This article is part of the series: The coming war against Iran
[ 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 26 - 27 - 28 - 29 - 30 - 31 ]

The attack on Iran has already begun

Video: The attack on Iran has already begun
Audio: Daan de Wit interviewed by BNR Nieuwsradio
Book: The Next War - The Attack on Iran - A Preview
Video: Documentary exploring the culture of Iran (English)
Article: The Other Face of Barack Obama - I (English)
The following article discussed on NuJij.nl
-

By Daan de Wit
Translated by Ben Kearney

For the first time in a year international talks are being held with Iran. The question is whether or not these talks are designed to arrive at a solution. Or do these discussions - and the sanctions which will no doubt follow - represent an uptick in the direction of a military conflict, just as was the case with Iraq?

The attack on Iran has already begun. War is merely one phase in the long-running conflict that the West, along with Israel, is engaged in with this country. This phase isn't underway yet, but the fundamentals for it are being layed - just as was the case with Iraq. An autonomous Iran is a thorn in the side of Israel and the West. You need only take a look at the map. The large gray area in the middle is Iran, surrounded by American bases and American interests, and within shooting range of Israel. Now take a look at the other map, on which oil and gas reserves are represented. Put both maps next to each other and you can see the problem. The energy interests for the West are huge, especially now that accessible reserves are in drastic decline. At the same time Iran is threatening the dominant regional postition of the nuclear power Israel. The manufacturing of consent in the the West and Israel was started under Bush and is continuing under Obama. A problem is being presented, and the consciousness of the people is being prepped for the solution. And all of this aided by Iran itself, a country that does not come across as very sympathetic in either word or deed. This despite some words having been distorted and some deeds possibly having been influenced.

Obama, Brown and Sarkozy gave the world a fright on Friday when they announced the disclosure of a new nuclear facility near the Iranian city of Qom. Yet the existence of the facility was not news to the American government. It's also still uncertain as to whether or not the highly-enriched uranium suitable for the production of nuclear weapons can be produced there. It says something about President Obama that he nevertheless presents this information as such. He underscores his message by saying that Iran is breaking the rules that all countries must adhere to. But this is also not true, because with the approval of the United States, Israel chooses not to follow these rules - it is not a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Earlier this year, during his famous speech on the Iranian New Year, Obama publicly reached out to Iran. He said that it was up to Iran to respond, but at the same time said that the country had to give up its nuclear program. For him the alternative is that Iran will 'continue down a path that is going to lead to confrontation'. In this way he is not ruling out the military option. It's the type of rhetoric that would have suited the previous American president quite well and which can be counted upon to evoke the same dismissal from Tehran. Iran is playing by the international rules of the game and is not prepared to shut down its nuclear program. That means that neither side is prepared to meet the other halfway. The question is how long this can go on. The clock is ticking.

As time goes by and Iran keeps testing rockets and making progress with its nuclear program, the moment is approaching when the country can at the very least give the impression of being untouchable. At that point the U.S. and Israel are no longer going to be able to achieve their goals. And from that moment on, Iran will get the respect that it has longed for and will take its 'rightful' place in the region. For Obama and Netanyahu, a nuclear Iran is unacceptable. And because at the same time Iran wishes under no condition to put a halt to its nuclear program, both sides are heading for a confrontation. Such a collision can assume many forms. Because of this, all we can do is hope that 'Iraq' is being viewed as a warning by the United States and Israel, and not as a blueprint.

Obama continues Bush's Iran policy

Also under President Obama Iran continues to dominate the world agenda. Iran is being presented as a crucial problem that must be solved. The Iran Problem is one with several layers. The uppermost layer is that Iran is a potential threat to world peace. What are the facts and the fiction that make up this first layer?

read more

WHO plays dubious role in Swine flu pandemic

On June 11, 2009 Margaret Chan, the Director-General of the WHO, declared the Swine Flu a pandemic. The declaration of phase six means that emergency procedures are put into motion which bypass established systems designed to safeguard the public health. The result of this is described in part six of this DeepJournal series on the Swine Flu. Conclusion: the vaccine is being tested while being administered to the public. The definition of what a pandemic is, is therefore of great import.

read more

Government flu advisors not independent

Ab Osterhaus is playing an important role in the affair surrounding the Swine Flu. Through his influence and conflicts of interest, he personifies a system that is now being subjected to investigation from all directions. Soon the investigators will undoubtedly stumble upon SAGE, the strategic advisory group of vaccine and immunity experts for the World Health Organization, or WHO. Osterhaus turns up here as well - he is an expert with SAGE.

read more

Influence of industry on 'fake pandemic' investigated

Also beyond The Netherlands the question is being raised over whether the large-scale acquisition of vaccines made sense. The Council of Europe began an investigation into this question last Tuesday. 'A number of members of the Council of Europe have expressed exceptionally harsh criticism of the World Health Organization and are asking themselves out loud whether drug manufacturers had too much influence in this decision'.

read more

How Dutch Minister Klink decided on vaccines with additives - 2

The Netherlands has an ongoing contract with Solvay Pharmaceuticals for the making of vaccines without additives. Then Dutch Health Minister Klink severs - with all of its accompanying financial consequences - the contract with Solvay. He signs new, secretive contracts with GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis, companies that make vaccines with additives - the so-called adjuvants. In The Netherlands everyone is receiving the same vaccine containing adjuvants - whether they are young or old, pregnant or not. What happened that caused Klink to make this decision?

read more