US attack to Iran HOAX for dummies - the two basic facts

[MattMarriott]

"Attack to Iran" Hoax: another example of End Times Reductionism. You only need two basic facts to completely expose it.
End Times: total brainwash, total refusal to add 1 + 1, with the illuminati able to sell the most primitive hoaxes to their sheep.

March 23, 2007: Iran detains British sailors.
Matt Marriott explains it is just the illuminati staging the 1000th act of the "Attack to Iran" Hoax script, and it is also used to divert from these REAL events taking place in Baghdad.

Below a transcript where the two basic facts are formulated as questions and how total brainwashed people (Hoax Believer or 1+1 Denier) will refuse to answer them.

Hoax Believer:
No, they are detained because the Zionist West KIDNAPED three Iranian Officers and they have to be returned. Iran is not under Illuminati control.

Matt Marriott:
I have two questions for you. Please answer with yes or no.

1. Is the Iraqi "government" a US puppet?

Hoax Believer:
The Iraqi gov. is a Puppet, but Iran is taking an advantage there.

Matt Marriott:
"The Iraqi gov. is a Puppet": Ok, you answered the first question with yes.

Now the second question:

2. Is the Iranian government supporting the US puppet "Iraqi" government?

Yes or No - please answer.

Hoax Believer:
Within limits, as long as their interests run along they may support actions .

Matt Marriott:
"Within limits": You did not answer with yes or no.
This is in fact the question you refused to answer with Yes or No:

- Supporting or not supporting a puppet government of your greatest enemy along your most important border, where your greatest enemy is trying to consolidate military bases against the will of 99.99 pct of the population.
A "government" that is not even able to leave the US military base protecting it, aka Green Zone.

1 + 1 = 2.

I don't need to ask you to name for me what those limits would be, i.e. starting by specifying one single action showing that the iranian government is not supporting the "Iraqi" puppet "government".

Case closed.

 

[Rich]

on the link you refer to above for 'the real events' on the goldismoney forum another user has decifered what you say above:

here is the translation from the MattMarriot secret decoder ring :

"Flabble the chootle bling plop hoytle plow the Himmee whop wham doodle. Chow the chomp flibble flabble. Fleetle flow wipsy the hoiken shoe shoitel. Clap blorimus vlop clickimus blim blow hookey. Wompus wikiwamus Iraq hickely poo-pa."

case closed? or do you have sources to back up what you say?

 

[Ryan]

I don't need to ask you to name for me what those limits would be, i.e. starting by specifying one single action showing that the iranian government is not supporting the "Iraqi" puppet "government".

Matt, I'm not sure of what you are trying to say with this post. Are you suggesting that the Iran War is being engineered as a hoax, and that Iran is really in control of Iraq? There is evidence to the contrary on both of these points, as has been highlighted by the SOTT team.

 

[Barry]

Yet another bizarro post from the Matster. Your posts sure dont read easy Matt, or is that the point?

 

[Petey of Lone Tree]

Rich, Ryan, and Barry,
Late yesterday when I read MattMarriot's post, I was simply going to ask, "Is the above post by MattMarriot a bunch of gibberish, or what?", but politeness or perhaps the realization that I had been reading too much and the words were starting to run together into meaninglessness overtook me. Thank you, chaps, for confirming my initial suspicions.

 

[MattMarriott]

Are you suggesting that the Iran War is being engineered as a hoax...

Yes, it is a hoax. There will be no US attack to Iran.

... and that Iran is really in control of Iraq?

No. What I am saying is that if the Iranian leaders were not illuminati agents, the US military would already be calling the helicopters from the rooftops of Baghdad. Does 1975 Saigon ring a bell?

 

[Rich]

What I am saying is that if the Iranian leaders were not illuminati agents, the US military would already be calling the helicopters from the rooftops of Baghdad

why?

where are you coming from? your posts don't seem to be enhance learning on the forum since you present your theories in movie trailer teaser style as if you know the answers and we have to play a guessing game. to gain considered responses to your posts you might do well to present your evidence to back up what you say, otherwise it is unfounded and self-congratulating noise.

 

[Cyre2067]

Ya, nothing to add really, other then: If they US doesn't directly attack Iran, it will definately support Israel when it does.

And: Your posts make no sense. I think Rich summed it up where he compared them to movie teaser-trailers.

 

[mango42]

Hope this helps(?) to clear the issue a bit (but probably not):-

Operation Bite: April 6 sneak attack by US forces against Iran planned, Russian

Webster G. Tarpley | 26.03.2007 10:49 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Terror War | World
The long awaited US military attack on Iran is now on track for the first week of April, specifically for 4 am on April 6, the Good Friday opening of Easter weekend, writes the well-known Russian journalist Andrei Uglanov in the Moscow weekly “Argumenty Nedeli.ᾠ

The long awaited US military attack on Iran is now on track for the first week of April, specifically for 4 am on April 6, the Good Friday opening of Easter weekend, writes the well-known Russian journalist Andrei Uglanov in the Moscow weekly “Argumenty Nedeli.ᾠ Uglanov cites Russian military experts close to the Russian General Staff for his account.

The attack is slated to last for 12 hours, according to Uglanov, from 4 am until 4 pm local time. Friday is the sabbath in Iran. In the course of the attack, code named Operation Bite, about 20 targets are marked for bombing; the list includes uranium enrichment facilities, research centers, and laboratories.

The first reactor at the Bushehr nuclear plant, where Russian engineers are working, is supposed to be spared from destruction. The US attack plan reportedly calls for the Iranian air defense system to be degraded, for numerous Iranian warships to be sunk in the Persian Gulf, and for the most important headquarters of the Iranian armed forces to be wiped out.

The attacks will be mounted from a number of bases, including the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Diego Garcia is currently home to B-52 bombers equipped with standoff missiles. Also participating in the air strikes will be US naval aviation from aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, as well as from those of the Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean. Additional cruise missiles will be fired from submarines in the Indian Ocean and off the coast of the Arabian peninsula. The goal is allegedly to set back Iran’s nuclear program by several years, writes Uglanov, whose article was reissued by RIA-Novosti in various languages, but apparently not English, several days ago. The story is the top item on numerous Italian and German blogs, but so far appears to have been ignored by US websites.

Observers comment that this dispatch represents a high-level orchestrated leak from the Kremlin, in effect a war warning, which draws on the formidable resources of the Russian intelligence services, and which deserves to be taken with the utmost seriousness by pro-peace forces around the world.

Asked by RIA-Novosti to comment on the Uglanov report, retired Colonel General Leonid Ivashov confirmed its essential features in a March 21 interview: “I have no doubt that there will be an operation, or more precisely a violent action against Iran.ᾠ Ivashov, who has reportedly served at various times as an informal advisor to Russian President Vladimir Putin, is currently the vice president of the Moscow Academy for Geopolitical Sciences.

Ivashov attributed decisive importance to the decision of the Democratic leadership of the US House of Representatives to remove language from the just-passed Iraq supplemental military appropriations bill that would have demanded that Bush come to Congress before launching an attack on Iran. Ivashov pointed out that the language was eliminated under pressure from AIPAC, the lobbing group representing the Israeli extreme right, and from Israeli Foreign Minister Tsipi Livni.

“We have drawn the unmistakable conclusion that this operation will take place,ᾠ said Ivashov. In his opinion, the US planning does not include a land operation: “ Most probably there will be no ground attack, but rather massive air attacks with the goal of annihilating Iran’s capacity for military resistance, the centers of administration, the key economic assets, and quite possibly the Iranian political leadership, or at least part of it,ᾠ he continued.

Ivashov noted that it was not to be excluded that the Pentagon would use smaller tactical nuclear weapons against targets of the Iranian nuclear industry. These attacks could paralyze everyday life, create panic in the population, and generally produce an atmosphere of chaos and uncertainty all over Iran, Ivashov told RIA-Novosti. “This will unleash a struggle for power inside Iran, and then there will be a peace delegation sent in to install a pro-American government in Teheran,ᾠ Ivashov continued. One of the US goals was, in his estimation, to burnish the image of the current Republican administration, which would now be able to boast that they had wiped out the Iranian nuclear program.

Among the other outcomes, General Ivashov pointed to a partition of Iran along the same lines as Iraq, and a subsequent carving up of the Near and Middle East into smaller regions. “This concept worked well for them in the Balkans and will now be applied to the greater Middle East,ᾠ he commented.

“Moscow must exert Russia’s influence by demanding an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council to deal with the current preparations for an illegal use of force against Iran and the destruction of the basis of the United Nations Charter,ᾠ said General Ivashov. “In this context Russia could cooperate with China, France and the non-permanent members of the Security Council. We need this kind of preventive action to ward off the use of force,ᾠ he concluded.



Resources:

http://fr.rian.ru/world/20070319/62260006.html

http://fr.rian.ru/world/20070321/62387717.html



Webster G. Tarpley is a journalist. Among other works, he has published an investigation on the manipulation of the Red Brigades by the Vatican’s P2 Suite and the assassination of Aldo Moro, a non-authorized biography of George H. Bush, and more recently an analysis of the methods used to perpetrate the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Webster G. Tarpley

 

[MattMarriott]

Ivashov is a retired General (one of the many NATO agents that was switched off by Putin). Like Tarpley, he is a CIA Psy-Op agent.

 

[monkee]

1 + 1 = 2.

This is the only part I understand

 

[OPINMYND81]

Ivashov is a retired General (one of the many NATO agents that was switched off by Putin). Like Tarpley, he is a CIA Psy-Op agent.

The only part you got right is that he is a retired general. The rest is either grammatically incorrect or unsubstantiated. Care to offer anything to back up your claims?

 

[fungusfitzjuggler]

Hi. First posting! Wheeee! Not a wirgin no more.

Matt has a "problem" I share. It takes so long to be crystal clear in expression that there is a definite mental state required for it. And if there is an emotion lurking, out of control, then it tends to interfere with clarity. I usually re read anything I draft?

I agree with Matt that Iran and USA have reached an accord on the Mid-East. The Mullahs helped RR by denying the release of captives to Jimmy Carter. They have been swapping guns for drugs ever since......and the same crew are back in the White House. There may be a face saving "attack", but I suspect it will just be another series of distractions. The Iranians are mainly Aryan types, not Arabic. Their responses will be unlike those of Iraqis abroad.

I could be wrong....there is also an idea that the USSA as I like to think of it, is performing an intricate dance in the region. Aimed at another country or twooutside of the region. Lebanon got whacked by Israel. Syria seems to be next. This whole thing is to last a generation. GWB told us that after 9/11. That is one thing that he said that is actually true.

I'd love Matt to expand on what he thinks is going on with Iran. Iraq was out of control of the CIA since the death of Sodamn Insane. His son-in law's defection seems to have been prompted by the death, well before the attack upon Iraq. The use of look-alikes at trials etc was quite amusing. I hope the poor guy(s) got well paid and a new face as well!

Iran seems to have been the lesser of two weevils. They get the Shia and the house of Saud get the Sunni factions and Kurdistan begins de facto but not de jure. And there are a lot of useful bases too. Mission accomplished. Oh I forgot the drugs and the money. But no one is to know about them anyway!

Or I am dead(!) wrong. Iran is attacked and takes out a few ships. Where will the USSA go from there?

 

[ark]

The point is that there are questions to which "yes" or "no" answer is sometimes impossible. Example:

Are you supporting American government? Please, answer "yes" or "no".

Your answer most likely will be: it depends in which area.

Similarly:

Are you going to stop beating you wive? Please, answer "yes" or "no".

Similarly:

2. Is the Iranian government supporting the US puppet "Iraqi" government?

Yes or No - please answer.

Hoax Believer:
Within limits, as long as their interests run along they may support actions .

Matt Marriott:
"Within limits": You did not answer with yes or no.
This is in fact the question you refused to answer with Yes or No:

The question is evidently manipulative. For which reason or purpose Matt Mariott is using manipulation? Have a guess.

 

[mango42]

Meanwhile: "At the Pentagon, spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Navy routinely conducts exercises when its forces are deployed near each other.

"The exercise should reassure our friends and allies of our commitment to security and stability in the region," Whitman said. "We are not interested in confrontation in the Gulf."

Can anyone genuinely make any sense of that, in or out of context? Makes Matt here sound the fount of reason, imo.

Here's the AP link to 'US Launches Show of Force in Persian Gulf' :-
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2007/03/ap_show_force_gulf_070327/

The only reason I've started posting again is a desire to at least participate publicly in shining some light on the madness but sure, seems nothing will decelerate the inevitable on the hyperreal plane...