Skip to content or view screen version

Iran attack imminent!

Whistleblower | 21.02.2005 12:11 | Anti-militarism | London

Scott Ritter Says US Attack on Iran Planned for June.

How can we stop these mass-murdering neocon maniacs?


By Mark Jensen
Saturday, 19 February 2005
United for Peace of Pierce County (WA)


Scott Ritter, appearing with journalist Dahr Jamail yesterday in Washington State, dropped two shocking bombshells in a talk delivered to a packed house in Olympia's Capitol Theater. The ex-Marine turned UNSCOM weapons inspector said that George W. Bush has "signed off" on plans to bomb Iran in June 2005, and claimed the U.S. manipulated the results of the recent Jan. 30 elections in Iraq.

Olympians like to call the Capitol Theater "historic," but it's doubtful whether the eighty-year-old edifice has ever been the scene of more portentous revelations.

The principal theme of Scott Ritter's talk was Americans' duty to protect the U.S. Constitution by taking action to bring an end to the illegal war in Iraq. But in passing, the former UNSCOM weapons inspector stunned his listeners with two pronouncements. Ritter said plans for a June attack on Iran have been submitted to President George W. Bush, and that the president has approved them. He also asserted that knowledgeable sources say U.S. officials "cooked" the results of the Jan. 30 elections in Iraq.

On Iran, Ritter said that President George W. Bush has received and signed off on orders for an aerial attack on Iran planned for June 2005. Its purported goal is the destruction of Iran's alleged program to develop nuclear weapons, but Ritter said neoconservatives in the administration also expected that the attack would set in motion a chain of events leading to regime change in the oil-rich nation of 70 million -- a possibility Ritter regards with the greatest skepticism.

The former Marine also said that the Jan. 30 elections, which George W. Bush has called "a turning point in the history of Iraq, a milestone in the advance of freedom," were not so free after all. Ritter said that U.S. authorities in Iraq had manipulated the results in order to reduce the percentage of the vote received by the United Iraqi Alliance from 56% to 48%.

Asked by UFPPC's Ted Nation about this shocker, Ritter said an official involved in the manipulation was the source, and that this would soon be reported by a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist in a major metropolitan magazine -- an obvious allusion to New Yorker reporter Seymour M. Hersh.

On Jan. 17, the New Yorker posted an article by Hersh entitled The Coming Wars (New Yorker, January 24-31, 2005). In it, the well-known investigative journalist claimed that for the Bush administration, "The next strategic target [is] Iran." Hersh also reported that "The Administration has been conducting secret reconnaissance missions inside Iran at least since last summer." According to Hersh, "Defense Department civilians, under the leadership of Douglas Feith, have been working with Israeli planners and consultants to develop and refine potential nuclear, chemical-weapons, and missile targets inside Iran. . . . Strategists at the headquarters of the U.S. Central Command, in Tampa, Florida, have been asked to revise the military's war plan, providing for a maximum ground and air invasion of Iran. . . . The hawks in the Administration believe that it will soon become clear that the Europeans' negotiated approach [to Iran] cannot succeed, and that at that time the Administration will act."

Scott Ritter said that although the peace movement failed to stop the war in Iraq, it had a chance to stop the expansion of the war to other nations like Iran and Syria. He held up the specter of a day when the Iraq war might be remembered as a relatively minor event that preceded an even greater conflagration.

Scott Ritter's talk was the culmination of a long evening devoted to discussion of Iraq and U.S. foreign policy. Before Ritter spoke, Dahr Jamail narrated a slide show on Iraq focusing on Fallujah. He showed more than a hundred vivid photographs taken in Iraq, mostly by himself. Many of them showed the horrific slaughter of civilians.

Dahr Jamail argued that U.S. mainstream media sources are complicit in the war and help sustain support for it by deliberately downplaying the truth about the devastation and death it is causing.

Jamail was, until recently, one of the few unembedded journalists in Iraq and one of the only independent ones. His reports have gained a substantial following and are available online at dahrjamailiraq.com.

Friday evening's event in Olympia was sponsored by South Puget Sound Community College's Student Activities Board, Veterans for Peace, 100 Thousand and Counting, Olympia Movement for Justice & Peace, and United for Peace of Pierce County.

Whistleblower

Comments

Hide the following 10 comments

Dubious

21.02.2005 12:35

Do you really think people are stupid enough to be convinced by a fabricated article such as this ? Even a basic internet search shows it's complete crap.

Or perhaps you will now claim this is all part of a worldwide agreement to hush up the truth

Has an Internet connection


acclimatising the public

21.02.2005 13:09

these kind of stories are always circulated months in advance of whatever latest madcap project a particular power interest wishes to see happen. wished-for events are talked about in the power friendly media as +certainties+ when they are in fact nothing of the kind. these reports are intended to +persuade+ people that events are inevitable when they're not. it is a slow and well used process of dissipating opposition to projects which would otherwise come in for massive public criticism. many recent examples: attack on Iran, London olympics, police brutality at the Glasgow G8 etc etc.

- -


What ?

21.02.2005 14:19

So your theory is that the government of the USA keen to prepare public opinion for an attack on Iran review the world's media outlets and choose . . . . . Indymedia UK !

Doesn't seem likely does it. What seems more likely is somebody was trying to create a story that wasn't there.

Still dubious


Sources

21.02.2005 14:49

This article first appeared here:

 http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/2295/2/

It's also been picked up elsewhere and is being discussed:

 http://www.newshounds.us/2005/02/20/scott_ritter_says_us_will_attack_iran_in_june.php

 http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=iraq_war&Number=293393206

One scary (scary because Iraq trading oil in Euros and OPEC considering it probably *was* one of the key reasons for the war) comment posted at libertyforum:

"Iran starts its regional Oil trading exchange in june."

"In 2005-2006, The Tehran government has a developed a plan to begin competing with New York's NYMEX and London's IPE with respect to international oil trades - using a euro-denominated international oil-trading mechanism. This means that without some form of US intervention, the euro is going to establish a firm foothold in the international oil trade. Given U.S. debt levels and the stated neoconservative project for U.S. global domination, Tehran's objective constitutes an obvious encroachment on U.S. dollar supremacy in the international oil market"

"The Iranians are about to commit an "offense" far greater than Saddam Hussein's conversion to the euro of Iraq�s oil exports in the fall of 2000. Numerous articles have revealed Pentagon planning for operations against Iran as early as 2005. While the publicly stated reasons will be over Iran's nuclear ambitions, there are unspoken macroeconomic drivers explaining the Real Reasons regarding the 2nd stage of petrodollar warfare - Iran's upcoming euro-based oil Bourse."

i18n


*SIGH*

21.02.2005 15:07

SIGH - DEEP BREATH

Just because the same fabricated piece is placed on a number of Internet discussion boards where people then talk about it does not make it "real". It just makes it repeated. Before posting articles saying that this "proves" the story sit back and think. A story of this magnitude, a planned invasion of Iran and NOT ONE MAINSTREAM MEDIA OUTLET REPORTS IT !

Teacher


Medialens thinks it is real

21.02.2005 17:03

I guess Scott Ritter is just another bunch of prankster students is he?

This is a guy who spent years in Iraq, and yet his reservations were hardly reported in the run up to GW II.

Oh but I forgot that the mainstream press now always looks beyond official sources and criticises the powers-that-be freely. Ha!

Sim1


Proof will be in the pudding

21.02.2005 17:21

Well wether or not this is a mis,dis or just bad information one thing is sure Iran is in the hot seat.
let's see what happens over the next few months, perhaps it will take another pearl harbour I meant.. whoops
I meant 9/11.

pie man


ritter / iran

21.02.2005 19:59

>>Do you really think people are stupid enough to be convinced by a fabricated article such as this ?

fabricated? which bit?

1) did ritter make an appearance and say these things or not?

the appearance was advertised here:  http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/contemporarysocialissues/wipart.htm
 http://bartcopnation.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=773

presumably he turned up.

i'd say the anti-war credentials of the UPPC are in order:

"United for Peace of Pierce County urges you to participate in a nonviolent call for a peaceful resolution of the Iraq crisis. -- United for Peace of Pierce County urges you to participate in a nonviolent call for a peaceful resolution of the Iraq crisis. Join us in marching from McKinley Park to the Federal Courthouse. Show your opposition to the unnecessary war in Iraq! Bring your signs and banners!
War is not the answer! THE WORLD SAYS NO TO WAR!"
 http://www.tacomapjh.org/ufppc.htm


attitude sounds ok to me. hence, almost certainly more reliable than your average reporter from the daily mail or daily express.


2) are ritter's statements accurate?

for the attack on iran claim, he gives "neoconservatives in the administration" as his source.

for the iraq election fix claim, he gives "an official involved in the manipulation [of the election]" as the source.

these sources aren't specific enough to be immediately verifiable. they may be true reports by ritter of what he was told or they may not be. first off, keeping confidentiality of inside sources is standard practice for newsapper reporters. then there’s the man's record. ritter "was a senior UN weapons inspector in Iraq between 1991 and 1998 and is the author of Frontier Justice: Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Bushwhacking of America". he has written and spoken extensively about iraq and america's policy in the middle east. his bottom line on iraq is that "through the invasion … a crime of gigantic proportions has been perpetrated." his expert opinion is widely valued by many well informed people around the world but of course his opinion is more widely undervalued by the very right-wing interests he criticises in government and in the press.

>>A story of this magnitude, a planned invasion of Iran and NOT ONE MAINSTREAM MEDIA OUTLET REPORTS IT !

well, where have you been? Al jazeera reports:

“US President George Bush said on 17 January that his administration would not rule out the possibility of using military force against Iran over its controversial nuclear programme and Vice-President Dick Cheney said on Thursday that Iran was right at the top of the list of world trouble spots.

Seymour Hersh reported in The New Yorker magazine on Monday that the Bush administration had been ‘conducting secret reconnaissance missions inside Iran at least since last summer’ for the purpose of gathering intelligence and targeting information.”

Their report also adds that Iran believes "One of the US objectives in this psychological war is to pressure Europe so that Europeans won't succeed in talks with Iran,"

 http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/47B14909-8CDB-49AB-B4EC-D6483C16CF2C.htm

meantime, condi rice is going round saying an attack on iran ‘is not on the agenda’ – exactly what she was saying in the months before the invasion of iraq. as we all now know, the iraq agenda had been worked out years in advance. seems only you would be surprised that the neocons have been poring over iranian maps.

- -


scott ritter

21.02.2005 22:57

1) It's likely that Scott Ritter gave a speech there, I doubt people would contest this.
2) He probably said those things--it conforms with what he's said in the past
3) There is likely a recording of what he said that will be uploaded soon enough by someone
4) So what?

Well, it boils down to just who this Scott Ritter character is. Is he some lefty peacenik that's been ranting since the 60s? Nope...

He was a weapons inspector in Iraq leading up to the current war there. He was in & out of the country and knew its WMD situation. In the months before the current war, he said:
1) The US is going to invade and soon ("plans are already on the table..." type of talk)
2) There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and he knew it, since it was his job to look for them.

Google the guy. You can download lots of his speeches and make a judgement about what he said in the past and whether it was accurate or not. He has built up some credibility...

j


The real story

22.02.2005 03:17

Ritter is much more believable that the war-loving corporat Media. For more information about this stuff try the following links.

Pierce County (WA) February 19, 2005 Scott Ritter, appearing with ... bombshells
in a talk delivered to a packed house in Olympia's Capitol Theater. ...
www.nowar-paix.ca/nowar/forum/5748 - 8k - Feb 20, 2005



Zionist (Israel first) Neocons Concentrate on Promoting U.S. - Iran War:

 http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=28963


A Clean Break' (War for Israel) from James Bamford's 'A Pretext for
War':

 http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=28769


Treason in High Places: Pentagon Zionists, AIPAC and Israel

 http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=20366

Additional material posted at the following URL:

 http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0/viewforum.php?f=24Similar pages

rene