Joint Mossad & CIA operation Killed Imad Mughniyeh

TIMES OF ISRAEL ARTICLE ‘Imad Mughniyeh killed in joint Mossad, CIA operation’ US operatives were on the ground, but the bomb was triggered in Tel Aviv, according to The Washington Post By Times of Israel staff January 31, 2015, 8:27 am Imad Mughniyeh, the senior Hezbollah commander who died in a bomb blast in Damascus on February 12, 2008, was reportedly assassinated in a joint Mossad-CIA operation that required approval from former president George W. Bush. The US built the bomb and had CIA spotters on the ground in the Syrian capital tailing Mughniyeh, but the explosion that killed him was triggered remotely from Israel, according to a report in The Washington Post late Friday. [Find that hard to believe.] “The way it was set up, the US could object and call it off, but it could not execute,” a former US intelligence official told the newspaper, adding that the CIA tested the bomb to ensure a contained blast that would cause no collateral damage. The US official said it was important for Israel to be the one to pull the trigger that killed Mughniyeh. “It was revenge,” he said. Mughniyeh, Hezbollah’s international operations chief, was implicated in some of the terror group’s major attacks including the 1992 bombing at the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, and the 1994 bombing of the AMIA building in the Argentinian capital, in which 85 were killed. The senior Hezbollah official was also involved in the 1983 bombing at the US embassy in Beirut, the killing in 1994 of the CIA’s Lebanon chief William F. Buckly and the 1996 bombing at the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. In the years after the US invasion if Iraq, Mughniyeh was responsible for the arming and training of Iranian-backed Shiite militias in Iraq who carried out deadly attacks on American troops — all of which put him at the top of the US’s wanted list. The Bush administration regarded Hezbollah, and Mughniyeh, as a top threat to the US, according to the report. “There was an open license to find, fix and finish Mughniyeh and anybody affiliated with him,” a former US official who was stationed in Baghdad told The Washington Post. In a 2007 speech, Bush singled out Syria and Iran, Hezbollah’s backers and closest allies “These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq,” he vowed. Nevertheless, the CIA had get to special approval from Bush to carry out the operation to kill Mughniyeh with the US attorney general, the director of national intelligence, the national security adviser and the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department all signing off on the plan. One former intelligence official said getting the authorization was a “rigorous and tedious” process. Intelligence officials had to show that he, and Hezbollah were a continuing threat to the US. “The decision was we had to have absolute confirmation that it was self-defense,” was former US intelligence official was quoted as saying. “All I can say is that as long as he drew breath, he was a threat, whether in Lebanon, Iraq or anywhere else. He was a very intelligent, dedicated, effective operator on the black side,” former US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan C. Crocker, told the paper. http://www.timesofisrael.com/imad-mughniyeh-killed-in-joint-mossad-cia-operation/ COMMENT Getting various US departments to sign off on an assassination still makes it an assassination by USA, which is an extra-judicial killing, I believe. Find it hard to believe that guy was responsible for everything they claim he was responsible for, like he's some Middle Eastern super-villain. Assassinated at the flick of a switch from Tel Aviv just doesn't sound credible.  Whoever flicked that switch was there, I reckon.

Adrian Salbuchi - AMIA Argentina attack: Mystery behind public prosecutor Nisman’s death

AMIA Argentina attack: Mystery behind public prosecutor Nisman’s death Adrian Salbuchi is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio/TV commentator in Argentina.  [ . . . ] Spy versus spy versus spy The bombed building housed – then and now – not just the AMIA Mutual Association, but also the DAIA - Argentine Delegation of Israeli Associations – the powerful local Jewish lobby working for Israel. After more than 21 years, this has become Argentina’s most corruption-riddled case, where obscene meddling by Israel’s Mossad, and America’s CIA and FBI included such pranks as planting false evidence of a nonexistent car bomb, censoring other much more likely leads, and paying kickbacks to false witnesses in order to falsely incriminate Hezbollah, either through Syria at first, or Iran since 2006. The mainstream media – both local and international – has held public opinion ransom to programmed confusion, outright lies and an emotional roller-coasting on an event which left 85 civilians dead. The real behind-the-scenes players have been, however, carefully protected. One such key player is a powerful Argentine SI (Intelligence Service) agent by the name of Jaime Stiusso who has systematically promoted the US and Israeli version of this event which led to Argentina falsely accusing Iran of that dreadful crime. Counting with full CIA, Mossad and MI6 support and protection, Mr. Stiusso became public prosecutor Nisman’s mentor as the latter systematically and boisterously pointed an accusing finger at Iran ever since he was placed in charge of the investigation in 2004. The “Iran did it” myth went into high gear under the George W. Bush Administration, as part of its strategy of generalized overrunning of the Middle East after 9/11, and especially after July 2006 when Israel’s invasion and bombing of Lebanon and Hezbollah led to Israel’s being routed (an entire Israeli tank division was decimated by Mr. Nasrallah’s Hezbollah forces trained and armed by Iran).  Iranian connection? Then, just over two months after Israel’s Lebanon incursion, on September 22, 2006 a private meeting took place at the New York Waldorf-Astoria hotel between then Argentine President Nestor Kirchner, his first lady Cristina Kirchner (National Senator and soon to be president) and Foreign Minister Jorge Taiana, and key powerful Jewish leaders including the American Jewish Committee (AJC), the World Jewish Congress (WJC), the B’Nai B’Rith Jewish Masonic Lodge and its militant arm the Anti Defamation League (ADL). An agreement was reached in which Argentina would accuse Iran of the AMIA attack, to which end Mr. Kirchner immediately dispatched federal prosecutor Alberto Nisman to the US to “gather the necessary evidence against Iran” from the CIA and Mossad intelligence agencies who clearly had their Anti-Iran axe to grind. As proof of full US and Israeli satisfaction with Argentina, the World Jewish Congress’s political director Rabbi Israel Singer promptly expressed these organizations’ satisfaction with Argentina’s accusations against Iran, proof that the Waldorf-Astoria agreement was being executed by the Kirchner Administration. Mr. Nisman immediately accused former Iranian President Ali Rafsanjani and key ministers of masterminding the AMIA attack. However, he was never able produce proper, tenable proof. He actually requested Interpol to arrest former Iranian ambassador to Argentina, Mr. Hami Soleimanpour in London, his arrest by British authorities quickly ended because Mr. Nisman submitted no proper evidence of its accusations, even making the Argentine government pick up the £200,000 court costs. Irrespective of this, over the past decade Mr. Nisman became the darling of Jewish entities in the US, Israel and Europe where he regularly visited to brief them on the AMIA/DAIA case. In 2007, he actually went so far as to report on the matter to the Supreme Court… not of Argentina, but of Israel. Mr. Nisman became very popular and was very much in the media but had just one problem: He just could not put together a proper case with proper evidence against Iran, to the growing concern of US Neocons like Republican lobbyist-legislator Ileana Ros-Lethinen and Israel’s successive ultra-right-wing governments. The case sank to new depths of confusion when in January 2014, former Israeli ambassador to Argentina during the AMIA attack, Yitzhak Aviram, publicly boasted that “the people who blew up the AMIA building have all been executed by us (Israel).” He was immediately hushed up by Israel. In sync with the Kirchner Administration, Mr. Nisman continued to blame Iran, but when the Obama Administration came to power in 2009, the US began having second thoughts about Baby Bush’s aggressive Neocon strategy of “taking out Iran”. With things growing dramatically worse in Iraq, and a growing resistance from Russia and other players to US/UK war-mongering, America became much more moderate on Iran and, through “unofficial and discrete channels” it was made clear to President Cristina Kirchner that maybe the time had come for her to have a chat with the Iranians. Thus, in January 2013, Argentina announced that it would indeed “start talking” to the Iranians – something it had not done for almost seven years – and quickly a “Memorandum of Understanding” was signed which became local law in March 2013. As part of this, a “Commission for Truth” was to be set up (but wasn’t Mr. Nisman and his Mossad and CIA controllers supposed to have in their power all the “damning truth and evidence against Iran”?) Neocons in the US and Israelis went ballistic with rage. To add insult to injury, last December President Kirchner cleaned out the top brass at the local SI Intelligence Agency, specifically throwing out US/UK/Israeli operator-agent Jaime Stiusso. An undated handout combination photo released in Buenos Aires on November 9, 2005 shows Ibrahim Hussein Berro, who has been identified by Argentine prosecutor Alberto Nisman as a Hizbollah militant and the suicide bomber responsible for the 1994 car-bomb attack on the AMIA Jewish community center (Reuters / Argentine Prosecutor's Office) Mr. Nisman was supposed to be on holidays touring Europe with his 15-year-old daughter during all of this month of January. However, suddenly whilst visiting Amsterdam “somebody there” seems to have ordered him to fly back immediately to Argentina. So fast that he asked his wife to pick up their daughter at Madrid Airport where he dropped her off and flew on to Buenos Aires. Upon arriving, he produced out of his hat as if by magic, a 350 page dossier case accusing President Kirchner and her (also Jewish) Foreign Minister Hector Timerman of “covering-up” Iran. He was about to present this during a special emergency summer session in Argentina’s Congress at 3pm on Monday, January 19, but he may have realized that his case was still-born and had no chance whatsoever of holding up. Anyway - alas! - he (or “somebody”) conveniently killed him sometime early Sunday, January 18. Nisman’s case and the ensuing cross-questioning would have probably thrown the whole AMIA/DAIA investigation back to square one. For a second time, as already happened in 2003 when the case for a “Syrian connection” fell completely through ending up with the prosecution of Juan Galeano, the former federal judge hearing the case, and where even one of DAIA’s former presidents - Ruben Beraja - ended up in jail for helping to bribe a shady car-dealer by the name of Carlos Telleldin to the tune of $400,000, so that he would incriminate the Buenos Aires Police which was supposed to produce a false lead, in turn leading back to the elusive “car bomb.” That “car bomb” was never found save for a small bit of metal of a van engine “found” by an Israeli military intelligence officer “helping out” in the AMIA building rubble right after the 18th July 1994 bombing which, “luckily” had the vehicle serial number on it. Sounds a bit like Mohammed Atta’s intact passport “found” in the WTC rubble? Or maybe the masked Charlie Hebdo terrorist’s dropping his ID card in Paris a couple of weeks ago? If Mr. Nisman’s flawed case were unmasked then the beehive would once again be stirred and that represented something very dangerous for the US, Israel, local and international Jewish lobbies that have fought so hard to put the blame on Iran. And that a far more plausible lead should be investigated: a possible Israeli connection.  Israeli connection During the early nineties, there was sordid internal fighting over Palestine and Israel’s illegal settlements, between Israel’s left-wing, and the rising ultra-fundamentalist racist right-wing. When the AMIA/DAIA HQ was blown-up by a never-to-be-found ”car bomb,” Israel was governed by Yitzhak Rabin’s Labour Party which was honestly seeking a peaceful two-state solution with the Palestinians. In July 1994, Rabin even allowed PLO leader Yasser Arafat to return to Palestine from exile, just 18 days before the AMIA/DAIA building was blown up. Other events pointing to this internal fighting occurred at the time, but a huge conflict finally came to a head less than 18 months after the AMIA/DAIA attack, when Prime Minister Rabin was assassinated at a public rally in Israel in November 1995. Who was the assassin? A Muslim terrorist? No. Some whacko neo-Nazi? No. PM Rabin was assassinated by one Yigal Amir, a young ultra-right wing Israeli militant linked to the Shin Beth (which Rabin had downsized) and the illegal Jewish settlers’ movement inside Israel. The political results for Israel basically boiled down to the peace-seekers never coming back to power in the country, and for Netanyahu, Sharon, Olmert, Barak, Lieberman, Livni, Feiglin and their friends running Israel ever since. Thus, the Palestinians never got their sovereign state. Instead, they keep getting Israel’s bombs, attacks, humiliations, and that 8-meter tall, 800 kilometer long Wall Israel built around their country. Within this global backdrop, the “logic” behind the AMIA/DAIA attack takes on a very different dimension: an internal war where the Israeli ultra-right sent the peace broking left “an offer they couldn’t refuse,” probably engineered by clandestine groups inside or even above Mossad+CIA+MI6+some Blackwater-like black ops player. Echoing Godfather Don Corleone, these dark perpetrators were suitably briefed to “make it look like an Iranian-sponsored Hezbollah car bomb.” It just didn’t work out quite the way they expected. Busybody Nisman was coming too uncomfortably close to stirring the bee hive. Maybe that’s what led to his death. Just as the police commissioner investigating the Charlie Hebdo event was “suicided” on the night of that attack; or as London Underground electrician Jean Menezes, who may have “seen something” in the days prior to the July 2005 London Transport attacks was “mistakenly” gunned down by London Police only a few days later. Clearly, the “War on Terror” has come home to Argentina. Again. As we write, the powerful local Jewish lobbies DAIA and AMIA are yelling and whining that they “fear a third terror attack against Jewish interests in Argentina,” conveniently media-fed by the “unexplained disappearance” of an Argentine Army anti-tank missile earlier this month. The US Center for Security Policy just published an article in The Washington Times calling on the US and EU to impose “sanctions against Argentina.” Presidential elections will be taking place later this year in Argentina, and practically all the candidates – with favorites Daniel Scioli, Mauricio Macri, and Sergio Massa leading the list – are toeing the politically correct line, a fact that is most consistent considering that they regularly visit and report to the Rockefeller-Negroponte-William Rhodes “Americas Society,” and regularly pay homage to the World Jewish Congress, American Jewish Committee, DAIA, AMIA and other local and international Israeli lobbies. Finally, for Ms. Kirchner there are two lessons: (1) when ultra-right wing Israelis and Neocons fight amongst themselves, do not stray into the crossfire, and if you do pick one side then stay there; because (2) “Rome does not reward traitors.” Adrian Salbuchi is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio/TV commentator in Argentina. He is also the Founder of the Second Republic Project – Proyecto Segunda República. The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT. EXTRACT - SOURCE:  http://rt.com/op-edge/226263-argentina-attack-prosecutor-death-amia/ .................................................................... COMMENT While I was just messing around largely playing devil's advocate putting forward alternate explanations for the Argentina events and unnamed intelligence officials speaking to the press etc, this guy has come up with a real CIA, Mossad and MI6 hand in Argentine events argument and had it published in RT. Not sure if I've already read this or not.  Know I've read something by him before. Not taking in all of the article.  Bit complicated for a newbie like me, but I suppose it's worth a read.

Scoop Journalist Damian Pachter - Flight from Argentina - Alberto Nisman Death

Argentina /Alberto Nisman Damian Pachter Article Why I fled Argentina after breaking the story of Alberto Nisman’s death In an exclusive column, Jewish journalist Damian Pachter – who first reported on the death of the special prosecutor – recounts the intimidation, the sleepless nights, the agent who stalked him and his ultimate decision to head for Israel. By Damian Pachter | Jan. 25, 2015 So here they are, the craziest 48 hours of my life. When my source gave me the scoop on Alberto Nisman’s death, I was writing a piece on the special prosecutor’s accusations against President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, her (Jewish) Foreign Minister Héctor Timerman, two pro-Iran “social activists” and parliamentarian Andrés Larroque. I learned that Nisman had been shot dead in his home. The vetting process wasn’t too tough because of my source’s incredible attention to detail. His name will never be revealed. Two things stood in my mind: my source’s safety and people’s right to know what happened that day, though not necessarily in that order. Of course, for both speed and the contagion effect, Twitter was the way to go. The information was so solid I never doubted my source, despite my one or two colleagues who doubted me because I only had 420 Twitter followers — a number now eclipsing 10,000. As the night went on, journalists contacted me in order to get the news from me even more directly. The first to do so was Gabriel Bracesco. Once I tweeted that Nisman had died, hundreds of people quickly retweeted the news and started following me. That was my first of many sleepless days. “You just broke the best story in decades,” lots of people said. “You’re crazy,” was another take. Either way, nobody questioned that the situation was very grave. The following days were marked by a government trying to create an official story. First, the head of state suggested a “suicide hypothesis,” then a mysterious murder. They of course were not to blame. In anything. That week I received several messages from one of my oldest and best sources. He urged me to visit him, but in those crazy days I underestimated his proposal. On Friday I was working at the Buenos Aires Herald.com newsroom when a colleague from the BBC urged me to look at the state news agency’s story on Nisman’s death. The piece had some serious typos but the message was even stranger: The agency quoted a supposed tweet of mine that I never wrote. Bus to nowhere I cursed in anger, adding amid the profanity: “I’ll tweet this and then they’ll see.” But I waited a few minutes to cool down and realized that this tweet was a kind of coded message. So I bounced it off my friend, who said: “Get out now and go to Retiro,” Buenos Aires’ central bus station. “And come visit me. You have to leave the city.” It was around 8:30 P.M. I was very lucky: When I arrived a bus would be leaving in two minutes. Where that bus was going I’ll never reveal either. After several hours on the road, I arrived at the bus station, where I remained for a couple of hours. It turns out this was a big mistake: I think that was the place someone started watching me. But I didn’t realize it back then. I didn’t want to stay too long in any one place, so I walked over to a gas-station joint nearby. My friend contacted me and said: “I’ll be there in 20 minutes.” I was sitting around there for two hours or so when a very strange person came in. He wore jeans, a jeans jacket and Ray-Ban sunglasses. I noticed him immediately but stayed where I was. He was sitting two tables from me. Suddenly I felt a finger on my neck and jumped like I never did my whole life. “You’re a bit jumpy son” — it was my friend making one of his jokes. “You’re under surveillance; haven’t you noticed the intelligence guy behind you?” “The one with the jeans and Ray-Bans?” “Yeah.” “What does he want?” “Stay calm and look into my camera,” my guy said as he took my picture. Well, actually he took a picture of the intelligence officer, who left five minutes later. I have that picture here with me. I then had to consider the best thing to do, because when an Argentine intelligence agent is on your tail, it’s never good news. He didn’t just want to have a coffee with me, that’s for sure. Montevideo and Madrid In any case, the decision came quick: I had to leave the country immediately. So I contacted one of my best friends, who got scared but understood the situation. We had to do it quickly, and I’m sure his efficiency saved my life. I will forever be grateful to him. So I did it: I bought a ticket from Buenos Aires, to Montevideo, Uruguay, to Madrid to Tel Aviv. I had to keep a low profile in order to get by the security forces. So I went back to the Retiro bus station — the scariest part of that long day. I was sure that if something happened, it would happen at the train station, a very dangerous place at night. I had the feeling someone was after me and I’d get shot from some strange angle. But then I suspected my taxi driver even more. I figured he’d stray and take me off somewhere. Meanwhile, text messages were sent to my two best colleagues, a friend and my mom. They were told where we would meet: Buenos Aires Airport. I couldn’t spend any time on the phone because I was being surveilled. When my mother arrived she of course cried but remained calm. We discussed a few things and I told her to leave. Then my journalist friends came and we did an interview that has already hit Argentina’s top newspapers. I was flying back home, to Tel Aviv, as I always wanted to. I have no idea when I’ll be back in Argentina; I don’t even know if I want to. What I do know is that the country where I was born is not the happy place my Jewish grandparents used to tell me stories about. After I left Argentina I found out that the government was still publishing wrong information about me on social media. The Twitter feed of Casa Rosada, the Argentine presidential palace, posted the details of the airline ticket I had bought, and claimed that I intended to return to Argentina by February 2 — in other words, I hadn’t really fled the country. In fact, my return date is in December. A tweet from the Presidential Palace showing Pachter's flight itinerary. Argentina has become a dark place led by a corrupt political system. I still haven’t figured out everything that has happened to me over the past 48 hours. I never imagined my return to Israel would be like this. http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/.premium-1.638933 COMMENT Writer is telling us: ^^ An unnamed source gave him the Nisman death scoop ^^ Never doubted the source because of 'solid' information ^^ Source didn't have to be vetted, b/c of 'incredible attention to detail' ^^ Source:  'his' name will never be revealed. Reference to 'attention to detail' and 'solid', convincing information, would indicate a source that had access to the crime scene, as that would be the 'detail' of relevance. Reference to 'his name', would indicate a male source. Mention of non-vetting of the source would perhaps indicate it is an untested (or new) source. Guessing source is:  male, with access to crime scene & not previously known to Damian Pachter.  Alternatively, this is merely what Pachter wishes to convey and the source could be anyone but the unknown male with crime scene access.  LOL. ^^ For speed and contagion got scoop out on Twitter ^^ Journalists would call the writer for information on the scoop Therefore the writer has become the central 'source' or central broadcaster, on behalf of whoever has given the information.   What is puzzling is that the writer hadn't bashed out the massive scoop and published it himself, before the Twitter broadcast. ^^ Argentine state news agency:  "quoted a supposed tweet of mine that I never wrote." Frustrating that we don't know what this fake or erroneous message was. Even more frustrating when the writer asserts it was a 'coded message' but doesn't go on to convey what that message was. Yet this appears to be the catalyst for the writer's departure from Argentina? ^^ Lucky breaks. Bus to unknown destination that will not be revealed.  But suspects someone watching him @ bus station -- so why not reveal bus station location, if likely already known? ^^ Suspects gas station Argentine intelligence agent (Denim & Raybans) on his tail. ^^ Friend takes photograph that captures photographic image of this suspected 'Argentine intelligence agent' Hmmm .. why Argentine intelligence when it could be (a) just some guy (b) CIA (c) Mossad (d) Rogue Argentine intelligence (d) Perhaps other Argentine opposition player ... or (e) Some other player that is a stakeholder in the Nisman affair or fall of the Argentine government. As a colleague from BBC gets a mention, I'm going to wager there's MI6 all over Argentina as well. ^^ Avoids phone calls as he suspects being surveilled -- but sends text messages, which would presumably also be surveilled (and a working mobile phone can pinpoint location). A government agency would have no problems finding someone travelling with a mobile phone and/or texting whereabouts to friends/family members, or covering the finite number of international departure routes, I am guessing. ^^ Takes flight 'home, to Tel Aviv' - via Montevideo & Madrid Aren't there direct flights to Tel Aviv? --------------------------- Find it hard not to be sceptical. The guy receives the scoop of the century but he doesn't bang out a story to publish it in a national Argentine newspaper (although he is a professional journalist).  Instead, he tweets -- as you or I would do and, wittingly or unwittingly, becomes the broadcaster for whoever fed him the story -- but we don't know who that is and it looks like neither does he, as he's taken the source as 'solid' without vetting what is likely an unknown or new source. While the Nisman death information was most certainly solid, what remains unknown is the messenger and therefore the likely motive/agenda of the messenger -- if you're looking beyond just a report of a death. If the source is someone who had crime scene access, as I suspect, that source is not necessarily government -- as any agent can get a foot inside government agencies (or, alternatively, government agency employees bribed etc -- especially in Argentina, where it has been exposed that two judges offered bribes in relation to the Nisman matter). Actually, you probably don't even need to be at the death scene to get solid or detailed information.  USA's NSA gather data on everybody around the world.  Latin America's communications cables ALL go across USA, if I understand correctly.  So all you probably need is NSA contacts to have solid info on what goes on in Argentina and you don't even have to set foot on Argentine soil to have that information, although you can have agents on the ground receiving instructions. CIA, Mossad and MI6 would all be likely NSA clients and collaborators. So whoever broke ranks and broke the story via the writer could be controlled by anyone. If the Argentine government can't get their act straight, and are alternatively pointing to a 'suicide hypothesis' and then a 'mystery murder', and if they are tweeting a bunch of crap on social media, wouldn't that indicate that they may not be the criminal masterminds behind the Nisman killing because if they were, wouldn't they have planned a better stance and cover than a bunch of confused social media crap? All that being watched speculation could just be paranoia and, if the writer was being watched, it could be watched by anyone in a place like Argentina. I'd be looking at right-wingers, CIA, Mossad and MI6 possibilities. Also, while we're all enthralled by the drama of the flight of the scoop journalist away from Argentina, what is it that we're not examining in Argentina? These are just some of the thoughts and feelings I have on the subject, taking a questioning perspective on what's presented.

"Netanyahu Was Imported by GOP to Ensure a War With Iran"

WAR WITH IRAN Israel’s Netanyahu Was Imported by GOP to Ensure a War With Iran Posted on Jan 22, 2015 By Juan Cole This post originally ran on Juan Cole’s Web page. Republican House Majority leader John Boehner secretly invited Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to Washington to address Congress and then once it was set up he let Barack Obama know about it. The reason for bringing Netanyahu is that Boehner wants to craft a super-majority in Congress that can over-ride Obama’s veto of new sanctions on Iran.  He doesn’t have enough Republican votes to do so, but if he can get Democrats beholden to the Israel lobbies of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee to join the veto over-ride effort, he might succeed. Obama has spent a great deal of time and effort trying to negotiate with Iran over its civilian nuclear enrichment program, intended to allow Iran to replicate the success of France and South Korea in supplying electricity.  (That would allow Iran to save gas and oil exports for earning foreign exchange). Because nowadays producing enriched uranium for fuel via centrifuges is always potentially double use, this program has alarmed the US, Europe, and Israel.  Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has given several fatwas (akin to encyclicals) orally in which he forbids making, storing or using nuclear weapons as incompatible with Islamic law (a position also taken by his predecessor, Ayatollah Ruhullah Khomeini).  So maintaining that Iran is committed to making a nuclear bomb is sort of like holding that the Pope has a huge condom factory in the basement of the Vatican. [LOL.  Pope strikes again.] But, there are no doubt Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps commanders and maybe some engineers and scientists who really wish Khamenei would change his mind (he won’t). So if you wanted a compromise between Iranian nuclear doves (the hard line leadership) and Iranian nuclear hawks (the subordinates who have to take orders from the doves), what would you do?  You’d keep options open.  And keeping options open also has a deterrent effect, so it is almost as good as having a nuclear bomb.  That is, if Iran has all the infrastructure that would be needed for a nuclear weapons program but didn’t actually initiate such a program, you’d put enemies on notice that if they try to get up a war on you the way Bush-Cheney got one up on Iraq, they could force you into going for broke and abruptly making a bomb for self-defense.  This posture is called in the security literature “nuclear latency” or colloquially “the Japan Option” (we all know Tokyo could produce a bomb in short order if they felt sufficiently threatened). [Japan as well?  Wow.] I started arguing that this policy was what Iran was up to some 7 or 8 years ago, and I think it is now widely accepted in policy circles. So the point of the UNSC plus Germany negotiations with Iran is really about how long Iran would take to break out and produce a bomb.  Will it be 3 months or one year?  Iran wants a shorter timeline (for maximum deterrence, since they already saw what happened to Baghdad).  The P5 + 1 want a much longer timeline.  They would also like to spike the centrifuges and make sure there is no heavy water reactor (plutonium builds up on the rods). [So negotiations are about bomb producing potential timelines?] If the two sides can reach an acceptable compromise, sanctions would be lifted, Iran would run its Russian-built reactors to produce electricity (though likely within a decade they will be undercut in price by solar panels; still, solar doesn’t have deterrent properties), and there would be thorough frequent UN inspections of its enrichment facilities (plutonium leaves a signature).  It isn’t really possible to have a big nuclear facility hidden from US satellites; the US spotted Fordo immediately.  You need a lot of water, truck traffic, etc. [Fordo = village in Iran.] But Iran would have latency and therefore deterrence and I suppose might be emboldened that Israel wouldn’t dare nuke it because it might well be able to nuke back some months later. US hawks in both parties and the Israeli political right wing want to prevent Iran from having any nuclear enrichment program at all, so as to prevent Iran from having the security that comes from the deterrence Lite produced by latency. The US Joint Chiefs of Staff looked at this issue and have decided that only an Iraq-style invasion, occupation and regime change could hope to abolish the nuclear enrichment program. If that is what it takes, the US and Israeli hawks are perfectly all right with it.  It would be good times for the military-industrial complex, and Israel’s last major conventional enemy (though a toothless one) would be destroyed.  An irritant to US policy and a threat to Wahhabi Saudi Arabia, our big volatile Gasoline Station in the Sky, would also be removed. Iran is three times as populous and three times as large as Iraq.  So I figure this enterprise would cost at least 15,000 troops dead, 90,000 seriously wounded, and altogether $15- 24 trillion dollars over time (including health care for the 90,000 wounded vets).  Given the size of the country and the nationalism of the population, it could be much more like the US war in Vietnam than Iraq was, i.e. it could end in absolute defeat.  Russia and China would almost certainly aid insurgencies to weaken the US. And that is what the right wing psychopaths in Washington DC and Tel Aviv have planned for us.  If they can over-ride Obama’s veto and scuttle the negotiations, they set us up for a war down the line, as Obama warned in the SOTU. In contrast, professional Israeli intelligence analysts are warning against new sanctions and any torpedoing of the Iran talks.  Because they deal in the coin of pragmatism and the real world. [Mossad opposition has been refuted, but I haven't checked on that widely.] Readers should please let their congressional representatives know they would prefer not to be subjected to this disaster. That Netanyahu is an unreliable narrator should be obvious by now: I wrote in 2012 :     Israeli PM Binyamin “Chicken Little” Netanyahu tried to scaremonger about Iraq in 2002, as his contribution to the Anglo-American war of aggression on that country.  “there is no question whatsoever,” Netanyahu said, “that Saddam” was seeking nuclear weapons. He said that Israeli intelligence reported to him that Russian scientists and North Korea were on site and actively aiding this phantom nuclear weapons program.     There was no Iraqi nuclear weapons program in 2002; it was dismantled in the early 1990s by United Nations inspectors.  There were none of the chemical or biological weapons Netanyahu spoke of.  No Russians.  No North Koreans. Bupkes. Netanyahu also warned that Iraq would give nuclear warheads (which it did not have) to “terrorist groups.” He also argued that no inspections could possibly find “mobile weapons sites” (which are impossible), implying that invasion and occupation was the only course open. Netanyahu proved that neither he nor the Israeli intelligence organization, Mossad, had the slightest actual intelligence on Iraq, and that neither should be trusted to provide such intelligence to the US.  Clearly, some right wing Israeli leaders always want the US entangled in regional wars in the Middle East, insofar as they are seeking US support in a hostile region.  They therefore habitually exaggerate the dangers, and are little more than bullshit artists. Netanyahu’s comments on Iraq are almost verbatim what he is now saying about Iran. The Mainstream Media never calls Netanyahu on his bull crap. SOURCE - TRUTHDIG - HERE. COMMENT Back to thinking 'We're doomed!' An interesting read and it should be interesting to see if the Congress numbers are there to override the Presidential veto and set up a potential Iran war US military industry bonanza. Don't know how binding a fatwa is in Iran.   Fatwa = legal opinion on Islamic law binding precedent to those bound to the scholar *but not universally binding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatwa May be more binding than elsewhere because they're all under the one religious leader, I think. But it doesn't matter, because it sounds like they may be after the deterrent factor of potential for weapons, rather than weapons, and the only thing being negotiated is the lead time on making weapons? Seems a good article.

Netanyahu Israel Re-Election Moves

ISRAEL - USA - IRAN Feeling somewhat sheepish after my 'Iran has long-range missiles, wants nukes & we're all doomed' panic attack. Not good at weighing up the political scene or various stories that I come across.  Tend to imagine we're on the verge of war.  Seriously.  Convinced, yesterday, that it's a war with Iran that everyone's really been planning.  Sounds like a dumb conclusion today.  Good thing I'm not in charge of defence.  LOL Fury in Israel Over Obama's Mossad 'Lies' / Mossad Head denies that Mossad opposes Iran sanctions >>> http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/190364 Mossad Head Tamir Pardo Israel also not happy re leaking of Mossad Head (Tamir Pardo) statements (even if falsified) / serious breach / unfriendly Report in Bloomberg re Mossad sanctions 'opposition' denied  =  #Obama admin's “revenge” re Bibi's invitation to Congress (unnamed source) Mossad says [nukes] agreement that is being formed with Iran is bad & could lead to a regional arms race Netanyahu out in the cold in USA over proposed Congress speech.  But relations cosy with Canada.  http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/netanyahu-trip-exposes-frosty-relationship-with-u-s-president-1.2201819 … Netanyahu running a nationalism + national security re-election campaign Turns out there is no 'rogue' Mossad opposition to sanctions. The claim is reportedly a US administration leak and a dirty trick ('revenge' tactic) against Netanyahu. Meanwhile, Netanyahu is running for re-election and it looks like it's on a nationalism and national security platform, so the whole thing with Iran and the US Congress speech could just be part of bolstering his electoral appeal in Israel, rather than cause for serious concern about Iran and Middle Eastern affairs. Not really sure what the go is with the European foreign ministers publicly appealing for no further sanctions on Iran, unless they're trying to help Netanyahu's election campaign moves. I feel ripped off.  I believed all the crap that was in the news and thought we were all heading for disaster.  LOL

HIT SQUADS, MUTINY, LOBBY-TOYS, A DEAD POPE, MORAL OUTRAGE -- WHAT 'FREE PRESS'? -- AND MOSSAD

HIT SQUADS, MUTINY, LOBBY-TOYS, A DEAD POPE, MORAL OUTRAGE -- WHAT 'FREE PRESS'? -- AND MOSSAD Started my browsing adventures off with looking for evidence of Iranian hit squads, cos I'm on a half-hearted mission to figure out who's knocked off Argentina's prosecutor, Alberto Nisman. Yet to find Iranian hit squads ... but I've been distracted by this find:  a hilarious 2011 article on Libyan & Iranian 'Greatest Hit Squads' in America: Libyan Phantoms & Iranian Assassins: Greatest Hit Squads 1981-2011 By Mark Ames If you’re feeling like you’re being taken for a ride with all this nonsense about Iranian-Narco-Mexican terror hit-squads infiltrating this great nation, read on… Think this is the guy who's written about American support for Chechen extremists. Yeah, checked and confirmed it's the same guy that wrote the Chechen article I liked.  Posted in relation to it here.  Remember also liking the humour that came across. Anyway, as I get distracted easily, the very next thing, I'm getting blown away by the news that John Boehner and Israeli ambassador Ron Dermer have teed up a Benjamin Netanyahu Congress speech on February 11th, having cut out the main man, Obama, and having seemingly rigged up a scandalous (and mutinous?) scenario, where Bibi gives a speech rebutting US foreign policy. Behind Obama's back: How Netanyahu's US trip was cooked up << Boehner initiated >>  http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.638396 > departure from protocol - Israel ambassador Ron Dermer & speaker John Boehner cook-up > Prevent Iran nuclear weapons shared goal John Boehner’s Bibi invite sets up showdown with White House >>> http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/john-boehner-invites-benjamin-netanyahu-congress-iran-114439.html <<< "Republicans & Democrats in the Capitol seem more closely aligned with Netanyahu than with Obama" >>> Bibi’s Congress speech Feb 11 = foreign leader, blocks from WH (invitation of Congress) to rebut the US foreign policy!! Boehner: "serious threat that exists" "serious conversation" "how serious the threat is" >> Going with 'serious threat', eh? The news seemed massive to me and I got super excited ... but nobody else seems as excited as I was. Just checked to see if it was reported elsewhere and found that The Guardian has also reported on Boehner's moves, rather coolly: John Boehner invites Netanyahu to address Congress on Iran next month   http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jan/21/boehner-netanyahu-invite-congress-iran-obama However, that's a rather mild take on what seems to be going on, when you consider that the authority of the President of the United States is being challenged here by some lobby-toy politican, Boehner. The Guardian continues: Invitation, provocative move by House speaker, came hours after Obama threatened during State of the Union address to veto any Iran sanctions bill 'Threatened'?  Sounds a rather extreme way to describe what is a statement of Presidential intent made during the President's SOTU address, and presumably within the President's authority. An odd way to convey what seems to be the other way around:  Congress threatening to pass a sanctions bill that the President considers counter-productive to furthering negotiations with Iran, who may well choose to walk, rather than negotiate, at the end of the day. As for 'provocative move', I'd have called it an underhand, backstabbing, embarrassing mutiny.  So what gives? The White House, meanwhile, is downplaying this by calling it a "break of normal diplomatic protocol".  Yeah, I'll say.  If this was happening in Russia, can you imagine the screaming headlines? Anyway, I wanted to know a bit more about Boehner and I found this fantastic Rolling Stone article: The Crying Shame of John Boehner He's a lazy, double-talking shill for corporate interests. So how's he going to fare with the Tea Party? http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/matt-taibbi-the-crying-shame-of-john-boehner-20110105 written by Matt Taibbi, who turns out to be another really clever and funny guy, who's co-edited The eXile with Mark Ames (of the 'Greatest Hit Squads' article fame, above). Not only that, turns out Taibbi's written a piece that was denounced by US politicians and talking heads: "The 52 Funniest Things About the Upcoming Death of the Pope"  http://konformist.com/archives/2005/03-2005/kn4m0311.txt At first I was like, dude, this is a bit sick ... but then I got reading and saw the humour in it. Personal favourites: 28. Bears everywhere shitting in woods.  8. Bush continued: "He touched all of us in places no one else could reach." Sure, it may not be to everybody's taste, but so what? This is the condemnation bandwagon list: Hillary Clinton (US lawyer, politician) Michael Bloomberg (businessman, magnate, mayor of NYC) Matt Drudge (political commentator, creator of news aggregate site Drudge Report) Abe Foxman (Soviet-born, US lawyer, national director of Anti-Defamation League) Anthony Weiner (New York politician, House of Reps, sexting scandal) Perhaps others also complained, but from the above list of denouncers (referred to in Wikipedia), there's not a single Catholic among those that took umbrage, so what's the real agenda? In addition to a pious whinge-fest, "the editor who approved the column was fired". A look-up elsewhere indicates that the New York Press editor, Jeff Koyen, was given two weeks unpaid leave but chose to quit, and: Koyen called his former publisher "a spineless alt-weekly weenie" for not standing up to the harsh criticisms the article received. Criticisms came from a variety of people such as U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton, a spokesman for New York City Mayor Bloomberg and former Mayor Rudolph Guliani. Koyen also reacted to statements made by Rep. Anthony Weiner who was quoted by the New York Daily News calling on New Yorkers to "exercise their right to take as many of these rags as they can and put them in the trash." Interrupting the distribution of a newspaper -- even by purchasing a large quantity of them and throwing them out -- is illegal, koyen noted.  Ooh, look, finally a (thrice-married) Catholic among the condemning mob, the toothy Guliani, who caused some controversy by supporting: People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK, also PMOI, MKO), from the United States State Department list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. The group was on the State Department list from 1997 until September 2012. They were placed on the list for killing six Americans in Iran during the 1970s and attempting to attack the Iranian mission to the United Nations in 1992. [Wikipedia] Cool, Iranian assassins is what I was originally looking for! Uncertain why a bit of satire caused such political outrage at the time (guessing nearing April 2005). There was four different incidents of US gun violence leading up to that time and 22 people were killed within a short amount of time, but I guess 22 people among a population of over 300 million doesn't upset things as much as it might in a smaller population. Well, not enough to challenge the armaments manufacturers and the gun lobby.  During 2005, USA was 2 years into the Iraq invasion and had been in Afghanistan since 2001. The other thing happening at that time was the final stages of the Terri Schiavo drama being played out.  Basically, heart attack and severe brain damage in 1990; kept on artificial supports until 2005, when feeding tubes were finally removed.  What is horrific is the amount of time this person had to linger in a vegetative state, as well as the amount of time (13 days, I think it was) it then took to die after removal of feeding tubes.  It's like something out of a horror story. It's really doing my head in that something like that can happen to a person and that medical people are not permitted to step in to do the right thing and euthanase the vegetative person, who will exist (if supported) in a vegetative state (which nobody could possibly want as an existence) or otherwise die ... slowly. Anyway, there seems to be some interesting reflections of the past in the present. Currently there's a satire and freedom of press related hysteria that's done an outraged wave around the world (but not as much outrage at the barbaric slaughter of people who have a right to live, to express themselves politically or otherwise, and to work without the threat of violence or death).  The current touring Pope has tried to declare religion as off-limits (self-serving, or what?) and virtually justified the violence along the lines that it could be expected, given his rather stupid insult-my-mother analogy.  The mommy insult analogy makes it sound like some playground bit of bullying between children (unless his Holiness thinks it's fine for adults to go around assaulting or murdering one another because they don't like what's said).  Automatic weapons and a rocket launcher aren't a bit of school-yard 'you-said, so I'm getting even' bullying.  Why trivialise something so ugly and uncivilised that we should all despair for the future on this planet?  Opportunistic politicians and others have also tried to deny the right and merit of free speech, effectively blaming the victims of extremist violence.  A number of figures have also  tried to use this atrocity to further state control agendas of (a) suppression of free speech and (b) expansion of state controls, such as mass surveillance and denial of encryption services etc. Getting back to the Netanyahu and US Congress drama, a Bloomberg article indicates that Mossad has broken ranks with the Israeli PM, telling US officials that new Iran sanctions would 'tank' the nukes negotiations. Israeli Mossad Goes Rogue, Warns U.S. on Iran Sanctions http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-01-22/netanyahu-mossad-split-divides-u-s-congress-on-iran-sanctions Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee  -- supported by Republican Senators Lindsay Graham and John McCain -- is pushing for his own legislation on the Iran nuclear deal, which doesn't contain sanctions but would require that the Senate vote on any pact that is agreed upon in Geneva. The White House is opposed to both the Kirk-Menendez bill and the Corker bill; it doesn't want Congress to meddle at all in the delicate multilateral diplomacy with Iran. Israeli intelligence officials have been briefing both Obama administration officials and visiting U.S. senators about their concerns on the Kirk-Menendez bill, which would increase sanctions on Iran only if the Iranian government can't strike a deal with the so-called P5+1 countries by a June 30 deadline or fails to live up to its commitments. Meanwhile, the Israeli prime minister’s office has been supporting the Kirk-Menendez bill, as does the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, ahead of what will be a major foreign policy confrontation between the executive and legislative branches of the U.S. government in coming weeks. Evidence of the Israeli rift surfaced Wednesday when Secretary of State John Kerry said that an unnamed Israeli intelligence official had said the new sanctions bill would be “like throwing a grenade into the process.” But an initial warning from Israeli Mossad leaders was also delivered last week in Israel to a Congressional delegation -- including Corker, Graham, McCain and fellow Republican John Barrasso; Democratic Senators Joe Donnelly and Tim Kaine; and independent Angus King -- according to lawmakers who were present and staff members who were briefed on the exchange. When Menendez (who was not on the trip) heard about the briefing, he quickly phoned Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Ron Dermer to seek clarification. OK, what's going on here?  How is who Israeli intelligence (or Israeli politicians) favour in the USA sphere of national sovereignty even relevant, and why are these American politicians -- who are answerable to the American voters -- even in Israel on a 'congressional delegation'?  Don't know why Obama doesn't just step down so Netanyahu can take his rightful place at the helm of US politics, if Israel is pulling that many strings in the US through its intelligence services addressing a visiting congressional delegation, as well as addressing politicians in the US, while Israel's Foreign Minister is making arrangements directly with Boehner (rather than Obama), and even the pro-Israel lobby group, AIPAC, happens to be playing some role in the decision-making process in the US, by the look of things. American Israel Public Affairs Committee, AIPAC Annual budget $67 million @ 2010 America's powerful Pro-Israel Lobby Critics have accused AIPAC of acting as agent of Israeli govt, with a "stranglehold" on the US Congress. [Wikipedia] All of this congress squabbling, and appearance of rogue senators and rogue Mossad, sounds like crap to me.  We wouldn't be privy to any of this if the politicians didn't want us to know about it. I'm going to take a guess and say this is some kind of smokescreen for something.  But I'm not sure what, seeing the final decision can only go as follows:  1) either the US goes with sanctions against Iran or it doesn't.  2) either the Senate gets to vote on the results of any Geneva agreement with Iran or it doesn't. Well, that's that.  But I still don't know what the Iranians get up to, I'm no closer to finding out who killed Alberto Nisman and no wiser about the sport of US Congress.