Galloway wary of 'staged terror attack'

[Jazzz]

Listen up folks! George Galloway has recently appeared on the Alex Jones radio show (www.prisonplanet.com) to speak about the possibility of a 'staged terror attack' occurring as a pretext for an Iraq invasion.

It's a possibility that we should certainly be taking very seriously.

Galloway appeared as a guest on The Alex Jones Show to discuss his Senate appearance and the subsequent fallout it generated.

At the end of the show Alex Jones asked Galloway if he thought an invasion of Iran was on the horizon. Galloway was confident that massively opposed public opinion would stop an attack from taking place, unless a staged terror attack carried out by the military industrial complex and blamed on Iran was carried out.

JONES: "What do we do if the military-industrial complex carries out a terror attack to blame it on them?"

GALLOWAY: "Well that's another very real danger. There's no way we can legislate for that but we we must be on guard. We need a vigilant citizenry."

JONES: "Unbelievable."

GALLOWAY: "We need a vigilant citizenry that are wise to all the tricks that these monkeys are up to."

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2005/010605gallowaywary.htm

 

[Loki]

There's no way Bush/Blair can justify an invasion of Iran. There's certainly very little public support for it in the UK. And should a "terrorist incident" occur which conventiently paved the way for an invasion, a huge amount of international suspicion would be levelled at the Bush administration. I think they know they can't get away with it.

Oh, and the article doesn't mention how the interview ended.

JONES: I salute you!
GALLOWAY: Thank you very much.

 

[Jazzz]

But you agree Loki, that they might try such a thing if they thought they could get away with it?

 

[Loki]

But you agree Loki, that they might try such a thing if they thought they could get away with it?

Yeah I agree, I just don't think they could. I bloody hope that's right.

 

[SeniorSbagliato]

if they thought they could get away with it?

They know they can get away with it.

 

[laptop]

Yeah I agree, I just don't think they could. I bloody hope that's right.

I also suspect - or hope - Bush would lack support somewhere he cares about (and can locate on a map):

Prez: "This is your Commander in Chief. I want you to invade Iran."
Joint Chiefs of Staff: "This is your armed forces. Fuck off. No way."

(Self-plagiarising from last July, where I also noted that a proxy or aerial-only attack is different.)

 

[slaar]

If Iraq, a heavily sanctioned and unsupported regime by anyone, even in the Middle East puts up this much of a fight against the US, Iran would absolutely kick their ass.

 

[nose blower]

Just goes to show the depths to which Galloway is willing to sink to push his own agenda. The guy reminds me of Hitler/Stalin/Mao.

 

[phildwyer]

They won't invade it, they'll bomb it to pieces, with Israel's assistance. I wouldn't be at all surprised at a Reichstag Fire, they don't have to convince the likes of us, only those who are predisposed to believe them anyway. Galloway hasn't been wrong yet.

 

[silentNate]

Just goes to show the depths to which Galloway is willing to sink to push his own agenda. The guy reminds me of Hitler/Stalin/Mao.

Coming from a poster who defends Ariel Sharon I think your opinion on this matters little.

 

[Loki]

Just goes to show the depths to which Galloway is willing to sink to push his own agenda. The guy reminds me of Hitler/Stalin/Mao.

Godwin's Law in just eight posts! Impressive

 

[nose blower]

Coming from a poster who defends Ariel Sharon I think your opinion on this matters little.

 

[nose blower]

Godwin's Law in just eight posts! Impressive

 

[Pickman's model]

Just goes to show the depths to which Galloway is willing to sink to push his own agenda. The guy reminds me of Hitler/Stalin/Mao.

i don't think mao had a moustache...

 

[nose blower]

i don't think mao had a moustache...

I heard they all had tails. Anyone licking Galloway's arse noticed if he had one?

 

[Pickman's model]

I heard they all had tails. Anyone licking Galloway's arse noticed if he had one?

weren't you paying attention when you did?

 

[jiggajagga]

Its quite obvious that if the USA wants to invade Iran it will use its pal Israel to initiate it by bombing the nuclear plant in Iran (to defend itself from possible nuclear attack ). The Iranians will have no choice but to retaliate, the USA will defend a democracy in the Middle East and Bingo! There we are!
Simple, innit!

 

[Loki]

Its quite obvious that if the USA wants to invade Iran it will use its pal Israel to initiate it by bombing the nuclear plant in Iran. The Iranians will have no choice but to retaliate, the USA will defend a democracy in the Middle East and Bingo! There we are!
Simple, innit!

That is a possible scenario (the Israelis have done it before after all). But I think the Iranians are too wily to fall into such an obvious trap.

 

[oi2002]

George is living in alternate reality. The US can barely cope with Iraq as it is an escalation with Iran would be a military disaster. The US does not have the troops to fully occupy Iraq let alone Iran and has balked at the necessary expansion of the army. Tehran has them by the ballls in Iraq, they've got a network of assets all over the country that dates back to the time of the Shah and the current nastiness will get very unpleasant if DC does more than rattle its sabre.

From the Iranian side things are looking just dandy and they are busily cosying up to their old friends who now govern both Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[slaar]

George is living in alternate reality. The US can barely cope with Iraq as it is an escalation with Iran would be a military disaster. The US does not have the troops to fully occupy Iraq let alone Iran and has balked at the necessary expansion of the army. Tehran has them by the ballls in Iraq, they've got a network of assets all over the country that dates back to the time of the Shah and the current nastiness will get very unpleasant if DC does more than rattle its sabre.

From the Iranian side things are looking just dandy and they are busily cosying up to their old friends who now govern both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Exactly.

 

[Andy the Don]

George is living in alternate reality. The US can barely cope with Iraq as it is an escalation with Iran would be a military disaster. The US does not have the troops to fully occupy Iraq let alone Iran and has balked at the necessary expansion of the army. Tehran has them by the ballls in Iraq, they've got a network of assets all over the country that dates back to the time of the Shah and the current nastiness will get very unpleasant if DC does more than rattle its sabre.

From the Iranian side things are looking just dandy and they are busily cosying up to their old friends who now govern both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Totally true, the US army brass are complaining about the pressure they are currently under keeping a lid on Afghanistan & Iraq. Iran a country with a much larger area & population, the majority under 25 yrs would be impossible to subjugate. The Iranians using their double agents got the US to invade Iraq & that's their number one enemy in the area out of the way. If the US are smart they will bide their time & await a time when the youthful Iranian population realize that the conservative mullahs cannot give them the living standards they wish & force by either democratic or non-democratic means a regime change in Iran.

 

[laptop]

If the US are smart

Nail. Head.

Or, in the case of the Administration:

Nail. Elbow.

 

[oi2002]

This looks at toppling the Mullahs by stealth. It concludes it looks unlikely despite the ethnic mix and permeable borders. The regime is unpopular and divided but as in Iraq outraged Iranian nationalism is a potent force.

Once Dubya decided to take out Saddam he made a major strategic error in not seeking a modus vivendi with Iran and pushing for reform there. No country was more eager than Iran to get rid of the Taliban and Saddam and a likely consequence of their fall was a much stronger Tehran. There was perhaps the mad delusion that Iraq would be a 100 day war and the M1A’s would charge on to Tehran but that little bit of moral clarity (or a short sighted desire to settle scores) closed down other options needlessly. DC has ended up backing Iran friendly goverments in Kabul and Baghdad. The much feared Shia Crescent has risen and DC has been forced into detente with Tehran when vunerable rather than unknowably strong.

Ironically with Iran's collaboration a democratic Iraq has a fighting chance, and a working Iraq might orgainically bring some reforms in Iran.

 

[sparticus]

Doh

Most posters are missing the main significance of this statement.

The significance to me is not what the US may or may not do in Iran. But that in George Galloway's opinion, there is a very real danger of the military industrial complex (of the USA) (for that read the military-industrial-political-media-judicial-banking complex) CARRYING OUT a terror attack in order to blame Iran (or some other 'rogue state') and provoke a war.

Now why would he think that? Is he thinking that the US military-industrial complex has a previous record of carrying out (or allowing to happen) terror attacks in order to blame an enemy and provoke a war? Is he thinking of previous examples like Pearl Harbour, the USS Maine, Gulf of Tonkin and of course 9/11 as possible examples where this has happened before.

 

[slaar]

No we're not, we just think he's deluded and overwhelmed with his own self-importance.

 

[laptop]

And anyway, even within the structure of speculation about conspiracies, why the hell would anyone want to set up an excuse for something they can't do?

 

[fubert]

piece of piss, get some 19 year old intern to write a paper about how the iranians are developing long range nuclear weapons. wave it around. fall out with the un and the french. quick hand job from tony blair and it's tehran here we come.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Its not really fare to say Galloway is actively warning about a staged terror plot - he was going along with the questioner in his usual way of smoozing his hosts (i.e 'we salute your indefatigability ..etc').

and agree with oi2002 and co - no fucking way is the US going to invade Iran. Bush is NOT an autocratic dictator whose word is law - he is there to represent the interests of oil and wall street. Ultimitely they call the shots - and they are not completely stupid - a war with Iran is one the US would loose unless they introduced mass conscription and a war economy and/or nuked the fuck out of it. I expect more sabre rattling and maybe a token cruise strike.

 

[fubert]

and agree with oi2002 and co - no fucking way is the US going to invade Iran. Bush is NOT an autocratic dictator whose word is law - he is there to represent the interests of oil and wall street.

iran has something like the worlds 4th biggest reserve of oil.

 

[Idris2002]

US won't invade Iran?

Maybe not.

But remember what Napoleon said: you can do anything with bayonets except sit on them.

The US may be so committed to regime change in Iran that it can't turn back.

But there are signs now that they may be looking to a contra strategy, with the mad Mujahedeen-e-Khalq as their proxies.

But Tehran will prove a tougher nut to crack than Managua or Belgrade - especially as the rest of the Iranian opposition seem to hate, fear and despise the MKO.