Last week journalist Mark Perry published a report which claimed that Mossad agents posed as CIA officers to recruit members of the terrorist group Jundullah, which is responsible for carrying out attacks on innocent civilians in Iran..
In 2007 ABC News reported on the alleged tie between the CIA and Jundullah.
According to Perry's article, when news of this supposed false flag reached the White House then President George W. Bush "went absolutely ballistic". A debate took place within his national security team of how to respond, with the administration finally deciding to do nothing. The article cited an unnamed former intelligence officer who said, "In the end, it was just easier to do nothing than to, you know, rock the boat".
The article went on to state that the Obama administration drastically scaled back joint U.S.-Israel intelligence programs targeting Iran and shut down key intelligence-gathering operations only to later give clearance to cooperate with Israel on classified intelligence-gathering operations focused on Iran's nuclear program.
Indeed this story is an important one in the war of public perception, and therefore should be questioned. There are a couple of things it accomplishes for the United States government.
The first, and most obvious-- it diverts blame from the United States for supporting Jundullah onto Israel. For the average American such a revelation reduces the perceived malice of the government's actions in its relations with Iran. The assurance that one's supposed leaders are not so evil as to recruit terrorists to kill innocent people in another country reinforces the idea that the United States is still the good guy, or at least trying to be.
Second-- it continues to portray the United States' actions with Iran as a response to Iran's hostilities, its current cooperation with the deceitful Israel a necessary evil resulting from Iran's supposed belligerence in continuing its nuclear program, and not part of a continuing agenda to stir up a war with the country. This falls right in line with the story we're being sold about how the next potential war will start"with either Iran blocking the Straight of Hormuz and possibly carrying out a new Pearl Harbor, orIsrael acting as the trigger and striking first to protect itself from a hypothetical nuclear annihilation, dragging the United States into the conflict. Either way, in the eyes of the American public, the United States is deemed innocent of starting a war that the neocons have been trying to start for years, and the notion of Iran's nuclear pursuit being a result of the West's increasing hostility becomes lost in the nervous cries of the people begging for the U.S. military to put out the fire.
Of course blaming the next big war's spark solely on a conflict between Israel and Iran will be just as convenient as blaming World War 1 --s on the squabbles between a few small countries, and not on thes geopolitical goals of certain nations, or the desire of globalists to create a profitable conflict and build a League of Nations out of the ashes.
What needs to be pointed out is that according to the article the source of Perry's information about the Mossad false flag is the CIA. Specifically, CIA documents and interviews with "six ( unnamed) currently serving or recently retired intelligence officers". The only non-CIA person quoted in the report who speaks about the Mossad false flag is former Centcom chief and retired Gen. Joe Hoar, whose quote was made upon being informed of the plot, (presumably by Perry).
From Perry's article:
""a Pakistan-based Sunni extremist organization. Jundallah, according to the U.S. governmentand published reports, is responsible for assassinating Iranian government officials and killing Iranian women and children.
But while the memos show that the United States had barred even the most incidental contact with Jundallah, according to both intelligence officers, the same was not true for Israel's Mossad. The memos also detail CIA field reports saying that Israel's recruiting activities occurred under the nose of U.S. intelligence officers, most notably in London, the capital of one of Israel's ostensible allies, where Mossad officers posing as CIA operatives met with Jundallah officials."
Throughout the article there is no outside source listed backing up the claim that Mossad ran this false flag. The claim itself comes from the collective words and pens of an intelligence agency working for a government trying to start a new war in a time when many of its citizens no longer trust it.
The purpose here is not to question the sincerity of Perry's journalism or accuse him of being part of a disinformation conspiracy, but simply to look at the news of the alleged Mossad false flag in comparison to the past actions of the United States government, as well as those of Israel's, and point out the bigger issue it reveals.
Regardless of whether the Mossad false flag story is disinformation or a legitimate report, both the Bush and Obama administrations have upheld a hostile policy towards Iran that has put the United States on the path to a much desired (by the war hawks) conflict.
Project for a New American Warmonger
Indeed, it's understandable that a president would be angry after receiving news that the intelligence service of his nation's ally was posing as agents of his own government and making secret deals, yet let's not forget that Bush didn't need any help destroying whatever relations the United States had with Iran when he came into office. Throughout his presidency, Bush's administration did everything it could to strain that relationship to its limit, turning a mildly helpful though cautious Iran into a vigilant, renewed bitter enemy.
For instance, not many people know that in the aftermath of 9/11 Iran was ready to lend assistance to the United States in its mission to unseat the Taliban in Afghanistan, yet the Bush administration spit in Iran's opened palm.
"The Iranians had real contacts with important players in Afghanistan and were prepared to use their influence in constructive ways in coordination with the United States," recalls Flynt Leverett, then senior director for Middle East affairs in the National Security Council (NSC), in an interview with IPS."
According to Porter's article, the State Department's policy planning staff wrote a paper suggesting that the United States should more formally cooperate with Iran to fight al-Qaeda. The plan would have included exchanging intelligence information with Iran and coordinating sweeps on the borders that Afghanistan shares with Iran and Pakistan. The CIA and the head of the White House Office for Combating Terrorism agreed with the proposal.
Yet the anti-Iran interests in the Bush administration overrode the recommendations of the other departments.
Form Porter's article again:
"Investigative journalist Bob Woodward's bookPlan of Attack recounts that Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley, who chaired an inter-agency committee on Iran policy dealing with issues surrounding Afghanistan, learned that the White House intended to include Iran as a member of the "axis of evil" in Bush's State of the Union message in January.
Hadley expressed reservations about that plan at one point, but was told by Bush directly that Iran had to stay in. By the end of December, Hadley had decided, against the recommendations of the State Department, CIA, and White House counter-terrorism office, that the United States would not share any information with Iran on al-Qaeda". "
In reality, neocons in the Bush administration had placed a target on Iran's even before 9/11.
During a speech many years back General Wesley Clark shared with his audience what he had learned of a plan to execute the same strategy of destabilization and invasion in the Middle East that we're seeing implemented today. Though, according to Clark, the architects of the plan had hoped to accomplish their goals in a shorter amount of time than we've seen played out-- before the next superpower (China) rises to challenge the United States-- the Obama administration is still carrying on the same agenda.
Off the heels of selling a war in Iraq to the American people based on lies (though the revisionists are now attempting to claim the lies were the result of "faulty intelligence', once again making the people in the White House at the time look like victims instead of villains) the Bush administration and the puppet media went about selling a war in Iran, hyping drummed up "provocations" to demonize the nation and to implant in the minds of Americans the idea that Iran is seeking "to wipe Israel off the face of the map" instead of defending itself from the foreign wolves that have gathered at its front and back doors in Iraq and Afghanistan. President Obama was then ushered into office with the promise of "Change", portrayed by his campaign and the media as a person who favors peace, and who would halt Bush's grab for empire.
But he didn't.
During his presidency Obama's administration attacked and overthrew the government in Libya without approval from Congress and continued the coordinated hype of Iran's nuclear program. Not only has he brought us closer to war with Iran than before, he's beat the drum against Pakistan and China (the rising superpower), openly preparing the United States military for a future conflict in the Pacific.
In 2010 President Obama wrote a letter to then President Lula of Brazil claiming strong encouragement for a plan to have Brazil and Turkey act as intermediaries and negotiate with Iran a deal to send its low enriched uranium to Turkey in exchange for fuel rods for the Tehran Research Reactor. As it turned out, Obama only strongly encouraged the plan because he didn't think Iran would agree to it.
A short while later Iran did agree to the plan.
The White House then rejected it.
President Lula published Obama's letter to him in order to cast light on the White House's double-talk.
The fact is, the White House under the Bush administration, and continued by the Obama administration, has sough a conflict with Iran for years. Given the past actions of the last two administrations, covert acts that further erode the Iranian government's perception of the United States helps towards this aim, destabilizing Iran in the process and further pushing the leadership there to do something that the United States could seize upon as a justification for its long sought after war.
Israel and a much bigger issue"
The notion that the government of Israel could have been involved in an act of deception that harmed the United States is not unrealistic, and certainly has precedent. From numerous accounts of Israeli spy networks operating in the United States it's clear that Israel regards our country more as a potentially dangerous guardian tiger held loosely by its leash than as a true ally. In the wake of the latest revelation regarding Mossad's false flag involving Jundullah against the United States, what should jump into the minds of every American who studies 9/11 is the confirmed report of Israelis working for an Israeli intelligence front company who were arrested on the day of the attack, dancing in celebration as they filmed the event. (See video below).
Though it's unlikely that the false flag event of 9/11 could have solely been an "Israel job" (it still would have required heavy cooperation from United States government insiders to pull it off), from the standpoint of a presumed innocent White House, an investigation of Mossad and any potential involvement in 9/11 should have been a priority of the Bush administration upon receiving the news of Mossad's false flag dealings with Jundullah (if the story is true). Nobody can doubt that the "War on Terror" that followed 9/11 has helped served Israel's own interests, with the might of the United States military being used to knock out its enemies. A president truly concerned about the welfare of the people he represents and pondering "just whose side these guys [in Israel] are on" (as Perry's article claims the Bush's national security team wondered) would have his alleged good intentions well served by re-investigating the event that his government prefaced a decade of foreign policy on. Regardless, for a president to not immediately call Israel out and reevaluate our country's relationship with the nation when the supposed false flag with Jundullah was reported is a violation of their oath. That President Bush and President Obama kept this information secret means that they conspired with a foreign government by covering up its hostile actions against the United States and continuing to support it.
This is why the Mossad false flag story is so important-- if it's not disinformation designed to distance the United States from its own crime of supporting terrorism overseas, then it's evidence that two administrations were complicit in crimes against the United States, looking the other way as Israel waged its own quiet war of deception against our country. In either case the American people must demand to know which story is true...not simply from the newspapers, but from the very mouths of its past two presidents.