Iran will be attacked - British government secretly plans

[HMiS]

I just got the rumours confirmed by Dutch press and Reuters, that tomorrow the British government is going to meet on the issue of a "possible" US attack against the Islamic Republic of Iran, of the consequences of an attack on Iran on the oil market, the dollar system, the European Union, Israel and the relations with the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China (Bejing government).

 

The British say the war will be inavertable after 30 days, because the USA will attack Iran if it does no comply completely with UN Security Council guide lines. The USA won't wait for another decade of sanctions it is said.

 

Also plans are made of how Great Britain would be able to help in the war.

 

France and the Federal Republic of Germany, two Western-European states formerly against the whole Iraq war etc., have in the past months issued aggressive statements against the Islamic Republic of Iran. France's president Chirac in January indicated, that France would use its nuclear submarines and its missiles to stop "states wanting the annihilation of Israel and the destruction of the USA and Western Europe". Clearly Iran was meant.

 

The plan Scott Ritter disclosed (I posted an article on him earlier) is, that first the USA will await the 30-day period, then they will bomb the nuclear enrichment factories and if the people has not yet thrown over the Shi'ite Ayatollah revolutionary party of Iran by then, it will throw an atomic bomb on a strategic location. The plans and speeches in case of this attack are already prepared Mr Ritter said. He thought the End of March was the final phase, but he emphasized the USA might wait for the UN Sec. Council.

 

Of course it all comes down on: the Dollar market (Iran since two months uses the Euro currency for its oil sales), Zionism in Israël, Islamist territorism, oil supply and general advancing of another war.

 

The Iranians have announced large military movements, guerrilla bands and have publicized videos of new tests of Russian and home-made long-distance missiles (probably aimed at Tel Aviv or Turkey - a Nato ally).

 

I personally fear, that the American public might be scared by yet another terrorist "Iranian" attack, just for publicity and for mobilizing states and new volunteer troops for the very expensive battle against the vital and strong Islamic Shi'ite Revolutionary Republic of Iran (formerly Persia).

 

It won't be another Iraq Easy Operation. Let alone the occupation.

 

An atomic bomb would create such tension, that huge military conflicts could erupt. (China vs. Taiwan and USA [China is a major business ally of Iran], Russian Federation vs. Ukraine and Baltic states [entering NATO, trying to take over the crypto- and neo-communists in Belarus and Ukraine; Russian Federation is very close to Teheran and anti-Western sentiment is raised in Russia's army and the Patriotic Youth of Russia, a youth movement for all ages propagating the glory of the Russian fatherland and the Soviet history])

 

Iran will be a starting point for desasters. If it comes to pass and will be attacked. For I am not a visionary and cannot predict this war, but it seems imminent after Easter. 

[HMiS]

So what do you all think? What will happen? What are the motivations? The consequences for the Asian and Russo-European relations? For the Middle East the consequences are clear: more violence, possibly 'clearing' Temple Mt. and rebuilding a third 'Temple'. It might hugely catalyze things waiting to erupt.

 

 

[Batman]

I'm rather suprised that the attack against Iran hasn't already started, from what the Masonic mouth organs have been saying over recent years I've been dreading the Ides of March. At least I've had a little extra time to stock up on canned tuna.

 

Anyway here is something you'll never see on any of the mainstream news networks. This topic would be right at home in the Zionist area and it sould give another prespective on the less than mysterious reasons for invading Iraq and now Iran:

[HMiS]

See, we have three Apocalypticalist (wanting to actively start the End of Times era by conflicts) movements involved: the Shi'ite Revolutionary Islam, which wants the Madi (great islamic teacher for the end of time) to come about and 'he will come in war and desaster only'. Then we have Zionism, wanting to bring by a false 'Messiah' and the dominance of Jewish Zionists on the world. Then we have Dispensationalist Evangelicalism which in the person of George W. Bush will catalyze events and wants to "exalt Israel" [ that is: the Zionist Republic of Eretz Israel in the Holy Land].

 

On the background: Freemasonry (Judeo-Western occultism, which wants a syncretistic monotheist One World Religion and government, along with the restoration of the Temple of Salomo in Jerusalem) and Islamic Mysticalism (behind Iranian Shi'ite radicalism which wants the 'Madi' to come).

 

Influenced by the Whore of Babylon (Freemasonic Jerusalem), the Roman "beast" riden is false ecumenism and New Modernistic Theology and liberalism in the Vatican and the universal Roman Catholic Church, though the Eastern rite Catholic particular Churches can be considered a bit differently (some of them remaining fairly traditional). That's the background of the coming battle.

 

I have got the impression, that because of a Middle Eastern war the Liberal and Modernist Theologians will push towards establishing a World Council of Religions more clearly, possibly with the help of the Vatican, which has thusfar refused to enter the World Council of Churches because some still believe the dogma of the one Church of Jesus Christ being the Roman Catholic Church! Those opposing this world religious council, will be branded "intolerant" and "hate-inciting believers" wanting to "continue the clash between religions and thus the war".

 

A war in Iran could do much.

 

What about the anti-Western Muslims, who by Millions and millions live in the larger West-European cities? Saddam they did not like, but Iran is an Islamic country (not a secular dictatorship like Saddam's Iraq used to be). Won't they respond to the war in civilian protests and acts of violence?

[HMiS]

I'm rather suprised that the attack against Iran hasn't already started, from what the Masonic mouth organs have been saying over recent years I've been dreading the Ides of March. At least I've had a little extra time to stock up on canned tuna.

 

Anyway here is something you'll never see on any of the mainstream news networks. This topic would be right at home in the Zionist area and it sould give another prespective on the less than mysterious reasons for invading Iraq and now Iran:

 

I am quite surprised too, because the anti-Iran media machine has been doing well and continuing well on for the last years and especially the last months!

 

They probably could not get France etc. to support a war now already. Most states wanted the UN to present a clause. They did, and this clause is being interpreted by the USA in such a way, that non-compliance would justify bombing the nuclear installations.

 

The border of Israel question is not the issue in itself. Though Israeli dominance over the entire city of Jerusalem and destruction of the Al Aqsa mosque and the building on Temple Mount are necessary for one of the 'greatest' goals: rebuilding the Temple of Salomo which they never tried after a minor effort in the 4th century under pagan emperor Julian the Apostate failed by harsh weather destruction and divine intervention thereby (for which 21st century new templ the old vestments, levite ancestry lines, sacerdotal men and the sacrificial offerings [including the sheep of the Bethlehem-Jerusalem fields] are prepared and ready since last March).

 

The border image is irrealistic. Ehud Olmert wants to define Israeli borders right now and has abandoned claims to the Gaza stripe and some settlements on the West Bank. So no, Eretz Israel won't expand that much. They cannot: the Islamics are too many and the Zionists too few (and the normal average Israeli citizen is tired of the fights and wants luxury, wealth and a peaceful life without war).  

[Credo]

 

...for the very expensive battle against the vital and strong Islamic Shi'ite Revolutionary Republic of Iran (formerly Persia).

       Everything sounds plausible, except the above. The government of Iran is unpopular from what I hear. Particularly with the youth. This would not be a problem for Iran, except that those under 25 or so, make-up a huge percentage of the population. I want to say at least 50%.

       HMiS, you are right however, in that Iran now is stronger than Iraq was before the start of war there. Also, the Iranians seem to be a little bit ideologically motivated. If you remember that little incident when not a few major cities in Iraq rose-up and threw the Americans out. Apparently Iran had a hand in that number.

       Also, if Iran is attacked, Mohammedans will likely take notice. From Iraq the Afghanistan (where there is supposed to still be quite a bit of fighting) there will be war. Looks like something out of the game Risk....

[HMiS]

Yes, I meant militarily. And yet, many Iranian youths are in government controlled groups and the Army gives their troops ideological indoctrination too. It is an illusion of American strategists, that the Iranian people will all revolt against the Islamic leaders. Some youths do, but they are hung. In case of a war, measures will be more harsh and less people will speak out in Iran.

 

Militarily Iran is many times stronger and more organized than Saddam's post-1991 army was in 2003.

 

And while Saddam's regime was not supported by Islamic authorities, the Iranian Republic even to Sunni leaders is an example of "good Muslim revolutionarism". So war against Iran might evoke more defensive and anti-Western actions among Muslims throughout the world. Espcially in Iraq and Afghanistan, but in Western Europe too!

[Credo]

       Saddam's army was never as strong after 1991 and the sanction as it was before. Which is why the country collapsed so fast. Saddam apparently told his army to hold the Americans off for one week, until his intelligence could consolidate a guerrilla movement.

       However, to beat the Americans toe-to-toe in a fight is almost impossible. Do you think the Iranian military can do so for a longer time? Will we not see another, this time massive, insurgency?

[gladius_veritatis]

What was up with the massive print in that post, HMiS?