À beira do Armagedão? Existem razões para temer ataque dos EUA ao Irão?

Segundo as últimas notícias que tenho lido e que infelizmente nunca aparecem nos nossos media, ou se aparecem já chegam atrasadas, os idiotas que dirigem a administração dos EUA preparam-se, com grande probabilidade, para atacar o Irão.

Segundo um ex-oficial da CIA, Philip Giraldi, os planos para atacar o Irão foram delineados tendo em conta um novo 9/11 nos EUA.
Vamos assistir a mais um ataque fabricado como o 9/11, como as operações GLADIO levadas a cabo na Europa, incluindo Portugal, pela NATO?

Estarão estes doidos a prepararem-se para declarar Lei Marcial após essa operação "False Flag" e tornar o que resta dos EUA um estado policial?

Eis algumas das notícias que indiciam mais uma desgraça mundial, que desta vez poderá acabar em guerra mundial.

6 Signs the U.S. May Be Headed for War in Iran - News Desk (usnews.com)

Is the United States moving toward military action with Iran?

The resignation of the top U.S. military commander for the Middle East is setting off alarms that the Bush administration is intent on using military force to stop Iran's moves toward gaining nuclear weapons.

1. Fallon's resignation
2. Vice President Cheney's peace trip
3. Israeli airstrike on Syria
4. Warships off Lebanon
5. Israeli comments
6.Israel's war with Hezbollah

Easter Surprise: Attack on Iran, New 9/11… or Worse - CommonDreams.org

Russian media is sounding alarms. In February, ultra-nationalist leader Vladimir Shirinovsky warned that the US would launch a strike against Tehran at the end of this month. Then last week, the Russian News and Information Agency Novosti (RIA-Novosti) quoted military experts predicting the US will attack Iran on April 6th, Good Friday.

Seymour Hersh has published numerous articles in The New Yorker detailing the Bush administration’s plans to invade Iran. His
latest, “The Redirection,” discusses participation in Iran-based clandestine operations, the kidnapping of hundreds of Iranians (including many “humanitarian and aid workers”) by US forces and the shocking revelation that an Iran-Contra-type scandal has been run out of Vice President Dick Cheney’s office with some of the illicit funds going to groups “sympathetic to al-Qaeda.”

“The Redirection” also reports that the Pentagon has been planning to bomb Iran for a year and that a recently-establishedgroup connected to the Joint Chiefs of Staff is formulating an assault strategy to be implemented “upon orders from the President,within twenty-four hours.” Hersh notes that current capabilities “allow for an attack order this spring,” possibly when four US aircraft-carrier battle groups are scheduled to be in the Persian Gulf simultaneously.

Former CIA Officer Philip Giraldi chillingly noted that the Pentagon’s plans to attack Iran were drawn up “to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States."
Writing in The American Conservative in August 2005, Giraldi added, “The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites …

While even contemplating another 9/11 brings shudders, it’s worth noting that last year, Congress quietly approved provisions making it easier for the President to declare federal martial law after a domestic terrorist incident. And recall that in late 2003, General Tommy Franks openly speculated on how a new 9/11 could lead to a military form of government:
“a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America(...)

Annals of National Security: The Redirection: Reporting & Essays: The New Yorker

The Redirection
Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?
by Seymour M. Hersh

The key players behind the redirection are Vice-President Dick Cheney, the deputy national-security adviser Elliott Abrams, the departing Ambassador to Iraq (and nominee for United Nations Ambassador), Zalmay Khalilzad, and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi national-security adviser. While Rice has been deeply involved in shaping the public policy, former and current officials said that the clandestine side has been guided by Cheney.

“It seems there has been a debate inside the government over what’s the biggest danger—Iran or Sunni radicals,” Vali Nasr, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, who has written widely on Shiites, Iran, and Iraq, told me. “The Saudis
and some in the Administration have been arguing that the biggest threat is Iran and the Sunni radicals are the lesser enemies. This is a victory for the Saudi line.”