Richard Stanley

Administrator
Supposedly Soleimani has been on a target list since some time before Trump's reign, but it was thought to be too provocative - in terms of garnering an escalation. If others convinced Trump to approve this, Trump decided to loudly take credit, instead of this being more of a 'subtle message' to the Iranians.

The Israeli hardliners are probably dancing in the streets, the Saudis are probably telling themselves to be careful what they wish for, and rumors have it that the Iranians, Russians, and Chinese are planning something in regards to all the sanctions America is foisting on them. And North Korea the same.

As Trump say, time will tell.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
A couple of thoughts here. Osama was very well known and thoroughly demonized when he was taken out. On the other hand, Soleimani is virtually unknown in the US, so the propaganda value is far lower. He's not scary looking. Besides, number two guys just don't get us worked up. Remember the days when we took out the #2 guy in Al Queda every couple of months?
It seems that the MSM and the intel intelligentsia are talking up Soleimani as a major boogey man, being responsible for the killing of hundreds of American servicemen in the second war with Iraq, despite the fact that the Shiites in Iraq were mostly working with us, and that Iran was supposedly not doing any more than to take advantage of situations that came their way. Whatever the truth about this, there had supposedly been a campaign in Iran to puff up his reputation.
Iran has to be careful about its response. The reprisal will need to be dramatic enough to satisfy the Iranian public, but without provoking a land war. Russian and Chinese interests must be protected, which I figure rules out cyber warfare. I could see the destruction of some high profile American asset in region, but bombing an Embassy would upset the International community. So I think we are looking at a counter assassination on a major US official. It would be someone notorious to the Iranians but expendable to the US. If my last name were Bush, I'd watch it.
While Trump stated that he did this to prevent war, now he is claiming that Iran will respond in a few weeks. Seems like a wish and/or a prophecy to me, given that this and what could follow could keep him out of prison.
Oh, by the way, there is speculation that Saddam was taken out by air-launched missile. This comes from the mother of the pilot.
Saddam? The story is he was found hiding in some hole, and then that he was hanged. Only nobody got to see what happened after a man that looked like Saddam had a noose put around his neck, then the camera panned away. Penn and Teller would be very suspicious I think.

Maybe you're thinking of someone else?
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I like the comment found on your link: "why would people wanna see that??"

This is why we have so many problems, we invent reasons to indulge in mass gullibility. The evidence of the biggest crimes in history is quickly destroyed, because ... "why would people wanna see that??"

Ummm ... so that we know whether or not that is what really happened, and if not, why are we being told otherwise?

I was not so certain that the man seen having the noose placed around his neck was Saddam in the first place. There had already been the pictures of the fake Saddam and the fake Osama paraded before us, which should have outraged everybody. But not enough were willing to say the stooges had no clothes. At least Mussolini was hung upside down and naked from a meat hook. But maybe Miles Mathis disagrees?

Ironically even the Wayback Machine's article doesn't include the claimed "crude images" of Saddam.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Quite possibly.

BTW, I recently watched an interesting video about an interesting social phenomenon in Fiume Italy, where many of the aspects of Nazi symbolism manifested into a fascist milieu, and Mussolini had a connection to on his way up the ladder. I hope to post this on an other thread soon.
 

Seeker

Active Member
Yes, it was taken over briefly after World War I by the renowned poet, novelist, war hero, and famous lover Gabriele d'Annunzio (1863-1938), who became the first "Duce", the forerunner of Mussolini (whom in turn was the forerunner of Hitler) and Fascism, and who considered himself a "Superman". Unfortunately eventually for Mussolini, his advice to him was ignored about having nothing to do with Hitler (perhaps d'Annunzio was also a prophet and knew that Mussolini would eventually end up as a "patsy"?). He was ennobled by none other than House of Savoy King Victor Emmanuel III, and made a hereditary Prince of Montenevoso. He certainly does deserve a thread of his own!
 

Seeker

Active Member
Very interesting, informative, entertaining video about a footnote to history. Besides a prototype of Mussolini and Fascism, d'Annunzio was a rather more successful prototype of Hitler as an artistic type, the way Hitler aspired to be at the beginning of his career (but was certainly not the ascetic Hitler type of artist!), and the parallels continue with their separate "putsches" (again, d'Annunzio was more successful at the beginning of "his" than the 1923 Hitler version), and d'Annunzio even started his in Fiune on Sept. 12, 1919, the same day that Hitler was supposed to have joined the German Workers' Party. What is going on here, is this all a "coincidence"? At any rate, one could argue that d'Annunzio ended up more successfully than either Mussolini or Hitler, living to an honorable old age and not seeing the defeat of Italy and Fascism in World War II, but apparently seeing disaster in the future by Mussolini aligning with Hitler. As far as Plato goes, would the conventional view of his "Philosopher King" be synonymous with the Nietzsche "Superman" that d'Annunzio thought that he was, and as for the Church, I am thinking that he was at least baptized as a Roman Catholic, as Mussolini and Hitler were. The Italian philosopher and esotericist Julius Evola, as a teenager, was immersed in the literature of d'Annunzio.
 
Saddam? The story is he was found hiding in some hole, and then that he was hanged. Only nobody got to see what happened after a man that looked like Saddam had a noose put around his neck, then the camera panned away. Penn and Teller would be very suspicious I think.

Maybe you're thinking of someone else?
As you know by now, I love conspiracy theories and this is a good one. The Saddam you saw hanged was a double, so it goes.

Here's a link to Scholars for 911 Truth (James Fetzer) that lays it out: http://twilightpines.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=116&Itemid=67

I wanted to bring this up because the coverup was due to Executive Order 11905 banning the assassination of foreign leaders of sovereign nations. "No employee of the United Stated government shall engage in or conspire to engage in political assassinations." Soleimani falls exactly into that category.
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Soleimani falls exactly into that category.
You mean as yet another real assassination or yet another fake termination?

Fetzer's account is interesting, but it could just be a cover story for that Saddam got a glorious stay at the Hidden Resort, the reward for a job well done for the people who put him in (controlled opposition) power? Either way, one would think that such as the Iranians, other Iraqis, and such would have known that the official story was bogus. But, then I have always suspected that the overthrow of the Shah was a scam, part of a piece with Bush's October Surprise. A great coup of the Neocons/Neoliberals, .... that set the populist stage for Trump.

Such is why the Bushes have such deep links to the Bin Ladens, the Aga Khans (the leaders of the Nasari/Ismaili Assassins), the Clintons, etc.. There is rarely a good reason to believe the surface narrative on such matters.

To me, having a presentation, of Saddam and his sons being killed, at the Crystal Cathedral is great evidence of being black propaganda. Then having to retract it and involving the pilot's mother is just demonically brilliant.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
The Saddam you saw hanged was a double, so it goes.
I remember seeing this claim on various conspiracy-oriented websites at the time. There were several pictures of "Saddam" going through the process of capture, trial and assassination. I had to agree that the person in those photos didn't look exactly like the prewar Saddam. It was difficult to imagine that the ravages of war could create such changes.

But at the time, I don't recall any explanation being offered for the exchange, other than Richard's view that the real Saddam had gone to the "Hidden Resort". This is the first I'd heard of Fetzer's explanation. But, it seems very plausible, and Fetzer has got some good evidence. In addition to covering up the violation of Executive Order 11905, this exploit would have provided the added benefit that the public circus spectacle of Saddam's death produced a sense of certainty and closure. (That is, at least for anyone willing to believe that the man tried and executed was indeed Saddam.) Whereas if the "official story" had been that he was killed in a random situation, there would have been much less sense of certainty, at least superficially.

With Soleimani (as with all the other possibly fake deaths and assassinations) one has to ask, what difference does it make if he really went to the Hidden Resort, or not? In either case, he'll never be heard from again in public. Whether real or fake, his death will serve equally well to work up war fever in Iran, and to prime Americans to believe it's OK to kill Iranians (because they deserve to die.) That's the one consistent theme I see in American media coverage of Soleimani's assassination: he was an Evil Doer who Deserved to Die. To shed a tear for Soleimani's passing would be UnPatriotic and AntiAmerican, regardless of one's position on whether this was a wise and well-timed military escalation.

If the US has the capability for targeted drone assassinations of foreign leaders, one has to wonder whether the Iranians (as part of the Russian bloc) might have a similar capability. Reported via Saker blog and ZeroHedge: NBC News' Tehran Bureau Chief Ali Arouzi tweeted Sunday that "At Solemani's funeral procession in Mashad one of the organizers called on all Iranian to donate $1 each in order to gather an $80 million bounty on President Trumps head."
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Administrator
With Soleimani (as with all the other possibly fake deaths and assassinations) one has to ask, what difference does it make if he really went to the Hidden Resort, or not? In either case, he'll never be heard from again in public.
The whole idea of the Hidden Resort(s) is not what happens subsequently to the respective immediate narrative, but rather what happens in convincing future supposed "Lifetime Actors" to play such roles on the world stage, .... if they believe that they will be tossed aside in such brutal fashion. They may be willing to sacrifice their eternal public reputations for the 'greater cause', but having to prematurely forgo all the shaky puddin' at the resort?

It's just an extension of what the Ismaili assassins were promised, albeit this latter was truly a scam played upon them. But few people are that gullible today thinking that 70 virgins await them in Heaven.

Was there any shaky puddin' in Stratford Upon Haven? (Heaven > Haven > Avon > Resort?)

To shed a tear for Soleimani's passing would be UnPatriotic and AntiAmerican, regardless of one's position on whether this was a wise and well-timed military escalation.
Yes, especially since he did so much to hamper our black ops Sunni ISIS and al Qaeda allies, or at least that's what 'they' all say.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
They may be willing to sacrifice their eternal public reputations for the 'greater cause', but having to prematurely forgo all the shaky puddin' at the resort?
"Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown" -- Henry IV part 2. A Shakespearean fiction? Perfectly safe to wear a crown in Stratford upon Heaven? Very clever! But convincing?
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
The Iranian response to Soleimani's murder seems to be "stage managed", at least so far.

https://www.rt.com/news/477773-satellite-iran-attack-damage/

Commercial satellite imagery of military bases in Iraq targeted by Iranian missile strikes show only minor damage, bolstering theories that Tehran was aiming for a flashy show of force rather than to actually kill US troops.
The Ain Al-Asad military base in Iraq’s Anbar province, as well as another facility outside Erbil, in the Iraqi Kurdistan, found themselves under fire by two volleys of ballistic missiles, fired from inside Iran during the night between Tuesday and Wednesday. Satellite imagery released on Wednesday by the private US company Planet Labs shows only minor damage in both places, mostly to warehouses and equipment storage facilities rather than barracks.
A comment by Terry Lawrence at the wsws.org site says: "Looking at the photos of the insignificant damage caused on the two US bases hit by the Iranian missiles it appears they hit their targets precisely but had no warheads. For example, one of them landed in a row of four tents and destroyed only a single tent! Didn't even blow the other three tents over. Even a token explosive warhead would have destroyed the whole row."
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Perhaps, but one can read into this that they are trying to send a message that they can put armed missiles just where they want.

Of further interest is the crash of the Ukrainian airliner. Just who fired on it? Iranians or provocateurs?
 

Seeker

Active Member
"Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown" -- Henry IV part 2.
Another "Harry" and his American bride may agree with that, and it looks as though the United States may be getting its own official, legitimate, dynasty, complete with heir, and descended from the iconic Princess Diana, who had her own American ancestry as well.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Perhaps, but one can read into this that they are trying to send a message that they can put armed missiles just where they want.
Indeed, and (as Terry Lawrence pointed out), Paul Craig Roberts thinks that the message was devastatingly effective. He hopes that "the accuracy of Iranian missiles possibly has changed Israel’s mind about provoking a war" and that "Trump possibly can turn the situation to the advantage of his original aim to withdraw from the Middle East and restore normal relations with Russia."

One can only hope that PCR is correct, but there's a lot of information in this thread to discredit the view that Trump is just a frustrated peacemaker. And if you look closer at this incident, it really does seem stage managed.

This article from Al Manar News (an Islamic / Arab source) indicates that the US sent a diplomatic message to Iran's Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) a few hours after Soleimani's assassination, asking the Iranians to respond proportionately. According to the article, the IRGC commander replied:

http://english.almanar.com.lb/905005

the United States was not in a position “to determine” Iran’s response.
“The Americans must await severe revenge. This revenge will not be limited to Iran,” he said.
“The Resistance Front, with a vast geography, is ready to materialize this revenge,” he added.
But I'd say that the Iranian response was not even proportionate. If it had been proportionate, some important person would have been in the tent. Why would Iran stand down to such an extent?
 
Top