This has made the rounds before, but apparently lots of you haven’t seen it yet: A 2 minute video of an Israeli Lobbyist speaking in the US, talking about causing a False Flag to start war with Iran – [01:55]
Neocon traitor Patrick Clawson openly suggests the US provoke Iran into firing the first shot, or failing that, a false flag deception operation to make it look like Iran attacked first — all in order to start the genocidal war that Netanyahu has been egging us on to.
This is in reply to the video posted at http://www.youtube.com/
I’ve added a transcript in English and translations in French and German.
If anyone can add more translations please do!
I frankly think that crisis initiation is really difficult. It’s very hard for me to see how the United States President can get us to war with Iran. Which leads me to conclude that if in fact compromise is not coming, that the traditional way that America gets to war — what would be best for US interests…
Some people think that Mr. Roosevelt wanted to get us into World War Two as David mentioned. We had to wait for Pearl Harbor. Some people might think that Mr. Wilson wanted to get us into World War One, you may recall he had to wait for the Lusitania episode. Some people might think that Mr. Johnson wanted to send troops to Vietnam, you may recall that he had to wait for the Gulf of Tonkin episode. We didn’t go to war with Spain until the USS Maine exploded. And may I point out that Mr. Lincoln did not feel he could call out the Federal Army until Ft. Sumter was attacked, which is why he ordered the commander at Ft. Sumter to do exactly that thing which the South Carolinians had said would cause an attack.
So if, in fact, the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war. One can combine other means of pressure with sanctions. I mentioned that explosion on August 17th. We could step up the pressure. I mean look, people, Iranian submarines periodically go down, someday one of them might not come up. (Laughter) Who would know why? We can do a variety of things if we wish to, to increase the pressure. I’m not advocating that, but I’m just suggesting that this is not an either/or proposition, just sanctions has to succeed or other things. We are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians. We could get nastier at that.
Ehrlich gesagt, meiner Meinung nach, die Entzündung einer Krise wird eine ganz schwierige Sache, und mir ist is schwer zu sehen, wie der amerikanische Präsident uns in Krieg mit Iran verwickeln kann. Das führt mich zum Schluss, dass wenn tatsächlich kein Mittelweg sich anbietet, denn die übliche Weise, wie Amerika zum Krieg geht — was eigentlich in den Interessen der USA steht:
Manche Leute glauben dass H. Roosevelt uns in den Zweiten Weltkrieg bringen wollte, wie es David eben erwähnt hat. Wir haben auf Pearl Harbor warten müssen. Manche Leute glauben dass H. Wilson uns in den Ersten Weltkrieg bringen wollte; wie Sie sich vielleicht erinnern, müsste er auf dem Vorfall der Lusitania warten. Manche Leute glauben dass H. Johnson Soldaten nach Vietnam schicken wollte; wie Sie sich erinnern mögen, müsste er auf dem Vorfall vom Golf von Tonkin warten. Wir sind im Krieg gegen Spanien erst nach der Sprengung der USS Maine gegangen. Darf ich auch darauf hinweisen, dass H. Lincoln sich nicht in der Lage fühlte, die Wehrkräfte der Bundnis aufzurufen, ehe die Festung von Fort Sumter angegriffen wurde. Deshalb gab er den Befehl am Festungskommandant, gerade das zu tun, was Sud-Carolina gewarnt hat, die Ursache für einen Angriff wird.
Also wenn die Iraner in der Tat nicht kompromisbereit sind, wäre es am besten wenn jemand anders den Krieg auslöst. Ja, man kann anderen Druckmassnahmen mit Sanktionen verbinden. Ich habe die Explosion vom 17. August erwähnt. Wir könnten mehr Druck ansetzen. Ich meine, schauen Sie, Leute, Iranischen U-Boote tauchen regelmässig herunter, was wenn einen schönen Tag eins davon taucht nicht wieder auf? (Gelächter) Wer wird wissen warum? Wir können verschiedenes machen wenn wir wollen, um den Druck zu erhöhen. Nicht dass ich das befürworte, ich schlage nur vor, das diese nicht eine Prämisse von entweder/oder wird, als ob nur Sanktionen wirken oder nur etwas anders. Wir sind schon im Spiel von gedeckten Massnahmen gegen die Iraner. Dabei könnten wir böser werden.
magnora7: This is important because it might be evidence of a planned false flag to bring the US in to war with Iran via Israeli Lobbying actions.
This man is Patrick Clawson and he’s speaking for WINEP, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, which is one of many spin-off lobbying groups from IAPAC, which is a humongously influential Israeli lobbying group.
If I could blow the whistle about one thing, it might be this. Plus now we are seeing the unrest in Iran, biggest since 2009, which is probably the CIA stirring up stuff to overthrow their natively-controlled national government, just like they did in 1954 when they installed the Shah that had power until the Iranian revolution of 1979.
The CIA and related corporations want Iran back, and they know the way to do it is by causing a revolution, and controlling the revolution in to a new government they own. Just like the JP Morgan and the Rothschilds did with the Russian Tsars when they backed Lenin’s rise to power during the Russian revolution of 1917.
1950rad: Jesus Christ, this man *really* wants a war with Iran. So f–ked up, imagine how many people have to die just to satisfy this idiot.
jerkedit: Recipient’s of the Institute’s awards include Bill Clinton and Tony Blair.
limesqueezeme13: Is this fake ?
LilTy07: Gotta love how he stops his historical citations before it gets too close to modern history. Even better, with a trick of rhetoric, he throws us off the trail by back peddling his citations to the Civil War. What a sham.
i0datamonster: Does anyone have the full conference? I’ve seen this clip a lot but never the full context.
OmarComingRun: WINEP is a disturbing think tank but there are so many and they get little media attention its hard to see how influential they are
The_Noble_Lie: > Im not advocating it [ crisis initation ]
> We are in the game of using covert means against iranians. We can get nastier at that
Sure you arent advocating that, disgusting scum of the earth, sure.
ignoremsmedia: He is a man of the utmost integrity.
You can just tell by his commitment to Infidel genocide .. I mean Goyem Genocide … oh Palestinian Genocide.
I imagine with his looks he is a direct descendant of Moses from the middle East / north Africa?
I_AM_AMHAARETZ: Why would anyone cast their lot with the Zionists over 80 million Iranians or 1.5 billion Muslims? These Neocons dodn’t seem to understand that when/if they ever manage to get through Islam, they’ll have me to deal with after. I’ll stretch their necks and mail Bubela a flag. Sic Semper Rodentia.
Iranian Government Has ‘Hard Evidence’ Of CIA Meddling In Protests
The Iranian government has told the UN it has irrefutable evidence that the CIA are involved in the “orchestrated protests” that have taken place across Iran in the last week.
Iran’s highest legal authority previously claimed direct CIA involvement in the unrest, which has taken over two dozen lives so far.
Iran’s prosecutor general, Mohammad Jafar Montazeri, alleged Thursday that an American CIA official was the “main designer” of the demonstrations. And Iranian Ambassador Gholamali Khoshroo – whose country isn’t a Security Council member but was invited to participate Friday – said the protests had gotten “direct encouragement by foreign forces including by the president of the United States.”
The Trump administration has denied having any hand in the demonstrations, saying they arose completely spontaneously. The CIA declined to comment.
Zerohedge.com reports: Ambassador Gholamali Khoshroo also accused the United States of abusing its power as a permanent member of the Security Council by calling for a meeting to discuss the protests. “It is unfortunate that despite the resistance on the part of some of its members, this council has allowed itself to be abused by the current U.S. administration in holding a meeting on an issue that falls outside the scope of its mandate,” he said.
Iran’s accusation was backed by Russia, whose envoy Vasiliy Nebenzia addressed the US head on, asserting “You are dispersing the energy of the Security Council, instead of focusing it on dealing with key crisis situations in Afghanistan, Syria Libya, Iraq, Yemen, DPRK, the African continent. Instead of that, you are proposing that we interfere in the internal affairs of a state.” The Russian representative continued, “We obviously regret the loss of lives as a result of the demonstrations that were not so peaceful. However, let Iran deal with its own problems, especially since this is precisely what’s taking place.”
Russia further presented the US position as one of hypocrisy:
“If we follow your logic, then we should have meetings of the Security Council after the events in Ferguson or after the dispersal by force of the Occupy Wall Street movement in Manhattan,” Vasiliy said. “We don’t want to get involved in destabilizing Iran or any other country.”
This was in response to US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley’s opening speech, who characterized the week long unrest in Iran as a “spontaneous expression of fundamental human rights,” claiming the protests were simultaneously playing out in “over 78 locations” – though according to many reports anti-regime protests have largely died down while giving way to possibly larger pro-government rallies. She ascribed the usual freedom and democracy motives to the Iranian demonstrators – which by the accounts of many analysts are multi-faceted and complex, mostly focusing on deep seated economic grievances – something to be expected anytime protests occur in any country whose government the US doesn’t like.
“In the end, the Iranian people will determine their own destiny. Let there be no doubt the US stands unapologetically with those in Iran who seek freedom for themselves, prosperity for their families and dignity for their nation. We will not be quiet,” Haley said, while also derisively shooting down accusations that protesters and provocateurs being used as “puppets of foreign powers.” She said the US was absolutely sure that protests were not at all being driven by external influence or intervention. She further reiterated a warning first emphasized in a prior State Department press release: “The Iranian regime is now on notice: The world will be watching what you do.”
Meanwhile Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has added his name to the growing chorus of countries charging the US with meddling in the internal affairs of both Iran and Pakistan, and other Muslim majority countries. At an Istanbul press conference on Friday, Turkey’s president accused the US of seeking control of the Middle East’s resources, saying, “We cannot accept that some countries – foremost the US, Israel – to interfere [sic] in the internal affairs of Iran and Pakistan,” according to the AFP.
A number of nations, including European countries like France, have worried that the US is exploiting Iran’s domestic situation to undermine the 2015 nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, JCPOA). Earlier in the week Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov expressly warned the US “against attempts to interfere in the internal affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” while stressing, “what is happening there is an internal affair.”
And even France in a rare moment of complete agreement with Russia and Iran earlier in the week slammed the US for prematurely using human rights to undermine the nuclear agreement. On Wednesdays President Emmanuel Macron told reporters, “The official line pursued by the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia, who are our allies in many ways, is almost one that would lead us to war.” He charged that some countries seemed to be engaged in a “deliberate strategy” to undermine the JCPOA.
“Otherwise, we end up surreptitiously rebuilding an ‘axis of evil’,” Macron said in reference to an infamous phrase by former President George W. Bush, who used the phrase to describe countries including Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Macron further warned at the time that the world could go down a path of a “conflict of extreme brutality” should US pressures on Iran continue.
During Friday’s UN emergency session, France stuck by Macron’s earlier words, as French Ambassador Francois Delattre urged a careful approach to Iran’s internal matters, saying just before the meeting, “Yes, of course, to vigilance and call for full respect of freedom of expression, but no to instrumentalization of the crisis from the outside – because it would only reinforce the extremes, which is precisely what we want to avoid.”
His call to cautiously prevent the “instrumentalization of the crisis from the outside” is a clear reference to repeat Israeli and US officials’ demands for international solidarity with the anti-Tehran protesters in cause of regime change. Thus when even France sides squarely against the US and with Iran and Russia, the US has definitely found itself isolated on the world stage.