Russian report: Netanyahu may be planning attack, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times

Topic started on 10-9-2009 @ 09:27 AM by MegaCurious

Russian report: Netanyahu may be planning attack

www.ynetnews.com

Russian media on Thursday continued to cover Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's mysterious visit to Moscow, that was leaked to the media from his office.

Kommersant newspaper quoted "experts" as saying they believe a visit of this kind could have stemmed from urgent circumstances, "for example, in the event that Israel plans to attack Iran".

At first, Moscow denied a visit ever took place, but after Netanyahu's office was forced to admit to the PM's Military Secretary Meir...

(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 09:27 AM by MegaCurious

The media is starting to report that Israel is planning an attack on Iran.

For me, I think that something is coming. But that's just because I've got "anomalies" that have been on my back for years, clearly tightening their noose (It's majorly awful around here, and that's an understatement! You don't know true torture...).

Is Israel really planning an attack soon on Iran? Only time will tell.

When do you think Israel will attack Iran?

www.ynetnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 09:40 AM by alienesque

Originally posted by MegaCurious

The media is starting to report that Israel is planning an attack on Iran.

For me, I think that something is coming. But that's just because I've got "anomalies" that have been on my back for years, clearly tightening their noose (It's majorly awful around here, and that's an understatement! You don't know true torture...).

Is Israel really planning an attack soon on Iran? Only time will tell.

When do you think Israel will attack Iran?

www.ynetnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

the odd thing about Netanyahu is the fact that i read 'the bible code' years ago and in that it states that his name is surrounded by lots of things basically saying he will cause or be at the center of the next world war..or end of the world or something...i dont think he was PM when i read the book (he had been but had then lost an election and was ousted) so i thought it was a bit of a stretch to believe there was anything to it...after all..his term had been and gone..

when he was then re-elected i remembered what i had read in the bible code and thought..'well..thats odd..maybe it could be true'..

and now this....

here..i found this:

www.muphin.net...

[edit on 10-9-2009 by alienesque]

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 09:41 AM by mrmonsoon

They may be warning Russia to remove it's tech from Iran.

However, the stupid Russians are the ones who built the reactor and is giving them uranium to refine for it.

They also have sold Iran missiles and radar systems.

Clearly, Russia only supports Iran and it's nuclear bomb program.

There was no negotiations, just informing.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 10:00 AM by praxis

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
They may be warning Russia to remove it's tech from Iran.

However, the stupid Russians are the ones who built the reactor and is giving them uranium to refine for it.

They also have sold Iran missiles and radar systems.

Clearly, Russia only supports Iran and it's nuclear bomb program.

There was no negotiations, just informing.

Russia needs to quit screwing around. They should give/sell Iran nukes, missles and defense systems. That is the only way the US and Israel are going to quit threatening Iran on a daily basis.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 10:00 AM by mattpryor

Sounds like third-hand rumours and sensationalism to me.

Stuff like this makes people very twitchy - I wish the media would be more careful.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 10:29 AM by patmac

This thread should be bumped and moved to the front page, it needs more attention.

Are there any other countries that are making similar claims? There seems to be a lot of talks of people having/creating/giving nukes lately. In regards to mattpryor's comment

Stuff like this makes people very twitchy - I wish the media would be more careful.

- Like many people these days, I am impartial to the media's take on anything. I'd feel more comfortable and less twitchy with the knowledge that our national security heightens it's radioactivity detection programs and at least pretends to increase efforts of securing it's citizens saftey.

What makes me twitchy is that we (ATS and other networks) are getting all sorts of warnings prior to 'an event' yet no visible reactions on part of any of our governments are resulting from it. Reminds me of how many warnings we heard prior to 9/11 and the ignorance that was exhibited in that time. Every politician that I know of seems to be compeled to focus on frivilous issues.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 10:45 AM by detachedindividual

Originally posted by mattpryor
Sounds like third-hand rumours and sensationalism to me.

Stuff like this makes people very twitchy - I wish the media would be more careful.

The problem now is that it was denied. If they had openly met they could have used any one of a number of excuses. The fact that they didn't makes it clear that they met with the intention of keeping it from other global leaders, not just the public.
That is what makes this even more ominous.

It was supposed to be a secret meeting apparently. So why else would these two groups of government officials be meeting in secret?

I don't think it is sensationalist or irresponsible. It's reporting.

Something is afoot.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 10:53 AM by ziggy1706

I looked at the muphin.net website,a nd the bible code thier..ive seen a documentary on this on history channel its amazing! only oone prob..i cannot read hrebrew; (
I question the accuracy though, as it says 1996..we are in 2009...

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 10:56 AM by googolplex

This is interesting, and there was a thread on ATS yesterday about Russia signing something that allows Russian troops to be deployed to other countries.
I was worried about enforcers for UN in US , but more realistic would be deployment to Iran which I would not hope either.
I don't really know that much about all this myself, but if they are now allowed to deploy toother countries they must plan on going somewhere.

About Russia helping Iran, why didn't France get in trouble for setting up Pakistan with nukes and nuclear subs three total with I think 11 nuclear missles.
France was also helped Iraq with it's nuclear adavances, and was cause of Israelis first bombing of Iraq's nuclear facility.
To me I think French people stink also, the only effect I can see on France is it's hard for me to buy French sheep cheese, why should me and the French sheep have to suffer.
I hope they don't boycott French green onion sour cream potato chip dip.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 10:57 AM by alienesque

Originally posted by ziggy1706
I looked at the muphin.net website,a nd the bible code thier..ive seen a documentary on this on history channel its amazing! only oone prob..i cannot read hrebrew; (
I question the accuracy though, as it says 1996..we are in 2009...

yep..doesnt it say 'delayed' somewhere?

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 11:04 AM by KSPigpen

MSM is ALSO pushing the notion that a 'stockpile' of Iranian-made weapons, including 'roadside bombs' was found in Afghanistan by U.S. troops.

I think it's fixin' to be 'on.' They're circling the wagons and feeding the sheep.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 11:27 AM by mmiichael

Conspiracy theorists pushing the envelope on this further and further may just be playing into the hands of certain interests trying to benefit from the a lot of unknowns in all this.

Israel reporting Russian media talking about a planned attack on Iran means little. The tabloid Russian media constantly publishes unconfirmed speculation for sensationalism and propaganda.

Many scenarios unchosen may be the actual story here. An attempt by countries like Russia and Iran to boost depressed oil prices with the whiff of war. An attempt to deflect from something embarrassing to the international community, like covert exchanges no one is aware of.

All sides try to exploit the unknown to their advantage. In the process the actual facts gets obscured by totally unfounded speculations given wide circulation.

This is another 1000 piece puzzle and so far we only have 10 pieces. And for all we know there really isn't even a 1000 piece puzzle, just a ploy to get attention to or away from something more serious happening behind closed doors.

When Israel has made moves in the past they usually have everyone looking in the opposite direction from where they are coming.

Better to keep to what is actually known, add on what's confirmed, then letting the rumour mill get completely out of control.

Mike

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 11:33 AM by Iago18

This thread is Critically important.

There is no chance that the Chief of State of a powerful sovereign nation would rush off to a neutral-enemy nation unless there was a major problem.

Note, in the past few days, the construction of settlements has resumed. This flies directly in the face of the American Administration. It is clear that Netanyahu is not expecting American support any time soon.

Remember that the Director of the CIA covertly went to Israel about a few months ago in a rush to stop a war. Link: Panetta Rushed to Israel

Netanyahu was either making sure Russia would not retaliate against Israel, or he was summoned there. Why would the Prime Minister be summoned to Russia? Your guess is as good as mine. Unless, there are a good number of things here that we cannot see.

However, this thread is possibly the most important news of the day.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 11:40 AM by captaintyinknots

I have read lately that the visit may have been about the the "disapearing ship" which some claim was carrying russian missile defense to Iran.

news.bbc.co.uk...

I don't know whether I believe this or not, but it IS becoming more and more apparent that Israel had a hand in the Arctic Sea's disapearance.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 11:43 AM by mmiichael

Originally posted by Iago18
There is no chance that the Chief of State of a powerful sovereign nation would rush off to a neutral-enemy nation unless there was a major problem.

Note, in the past few days, the construction of settlements has resumed. This flies directly in the face of the American Administration. It is clear that Netanyahu is not expecting American support any time soon.

Remember that the Director of the CIA covertly went to Israel about a few months ago in a rush to stop a war. Link: Panetta Rushed to Israel

Netanyahu was either making sure Russia would not retaliate against Israel, or he was summoned there. Why would the Prime Minister be summoned to Russia? Your guess is as good as mine. Unless, there are a good number of things here that we cannot see.

Unfortunately this speculation flies in the face of the generally conceded understanding that the US has given the hands-off to Israel to do something about Iran's increasing bellicosity particularly when their election has left the country in political disarray. When the US complains about something like the settlements that can be seen as an indicator they are onside. For public face the US has to be seen rapping Israel's knuckles.

Similarly the Saudis rail against Israel but offer them support through back channels and pray to Allah that Israel will rid them of their biggest threat.

Same with Russia. Despite baring of fangs with Israel and the West, Russia has more long term concern with Iran's increasing influence than anyone.

Increasing the version of events we're told by the press is a means to deflect from the real story. When talk of war in the news quiets down that's often when to expect it most.

Mike

[edit on 10-9-2009 by mmiichael]

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 11:48 AM by captaintyinknots

reply to post by mmiichael

While I agree that is most often the case, we are in a time when people are on edge. The american people wont just stand for another pre-emptive attack in the middle east. There is going to be some buildup(actually, there already has been) if there is going to be a war. They need the backing of the people this time.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 11:49 AM by Iago18

reply to post by mmiichael

I certainly don't disagree with your analysis. However, I would point out that the Netanyahu visit as well as the early Panetta visit were not meant to be publicized.

Clearly there is much more going on behind the scenes than we are privvy to, I certainly grant that. I also grant that Israel has definite cassus belli on Iran.

Do I believe that the United States or Russia would stand in the way of Israel? No. Do I think that was the reason that Netanyahu went to Russia? No.

The reason why I believe this is such a crucial story is precisely for the reason that Heads of State should not be jetting off for secret meetings. Why not send the defense minister? There is something bigger at work here than simply a discussion of public policy.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 12:18 PM by mmiichael

reply to Iago18

I think we both undertand there might be something of international importance of high magnitude happening right now.

But for all we know Putin asked Netanyahu to come to Russia so he could personally talk Israel out of something he wants to prevent.

Major players jockeying back and forth and making temporary alliances has happened in the past.

My own thinking on these two countries is that we may see the US distancing itself from Israel if it hasn't already happened, and Russia warming up to them. Not as bizarre as it may sound.

Alternately, the showdown with the Muslim countries being controlled by extremists may be coming to a theater near you. Someone with deeper knowledge of these matters has suggested a simultaneous Israel v Iran, India v Pakistan, Russia v chosen Muslim neighbour, and a surprising Saudi Arabia v Syria, unified effort may already be planned and waiting for execution.

We just don't know for sure. And my feeling is this is beyond the usual alliances and enmities we've been conditioned to see.

I can safely predict something unpredictable is going to happen.

Mike

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 12:23 PM by detachedindividual

reply to post by Iago18

And while all of this is going on the BBC are reporting on the Royal Mail strike and the sale of Vauxhall and Opel to Magna. Oh, and that pesky Obama speech.

It doesn't even deserve a mention on the BBC news website. Curious, considering almost every move Russia makes is reported and commented on by the BBC usually.

How America stands in this situation is anyone's guess, they like to pretend to be "sensible" by making demands about settlements and the harassment of Palestinians, but in action they prop-up the Israeli war machine.
It's all smoke and mirrors, as long as the people think you're doing good, you can sell all the arms you like through the back door without causing much fuss. Especially when the MSM is on your payroll to look the other way.

Ultimately, nothing might come of this. Various leaders have such meetings all around the world at various times. When they all get together for a G20 or G8 meeting, do you not think they sequester an odd hotel room here or there at three in the morning to discuss something they don't want others to know about?
Of course they do.

There are intelligence communities in operation 24 hours a day. We have spies everywhere, we monitor communications, we bug rooms and send satellites to watch movement... there is an entire industry in all our countries built on the knowledge that governments do things they don't want other governments to know about, for defence, strategy, financial benefit...

The reasons this is significant though are as follows...

1. When governments make a meeting secret, it usually stays that way for the duration of any scenario. If the info is "leaked" it is not likely to be an accident, it's through sabotage or a deliberate act of espionage. This means that someone (likely a nation with a spy somewhere they shouldn't) decided that it was in their strategic interest to leak this meeting.
Any offers?

2. This is Israel and Russia. Say no more.

3. It is now widely accepted that either Russia or China are about to take the lead globally. Now would be the right time to solidify an alliance. China is not making any moves other than financial, whereas Russia has been making increasingly bold military moves in various directions for the last eight or nine years.

However we analyse this, if it does lead to war it probably won't be clear to us for another fifty years exactly what this meeting meant.

Having said that, it certainly shouldn't be dismissed as nothing simply because we don't know the details of it.
You can guarantee that there are teams of people in the UK, USA, China, Japan, Germany, Italy, France, Poland... all now convening in closed rooms to discuss the intelligence they themselves have gathered (and likely discussing between nations too), what it means, what they could have discussed, what their plan is, what it will mean for each nation, how best to deal with it, what to tell their own people... That's their job. To them this will be significant.

People should now be watching their own media to see what happens over the next few weeks in relation to national defence. If this is viewed as a pre-war meeting, I'd expect to see Britain quietly announcing plans to improve defences, increase energy independence, and suggestions of military improvement/expansion. I'll bet any money over the next few weeks or maybe a month or two Gordon Brown will pull a U-turn on cutting defence budgets.

The G20 meeting will allow for a lot of discussion behind closed doors, so I would expect to see some military comments after that.

I very much doubt any nation is simply disregarding this meeting as "nothing". Because even with the very basic intelligence we have it is certainly something.

Pages: << 1 2 3 >> ^^TOP^^