Brink of War with Iran?


Richard Moore

From: "ecopilgrim " <•••@••.•••>
Subject: FW: URGENT: Brink of War with Iran?
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 14:38:50 -0700
-----Original Message-----
From: President, USA Exile Govt. [mailto:•••@••.•••]
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 7:52 PM
To: President, USA Exile Govt.
Subject: URGENT: Brink of War with Iran?

Forwarded with Compliments of Government of the USA in Exile
(GUSAE):  Free Americans Resisting the Fourth Reich on Behalf
of All Species.

      Behind the Israeli Mole Affair:
      Point of Maximum Danger of War with Iran Approaching

Exclusive -- By Webster Griffin Tarpley

Washington DC - August 30 -- News of the investigation of
Larry Franklin, a middle-level functionary working for the
Wolfowitz-Feith-Luti-Shulsky clique in the Pentagon, indicates
that we are now approaching a critical choice-point on the
road to war with Iran, and towards a synthetic terrorism
attack inside the US which would be used as an additional
pretext to start such a war.

The probe of an Israeli mole in the Pentagon was made public
by CBS news last Friday evening. The Saturday edition of the
Washington Post named Larry Franklin as being identified by
sources as the person under investigation. In Sunday's
Washington Post, it was confirmed that Lawrence A. Franklin
was the person at the center of investigation...

As seen in the excerpt below, this same Larry Franklin was
named in my June 6 news release, "Rogue Bush Backers Prepare
Super 9-11 False Flag Terror Attacks." Franklin was indicated
as one of the vulnerable links in the neocon network which
finds itself in a hysterical flight forward to try to salvage
the debacle of their Iraq war by expanding that war to
neighboring countries, notably Iran. The threat of a new round
of "own goal" synthetic terrorism, quite possibly in the ABC
dimension, was linked to the preparation of that wider war.
The logic at work was that of an "October surprise," this time
on the scale adequate to shock the post 9-11 world.

The best working hypothesis to understand the new mole
investigation is that neocon networks in the Pentagon may be
very close to embroiling the United States in a war with Iran.
This would likely come as an Israeli or US pre-emptive bombing
attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, possibly combined with a
terrorist attack inside the US using weapons of mass
destruction, which the corporate controlled media would
immediately blame on Iran.

Whatever forces are behind the naming of Franklin, it must be
assumed that their main aim is to break up neocon preparations
for a surprise attack on Iran, which the neocons have been
boasting about in the media with special emphasis for some
weeks. Backing the Franklin probe may well be military
factions who have no desire to be fed into the Iranian
meatgrinder, and who do not fancy neocon fascist dictatorship.
The immediate goal would be to knock Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz,
Feith, Bolton, Rice, Abrams and their cheering section in the
media and think-tanks onto the defensive. While the exposure
of Franklin is a positive step, it is far from decisive, and
the neocons are still in a position to unleash the dogs of war
over the next days and weeks.

We are therefore now most probably on the brink of war with
Iran, and at the same time entering a period of steadily
increasing danger of synthetic terrorism designed to steal or
cancel the November elections, and thus freeze the current
neocon clique in power for the foreseeable future. The
calculation of the rogue network operating behind the scenes
is evidently that terrorism taking place a few days before the
elections will stampede the electorate to support Bush, while
terrorism well in advance of the elections will give the
public time to recover enough to advance recriminations and
demands for accountability on the part of the administration.
We are now entering the time frame when the terrorist
controllers can expect the maximum impact of their handiwork,
either in stampeding the electorate, or in calling off the
elections completely.


On August 19, Martin Sieff of UPI warned: "Forget an October
Surprise, a much worse one could come in September: Full-scale
war between the United States and Iran may be far closer than
the American public might imagine."

Sieff quoted remarks made by Iranian Defense Minister Ali
Shamkhani on August 18 which bluntly warned that if Iranian
military commanders believed the United States were serious
about attacking Iran to destroy its nuclear power facility at
Bushehr, or to topple its Islamic theocratic form of
government, the Iranian military would not sit back passively
and wait for the U.S. armed forces to strike the first blow,
as President Saddam Hussein in neighboring Iraq did in March
2003. They would strike first.

"We will not sit to wait for what others will do to us,"
Shamkhani told al-Jazeera. "Some military commanders in Iran
are convinced that preventive operations which the Americans
talk about are not their monopoly," he added. With this, the
Iran-Iraq border became a new line of hair-trigger
confrontation in the restless war agitation of the neocons.

One day earlier, neocon Undersecretary of State for Arms
Control and International Security John Bolton told an
audience at the Hudson Institute in Washington that it was
imperative that the Iranian nuclear program be brought before
the U.N. Security Council. "To fail to do so would risk
sending a signal to would-be proliferators that there are no
serious consequences for pursuing secret nuclear weapons
programs," said Bolton. "We cannot let Iran, a leading sponsor
of international terrorism, acquire nuclear weapons and the
means to deliver them to Europe, most of central Asia and the
Middle East, or beyond," Bolton added. "Without serious,
concerted, immediate intervention by the international
community, Iran will be well on the road to doing so." Similar
threatening noises have come from Condoleezza Rice at the Bush
National Security Council.

Iranian public opinion had been shocked by a raving, psychotic
column by Charles Krauthammer in the July 23 Washington Post:
Krauthammer wrote: "The long awaited revolution (in Iran) is
not happening. Which [makes] the question of pre-emptive
attack all the more urgent. If nothing is done, a fanatical
terrorist regime openly dedicated to the destruction of 'the
Great Satan' will have both nuclear weapons and missiles to
deliver them. All that stands between us and that is either
revolution or pre-emptive attack." Iranian observers compared
this to the US propaganda campaign which had preceded the
attack on Iraq.


Competent US military commanders dread the prospect of war
with Iran. Iran is four times the area of Iraq, and has three
times the population. Its infrastructure was not destroyed
during the Kuwait war in the way that Iraq's was, and Iran has
not been subjected to 13 years of crippling UN sanctions on
everything, including food and medicine. The Iranian military
forces are intact. In case of war, Iran could be expected to
use all means ranging from ballistic missile attacks on US and
Israeli bases to asymmetrical warfare. The situation of the US
forces already in Iraq could quickly become extraordinarily
critical. Shamkhani alluded to this prospect when he said that
"The U.S. military presence will not become an element of
strength at our expense. The opposite is true because their
forces would turn into a hostage."

For purposes of analogy, the Iraq war so far could be compared
to the first months of the Korean War, from June to November
1950. By provoking Iran to go beyond logistical support for
guerrillas and the sending of volunteers, and come into the
war with both feet, the neocons would be inviting a repeat of
the Chinese intervention and the disastrous US retreat south
from the Yalu to south of Seoul, which still stands as the
longest retreat in US military history. Just as Chinese entry
into the Korean conflict in late November 1950 created a
wholly new and wider war, Iranian entry into the US-Iraq war
would have similarly incalculable consequences. The choices
might quickly narrow to the large-scale use of nuclear weapons
or defeat for the current US hollow army of just 10 divisions.


In the case of Iran, the use of nuclear weapons by the US
would have a dangerous complication: Iran is an important
neighbor and trading partner of the Russian Federation, which
is helping with Iran's nuclear power reactor program. The
threatened US/Israeli raid on Iran might kill Russian citizens
as well. Such a US attack on Iran might prod the Russian
government into drawing its own line in the sand, rather than
sitting idle as the tide of US aggression swept closer and
closer to Russia's borders, as one country after another in
central Asia was occupied. In other words, a US attack on Iran
bids fair to be the opening of World War III, making explicit
was already implicit in the invasion of Iraq. The Iran war
project of the neocons is the very midsummer of madness, and
it must be stopped.

War with Iran means a military draft, just for starters. If
Iran can close the Straits of Hormuz, it might mean rationing
of food and fuel. Bloated speculative financial structures
could hardly survive.

The Israeli mole investigation seeks to explore the
intersection of the Valerie Plame affair, the Chalabi affair,
the Niger yellowcake forged documents scandal, and some key
policy documents passed to the Israelis. According to a CIA
veteran interviewed by CNN, the probe reaches into the
National Security Council as well as the Pentagon. On June 6,
I had identified Larry Franklin in these terms:

At the root of the Valerie Plame affair is the role of her
husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, in refuting the baseless
claim that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium yellowcake from
Niger. This story was buttressed by documents which turned out
to be forged. A prime suspect in this regard is Ledeen, and
the accusation is made more plausible because the faked
documents first surfaced in Rome, where Ledeen possesses
extensive contacts. A federal grand jury is probing this
matter. Ledeen, like so many Bush officials, is an alumnus of
the 1980s George H. W. Bush-Poindexter-Abrams-Oliver North
Iran-contra gun-running and drug-running scandal, and appears
to have mobilized these networks as part of the post 9-11
assault on Iraq. In December 2001, Ledeen moved to revive the
Iran connection, setting up a meeting between two Pentagon
civilian neo-cons and Manucher Ghorbanifar, an Iranian arms
dealer whom the CIA called a criminal and liar. Three days of
meetings in Rome involved Harold Rhode, Larry Franklin,
Ghorbanifar, and two unnamed officials of the Iranian regime.
After the conquest of Iraq, Rhode was sent to Baghdad as the
contact point between the Office of Special Plans and Chalabi.
Ghorbanifar, in a Dec. 22, 2003 interview with Newsweek's Mark
Hosenball, reported that he maintained contact with Rhode and
Franklin "five or six times a week" through June 2003, when he
had a second meeting with Rhode in Paris. This back channel to
the Iranians is now also under intense scrutiny.

In the June 6 release, I also showed that, for Bush, the
notion of a confrontation with Iran was closely linked to the
hypothesis of a new wave of synthetic terrorism. I pointed in
this context to a key speech in which Bush had escalated his
threat of both:

A dramatic turning point on the way to the current emergency
came on April 21, when Bush delivered two speeches which
represented a palpable escalation of the tone of his usual
demagogy of terrorism and fear. In the afternoon, he assured
the Newspaper Association of America, composed of newspaper
editors, that Iran "will be dealt with" if they pursue a
nuclear development program. Bush went on to characterize the
United States as "a battlefield in the war on terror." He was
at pains to build up the stature of Al-Qaeda, whose members he
emphatically characterized as "smarttoughand sophisticated."
Because the terrorists are so formidable, Bush said the United
States "is a hard country to defend. Our intelligence is good.
It's just never perfect, is the problem. We are disrupting
some cells here in America. We're chasing people down. But it
is - we've got a big country." Later, Bush spoke to the same
themes at a closed-door gathering at the White House: "...On
Tuesday evening, Bush told Republican congressional leaders
during a meeting at the White House that it was all but
certain that terrorists would attempt a major attack on the
United States before the election, according to a
congressional aide. The leaders were struck by Bush's
definitiveness and gravity, the aide said..." (Washington
Post, April 22, 2004)

The general thesis of the June 6 release was this:

Washington DC, June 6 - Intelligence patterns monitored here
now point conclusively to the grave threat of an imminent new
round of ABC (atomic-bacteriological-chemical) terror attacks
in the United States, Great Britain, Canada, and possibly
other nations. These attacks could include nuclear
detonations, radiological dirty bombs, poison gas and other
chemical weapons, or biological agents, to be unleashed in
such urban settings as New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago,
Washington DC, Vancouver BC, or London. The goal of these
operations would be to produce a worldwide shock several
orders of magnitude greater than the original 9-11, with a
view to stopping the collapse of the Bush administration, the
Wall Street-centered financial structures, and the US-UK
strategic position generally. The attacks would be attributed
by US/UK intelligence to controlled patsy terrorist groups who
would be linked by the media to countries like Iran, Syria,
Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia, thus setting these
states up for attack. The organizers of the attacks would in
reality be substantially the same secret command cell in the
United States which set up the 9-11 events and its associated
networks, which has been able to continue in operation because
of the abject failure of all 9-11 investigations to date to
identify it. These forces are now in a desperate flight
forward to escape from their current increasingly grim
position. Their goal is now to establish a neocon fascist
dictatorship in the United States, complete with martial law,
special tribunals, press and media censorship, and the full
pervasive apparatus of the modern police state.

As of the end of August, 2004, this threat is now more urgent
than ever.

These issues will be discussed in my upcoming book, 9/11
Synthetic Terrorism: The Myth of the Twenty-First Century, to
be published by Progressive Press. For information, please
contact •••@••.•••.


To read the full text of the June 6 release, "Rogue Bush Backers Prepare Super 
9-11 False Flag Terror Attacks," please go to:
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

If you find this material useful, you might want to check out our website
( or try out our low-traffic, moderated email 
list by sending a message to:

You are encouraged to forward any material from the lists or the website,
provided it is for non-commercial use and you include the source and
this disclaimer.

Richard Moore (rkm)
Wexford, Ireland
    "...the Patriot Act followed 9-11 as smoothly as the
      suspension of the Weimar constitution followed the
      Reichstag fire."  
      - Srdja Trifkovic

    There is not a problem with the system.
    The system is the problem.

    Faith in ourselves - not gods, ideologies, leaders, or programs.
"Zen of Global Transformation" home page:

QuayLargo discussion forum:

cj list archives:

newslog list archives:
Informative links: