WHAT DO YOU THINK THE PEARL HARBOR EVENT WILL BE TO JUSTIFY ATTACKING IRAN?

Norsemaiden

barbarian
Dec 12, 2005
1,903
6
38
Britain
The neo-cons in Bush's government, who are members of the Project for the New American Century wrote in a report in 2000 that they needed a "Pearl Harbor" event to galvanise public opinion to be in favour of (and justify) attacking Iraq. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm Conspiracy theorists point to the fact that these "Pearl Harbor" events often precede American involvement in wars. It is now not even especially controversial to say that Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen for the purpose of joining in WWII. My Collins encyclopaedia (bizarely) states it as fact.

An attempt to stop Iran from building a nuclear weapon seems imminent. This would require an attack that would be likely to spread radiation over millions of people, including American forces in Afghanistan. http://www.sfbaypsr.org/n_f05_usnuc.html

Knowing that, the neo cons would have to need a hell of a Pearl Harbor event - to make the retaliation not seem like a huge overreaction to the public. This is what worries me. This looks set to be a big one.

Someone has theorised (predicted actually - on the godlikeproductions.com site) that the Pearl Harbor event is going to be involving a nuclear strike on a certain part of America that Muslims might be expected to target. The strike would be via a submarine. The date given was 11 March. The Iranians have a few old diesel subs and they are not supposed to have any nuclear capability.

You would think diesel subs would easily be tracked, but for whatever reason (!!!) this is refuted on the following site http://www.navytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1558127.php

Someone else, a close ally of the US, with plenty of motivation to cooperate could do the job of pretending to be an Iranian sub http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3221853,00.html
"we can hit targets overseas".

The conspiracy theory for 9-11 says that certain people (friends of the establishment shall we say) were warned not to go into work on that day. I mean certain people who worked at the twin towers. So there should be some kind of subtle exodus from say Hollywood if this fairly far-fetched prediction has any validity. I don't think anyone should worry unless they see obvious signs.
The reason I am putting this thread here is because it is so very likely that there will be another "terrorist attack", supposedly by a Muslim group on the US. It's not MY idea, the American government and intelligence services are on high alert for it, so it's not me who is being alarmist. All I'm doing is postulating an advance conspiracy theory. If you put the data into a computer with artificial intelligence and asked it to come up with a likely scenario based entirely on conspiracy theory conjecture post 9-11, the computer could easily come up with this same line of thought.
So what do you all think? Is there going to be another attack on America sometime soon? And are you going to believe what your government tells you about Iran being behind it?
 
Let there be no doubt that our goverment played a hand in 911 and the "terror attacks" to come, There will be a time when america wakes up and say's hey why does my ass hurt? i feel like i have just been f@#$ed!!! hopefully it will happen soon!......... Do a search on Operation Northwoods.
 
Once enough people start saying this kind of thing may be done by a government on its own people, then hopefully they won't be able to use the tactic any more. That is why it is responsible, rather than irresponsible conjecture and may even save lives.
 
I believe you are all "Gulf of Tonkin Incident Deniers." I think you should all be confined to prison where you cannot spread these pernicious lies that threaten our fragile democracy.
 
The Gulf of Tonkin incident got the US involved in the Vietnam war, and with the First World War they used the sinking of the Lusitania.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWlusitania.htm
"In February 1915, the German government announced an unrestricted warfare campaign. This meant that any ship taking goods to Allied countries was in danger of being attacked. This broke international agreements that stated commanders who suspected that a non-military vessel was carrying war materials, had to stop and search it, rather than do anything that would endanger the lives of the occupants."

The Lusitania was a huge luxury liner. "On this journey the ship carried 1,247 passengers and 650 crew."

"There was some concern on board as a few days previously the German Embassy had published a statement that warned 'Travellers intending to embark for an Atlantic voyage are reminded that a state of war exists between Germany and her allies and Great Britain and her allies, that the zone of war includes the waters adjacent to the British Isles; that in accordance with the formal notice given by the Imperial German Government, vessels flying the flag of Great Britain or any of her allies are liable to destruction in those waters; and that travellers sailing in the war zone in ships of Great Britian or her allies do so at their own risk'."

A German submarine fired on the Lusitania while it was 10 miles off the coast of Ireland. "A total of 1,198 people died," "Those killed included 128 US citizens".

"The sinking of the Lusitania had a profound impact on public opinion in the United States. The German govenment apologised for the incident, but claimed its U boat only fired one torpedo and the second explosion [that finished the ship off] was a result of a secret cargo of heavy munitions on the ship. If true, Britain was guilty of breaking the rules of warfare by using a civilian ship to carry ammunition. British authorities rejected this charge and claimed that the second explosion was caused by coal dust igniting in the ship's almost empty bunkers."

The loss of the Lusitania provoked such outrage in the US that it created the climate of public opinion that would later allow America to join the war.

http://www.pbs.org/lostliners/lusitania.html
"We came to the wreck of the Lusitania in the summer of 1993 hoping to solve its greatest mystery: What caused the violent secondary explosion that undoubtedly led the ship to sink so quickly."

"Unfortunately for our investigation, previous visitors had already tampered with the evidence. The wreck lies in just 295 feet of water, making it relatively easy pickings. Reports of blasting and salvaging operations, some apparantly conducted by or for the Royal Navy, dated back to 1946."

What caused the Lusitania to sink remains a matter of controversy, but the warnings given regarding the danger that the ship would be in were crystal clear and there is even the possibility that German spys were fed information that ammunition was on board the vessel, as the German government claimed it was.

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/lusika03.htm
"There are two distinct issues pertaining to Lusitania's carriage of munitions: the cargo of rifle cartridges and shrapnel cases, whose existence is not in dispute and the allegations that she was carrying a larger and much more dangerous cargo of smokeless powder (guncotton). These are pertinent both to the legality of Lusitania's cargo and to its possible role in the second, fatal explosion."
 
Hmm... I have many ideas and such for this kind of thread, but I'm going to leave a meaningless reply.

As long as the US stays out of Canada, I'm happy, since there is nothing I can do about other countries. I agree, that the US is doing many things wrong, and I can say proudly that I am disgusted by how the US has been handling recent events and such. I feel very bad about the people who live in the US and have to be fed lies, deceit, and bullshit, every day.

I'd also say that reasons for the US still standing, in my opinion, is the safety of Canada's peace treaties with many countries. But thats just opinion.
 
AmericanFreePress.net "US WEAPONS POISON EUROPE" "Radiation from Iraq War Detected in UK Atmosphere"
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/weapons_poison_europe.html

This refers to illegal American use of depleted uranium. It is terrrible and it shows how little these big corporations that have members in governments and also the British Royal family care nothing for the ill health and death they cause all around the world.

I wonder when any of this will appear in any mainstream British newspaper.
 
Garbagemx36 said:
Please do note though, most 'news' sites that claim to be the last objective, non-censored press are usually lying and have extreme leftist motives.

That description could just as well apply to the mainstream press. You have to try to figure the facts out for yourself like a detective, unfortunately. But this story sounds very believable and I am personally not giving Halliburton, etc the benefit of the doubt because I don't see how multinationals like that who are making a lot of money from deals as a result of wars, and who have executives in high places could possibly be ethically sound or trustworthy.
 
Published March 10 2006 Al Qaeda's "LAST WARNING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE". http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD111206

Read this because it is worth it. What do you think?

Particularly note: "You will have a choice of either let us carry it out on our own schedule and with our own hands or allow your own intelligence apparatus to cause it to happen."
 
It's fun to imagine our government playing a role or "setting up" 911 for the Iraq invasion, but I think it's quite unlikely. I don't like Bush at all, or his administration, or anyone in his staff....but you'd be kidding yourselves if you actually thought they had something to do with murdering thousands of americans. I realize it would make things easier to justify any war we were in, but I seriously doubt that this was the case.

EDIT:

I think that before Bush came into office there was a definite plan to invade Iraq and finish the job his daddy couldnt get done. I dont doubt that for a second. I think they purely lucked out with the 911 attacks and tried to use it as an excuse for Iraq, although we all know the sheer illogicalness of this "relationship." The scary part is that when these attacks happened, you know in the backs of their minds certain members of the Bush administration were most likely "happy" in a sense, because this would give the USA carte blanche, from an international perspective. I know Bush and this administration are full of liers and thieves but not mass murders.


As far as Iran goes.....I think it's so fucking funny how Bush says "There is no plan to invade Iran or go to war against Iran. Having said that, all options are still on the table." LOL.
 
Norsemaiden said:
Published March 10 2006 Al Qaeda's "LAST WARNING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE". http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD111206

Read this because it is worth it. What do you think?

Particularly note: "You will have a choice of either let us carry it out on our own schedule and with our own hands or allow your own intelligence apparatus to cause it to happen."


I just read that. Not sure if i believe any of it.
 
Devy_Metal said:
I just read that. Not sure if i believe any of it.

What do you think may be false about it? If you google "Global Islamic Media Front" you'll see many sites describing it as a mouthpiece for Al Qaeda and mentioning that this announcement was "recently disseminated across several jihadist forums".

The part that is perhaps harder to believe is what Al Qaeda says it is capable of doing to America. It could be a bluff, but who knows?

I'm also curious about suggestions I heard that Al Qaeda itself is perhaps not what it seems, as Bin Laden was working for the CIA in the past. (But then so was Saddam Hussein).

In another statement distributed by the Global Islamic Media Front threats were made to kidnap and decapitate various world leaders. A site carrying this message has been closed by an American internet company. See "The American Daily" http://www.americandaily.com/article/10386
 
Norsemaiden said:
Bin Laden was working for the CIA in the past.
as far as i had understood, the c.i.a trained him in preparation for operations against russians during that whole russia vs اﻓﻐﺎﻧﺴﺘﺎﻥ (afghanistan) war.
 
کوڈانشی said:
as far as i had understood, the c.i.a trained him in preparation for operations against russians during that whole russia vs اﻓﻐﺎﻧﺴﺘﺎﻥ (afghanistan) war.

CIA still funds Al-Qaida through Pakistani Intelligence Service (ISI) (note that I didn't say 'plan their operations' or 'give them orders', just 'fund'). Why? Because terrorists suit US needs to have an enemy that can be used as an excuse to establish control over Middle-Eastern, Caucasian and Central Asian oilfields and pipelineroutes. It's not that special in historical sense, "normal people" are being fucked and scammed like they have been throughout the history.
 
Final_Product said:
In response to the intial departure point:

The scary thing is, I'm not even sure a reason will even need to be given.
It could be the very reason a draft may be put in place.