iranian rial, the euro and other major currencies.
Saddam changed to the Euro and we know how that went. If the much of the world were to stop trading petroleum with the US dollar, our economy would collapse. DemocracyNow covered this extensively back in 2005(?). Even Kucinich has spoken about it.
"Iran with no nukes!" I'm "shocked, just shocked." Where's "the awe?" How about "awe shocks?"
Obama HAS no control over the situation. He's a willing puppet.
So then what are the economic sanctions about? What is all the "sabre-rattling" about? Why are the U.S. and Israel sponsoring a covert war against Iran, killing Iranian nuclear scientists? Does Panetta or anybody else explain this?
It seems that the Obama administration may be getting worried that its campaign against Tehran may be taking on a life of its own -- and that the GOP (and Israel) may run away with the ball. So why doesn't Obama stop the campaign, then, and engage Iran honestly? Tell Israel that a unilateral strike would end the U.S.-Israel alliance. Tell AIPAC to go to hell.
There are some real mixed messages here that speak of a dangerous split in control of the U.S. military...
Panetta calling for "continued economic pressure" against the threat that Iran is laying the groundwork to someday maybe start building a weapon? Really?
US Sanctions Against Iran More Draconian Than Originally Proposed -
The US Senate has approved sanctions against Iran that include controversial action against the Iran Central Bank that could cause economic trouble for the US itself and allies, by forcing banks in allied countries to stop dealing with the ICB, and threatening them with sanctions if they do not. Combined with the UK sanctions, this would monetarily isolate Iran, effectively destroying their ability to pay for importing anything
http://www.secularcafe.org/showthread.php?t=15971
"This policy is pure isolationism. It is designed to foment war by cutting off trade and diplomacy. Too many forget that the quagmire in Iraq began with an embargo. Sanctions are not diplomacy. They are a precursor to war and an embarrassment to a country that pays lip service to free trade. It is ironic that people who decry isolationism support actions like this.
If a foreign government attempted to isolate the US economically, cut off our supply of gasoline, or starve us to death, would it cause Americans to admire that foreign entity? Or would we instead unite under the flag for the survival of our country?
We would not tolerate foreign covert operations fomenting regime change in our government. Yet our CIA has been meddling in Iran for decades. Of course Iranians resent this. In fact, many in Iran still resent the CIA’s involvement in overthrowing their democratically elected leader in 1953. The answer is not to cut off gasoline to the Iranian people. The answer is to stay out of their affairs and trade with them honestly. If our operatives were no longer in Iran, they would no longer be available as scapegoats for the regime to, rightly or wrongly, blame for every bad thing that happens. As bad as other regimes may be, it is up to their own people to deal with them so they can achieve true self-determination. When foreigners instigate regime change, the new government they institute is always perceived as serving the interest of the overthrowing country, not the people. Thus we take the blame for bad governance twice. Instead we should stay out of their affairs altogether.
Here are the facts: Iran has never been found out of compliance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) they signed. However, being surrounded by nuclear powers one can understand why they might want to become nuclear capable if only to defend themselves and to be treated more respectfully. After all, we don’t sanction other nuclear capable countries" - guess who sait this
FDR did basically the same thing to Japan - forcing japan into a corner and they responded with Pearl Harbor thereby forcing us into WW2.
Which we wanted to do but needed cover and a rallying point for the masses.
Worked so well migh as well try it again.
~mtdon~ you are repeating old time political propaganda about FDR.
FDR didn't cut off trade with Japan until AFTER the Japanese had invaded Manchuria, Korea and China and were then poised to invade all of SE Asia, including all of the Island groups in the South Pacific and India.
Our government was very certain the the Japanese would eventually attack us but do so in the Philliines, not Hawaii as they finally did.
We didn't "force" the Japanese into a corner, they determined their own fate and chose war instead of free trade with their neighbors.
Btw, General ~Martin Dempsey~ had his Sunday morning on Face The Nation and was replaced Monday morning... Guess he said some things that didn't set well with the powers who be.... He said some things that sure didn't set will with me either.
~mtdon~ is right, and is not propagandising. In fact WayneWR can you please explain what the British, the French, the Germans, and the Russians... had been doing in China, with their "concessions" etc...? Perhaps your historical perspective is as much skewed by propaganda as anyone else's that you purport to be.
As far as I read it China was by the 30's a grouping of territorial war-lords and an imploding and ineffective central government which was dominated by foreign imperialism and local intrigue and corruption, of which the Japanese were considered the new upstarts in comparison to the Anglo-Saxon establishment. America was the other failed late-comer to the colonialist party having lost its play for the Philippines. The idea of an oil embargo on Japan was just another arrogant move to assert dominance against what was considered the inferior upstart, Japan, and exactly like the present Iranian arm twisting, it lead to war. It gave Japan no choice, as the present scenario tries to do to Iran.
That Japan had colonized Korea, and founded the state of Manchukuo as a buffer against Russia posed no threat to the USA. While the oil embargo imposed by the USA in retaliation for Japan's actions (attacks) in China were supposed to be crippling to Japan. (Japan's attacks in China could easily be portrayed in a manner not un-similar to America's "liberation" of Iraq..., remember they had their railways blown up by "terrorists".... they sited "national interests, regional stability.... one could easily compare the Rape of Nanking to the hidden massacre of Fallujah). The oil embargo on Japan was an act of war on the part of America and made the Pearl Harbour attack inevitable.
India was under British colonial rule while forces seeking independence under the political leadership of Subhas Chandra Bose were already established and supported by Japanese, again it is only a question of which status quo, you wish to accept and propagate; Western Anglo-Saxon military colonialism or the The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.
There was no intention to invade the Pacific Islands. They were only of consequence after the war began, because of their strategic position to the American forces as aircraft and other military staging and re-fuelling bases. Although, Indonesia and South East Asia was of strategic importance for resources, again oil and its transport played an important role.
Well said. If Iran isn't actively building a bomb now, they will be when these economic strangleholds take effect. Your example of Iraq is good. Also, remember that before WWII, the US placed an oil embargo on Japan. That didn't work out so well, did it.
The sanctions against Iran's central bank won't happen unless Iran starts to threaten Dollar Hegemony in the oil trade, wouldn't you agree?
That seems to be a trigger. Sadam was close to opening an oil trading center that would operate in other currencies. Qadaffii was pursuing a gold dinar.
The US lost direct control of middle east oil production decisions in the 70's, but never, lost control of the financing.
An US invasion is unlikely, and would trigger an end to any "stability" in the region. "Stability" means continued international bankster dominance of the oil markets, and that is a paramount concern that overides even the zionist agenda of bombing Iraq. It's why the banksters, through Obama, are calling off the Isreali dogs. Obama may end up paying politically for following the banksters on this.
Lost control of the financing in 70's to Inter-alpha group of banks, which was set up for the occasion (coming off gold standard, and 1st phony oil shortage). Inter-alpha is run out of city-of-london; the long-standing City policy of re-constituting its' world empire of english-speaking provinces was finally achieved with this financial "recapture" of its' "rogue" US province (btw, they also control the eurozone; achieving what they were aiming for, in the seven years war', which we call the French & Indian war). Of course, as mentioned above by some, this makes no sense for US nat'l interest. We haven't been in the drivers' seat since the 70's. This happened during the 10 year long, internal, covert, psych-war from JFK's murder, to Nixon's dismissal. Financial control was LOST. We became junior partners in an empire, run by a financial crime syndicate, and THEY WANT WORLD WAR (they think they can survive it). They use US as front for this operation. Taking advantage of the built-in, glowing hot hatred for US, most folks will never see the REAL culprits behind it. Still refuse to. These events under discussion are just provocations toward that end. No nation controls this crime syndicate anymore. IT controls the family of nations.
The 'phony' oil shortage of the mid-70s was anything but.
That's exactly the time that the US stopped being a major domestic producer and EXPORTER, and became a major foreign oil IMPORTER.
While the so-called 'Oil Crisis' was engineered by OPEC, the oil companies and financial speculators, the very real demonstration of 'Peak Oil' was not lost on the US Military or Government.
Exactly. It's what I've been saying for a decade, but people look at me like I've sprung a second head. The world is run by international gangs of thugs competing for resources and territory. Iran is about the channelling of money to the gangs, and I frankly believe that since the dollar is disconnected from gold, the new standard is opium, the drug wars being about material control. Kinda makes you sentimental for the mafia - at least, at some level, there was a code of honour...and no BS lies about bringing democracy to anyone.
Great postt. It needs to be formatted.
Do this next time: Look in the preview to see whether you have lost your paragraphs. If you have, then you need to cut and paste the following sequence between paragraphs:-
<br><br>
Then check in the preview again to see if you got the paragraphing correct.
Rangoon78@ 9:57 am. Where I agree with most of what you said I would ask you to reevaluate your statement that, “We would not tolerate foreign covert operations fomenting regime change in our government.” If you observe the fealty of the U.S. government to Israel presently then you would realize that has already happened. The regime change that you’re concerned about was finally entrenched as a result of the Reichstag fire known as 9/11.
The answer may be in the military/indusrial complex and the need to continue making more and more high tech weapons and research thereof and surveillence, and, and.....They must be tested on *someone*.
And now they even have an invisibility cloak. Gotta get busy with that one!
Also, they want to be on record so as not to be accused of being 'incorrect' as in S.H. having weapons of mass destruction. They don't want any finger pointing after the invasion, claiming that the government lied or got it wrong.
I suspect it is all about access to Iran's coveted oil. The nuclear issue is just a replay of the old "WMD" lie used to justify the invasion of Iraq.
arkay, here's a very good article I noticed yesterday pointing out that US "sabre-rattling" etc. (actually, of course, the global corporate/financial/militarist EMPIRE's rattling through the mouth of the hidden Empire's dummy US facade) is causing exactly the opposite effect and actually increasing the likelihood of WWIII:
http://www.thenewstribune.com/2012/01/08/1974145/iran-itching-for-a-fight-hard.html
The same observation has been cogently made by the brilliant Vali Nasr.
Business Week article on Iran situation by Vali Nasr:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-04/hard-line-u-s-policy-tips-iran-toward-belligerence-vali-nasr.html
Vali Nasr is the most informed and sane voice on the Middle East.
The pro-war policy being taken by the global corporate/financial/militarist/media EMPIRE that has fully 'captured' and now "Occupies" our former country, by hiding behind the facade of the empire's modernized Two-Party 'Vichy' sham of faux-democratic and totally illegitimate government (as surely as the Nazi Empire tried to hide behind its facade of a single-party 'Vichy' France), is playing a typical end-stage Empire death-spiral game of existential proportions.
This will not end well until the "ordinary American" people expose, confront, and ultimately excise this disguised and deceitful 'Vichy Empire' that is killing our country and our world.
As Hannah Arendt presciently warned of the Nazi Empire and all empires:
"Empire abroad entails tyranny at home"
But, what the hell. The very reason for this tack is to precipitate a nuclear war by the global Empire in order to 'clear the field' of surplus people --- particularly those who have 'caught-on' to the the global Empire's lies and shit.
As long as most "Ordinary Americans" stay as ill-informed, propagandized, and neutralized by the global Empire's facade America being "their country", and they make no trouble for the Empire while it slaughters a few millions of more politically astute foreigners, these deluded "Ordinary Americans" will be allowed to help the global Empire with their passivity, just as the "Ordinary Germans" were allowed to passively help the Nazi Empire and be "Hitler's willing executioners" just through their passive accedence to the slaughter.
Hell, this could become the premise of a new and fabulously successful new reality game show on our drug TV, following the model of "Who wants to be a Millionaire?", or "Are you smarter than a 5th Grader's Dancing Dog", ----- "Who wants to be a cheer-leader for our WWIII Patriotic Team?"
What an ignoble slide down-hill for the founders' American Dream of "The City on a Hill".
Best luck and love to the growing "Occupy Empire" movement.
Liberty, democracy, justice, and equality
Over
Violent/Vichy
Empire,
Alan MacDonald
So when do we pay Iraq the trillions we owe for repairs and reparations?
Some articles have started to appear on CD without a byline or source. I presume these are written by the people at CD. If so, please would you note that there is no treaty of alliance between the US and Israel, so they are not allies in the strict sense. As I understand it, Israel is the party that does not want a treaty, since (a) in order for the US to pledge to defend Israel's territorial integrity from an enemy attack, Israel would have to define its borders; (b) a formal alliance would drag the US into any wars Israel starts, so would act as a brake on Israel's freedom to do as it pleases.
secretarybird. I am impressed that you bring up the issue of Israel's undefined border (the border along the Mediterranean is not in dispute, however) because that is also exactly the reason why Hamas correctly states that it cannot recognize a state with non-defined borders and perhaps we should not either. As far as I understand, the only "borders" that have been firmly accepted in the UN were the ones of the idiotic 1947 partition of the Mandate which was not submitted to a popular referendum (because it would have failed miserably). Exeunt "Wilsonian Democracy". The "cease-fire lines" negotiated by our Ralph Bunche are not state boundaries. If that is not logic, what is? Of course anyone who is not asleep knows that the people of Israel are badly split on this issue. The Netanyahus want all of the former British Mandate minus Gaza to become Israel hence no Palestinian state other than Gaza (perhaps). The more rational Israelis reject this in favor of some compromise. The former are in power and that is the rub.
Does Iran's tough stance against US military presence along its coastline have anything to do with this?
It is beyond doubt that the US knows that Iran possesses anti-ship missiles for which it has no defence.
http://www.rense.com/general59/theSunburniransawesome.htm
Maybe; but it is hard to believe that the US, with it's huge investments in aircraft carriers and trillions in military spending, hasn't figured out a way to deal with the Iranian missile problem.
Maybe. But if reports of their satellite jamming capabilities are true, it may have something to do with this too. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4162770,00.html
The government of Iran had already answered Panetta and Dempsey before the pair had even uttered a single word. Successful U235 enrichment with ultracentrifuges is now proceeding so deep underground that probably only a nuclear weapon can stop it. "[Panetta] says Iran is laying the groundwork for making nuclear weapons someday". What he means is that Iran has the capability to enrich U235. How to build a nuclear bomb Iran and possible every other government on Earth knows already. Well, there are plants in the Netherlands and Germany which use exactly the same technology to enrich U235 as Iran is using. With its past of war-making should we not suspect that Germany is secretly working to get what it failed to get during Hitler's reign? And how about Japan which is sitting on a huge pile of potentially usable plutonium for nuclear bombs? It is clear that the threats at Iran of the recent past have resulted in moving the enrichment underground. One must suspect that the continued violent attempts at "regime change" will result in an Iranian nuclear bomb eventually.
"One must suspect that the continued violent attempts at "regime change" will result in an Iranian nuclear bomb eventually."
Nothing wrong with regime change. A good place to start would be right here in the US.
Presumably, all countries have some plans, even when there is no immediate intention to use them. Australia has 4 "blue danube" cases with the fissionable material kept at a separate location. The bllue danube was proof tested in Maralinga in 1956/1957.
The opportunity for a peace agreement is here now and Obama has the chance before the Republicans take over.
A peace deal would piss off Israel because they would be in a weak position to ignore the changes in the Middle East much longer.
A settlement of Israel’s borders is exactly what is being put off with Israel’s false information about Iran that Obama and the media continue to buy but with an increasing skeptical eye.
Who really wants a hot war? So far only right wing Israel.
The zionist propaganda makers disagree, or lie.
Pepe Escobar expertly details why sanctions against Iranian oil will not succeed.
Here's a snippet:
China, India, South Korea, they all have complex two-way trade ties with Iran (China-Iran trade, for instance, is $30 billion a year, and growing). None of this will be extinguished because the Washington/Tel Aviv axis says so. So one should expect a rash of new private banks set up all across the developing world for the purpose of buying Iranian oil.
Washington wouldn't have the balls to try to impose sanctions on Chinese banks because they will be dealing with Iran.
On the other hand, one's got to praise Tehran's balls. After a relentless campaign of covert assassinations; abductions of Iranian scientists; cross-border attacks in Sistan-Balochistan province; Israeli sabotage of its infrastructure, with viruses and otherwise; invasion of territory via US spy drones; non-stop Israeli and Republican threats of an imminent "shock and awe"; and the US sale of $60 billion of weapons to Saudi Arabia, still Tehran won't balk.
http://tinyurl.com/6topc4w
Escobar writes:
"... non-stop Israeli and Republican threats of an imminent "shock and awe";"
Great, so instead of getting a Republican president who will unleash imminent "shock and awe" we'll get a Democratic president who will...?
In all honesty and likelihood, it will be President Romney who will inherit the Iran situation and/or war, in much the same way Oh.Bummer inherited the Iraq War.
I believe Obama would willingly go to war against Iran if he thought it would secure the election for him. We wouldn't want to change presidents right in the middle of yet another illegal, undeclared war against women and children would we now?
Just beware the "Black Op" that will catapult us into a war with Iran. We are good at it. Remember Tonkin Gulf and 9/11? Both served their purpose well.
It makes no difference what Iran wants or doesn't want. They have oil our Oil Giants want, and our Wehrmacht is running out of wars and is ready to go.
The Military-Industrial-Congressional-Complex doesn't want to see that cash flow into their coffers diminish. Need one say more?
It is much more likely for the Israelis to launch a "false flag" attack - most likely against a US ship.
Which would explain why the US Navy's Pacific Fleet flagship aircraft carrier is haunting the area...
This sounds like one highly possible scenario. I am so gullible to believe that Panetta is moving toward peace, even for a minute. What's wrong with me??! !Just to be clear, no sarcasm here, just head-slapping.
I think we should talk up this possibility in advance so that if and when it comes, at least a few people will see it as the Reichstag fire it will be.
**
Then why did Obama just sign such harsh sanctions into law? Say one thing and do another! Cutting Iran off from financial markets. Starting in June, not allowing Iran to sell their oil (50% of their revenue). The sanctions are quite extreme. It must certainly seem to be 'a declaration of war' to Iran. The US presence is 'causing mayhem in the region'.
Interesting note: More and more people in Russia want communism back. They want their wealth stolen by western style capitalist oligarchs back. The Russian oligarchs are all friends of Hillary Clinton. This is the threat Putin is facing in coming elections. His billionaire challengers will dilute his support and maybe bring communism back to Russia. Western capitalism is causing mayhem in Russia too.
We are the biggest cause of mayhem in the world today. All in the name of the spread of freedom and democracy. We preach the spread of freedom around the globe yet, our sermon is delivered from the flight decks of carrier groups. How much of the world prays to just be free of US? With nearly half of Americans living in poverty, in a surveillance state, having lost rights that have been enjoyed since the Magna Carta, can "We" honestly call ourselves a free people?
Progressives should stop using the pronoun "we" when they refer to US foriegn or military policy. There is no "we" there. It is "they" or "it".
Exactly.
German Chancellor Otto von Bismark
The death of Lincoln was a disaster for Christendom. There was no man in the United States great enough to wear his boots ... I fear that foreign bankers with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America, and use it systematically to corrupt modern civilization. They will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into war and chaos in order that the earth should become their inheritance.
Representative Louis McFadden (D-PA), chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee from 1920-31 - said that the Federal Reserve Act that established a private central bank in the United States with a monopoly over the country's currency
[The stockholders of the Federal Reserve are] a super-state controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure.
Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England in the 1920s
Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money and control credit, and with the slick of a pen they will create enough money to buy it back again. Take this great power away from the bankers and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for this would be a better and happier world to live in.
But if you want to continue as the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of slavery, let them continue to create money and to control credit.
David Rockefeller
We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nation will accept the New World Order.
Well said ez. At this late date, there aren't any truely sovereign nations to be cast in the role of villain, hero, or bystander anymore. Boundarylines aren't the battlelines anymore. It really is more like "99ers vs the 1ers".
Isn't it about time that we stop batting around this "Iran may someday develop a nuclear weapon" chit chat and start a conversation about the REAL problem facing the planet?
That problem (and it is a problem we will NEVER hear addressed by the so-called MSM) is Israel's ALREADY EXISTING 300-500 nuclear weapons AND the systems to deliver them all over Europe and the Middle East!
These are weapons Israel and the United States REFUSE to discuss. These are weapons that are NOT investigated by the IAEA.
Israel also refuses to become a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
I have read articles regarding Israeli's stealing nuclear fissile material from the United States in the 1950's.
President Kennedy was making serious demands that Israel allow inspections of Dimona just prior to having his head nearly shot off in Dallas in broad daylight.
Check out Seymour Hersh's book regarding Israel's nukes, "The Samson Option".
For some BIZARRE reason, the terrorist and apartheid state of ISRAEL continues to drive the political/military U.S. agenda using OUR soldiers to fight and die and be maimed to fight their supposed battles.
THIS is the discussion we need to have now. Talking about the big, bad Iranians and their "someday" "maybe" nukes is a smokescreen.
Israel is the real threat to peace in the region, not Iran.
There's an elephant in the room. Anybody else see it?!