As a public speaker on
subjects dealing with foreign policy, especially US/Iran relations, I frequently
encounter genuinely curious individuals who confront me with tantalizing
questions. “Why does
Questions like these are raised, not just by people of very little knowledge of foreign affairs or academic background, but some supposedly well-informed and high caliber academics, businessmen and even by some with diplomatic backgrounds.
Experience shows that any blunt challenge to or refutation of the questioners’ basic assumptions regarding Iran is a sure way for me to be labeled as an Iran or Islam apologist and a supporter of the Islamic Republic’s policies. That, by extension, leads to other incorrect conclusions, that whatever the Iranian government does is ok with me.
If the attempt is to
correct misperceptions and bring about a constructive dialog with hopefully
fruitful results, overreaction, anger, ridicule or even gentle condescending
responses should be avoided. It is
very tempting to respond to a loaded question such as, Why does
When confronted by the question, Why is the Islamic world becoming increasingly more militant, intolerant and barbaric?, I once answered; Perhaps Moslems are learning more about the Christian world and Western values and history, from colonization and exploitation of the world to catastrophic world wars and genocides. Afterwards, I was sorry I said that; I had brought myself down to the level of the ignoramuses who ask questions like that.
Today, when I am asked
the question why
On April 25, PBS
carried a 90 minute program by Bill Moyers, titled Buying the War, aimed at
exposing and expounding on the lies and deceptions that led this nation to
I was frankly surprised that the Public Broadcasting actually aired such a program, especially by Bill Moyers, who has lost his tenure among the ranks of “favored” journalists because of his countercurrent or rogue reporting.
Possibly, Mr. Moyers
might consider doing a sequel titled, Buying Another War, This Time Against
Iran. In a two-seconds-long flash at the end of the program the word
As much as I have always admired Bill Moyers for his honesty, integrity, and his bold reporting, I have to respectfully offer my disappointment at the incompleteness of his otherwise monumental presentation.
The main emphasis of
his presentation was detailing the extent to which the American administration
went to make a case for war against
Here is where Mr.
Moyers and I part company; I would like to take off from where he has decided to
end his journey. Yes, Mr. Moyers, the invasion of
In numerous articles written since the war drums began to roll against Iraq, I, as many others, tried to point out that allegations against Iraq’s WMD programs and Al-Gha’eda connections, etc., were false, leading to the conclusion that the rationale for an invasion of Iraq, as well as the tightening of the noose around Iran, had nothing to do with terrorism or the danger that Iraq or Iran posed against the security or the legitimate interests of the United States.
Question could have
been asked even then as to why
My position was from
the very beginning, and remains to this day, that the Administration knew fully
The question should
be: If the decision makers in our administration knew the truth then, what
prompted them to push the nation toward war with
Of course, while we
can be confident that faulty intelligence regarding an Iraqi threat was not to
blame, we could blame poor judgment in the part of the movers and shakers of
As I have said many
times before, I believe we attacked
So, the policy making cabal knew that pretexts for going to war were totally unfounded, and must have known that the aftermath of the rather easy military victory would be a long term involvement in that quagmire.
I would prefer to believe that our neocon cabal that has been running our foreign policies, and the radical rightwing conservative think tanks that mastermind and write the scenarios of war in the Middle East are not a bunch of uneducated, trigger-happy morons who now want to drag us into yet another bloody mess by extending our involvement into Iran, so that they can be celebrated on Fox TV for their role in spreading freedom and democracy worldwide!
For a list of relevant think tanks, groups and organizations that fall into that category, check out the following short list on the Web:
American Enterprise Institute
The Project for the New American Century
Clean Break, Securing the Realm
Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
as well as several other “Rapture” oriented evangelical groups.
Look at the membership rosters of these organizations and trace their associations, affiliations and loyalties. You will not only see that there are no idiots or imbeciles among them, excepting, of course, some devotees of the last group, most have a common denominator that would take a blind person not to see.
tactics and conspiracy theories will continue to be employed to focus attention
away from the real culprit in this macabre chess game being played in the
countries count primarily, and very unfortunately, on the sale of their oil for
their economic survival. Countries like
Regarding Halliburton, I do not believe for one second that Mr. Cheney, who has not been enjoying good health for a number of years, is really interested in revenues from his Halliburton involvements to take the nation to war for it!
military-industrial complex, a network of suppliers, manufacturers and
propagandists who cater to and profit from the defense establishment, do not
need wars of aggression to prosper. As long as instabilities and threats to the
nation’s strategic interests exist, there will be ample rationale to maintain a
well equipped and capable force to protect against such threats, fabricated,
exaggerated, perceived or real. Ironically, a terrorist attack or assault on the
nation or against the widespread military forces worldwide would further
validate the importance of the
I am sure many readers
are tired of my harping on the same chord,
There was once an innocent, young and inexperienced fellow, Barak Obama by name. He spoke eloquently and with a degree of honesty and genuine self-confidence unlike his older and more politically savvy fellow lawmakers. He saw the opportunity to claim more public recognition by becoming a candidate for the presidential elections in 2008. His sudden popularity even alarmed the front runners and, much to his own surprise, he found himself the darling of the cheering crowds as he traveled the country.
He and his handlers soon realized that he was indeed a viable candidate for the Democratic Party, worthy of serious recognition. And, so did the movers and the shakers behind the scene who make or break political hopefuls in this country.
Oh, bummer, Obama; your only asset and real charm, your charisma, was in your innocence, your refreshing inexperience. You were unpolluted and brave while you really had nothing to lose. As a viable candidate your very future was now suddenly at risk. So you allowed them to rape you and lift that virginity that was the source of your noble pride and charm.
First it was that
In one of your latest
appearances on television, you were asked about a comment you had made a while
back before you became a viable candidate, that the Palestinians have been
suffering the worst human rights violations in the world. The candidate Obama,
no longer a virgin, answered that what he meant was that it was the
Palestinians’ own fault for their miseries!
... Payvand News - 5/2/07 ...
... Payvand News - 5/2/07 ... --