Skip to main content

Donnie Brasco, Billy Costigan, David Petraeus

William White of Concord Bridge Coalition has written another entry in his ongoing current events analysis. This most recent entry discusses the disinformation campaign being waged against the American people to purchase their support for yet another illegal war against yet another country which has not attacked us, Iran, and in which tens of thousands or in all likelihood many more innocent people would be killed in our names.

The Bush administration and Israeli government appear to be operating a joint disinformation campaign, whose objective is to establish a media based alternative reality from which to accuse Syria/Iran of developing nuclear weapons with help from North Korea, by using a real event combined with planted stories establishing a defining narrative. This accusation in turn is augmented with stories about Iranian sponsored “Special Groups killing US troops in Iraq” and purported naval incidents the Persian Gulf, creating self-reinforcing, media based crisis.

As far as can be determined, no credible or even plausible evidence for any of these claims has been presented by the Bush administration, let alone by any independent verification of such claims. Instead, in the pattern similar to the disinformation campaign before the invasion of Iraq, questions about these claims, when raised at all, are ignored or “answered” with repeated or additional claims. Essentially this disinformation campaign, as all such campaigns, is an elaborate set of lies to deceive an enemy, in this case the Unites States Congress and the American people, in pursuit of Bush administration secret policy objectives for the benefit of a foreign government.

By all means, do yourself a favor and read the whole thing. He provides many examples, for unlike corporate media ‘news’, many people who labor to provide analysis in the alternative news community back up their work with facts. I like to think of them as Conspiracy Facts. In contrast, here’s just one example of the corporate media’s pervasive disinformation campaign from yesterday’s TimesOnline.

The US military is drawing up plans for a “surgical strike” against an insurgent training camp inside Iran if Republican Guards continue with attempts to destabilise Iraq, western intelligence sources said last week. One source [unnamed, of course - ed.] said the Americans were growing increasingly angry at the involvement of the Guards’ special-operations Quds force inside Iraq, training Shi’ite militias and smuggling weapons into the country.

Despite a belligerent stance by Vice-President Dick Cheney, the administration has put plans for an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities on the back burner since Robert Gates replaced Donald Rumsfeld as defence secretary in 2006, the sources said.

However, US commanders are increasingly concerned by Iranian interference in Iraq and are determined that recent successes by joint Iraqi and US forces in the southern port city of Basra should not be reversed by the Quds Force.

Please note there is not one single named source in the entire TimesOnline story. Not One. Continuing on…

British officials believe the US military tends to overestimate the effect of the Iranian involvement in Iraq.

But they say there is little doubt that the Revolutionary Guard exercises significant influence over splinter groups of the radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army, who were the main targets of recent operations in Basra.

The CBS television network reported last week that plans were being drawn up for an attack on Iran, citing an officer who blamed the “increasingly hostile role” Iran was playing in Iraq.

The American news reports were unclear about the precise target of such an action and referred to Iran’s nuclear facilities as the likely objective.

According to the intelligence sources there will not be an attack on Iran’s nuclear capacity. “The Pentagon is not keen on that at all. If an attack happens it will be on a training camp to send a clear message to Iran not to interfere.”

President George W Bush is known to be determined that he should not hand over what he sees as “the Iran problem” to his successor. A limited attack on a training camp may give an impression of tough action, while at the same time being something that both Gates and the US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, could accept.

Too rich. I love the little arms-length distance from those over-excitable US military types who see Iranian boogeymen hiding behind every pile of Iraqi rubble. But on the other hand, the British officials have to admit that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is really exercising a lot of influence on the Mahdi army. A shame, that. So now there’s a ‘new’ plan — to attack an Iranian training camp and not their nuclear facilities because after all, George Bush, being a great and selfless leader, is loathe to leave his successor with ‘the Iran problem’ or, I’m sure, any problem. Yup. You go ahead and wipe the coffee off your keyboard now.

I mean look at that last sentence again. They practically tell you that it’s all a big game.

A limited attack on a training camp may give an impression of tough action, while at the same time being something that both Gates and the US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, could accept.

As long as there’s an impression of tough action, we’re good. These people know this whole thing against Iran is a giant cock-up, which begs the question of why the hell they go along with it.


For an answer to that, read this outstanding and scathing explanation of why Petraeus prefers to finesse his way out of this sticky wicket with something less than a full-blown war with Iran.

By the spring of 2008, as the war turned from bad to worse, as the insurgency grew in power and his leadership and strategy was transparently a sham, Petraeus played his last formidable political card. To sustain his position and cover up his defeats in Basra, and his inability to lower US casualties or even defend the Green Zone, he blamed Iran. It was Petraeus who charged Iranian weapons were blowing up US armored carriers; Iranian agents were training the Iraqi resistance and defeating his army of 200,000 Iraqi collaborators. Petraeus could not face the fact that he was losing Iraq. He deflected attention from the failure of his entire military-political strategy in Iraq by dragging in Iran as a key military player.

And who does that help? Israel. And therefore, who totally supports General Petraeus? Zionists, who happen to own the corporate media and control our Congress. So it seems like ‘everybody’ loves General Petraeus, doesn’t it? You hardly ever hear anything negative about him on corporate media, and when you do, whoever dares to say it gets hammered over the head with accusations of being unpatriotic, hating the troops, etc. Gee, it’s almost like what happens when people dare to criticize Israel. Actually, it’s exactly like that. Maybe criticizing Petreaus is the same as criticizing Israel? Ding!

The only organized group, which took up Petraeus’, campaign to blame Iran for the US defeats was the Zionist Power Configuration in the US. In the Congress, media and public forums, Zionists amplified and backed Petraeus. They see him as a critical ally in countering the National Intelligence Report absolving Iran of having a program to develop nuclear weapons. No other high military commander, in Europe or the US, took up Petraeus call to arms against Iran…except the Israeli military command. It is a sad commentary on the state of the US military when generals advance to the highest posts by flattering and propagandizing for the most discredited American president in memory and advance the agenda of power brokers for a foreign power.

So Petraeus owes the Zionists for helping him ’succeed’ by transferring the blame for Iraq’s continued instability onto the Iranians, and the Zionists in turn love Petraeus because he’s their man to carry out their agenda against Iran, and now they own him. Woo hoo.

But there’s a problem. The problem is that a war against Iran would still be insane and would trigger all the horrible risks I’ve been trying to highlight on this blog over the past several months. If General Petraeus ever wants to be President Petraeus, which apparently he does, he had better think long and hard about Iran. He’s sold his soul to the devil to get where he is today, and maybe he thinks he’s going to find some way to satisfy the devil and live to tell the tale. How did that work out for Colin Powell, or anyone else for that matter? Does Petraeus think he can thread this needle when nobody else can? Is he a legend in his own mind, or did he just sell out completely? I don’t know, but I bet we’re going to find out.

The advance of Petraeus is a victory of the Zionist Power Configuration in its quest for American military leaders willing to pursue Israel’s agenda of sanctions and war against Iran. That is why the ZPC was a factor in the ousting of Admiral William Fallon, and why the main propaganda bulletin (the Daily Alert) of the Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations worked for and hailed his promotion to military overseer of the Middle East wars.

AIPAC and their bought and bonded Senators ensured Petraeus an easy time during his confirmation hearing and his unanimous endorsement. His appointment marks the first time that the Zionist Power Configuration has trumped the views and opinions of the majority of active and retired American military officers. How far Petraeus will go in ‘paying back’ his debt to his long-term Zionist backers for his meteoric rise remains to be seen. What is certain is that they will demand that he line up with the State of Israel in pushing forth toward a war with Iran.

It is neither military honor, nor patriotism, which will restrain Petraeus from pursuing the Zionist War for Israel agenda – but his future presidential ambitions. He will have to calculate whether a second Middle East war, which will please Israel and billionaire American (?) Zionist political fundraisers can offset voter discontent resulting from a war in which the price of oil will rise to $300 dollars a barrel and cost several tens of thousands of American casualties, will further his political ambitions.

The US has degenerated into a sorry state of affairs when its future course depends on the political calculus of a reckless General, a failed counter-insurgency ‘expert’ and ambitious politician pandering to billionaire political contributors working for a foreign colonial power.

It amazes me how many people seem to think they can do these dirty deals and somehow come out clean in the end. It doesn’t work that way.