Why are people ignoring what is in front of them?

I've posted this document before, and I'm going to post it one last time to try and get people to see what is no longer hidden from them, but out in the open.

This is the document called 'Which Path to Persia? from the Saban Center of Middle East Policy, 2009

www.brookings.edu...

These people work in line with the likes of the PNAC, people like Dov Zakheim and Paul Wolfowitz with incredible influence over American policy. They have an agenda that they do not hide.

A critical challenge for this policy (American airstrikes) option is that, absent a clear Iranian act of aggression, American airstrikes against Iran would be unpopular in the region and throughout the world.

So basically, unless Iran DOES SOMETHING, then American action against Iran would be unpopular. This is important because if we think back to September 2000, The PNAC's RAD document stated without an event, like a 'new Pearl Harbour', the process of transformation would take a lot longer. We then had 9/11.

Especially in the absence of a clear Iranian provocation, averting this paradoxical danger would be a major task for U.S. diplomats in the run-up to such an air campaign.

This is where we are RIGHT NOW, the charades that Obama is playing regards 'diplomacy', it's spelt out as American foreign policy in 2009 and planned well before. They can't just bomb Iran, it wouldn't look good, so they're playing this game of 'diplomacy', which they know will fail. Just as they are funding rebels in Syria they know full well a peace plan will never work. It is all about deception and making people think war is the only way.

The hidden suggestion to a false flag event throughout the document is unsettling-

The truth is that these all would be challenging cases to make. For that reason, it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be.

In a time when America is amending the NDA to legalise propaganda against their own people, this is a time to wake up people, because the plan is set.

Chapter 5 of this backbone of American foreign policy is called (I'm not making this up)-

LEAVE IT TO BIBI- Allowing or Encouraging an Israeli Military Strike

Regarding an air attack, which Israel is planning to do against Iran's nuclear facilities, they go on to say (again with more reference to potential false flags)-

They would probably retaliate against Israel, and they might retaliate against the United States, too (which might create a pretext for American airstrikes or even an invasion).

How at this point in time, can people still believe the Necons and Zionists are not pushing for war with Iran, they have spent millions on developing policy that can bring the war to being.

On a regime change through a planned uprising or coup (1953 spring to mind anyone?)-

The true objective of this policy option is to overthrow the clerical regime in Tehran and see it replaced, hopefully, by one whose views would be more compatible with U.S. interests in the region.

The United States could play multiple roles in facilitating a revolution. By funding and helping organize
domestic rivals of the regime, the United States could create an alternative leadership to seize power.

I thought this line of though was reserved for 'conspiracy' lunatics?! But here they are, openly discussing what they have planned many, many times in the past- CIA led uprisings, it happened in Libya and is happening in Syria right now.

However, they point out Iran is much stronger and would need military intervention anyway-

This requirement means that a popular revolution in Iran does not seem to fit the model of the “velvet revolutions” that occurred elsewhere. The biggest challenge to regime change would be its feasibility. For all its many shortcomings, the Iranian government is well entrenched.

Chapters 6 and 7 ensure we know that the idea of a coup will not work with Iran, which leaves the alternative being an all out invasion-

Iran also has multiple centers of power, which would make a coup far harder to pull off than in 1953.
Consequently, any plan to aid a coup would first require a major effort to build up American intelligence on Iran,
which would itself be time consuming and difficult given the inherent nature of Iranian society
and the paranoia of the regime.

What, in their own words was achievable in 1953, is not possible with Iran today.

Part four is regarding 'containment' and how this no longer works as a policy. They make the argument of the Nuclear threat, that Iran would give a nuclear weapon to terrorists. This is the current policy of Obama- diplomatic solutions, sanctions etc, and as the document points out, is no longer working because it leaves Israel threatened as Iran gets closer to their nuclear weapon.

In conclusion of the document, they make it quite clear which strategy they prefer-

Efforts to promote regime change in Iran might be intended by the U.S. government as deliberate provocations to try to goad the Iranians into an excessive response that might then justify an American invasion.

Bear this in mind with this quote-

Absent some dramatic Iranian provocation, it seems very unlikely that those same countries (Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and Britain, in particular) would allow the United States to use those same facilities for an invasion of Iran, potentially further lengthening the time required for the invasion itself.

Just like in 2000, they are making it known something is being planned to start this war. With reference to 'Britain in particular', it doesn't take a genius to connect the dots. Throughout the entire document we have inference to a false flag event, be it to speed up the process, gain international support or to justify an American military response, most likely all 3.

Who are the authors?

Kenneth Pollack- Persian Gulf military analyst at the CIA, worked for NSC.

Martin Indyk- He served in several senior positions in the U.S. government, most recently as Ambassador to Israel.

Daniel Byman- He has held positions with the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the
United States (9/11 Commission), RAND Corporation, and the U.S. government.

Michael O’Hanlon- A former defense budget analyst who advised Members of Congress on military
spending, he specializes in Iraq, North Korea, Afghanistan,homeland security...

Bruce Riedel- He served as Chairman of President Obama’s Strategic Review of U.S. Policy toward Afghanistan
and Pakistan. 30 years service at the CIA including postings overseas in the Middle East. He was a senior
adviser on the region to the last four presidents of the United States as a staff member of the National
Security Council at the White House.

These aren't just some academics speculating foreign policy, they are highly influential people, just like Dov Zakheim and Paul Wolfowitz. Influential in terms of their positions in US government and the CIA and organisations such as the NSC-

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Wonderer2012


Well researched OP!!! Like the old saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make em drink!".

reply to post by Wonderer2012

yes! I read somewhere that it's required that they tell what is going to happen before hand, and they do so.
Just so few give a ------.

Ahhh hemm

What do you have planned to keep this from happening?

Do you think its Obama's doing, orrrrrr the US government's doing?

Why are people ignoring what is in front of them?



While you meant for that question to apply to your thread and subject it in fact applies to just about every thread and subject on ATS.
The answer to them all is the same. People just do not see anything that does not fit into what they are use to seeing. I guess you could call it a "perception filter" as they call in it in Sci-Fi. If it is outside their knowing or understanding it is invisible to them. The human mind has a bad habit of just ignoring what it can not process.

reply to post by Wonderer2012


F&S, Wonderer. Great post. I've been saying for a while now that some next major war is being planned. Iran does seem the likely candidate, but there are other options: Syria, Libya, Egypt. Obama claims to want troops out of Afghanistan by 2014, so I personally believe the time table for the start of the next American Crusade will be between 2014 and 2016. It doesn't matter if it's him or Romney in office. The groundwork is already being laid out.

Originally posted by PLASIFISK
Ahhh hemm

What do you have planned to keep this from happening?

Do you think its Obama's doing, orrrrrr the US government's doing?

I don't have anything planned I'd just like people to know what is happening, but people will ignore it and this thread will hardly get any attention.

It's got not to do with government as such, it is the filth that controls and influences it.

Here's the PNAC writing to Clinton in 1998 pushing for an Iraq War-

www.newamericancentury.org...

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished.

'Containment' failing, WMD, it's all so familiar isn't it! Same tactics and bull#, just different names and places.

Obama is interesting right now, he is getting a lot of criticism from the Neocons and Zionists, but whether he is still playing game is up for debate. The agenda is obvious and he may just be 'waiting' for 'that' thing to happen before giving the 'green light' on Iran.

reply to post by donlashway


they do, Lindsey Williams and A Jones.... that is why they get away with it because if you have to admit that Williams and Jones might be right

reply to post by Wonderer2012


I don't think makes a difference but Iraq was correct about Kuwait slant drilling into Iraqi oil fields. The funniest part to me is that Haliburton sold Kuwait the slant drilling equipment. So, the first Iraq war was a fraud and Saddam had cause to stop it.

Originally posted by shaluach
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

F&S, Wonderer. Great post. I've been saying for a while now that some next major war is being planned. Iran does seem the likely candidate, but there are other options: Syria, Libya, Egypt. Obama claims to want troops out of Afghanistan by 2014, so I personally believe the time table for the start of the next American Crusade will be between 2014 and 2016. It doesn't matter if it's him or Romney in office. The groundwork is already being laid out.

Well given one of the masterminds behind 9/11 was Dov Zakheim, and he is Romney's middle east advisor as of October 2011, you could be right with the timeline, although one could argue they are just 'covering the bases' as it were if Romney became president.

There's so much going on right now, I think intervention in Syria is just around the corner, but as you say, Egypt is also underway- their elections actually finish today, we are accelerating to an awful time, especially if the MB get into power in Egypt, as many see as part of the agenda anyway.

For anyone who cannot be bothered reading the main OP, here is one of the quotes from this document-

The truth is that these all would be challenging cases to make. For that reason, it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be.

So basically, the worse the provaction (AKA false flag), the better the position America is in to launch an all out war against Iran.

People behind this document have worked in government, in the NSC, as advisors over 4 administrations, in the CIA, these are powerful, knowledgable people.

What they are saying, especially with hindsight from the Pearl Harbour comments of the RAD, it is horrifying.

The US nore NATO will get involved in a War with Iran,


They will likely assist Israel in an air strike on Iran's nuclear weapons program should there be a need to but thats about it, there will not be a war or any troops being sent to Iran, mainly because all the reasons people claim they want to invade and occupy Iran are theory's based on misinfo, propaganda, & BS,

reply to post by Wonderer2012


Well, researched and a good warning. Too bad alot of people won't believe until it happens. It seems the more you point out and try to warn, the more you are ignored, even on a website where there are lots of intelligent people.

Originally posted by TritonTaranis
The US nore NATO will get involved in a War with Iran,


They will likely assist Israel in an air strike on Iran's nuclear weapons program should there be a need to but thats about it, there will not be a war or any troops being sent to Iran, mainly because all the reasons people claim they want to invade and occupy Iran are theory's based on misinfo, propaganda, & BS,

As the document refers a few times, an Israeli airstrike would only increase Iran's push for a nuclear weapon, also Iran would see America as giving the 'green light.' The document hides nothing, it even notes America sends $3 billion annually in US tax payers money to fund Israel's military, so Iran would take an Israeli attack as an American attack- they even propose Iran using a terrorist attack against US or allies in response!

reply to post by Wonderer2012

How at this point in time, can people still believe the Necons and Zionists are not pushing for war with Iran, they have spent millions on developing policy that can bring the war to being.

Ahmadinejad has announced he is stepping down in 2013, so the PNAC crowd won't wait much longer. They've gone to a lot of trouble to create this "monster" and won't let all that propagandizing go to waste.

reply to post by Wonderer2012

General Wesley Clark reveals the US plan to invade and take over 7 countries, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Lybia, Somalia, Sudan, And Iran, before we even invaded Afghanistan. The first part of the plan was revealed 10 days after 9/11 and was expanded to included the other nations. Clark is quoted as saying the invasion wasn't based on links to Al-Queda or any other intelligence reports but just because the US has an army that is great at taking over other nations.

Originally posted by Wonderer2012

Originally posted by TritonTaranis
The US nore NATO will get involved in a War with Iran,


They will likely assist Israel in an air strike on Iran's nuclear weapons program should there be a need to but thats about it, there will not be a war or any troops being sent to Iran, mainly because all the reasons people claim they want to invade and occupy Iran are theory's based on misinfo, propaganda, & BS,

As the document refers a few times, an Israeli airstrike would only increase Iran's push for a nuclear weapon, also Iran would see America as giving the 'green light.' The document hides nothing, it even notes America sends $3 billion annually in US tax payers money to fund Israel's military, so Iran would take an Israeli attack as an American attack- they even propose Iran using a terrorist attack against US or allies in response!

edit on 17-6-2012 by Wonderer2012 because: (no reason given)

I'm not saying that tho, Israel will only strike Iran when it has good Intel that Iran are close to developing its Nuclear Weapons, and will likely get western support for such a strike, but there will be no war with Iran that is almost certain, its totally pointless and would not get public backing the public doesn't have the stomach for another proxy war & there are bigger issues & threats to deal with, it will amount to nothing more than an Ariel campaign

This will likely be when there is good enough Intel of such sites and good Intel that Iran has enrichment uranium beyond 90% (nuclear weapons grade)

The US doesn't fund Israel to attack Iran it funds Israel to defend itself,

Originally posted by TritonTaranis

Originally posted by Wonderer2012

Originally posted by TritonTaranis
The US nore NATO will get involved in a War with Iran,


They will likely assist Israel in an air strike on Iran's nuclear weapons program should there be a need to but thats about it, there will not be a war or any troops being sent to Iran, mainly because all the reasons people claim they want to invade and occupy Iran are theory's based on misinfo, propaganda, & BS,

As the document refers a few times, an Israeli airstrike would only increase Iran's push for a nuclear weapon, also Iran would see America as giving the 'green light.' The document hides nothing, it even notes America sends $3 billion annually in US tax payers money to fund Israel's military, so Iran would take an Israeli attack as an American attack- they even propose Iran using a terrorist attack against US or allies in response!

edit on 17-6-2012 by Wonderer2012 because: (no reason given)

I'm not saying that tho, Israel will only strike Iran when it has good Intel that Iran are close to developing its Nuclear Weapons, and will likely get western support for such a strike, but there will be no war with Iran that is almost certain, its totally pointless and would not get public backing the public doesn't have the stomach for another proxy war & there are bigger issues & threats to deal with, it will amount to nothing more than an Ariel campaign

This will likely be when there is good enough Intel of such sites and good Intel that Iran has enrichment uranium beyond 90% (nuclear weapons grade)

The US doesn't fund Israel to attack Iran it funds Israel to defend itself,

Israel defend itself? OK OK, I give in, hopefully someone else can chime in here I'm getting tired.

reply to post by Wonderer2012


Its called an offensive defense. Very offensive.

Why are people ignoring what is in front of them?

So WHY are people in denial?

They have been lied to their entire lives about everything...

"Just look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information, and religions destroy spirituality." ~ Michael Ellner

Human beings tend to be unthinking conformists and can't imagine that society has been thoroughly corrupted. Monkey see; monkey do. And most of what monkey sees is degrading and often disgusting. Link

American education has been used to dumb down and brainwash every person in this country:

The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America

Everyone on ATS that ignores what is in front of them as the OP says is ALL the proof we need of this taking place.

WHY SMART PEOPLE OFTEN CAN'T SEE THE TRUTH

"Psychologists use the term Cognitive Dissonance to explain the brain’s inability to consider opposing evidence. Governments intentionally try to create this disorder in the population. That’s how they can get away with creating events like 9/11. Cognitive Dissonance is a form of government sponsored mind control." Source

Originally posted by PLASIFISK
What do you have planned to keep this from happening?
Do you think its Obama's doing, orrrrrr the US government's doing?

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
It's got not to do with government as such, it is the filth that controls and influences it.

BINGO...

The Synagogue of Satan

One group and one group alone is responsible for virtually all wars and bloodshed on the face of this planet. This evil cabal is few in numbers but, like a deadly octopus, its tentacles reach out to grip and strangle untold multitudes of innocent victims. The initiates of every secret society and internationalist organization, from the Council on Foreign Relations and the Jesuits to the Bilderbergers and the Order of Skull & Bones, obey the dictates of this sinister group and tremble when standing before its leaders.

The cabalist group I refer to is the Synagogue of Satan, an ancient, yet modern, elite so politically powerful and so fabulously wealthy that even past history has been twisted, reshaped, and revised to meet its preferred version of humanity's gloomy, totalitarian future.

Religious in nature, the Synagogue of Satan is, at its essence, a grotesque, satanic cult. It's high council is composed of High Priests of Lucifer; these are men who literally worship death while practicing sexual magick and occult rituals of the blackest nature. LINK

“Most wars are engineered by the Illuminati to weaken civilization and create a global police state" ~ Henry Makow Ph.D.

“All war in history has been hatched by governments, independent of the people’s interests, to whom war is always pernicious even when successful” ~ Leo Tolstoy

"War is the major way for the EVIL, sinister, insane Illuminati to control humanity."
Michael Shore