|
The
possibility of a US attack on Iran
Excerpts of presentation, Vancouver 9/11 Truth
Conference
By Prof. Peter Dale Scott
06/27/07 "backofthebook"
-- - June 26, 2007 - - "I have been speaking in public for
60 years, but this is perhaps the most important topic I have
ever spoken about."
"I want to talk about the threat to world peace, and the
possibility of a US attack, possibly a nuclear attack, on Iran."
Even The New York Times is worried about it, and has reported on
the split between the pro-war Vice-President's office and
Condoleezza Rice's State Department . . . the plans are there,
and they concern a lot of people within the Bush administration,
who are leaking them. One thing the leaks show is that the plans
are massive."
"There has been talk of this for three years now, and Seymour
Hersh has been predicting it about every three months . . . Does
that mean we shouldn't be alarmed [because it keeps getting
predicted and doesn't happen]?
"The recent replacement of Robert Gates [as US Secretary of
Defense] may be taken as a sign that the Bush administration has
become less likely to attack Iran. However, paradoxically the
lessening influence of the hawks increases the chance of another
9/11 . . . The plans were drawn up to be in response to a
supposed attack on the US" [hence pro-war factions may require
one in order to trigger the war].
Scott quotes a military officer: "As in the case of Iraq, the
response is not conditional with Iran actually being involved in
the act of terrorism against the United States" A similar
warning has been given by former US National Security Advisor
Zbigniew Brzezinski.
On the 9/11 movement:
"Like all research movements, the 9/11 movement is becoming
ingrown, debating matters that alienate the general public.
[This debate] focusses on detail rather than anlysis . . . false
simplicities as opposed to analytic depth [a mirror opposite of
the Bush simplicities]. LIHOP [the theory that the Bush
administartion allowed 9/11 to happen] and MIHOP [the theory
that the Bush administration caused 9/11 to happen] are also
false simplicities . . ."
"The 9/11 movement is a movement that wants the truth. It cannot
be said to be a movement that has the truth."
"I find it very hard to believe that the Bush administration
either let or made it happen. It's clear that people within
government were involved, but we should avoid condemning an
entire administration."
"There is a whole milieu of Saudi capital allied with Texas
capital . . . somewhere within the Saudi/Texas/Geneva [banking]
milieu there is the place for a meta-group . . . with resources
necessary for a successful plot."
Quotes Russian general: "'9/11 changed the direction of the
world in the direction desired by transnational oligarchs and
and an international mafia.' That's what I mean by a meta
group."
Nevertheless, Scott regards Cheney as likely involved: "Cheney
should be made to testify again under oath . . . The most likely
candidate for involvement in the first 9/11 for Iraq is also the
most likely for a second attack on Iran."
"The more status someone has in this society, the harder it is
for them to accept that there is something wrong with that
society . . . my book [The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the
Future of America, forthcoming from the University of California
Press] is addressed to the problem of the ignorance of the
highly educated."
"The 9/11 report only lies in certain places. . . there is a
pattern: a diminishment of the role played by Cheney on that
day." Scott cites [former Secretary of Transportation] Norman
Minetta's testimony that Cheney was in the White House bunker by
9:20; 9/11 commission simply ignored it, and reported instead
that he arrived shortly before 10."
Cheney himself told the press five days after 9/11 that he had
arrived in the bunker before the Pentagon was hit. He later
changed his account. "One of the accounts has to be wrong.
Should we believe this man when he comes before us and says we
should go to war with Iran? I think we need more information
about the first thing he told us."
"If he was in the bunker before 9:37, he had time to issue all
the salient commands on that morning."
"It is inconceivable that the Secret Service waited 14 minutes
to rush Cheney into the bunker. And we now know that the first
report of a plane incoming to The Pentagon was at 9:21. If we
ever receive the Secret Service timeline, we will most likely
find that that is when he was taken there."
The 9/11 Commission didn't investigate the flagrant
contradiction between Minetta's testimony and Cheney's
[statements]. The White House implied that Minetta got the time
and plane wrong, based on the account given by Cheney. "A third
version comes from Mrs. Cheney and the leading White House
perjurer, I. Lewis Libby . . . that's the one the 9/11
Commission chose."
"On the basis of the track record, the one that would carry the
most credibility is Norman Minetta's. The notes of I. Lewis
Libby should be subjected to severe scrutiny. Mr. Cheney should
be recalled, leading either to charges of perjury or a very
different version of what happened."
In the 1980's, during the Reagan administration, Cheney,
Rumsfeld, et al. were charged with creating a plan that, in the
event of a national emergency, would "dispense with legal
procedures and replace them with a secret procedure for putting
in place a new President and his staff," in the name of
continuity of government. George H. W. Bush also had input.
"By this means Cheney was able to put in place a radical change
of government before 9:54 on Sept. 11, 2001."
"What we have seen since 9/11 is the constitutional government
being replaced by deep government."
Similar tactics used used in the JFK assassination. "When deep
government makes these encroachments, they turn to their ties in
drug trafficking . . . in the case of 9/11, those drug proxies
were almost certainly people embedded in 9/11 . . . my
hypothesis is that there is still a deep-state, there is still
an Al Qaeda involved in drug trafficking, and they are still
capable of creating another 9/11."
"We are talking about the largest homicide in the history of the
US, and it is a homicide that hasn't yet been properly
investigated."
"We know that Cheney disappeared for long periods of time to a
bunker on the Pennsylvania-Maryland border and became, according
The Washington Post, the leader of a shadow government."
On the morning of 9/11, Both Cheney and Rumsfeld absented
themselves from their staffs. Rumsfeld claimed he was outside
the Pentagon, helping carry stretchers. But Scott proposes they
were absent "in order to discuss a topic their staffs were not
cleared to know about, and that was COG ["Continuity of
Government.]"
Areas to focus on:
1. Who authored the June, 2001 document giving control of the
air command to Cheney?
2. The contested time of Cheney's arrival in the White House
bunker.
3. Cheney's orders regarding the plane approaching the Pentagon
[see Norman Minetta's testimony to the 9/11 Commission].
4. Cheney's calls with Bush and Rumsfeld on the morning of 9/11,
and did they talk about COG?
"My last paragraph is addressed to you in this room. If what I
have said about peace and 9/11 has any meaning to you, then what
you do in the months to come will be very important."
Dr. Peter Dale Scott, is a former Canadian diplomat,
researcher, professor, University of California, Berkeley
Click
on "comments" below to
read or post comments
Comment
Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We
encourage engaging, diverse and
meaningful commentary. Do not
include personal information such
as names, addresses, phone
numbers and emails. Comments
falling outside our guidelines
– those including personal
attacks and profanity – are
not permitted.
See our complete
Comment
Policy and
use
this link to notify us if you
have concerns about a comment.
We’ll promptly review and
remove any inappropriate
postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
