WINEP discusses strategems for starting war with Iran.

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) is part of the galaxy of infuential groups that do AIPAC's serious work outside the electoral field.

In this video, they are seen hosting a discussion of ways and means with regard to the possibility of staging a false flag or other provocation as a means of triggering a war between the Unites States and Iran.

Isn't this kind of thing somehow a violation of federal law?  pl

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-09-26/guest-post-globalist-think-tank-suggests-using-engineered-event-excuse-war-iran

 

Comments

[par4]

I suggest a drone strike on their meeting place. They are obviously terrorists. Anyone who has given them money should be tried for giving them material support.

[former 11B]

You would think so. But we live in an age where Goldman Sachs committed outright textbook fraud and was not prosecuted. Perhaps this is another example of those in power flaunting their immunity from the laws the rest of us are expected to follow.

[Bobo]

Last week we discussed an idiot making a movie trailer which was similar to Yelling Fire in a Theatre now we have a supposedly educated man doing the same thing by proposing destruction of an Iranian submarine to start a war with Iran. Not being a lawyer I cannot cite the exact laws being broken here but somehow a hundred years ago our great grandparents had a way of dealing with such men in a prompt manner. What has changed?

[Hans]

This is terrible. The guy in the video is Patrick Clawson. He is Dennis Ross's sidekick:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/experts

It's freighting that people with this type of mentality were allowed to work in the White House and penetrate the highest level of power structure in the US. I've read elsewhere that Obama established a red phone connection to Ross after he left the White House, so that he could ping him anytime he wanted and discuss Middle Eastern issues in real-time. What an idiot. Someone should forward this Youtube video to Obama.

This stuff comes right out of Protocols of Elders of Zion, and its just terrible, and will end in the worst possible way for everyone involved. I hope wiser men intervene and pull these idiots to the side and smack them a few times before its too late.

[Jackie]

That's it! We need to attack WINEP!!!

I remember Clawson's spiel before Iraq. Is he a self hating American?

[turcopolier]

jackie

I spent 12 hours sitting next to him on a plane to Cairo once. As I recall (and I may be wrong) his Mormon parents converted to judaism and made aliya. So, I think he is probably a dual national. I am willing to change that if it is not correct. pl

[mbrenner]

Colonel

I'm afraid that law in too many spheres has necome whatever the authorities want it to be - witness the immunity received by the financial hucksters, e.g. the robo foreclosure operations where thousands of imndispoutable felonies were committed.

On the substantive issue: all of the discussion within the so-called foreign policy community focuses on tactics for getting what we want without paying attention to Iranian interests or outlook. Iran, and its leaders, are treated as a cypher. There is no attempt to construct a portrait of who they are, how they see the world, etc. The ancient admonition: "Know thy enemy" is completely ignored.

Iran is being pressured to do something that makes no strategic sense from its security perspective - especially when divorced from other security issues. Since it is highly unlikely that Tehran will find this acceptable, the implied ancillary premise is that only regime change can solve the problem as we define it. The MEK action confirms this suspicion. There are a variety of other reasons, with which we all are familiar, why Iran as an active regional power is incompatible with the American-Israeli vision of the region's future.

So no tolerance of the current regime which is denied legitimacy and/or legitimate security interests; therefore, no interest in a comprehensive sceurity talks with them.

Conclusion: if sanctions don't work (which they won't)and if covert warfare now underway doesn't work (which it won't - although it could provoke an escalating crisis), what are you left with? War or real diplomacy - except the latter has been taken off the table by you know who.

[CTuttle]

*heh* Speaking Truth to Power...

"Was it not audacious for the US President to say that his country supported the forces of change in the Arab Spring? Tunisian history did not begin in December 2010, and Mohamed Bouazizi did not set himself on fire so that Barack Obama could be re-elected," Assange told the panel.

"The world knew after reading WikiLeaks that Ben Ali and his government had for long years enjoyed the indifference, if not the support, of the US, in full knowledge of its excesses and its crimes. So it must come as a surprise to the Tunisians that the US supported the forces of change in their country, and it must come as a surprise to the Egyptian teenagers who washed American tear gas out of their eyes, that the US administration supported change in Egypt"

http://rt.com/news/assange-addresses-un-human-rights-069

[turcopolier]

C.Tuttle

Your time scale begins when? Is it at Tunisian recognition of the independence of the US? I think it is fair to say that the misguided US encouragement of revolution across the Arab World began in the GW Bush administration. pl

[Jackie]

Correction...self hating Iranian?

[Jackie]

You could sit there for 12 hours next to him? Must have seemed like forever. Great intestinal fortutide.

[WP]

Could it be that the reason the AIPAC people are getting so shrill for war is that Bibi and his followers have lost the confidence of the bulk of the Israeli voters who do not support unilateral action against Iran? Perhaps, without the shilling of a war against Iran and the notoriety it produces, these people have really little to say as their claim to fame. Does anyone know the extent to which AIPAC may speak for the Israeli people? Do the war drums drown out the wishes of the “silent majority” of Israeli citizens who may not dream of a war and wish there could be a better solution? Where does the majority of the Israeli population stand on a pre-emptive war against Iran?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/09/23/bibi-in-a-box-netanyahu-loses-support-on-bombing-iran.html

[CTuttle]

Col. Lang, here's Obama's own words yesterday...

It's been less than two years since a vendor in Tunisia set himself on fire to protest the oppressive corruption in his country and sparked what became known as the Arab Spring. And since then, the world has been captivated by the transformation that's taken place, and the United -- the United States has supported the forces of change.

"We were inspired by the Tunisian protests that toppled a dictator because we recognized our own beliefs in the aspiration of men and women who took to the streets. We insisted on change in Egypt because our support for democracy ultimately put us on the side of the people. We supported a transition of leadership in Yemen because the interests of the people were no longer being served by a corrupt status quo."

Video...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0nr1cxAG44 and the Text...http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/25/remarks-president-un-general-assembly

[turcopolier]

C.Tuttle

Surely you you are not so foolish as to give credence to the utterances of politicians. pl

[CTuttle]

Not one whit, Col., I was just enjoying the fact that Assange had so pointedly exposed Obama's nakedness to the UN...! ;-)

[Cal]

''I suggest a drone strike on their meeting place''

I second that.

[Schuyler]

From whence does this power derive, which they flaunt so recklessly? These banker-gamblers who accumulate billions for themselves, perfectly legally?

And if the USA were to wage war against Iran, under what authority or law would this be done? How could anyone in his right mind consider it to be morally justified?

To unleash the unrivaled power of our military might upon a nation that does not threaten our peace and security in any way would be in my opinion a criminal offense. And yet here we are, right on the verge of doing just that, with the acquiescence of half the damn Congress.

[Schuyler]

My feeling is that Obama keeps his fingers in many different pies. He strikes me as being a power-broker, and a very practical-minded man.

[Will Reks]

I' not sure Assange did what you seem to think he accomplished. He's irrelevant as is most of the UN other than the veto-holders.

[confusedponderer]

In Nuremberg war of aggression was called 'the supreme crime'. The tribunal held that waging of aggressive war is "essentially an evil thing...to initiate a war of aggression...is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

In my country instigating or preparing war of aggression is a crime. If the folks in that clip have their way I see the elements of that crime clearly met.

But these aspiring white collar criminals are clearly in tune with the past.

Didn't one of the Bush 43 nuts suggest painting a US spy plane baby blue and have the Iraqis shoot it down in order to create a situation which lead to the UN granting a mandate for an invasion, already?

Same thing. As far as a war is concerned that they want, they'll always find a pretext.

It also suggests that at least in US politics, rejection of the 'supreme crime' is no longer considered as a part of American values. Military action, unprovoked or not, is simply an option, like the choice between tea or coffee for breakfast.

[optimax]

This from last May. It wasn't that long ago the rightwing politicians were giving Bush credit for the Arab Spring. Such short memories the politicians and pundits expect us to have.

"Former President George W. Bush on Tuesday praised the Arab spring movement and said the U.S. shouldn't fear the spread of freedom, even if it doesn't know what policies newly liberated countries will pursue."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/15/bush-touts-arab-spring-says-us-cant-fear-freedom/#ixzz27eR6jAl3

[Harper]

The chutzpah that these guys are showing is both off the charts but par for the course with WINEP, AIPAC, ADL and the whole crew. They are flagrantly promoting the idea of a provocation to draw the U.S. into a war that could very well mushroom out of control and draw in players from outside the region. We have cooperation to some degree from both Russia and China, who share our objective of preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and triggering a regional nuclear arms race with countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt getting into the act. But if we are looking to stage false-flag provocations, that won't fly and the danger of war getting out of control is there. This underscores the criminality of these characters. Whether it is an explicit crime to promote such false-flag war provocations or not, this should be something that is used to at least strip them of their tax exempt status and hold hearings to expose their criminal mindset and the threat they pose to every American.

[Babak Makkinejad]

This so-called objeective of "...preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and triggering a regional nuclear arms race with countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt" is clearly a red herring.

Neither Saudi Arabia nor Egypt have that capability; Algeria is a ditant possibility.

Now let me get this straight - nuclear-armed Israel, nuclear-armed Pakistan, and nuclear-armed India are all irrelevant to potential nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, but Iranian non-proliferation is essential.

I cannot agree with that assessment.

[CK]

Old wine; cracked bottles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

[The Moar You Know]

"Isn't this kind of thing somehow a violation of federal law?"

Probably not in the narrowest of legal terms, but still, a good prosecutor could easily make a conspiracy case out of it.

If they wanted to.

But you know what they say about prosecutors and ham sandwiches...