ONE, TWO, THREE, IRAN

ONE, TWO, THREE, IRAN…

July 23, 2020 By Joseph P. Farrell

There's an adage, or aphorism, or principle - call it what you will - and I suppose it could be summarized something like this: "One is an accident; two is a coincidence; three is a pattern." Now, as far as cathedrals in France go, we're past accident (Notre Dame... maybe), and into coincidence (Nantes... we'll get back to that), and I hope we're not on the way to pattern. All I can say in that regard is, the people of France should be grateful that Nuttyfornia governor Gavin Newsom isn't the President of France, because I have the feeling he'd be setting fires to the cathedrals at Reims, Rouen, or Chartes, just to make sure the French were obeying his edicts not to pray, sing, chant, or otherwise worship in churches.

In Iran's case, it seems we're well past accident and coincidence, and deeply into "pattern", if you've been following the series of explosions and burning ships that country has suffered recently, according to these stories shared by G.B., G.B.2, and G.L.R.:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-gas-fire/explosion-as-fire-breaks-out-at-iranian-industrial-complex-idUSKCN24E287

Seven Ships On Fire At Southern Iran Port In Another 'Mystery' Disaster

As the New York Times article and Zero Hedge story point out, these explosions and "accidents" are peculiarly occurring at various Iranian military sites, or key infrastructures, and these are raising the obvious question of whether or not they are accidents at all, or the result  deliberate sabotage and covert operations, with the USA and Israel at the top of the list of suspects. I have to wonder, however, if that speculation encompasses the whole story. For example, there is an opposition within Iran, and I wonder if in some way it is active in this, with, or without foreign actors.

But there's a wider context here that bothers me, and thus far, I've not seen any propatainment, or alternative, media source raising the issue. Over the past few years, we've seen:

  1. a series of chemical plant explosions in China, beginning with Tianjing. In this case, the explosion not only flattened the plant, but left what was in my mind a suspiciously narrow and very deep crater, leading some, including me, to speculate that it had maybe been struck with a "kinetic Rod of God" weapon;
  2. a cave-in of a North Korean nuclear site after a nearby earthquake;
  3. an ammunition dump explosion in Iraq;
  4. explosions at Russian munitions plants, and a Russian hospital that may, according to some, have been involved in biowarfare;
  5. explosions in chemical plants in Rouen, France and Tarragona, Spain;

...and so on. Of course, accidents happen all the time, and each and every one of these could be construed as such. Interestingly, however, these events seem to have something in common, namely, the fact that the incidents occur at military facilities, or infrastructure that could be construed as having some sort of military potential, or otherwise important infrastructure. And if one removes the accidents in France and Spain, they are occurring at sites of countries inimical to the leaders of "the West." Additionally, the pattern - if indeed it is a pattern - is rather odd. If all this was merely coincidence, one would expect that there would be more or less a uniform random distribution of these events both in time and in place. Yet, it appears to run in "streaks." First there were the explosions in (1) China; then  (2) North Korea;  then (3) Russia.

Then came France and Spain (the re-randomizers?)

And now (4) Iran.

So I have to wonder if we are looking at a covert warfare of some sort. Now throw those chemical plant explosions in France and Spain into the mix. What might one have? A response? Certainly I do not know. When one throws them into the mix, while considering the suggestive outlines of what may or may not be a pattern with the others, one might have to go so far as to entertain the idea that maybe there's another actor on the stage altogether, trying to stir up tension and conflict between "western interests" and the others.

But looking just at Iran, what I'm seeing is definitely "pattern." To believe that that country would have suffered such a string of accidents in so short a period of time in my opinion strains credulity.

See you on the flip side...