On Friday, President Trump said he believed that Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani was plotting to attack four US embassies. He offered the American public no evidence of this, which seems to be the same treatment Defense Secretary Mark Esper got.
On Sunday’s news shows, Esper struggled with this question. On CBS, he said he’d seen no evidence at all to support the idea that US embassies were under threat. He did say he shares the president’s view that “probably” the embassies would’ve been attacked.
This again suggests there isn’t good evidence to back up the president’s claim, as Esper presumably would’ve been in the loop on that matter if there had been. By his second appearance of the day, on CNN, Esper was more supportive of the Trump narrative, saying what Trump said “is what I believe as well.” He added that Iran “probably could have been targeting the embassies.”
Even later, Esper was bragging of “exquisite intelligence” he received. He claimed everyone was in agreement that Congress must not be given access to this intelligence.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) has continued to express concern about the quality of information given to Congress, and it seems that may extend to national security officials. President Trump never even suggested the four embassies belief had evidence behind it, it was just what he believes.
This raises the distinct possibility that Trump came up with this Iranian plot, because it sounded good to justify the US assassination of Soleimani, and everyone else in the administration is just rubber stamping it because contradicting Trump is a risky career move.
“trump came up with this Iranian plot”…naw, right out of cia marketing dept…..the script for the latest episode.
Bottom line is admin does not have a clue as to what the threat was, if any-all lies after the fact to try to justify the murder.
The report about the unsuccessful attempt to murder another Iranian general in yemen further indicates how shallow and full of holes this “justification” effort is.
Oh, yes they do. As far as Iraq is concerned, an Occupy Embassy movement would be a real problem.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/01/protesters-leave-embassy-compound-baghdad-200101150105003.html
Its too dangerous for the Iraqis to try again for a while, though.
Esper danced around the obvious; the Dec. 31 2019 Baghdad Embassy attack.
https://thehill.com/policy/international/middle-east-north-africa/476318-protesters-storm-us-embassy-in-baghdad-after
Few would believe Iran and Soliemani had no say in that event. On the other hand, he can’t remind the Iraqis that stung, or they’ll try it again.
Within a few short weeks, anti-Iraqi Shia government protests were turned back against the U.S.. Again, surely Soleimani’s work.
Esper’s doggedly covering his rear, though, Trump be darned. He won’t be caught misleading like Flynn was, and he’s not even under oath.
I am sure the Iranians and the CIA have agents in Bagdad and some major Iraqi cities. But what I saw was thousands of Iraqis demonstrating against both the US and Iranian interventions in their country. Give people credit for thinking for themselves.
In 1968-1971 hundreds of thousands of Americans demonstrated whenever the US bombed Hanoi, invaded Cambodia or attacked Laos. Thousands of the American demonstrators waived Viet Cong flags and chanted “Ho-Ho-Ho Chi Minh, the NLF is gonna win!” I can guarantee you that the Vietnamese had no role in calling those spontaneous demonstrations. by Americans pissed off at what the US government was doing in Indochina and the lies it was telling in the USA. Thousands of Iraqis attacked the US embassy and the Iranian consulate because they don’t want their country to be a battlefield for foreign powers. The Iraqi demonstrators aren’t looking to Iran to tell them what to do.
There’s no comparison between middle class America in the 1960s and Iraq in 2020.
The U.S. was a (more or less) free and certainly popularly wealthy Western country; Iraq is an occupied developing state with a huge wealth gap.
The Iraqis are factionalized; you might say they think too much for themselves, less so the nation.
While the U.S. and Iran must both go, some Iraqis are aligned with the U.S., some with the Shia Crescent, and the rest with whomever will give them the best deal at the moment.
Whatever the decisions, it is no business of the USA, which has completely ruined a country which had the highest living standards and infrastructure in the whole region,and even with Saddam Hussein (supported by “us” for decades including 8 years of war against Iran), decent housing, jobs and education for the people.
This is all done for Israel. They’ve bought Congress, and the Neocons, essentially American agents of Israel, run the State Dept, which is to say American foreign policy — Wolfowitz Doctrine, Oded Yinon Plan, with the predictable focus on the middle east and fighting Israel’s wars for them. America is Israel’s bitch.
“We have to fight them over there, so that
we don’t have to fight them hereso that Israel doesn’t have to fight them over there.”Post-WW2, with the Americans basking in martial glory amplified by having finally escaped the great depression, and with creation of criminal Israel in 1948, the original Neocons — Straussians out of the Univ of Chicago — descended on Scoop Jackson and began pimping for an Imperial America to conquer the world (for them). Leveraging the new-found love of militarism combined with fervent anti-Communism, and the irresistible capitalist motivation — greed — of for-profit-militarism, the Neocons & MIC set to work looting America.
And here we sit. Stick a fork in her, America is done.
Israel/the Zionists/the Neocons — and “those who support them” — have “ruined” America.
Plus the Shia and the Sunni lived in the same neighborhoods without killing each other.
War is the business of the USA, driven by geopolitics and the cult of Halford Mackinder and his recipe for the Holy Grail of World Empire and forever war.
Pepe Escobar explains this well.
http://thesaker.is/battle-of-the-ages-to-stop-eurasian-integration/
Iraq needs to rebuild – but can they do so cut off from world trade in U.S. dollars? The bribes given to the Iraqi government isn’t just shadowy suitcases of cash to corrupt politicians but more or less legal white collar aid and banking crime.
https://www.sovereignman.com/trends/uncle-sam-just-used-its-financial-nuclear-weapon-again-27056/
Under a different vision of the USA, rebuilding Iraq could still be America’s business, but negotiated fairly in non-imperial terms, if Iraq agrees. That vision seems further away than ever.
Brockland, the agreement with China to help rebuild Iraq has not only been “nixed” by Trump, but his threats to destroy Iraq’s outgoing PM were carried out and continue. This is available in several sites.
btw, my “warning” from thunderbird of your link claimed danger from sovereignman.co!!!!! I do not think I am paranoid but these warnings come every time I use consortiumnews.com too. Is Mossad watching me???
Are you worth watching?
The technical answer to your question would probably be ‘yes’, insofar as mass surveillance is automated. They technically catch everything then feed it through threat-level algorithms.
However, not like even the U.S. can afford a live operative tracking down every forumer.
My original source was Zerohedge. org, which alongside Antiwar is listed as a leading alternative news site.
“beyond being a crime, Sire, it is a mistake”(Talleyrand, minister & top diplomat of Napoleon).
It is absolutely ludicrous to believe that Soleimani’s assassination could have prevented an “imminent” terrorist attack on US targets. Soleimani was a government official, a public figure, the most visible general in the ME. He could have been a terrorist mastermind giving orders behind the scenes. But Soleimani was obviously not a terrorist operative.
So let’ s assume Soleimani was a terrorist mastermind. If that was the case, killing him would have had no effect on any “imminent” attack. If Osama Bin Laden had been killed 2 months or six months before 9/11 it would not have prevented the attack on the WTC because the sleeper cells planning, preparing and executing the attack were in place long before 9/11 and were acting autonomously at that point.
You’ve got a valid point here, Skywalker. Of course, it’s ludicrous to believe Soleimani’s assassination could’ve prevented an “immanent” terrorist attack on US targets. As you rightly said, Soleimani was a gov’t official, a public figure, the most visible general in the ME. He could’ve been a terrorist mastermind giving orders behind the scenes .. but he was obviously not a terrorist operative.
Why are all Israeli newspapers revealing the Israeli involvement at the same time. Usually Israel steers clear of any publicity. I smell some sort of disinformation operation. What it actually is I have no idea.
Very good question. Think about it.
One thing is for sure, the Neocons/Israel still want the US to destroy Iran for them. How does this help toward that goal? Are the Israelis baiting the entire Shia world, hoping to goad some lesser Shia group into getting belligerent in Israel’s direction, belligerence that could then be blamed on Iran?
Zionism is geopolitical cancer.
This is pure Bethlehem Doctrine by which “imminent” is interpreted as “we dunno.”
Criminals R Us
Notice how all of the networks, invite the perpetrators of the wars onto their networks? How come hardly ever do you see them invite veterans who totally disagree with these imperialist wars?
Perhaps the threat is that US missiles are dangerously overstocked.
“This raises the distinct possibility that Pompeo & Netanyahu came up with this Iranian plot, because it sounded good to justify the US assassination of Soleimani, and everyone else in the administration is just rubber stamping it because contradicting Pompeo and Netanyahu is a risky career move.”
There Jason, fixed that for you.
The Soleimani hit has Neocon psychopath and Trump yes-man Pompeo written all over it,
“This raises the distinct possibility that Pompeo & Netanyahu came up with this Iranian plot, because it sounded good to justify the US assassination of Soleimani, and everyone else in the administration is just rubber stamping it because contradicting Pompeo and Netanyahu is a risky career move.”
Anything to make Trump blameless. Maybe you’re right though, if Trump were to pick someone to assassinate it would probably be Edward Snowden.
Trump isn’t blameless (I’m through with him if he doesn’t fire Pompeo and take this opportunity to withdraw from Iraq and Syria) but “The Swamp” is real and immensely powerful, and has been draining him since about March of 2016.
It’s HIS appointed swamp creatures. I could understand if at some point in the last 3 years that he made an attempt to start draining it but instead he just replaces them with something that is equally swamp-like or worse.
“It’s HIS appointed swamp creatures.”
Indeed they are. But here’s a genuine snark-free question:
Can you, or anyone, show me those more moderate candidates for National Security Advisor, Secretary of State, or Defense Secretary who have offered their services to this President and been refused? Because I’ve “heard” (without confirmation) that the “respectable” DC candidates have refused service in the Trump White House.
My point being — and not to defend or excuse Trump’s dangerous/unpredictable behavior — if the peace-loving folks — are there any in DC? — have all refused service, then they have to own their part of the current catastrophe.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” ― Edmund Burke
I really don’t know who has offered their services. I do know that recently when Rand Paul and Mike Lee blew a cork over the briefing of the assassination. Trump had this to say:
“I get along great with Mike Lee,” Trump said. “I’ve never seen him like that. But other people have called and they’ve said it was the best presentation they’ve ever seen.”
I mean, c’mon man, who the fu*k in their right mind would want to work for him?
“Offered their services” is not how it works. The executive picks the guys he wants. Just off the cuff…Ralph Nader, Juan Cole (me expert), Dr Paul, …
You’ve got a valid point here .. It raises the distinct possibility that Pompous Pompeo, along with Nutty&Yahoo, came up with this Iranian plot, simply because it sounded good to justify the US assassination of Soleimani, and everybody else in the administration’s simply rubber stamping it because contradicting Pompass and Nutty&Yahoo’s a risky career move.
I fully agree .. The Soleimani hit has Trotskyist psychopath and DJT yes-man Pompass written all over it.
There was no intelligence of any ‘imminent threat’ or anything like that.
This was an operation that had been worked on for 18 month. Trump signed off on it more than half a year ago. Those who had planned it just waited for a chance to execute it.
The US did not care that their target was on a peace mission that day, it was an easy target, it was in the open, Trump had approved the peace mission.
The US will never be a peace broker….but a cowardly war machine.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/01/the-long-planned-us-assassinations-in-iraq-will-increase-the-political-chaos.html#more
Trump had no reason to kill Soleimani except to distract him from the impeachment inquiries & to be re-elected. Trump has no proof Iran was behind the demonstrations at the US Embassy in Baghdad. If there was a plot to attack 4 US Embassies, why couldn’t Trump identify those embassies or do anything to prevent the attacks?