SEEING THROUGH ALL THE PROPAGANDA ABOUT IRAN
WASHINGTON - June 22, 2009
Iran’s political crisis continues to blaze. It’s still impossible to say which leaders or factions will emerge victorious, but one thing is certain: the earthquake in the Islamic Republic is shaking the Mideast and deeply confusing everyone, including the US government.
 Highlighting the complexity of this crisis, Meir Dagan, the head of Israel’s intelligence agency, Mossad, reportedly voiced his hope that Iran’s embattled president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, would remain in office.  On the surface, that sounds absurd, since Ahmadinejad is Israel’s Great Satan.
 
But, according to Dagan, if Ahmadinejad’s supposedly `moderate’ rival, Mir Hossein  Mousavi,  came to power, it would be harder for Israel to keep up its propaganda war against Iran over Tehran’s nuclear program. 
 
Besides, added the Mossad chief, the devil you know is better.
 
Meanwhile, we have been watching an intensifying western propaganda campaign against Iran, mounted by the US and British governments.  What we hear is commentary and analysis that comes from bitterly anti-regime Iranian exiles, `experts’ with an ax to grind, and US pro-Israel neocons yearning for war with Iran. 
 
In viewing the Muslim world, Westerners keep listening to those who tell them what they want to hear, rather than the facts.  We are at it again in Iran.   
 
President Barack Obama’s properly stated he would refrain from being seen to `meddle’  in Iran’s internal affairs in spite of calls by hard-line Republicans for American action – whatever that might be. Obama did the right thing by apologizing for the US/British coup that overthrew Iran’s democratic Mossadegh government in 1953.
 
But that was not the whole story. Washington has been  attempting to overthrow Iran’s Islamic government since the 1979  revolution and continues to do so in spite of pledges of neutrality in the current crisis.
 
The US has laid economic siege to Iran for 30 years, blocking desperately needed foreign investment, preventing technology transfers, and disrupting Iranian trade. In recent years, the US Congress voted $120 million for anti-regime media broadcasts into Iran, and $60-75 million funding opposition parties,  violent underground Marxists like the Mujahidin-i-Khalq, and restive ethnic groups like Azeris, Kurds, and Arabs under the so-called `Iran Democracy Program.’ 
 
The arm of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, remains withered from a bomb planted by the US-backed Mujahidin-i-Khalq, who were once on the US terrorist list.  
 
Pakistani intelligence sources put CIA’s recent spending on `black operations’ to subvert Iran’s government at $400 million. 
 
According to an ABC News investigation, President George Bush signed a `finding’ that authorized an accelerated campaign of subversion against the Islamic Republic. Washington’s goal was `regime change’ in Tehran and installation of a pro-US regime of former Iranian royalist exiles.
 
While the majority of protests we see in Tehran are genuine and spontaneous, Western intelligence agencies and  media are playing a key role in sustaining the uprising and providing communications, including the newest electronic method, via Twitter.  These are covert techniques developed by the US during recent revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia that brought pro-US governments to power.
 
The Tehran government made things worse by limiting foreign news reports and arresting prominent politicians.  Its leadership is increasingly – and dangerously -  split over how to handle the protests.   
 
We also hear lot of hypocrisy from Western capitals.  Washington, Ottawa, London and Paris piously accused Iran of improper electoral procedures while utterly ignoring the total lack of democracy in their authoritarian Mideast allies such as Egypt, Morocco, and Saudi Arabia, that never hold elections and throw political opponents into prison and torture them.  Compared to them, Iran, for all its faults, is almost model of democratic governance.
 
The US, France and Saudi Arabia just cooperated to rig Lebanon’s recent elections, dishing out millions in bribe money to ensure victory of the pro-US faction.  France’s President Nicolas Sarkozy had the chutzpah to rebuke Iran for improper election procedures after returning from the funeral of Gabon’s dictator, Omar Bongo, who had ruled for 41 years and supplied France with cheap oil.
 
When Hamas won a fair and square democratic election in Gaza, the US and Israel swiftly moved to mount a coup against the new Palestinian government.
 
US senators, led by John McCain, blasted Iran for not respecting human rights. That’s pretty rich after they just voted to bar the public release  of ghastly torture photos from US prisons in Iraq, want secret US prisons kept open, and champion torture.   
 
Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of the dimmest bulbs in the weak-wattage Republican ranks, called for US intervention in Iran.  Graham was an architect of the Iraq fiasco.  Let’s air assault the warlike senator into downtown Tehran.      
 
Uber-moral Canada, which backed Pakistan’s military dictatorship under Gen. Pervez Musharraf, accused Tehran of unfair elections.    
 
There are many questions about Iran’s vote, of which  incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won by 60%.  
Voter turnout was an amazing 84%, putting to shame the US and Europe, where less than half of voters exercise their right.
Pre-election polls that showed Ahmadinejad headed for a big win were right.  All those foreigners praying for his defeat and the collapse of the Islamic government may be deeply disappointed.
 
But it also appears there were significant –though as far as we know now – not decisive irregularities.  Iran’s government has admitted that some ballot boxes were stuffed, and the speaker of the Majils (parliament), the capable Ali Larijani, rebuked certain unnamed clerics for trying to rig results.   This was extremely stupid, as Ahmadinejad was way ahead in pre-election polls anyway,  and very popular.   
 
This leaves Washington in a quandary.  President Obama sincerely wants to enter into talks with Iran over its nuclear program and try to convince Tehran to give up enrichment.  But hardliners in his cabinet and Congress are urging Obama to seize the opportunity to further destabilize Iran.
 
Bad idea.  A stable Iran is essential to a stable Mideast.  Mossad chief Dagan knows what he’s talking about.  US and British efforts to subvert Iran’s government could yet blow up in our faces.  And do we really need another monster crisis after Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Palestine?
 
Meanwhile, other Mideast nations allied to the US will look at Iran and conclude that giving any democratic rights can be downright dangerous and must be avoided at all costs.    
 
 
copyright Eric S. Margolis 2009
  
 
 
 
       
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
Saan
Monday, June 22, 2009 1:24 PM
Here we go again, Margolis making excuses for brutal murderous dictators as long as they are anti-American. It it not only neocons who are hypocrites, Margolis is just as big of a hypocrite as they are.
But don't you find it interesting that Margolis is agreeing with Mossad's chief?

I say this to Muslims who read these articles, beware, Margolis does not have your best interests in heart, in fact he may be a very well placed Mossad or CIA agent provocateur.
Either that or he is bitterly anti-American and wishes for Muslims in the Middle East to fight those wars for him.

Have you noticed that in all the years he is writing that he wants the Muslim Middle East run by backward, primitive, brutal dictators as long as they are anti-American. What does this mean? It means poverty, ruin, and eventual invasion by America... now, in who's interest is that I wonder...

We know what neocons want, but they are not in power so it doesn't matter. And we know what Iranian royalists want but they have no chance of gaining power, so it doesn't matter. But we do know this: decent, honest, and fair journalists such as Christiane Amanpour,
John Simpson, Roger Cohen, Jeremey Bowen and others have reported of wide human rights abuses and even murder by Iranian state militias, and of the oppression people there live under. Ahmedinejad may well have won, but the election was almost certainly rigged, more so than in Lebanon. By the way, Lebanon does not need to rig the polls, the electoral system there is already deeply sectarian and therefore totally undemocratic in my view (for example Shias who are at least 35% of population get about 15% of the vote).
Allan
Sunday, June 28, 2009 1:08 AM
If a country exploits another country do you think it's people will love the exploiting country. Anti-Americanism exists for a reason. The U.S. is responsible for deposing the Iranian government of democratically elected PM Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953, yet rails against Iran and other nations about democracy? Ask the Latin Americans how the U.S. sabotaged the democratic process in their countries or ask the people of the Phillipines about the U.S. annexation of its lands at the turn of the 20th century. Many of the brutal dictators you mention are best buddies with the U.S. Do you think the U.S. even gives an iota about having a democracy in these countries? On one hand it supports dictatorships in some countries and on the other hand it advocates democracy in others . It is pretty naive for anyone to entertain the thought that the U.S. is their friend - we only need to look back at how the U.S. dealt with their once good chum Saddam whom they showered with state of the art weaponary & intelligence against Iran during the Iran-Iraq war ... and the world should just love the U.S.
js8me
Friday, July 03, 2009 6:52 PM
To Saan.
I am a big fan of Margolis since i came to Canada about 11 years ago. I've been listening to him and reading his articles, specially his take on Mujahidin during Russian invasion of Afghanistan. I am an Afghan and here is what I think.
Mr. Margolis seem to know the area very well and has great understanding of the region, unfortunately he is very biased on his view about many things specially Afghanistan. I know this article is about Iran, but since I know nothing about Iran I can only doubt half of what i read in his commentaries. He seems (or pretends) to have known figures like Benazir Bhuto, Sadeqh Ghotbzadeh or connection with ISI. He favours Pushtoon Tribes, as he previously claim that victory in Afghanistan was achieved only and only by Pushtoon Tribes. In Afghanistan we have Tajik, Uzbek, Hazara, Pushtoon, Turkmen, Pashayee and Soviet fought each and every one of these ethnic groups and the victory was not achieved by these Talibans (Mr. Mrgolis's favoured former pushtoon worriers).
Unfortunatley Mr. Margolis never talks about other dirty dimensions of involvement in the region. A cancer is growin deep in that region and it will spread everywhere very quickly. Starting from bad Western policies, deep Wahabi influence in Iraq, Afghanista, Pakistan, even ISI, Taliban etc.
I think just becoming anti-American is not good enough reason to support or praise any brute system. But I guess politic is a dirty game and once in it you are as dirty as the rest of them. I am not suggesting Mr. Margolis's direct involvment in politics, but his report or take at times to me seem like a different version of CNN.

Cheers.
FredVarua
Monday, June 22, 2009 1:57 PM
I am very disappointed by this article. It's far from a journalist's ethical code of conducts to publish or rely on unproven facts. you wrote:

"Voter turnout was an amazing 84%, putting to shame the US and Europe,
where less than half of voters exercise their right.
Pre-election polls that showed Ahmadinejad headed for a big win were right. All those foreigners praying for his defeat and the collapse of the Islamic government may be deeply disappointed."

The voter turn out was part of the made up results of the rigged election, in some of the provinces the turn out was reported as bing 140%.
And also those pre-election polls that Eric mentions was all conducted by the iranian government, there is no independent organization allowed to poll public opinion over there.

I find this article is so biased toward Ahamadinjad and his dictatorship, which is very sad as we see how they keep killing protesters. I should say shame on you Eric... you just downgraded yourself as one of Khamenei's and Ahmadinejad's writers.








K Ahmed
Monday, June 22, 2009 5:13 PM
I am not sure on what basis people make strong statements, if you have an opinion you must express it “as an opinion” but one should not ignore the facts. If you don’t know the facts then don’t make a comment. You wrote that "there is no independent organization allowed to poll public opinion over there".
Just to keep the record straight … At least one poll which I know carried out by an independent entity called Center for Public Opinion (CPO) of the New America Foundation. This poll was conducted few weeks before election, and it predicted an 89% turnout rate. It also showed that Ahmadinejad had a nationwide advantage of two to one over Mousavi. http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/TFT-NAF%20Iran%20Survey%20Report%20.pdf
Market Socialist
Monday, June 22, 2009 3:17 PM
I applaud Mr. Margolis for articulating his “views”. God/Allah only knows how many more times we in the West have to be subjected to the “party line” of the corporate media.

Although I am no fan of the Mullahs and Ahmadinegad however, they (et al.) have brought more prosperity to a majority of the Iranian people than the US installed despot aka Shah.

These upheavals in Iran smell of another “coloured revolution” which is not beyond the realm of reason when one considers that $400 million of indebted money was spent on subverting the Iranian government.

Eric alludes to the US answer to the Mullahs, “installation of a pro-US regime of former Iranian royalist exiles.” Perhaps we can also exhume Pinochet and put his skeleton in power in Argentina. I hear the Idi Amin is also looking for work.

Keep up the good journalistic undertakings Eric.
Musaddiq Virk
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 3:22 AM
"Although I am no fan of the Mullahs and Ahmadinegad however, they (et al.) have brought more prosperity to a majority of the Iranian people than the US installed despot aka Shah."

Very well said, you noticed the thing everyone else is missing! It's only the elite class who is protesting!!!!! People, nothing is going to change in Iran, it's just western media fooling his own people again. For what and for whom? GUESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????????

FredVarua
Monday, June 22, 2009 3:39 PM
You wrote:

"...., they (et al.) have brought more prosperity to a majority of the Iranian people than the US installed despot aka Shah."

I am not sure who/what your sources are, but I hope you think twice about relying on them in future.
I have been in contact with many many Iranians have visited there, people have suffered great financial loss these past four years and it happened to be during the time that Oil price was at its highest. Based on the reports that Majlis (Iranian parliament) has reported , there is $1B unaccounted for in Ahmadinejad's government, people are frustrated from the corruption and are getting poorer every day. Ahmadinejad has failed putting that all that money into good use for people, he has failed creating jobs, as the jobless rate is now around 17% while the inflation rate has climbed to 26%.
Marbou
Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:41 PM
"...there is $1 billion unaccounted for in the Ahmadinejad's government,..." Wuppy do! Look at the USA, the Pentagon alone has $1 trillion unaccounted for. Now that's corruption, and all in that great democracy. Freeeeeeedooommmmmmmm.
jeff
Sunday, June 28, 2009 10:12 PM
and how are things going in the States?
Lavrenti Beria
Monday, June 22, 2009 6:30 PM
A fair and perhaps overly generous analysis, Eric. And you are supported in the main thrust of your analysis by Paul Craig Roberts and others at CounterPunch:

http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts06192009.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts06222009.html

Not sure I'd be as complimentary toward the fancied "non-interference" of Barak Obama, however. Not an hour passes without some provocative meddling from that quarter. Election protest? Bull hockey! What we're witnessing is a Western sponsored and inspired attempt at a revolution. No one should be surprized at the response of the Iranian government. Would Wahington have stood still for comparable "protests" in 2000 over the election of George Bush? Did the Chicago police stand still for much smaller scale demonstrations in 1968?
manfred k
Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:04 AM
"Omar Bongo, President for life" I believe you so aptly described this tyrannical African dictator. Yet another very good observation on current events supported with historical fact. An unstable Iran places the entire mid-East in a precarious position. While there have been blatant voting irregularities in the Iranian election, Ahmadinejad’s base of support in rural Iran democratically had the advantage. "The devil you know" mentality is not only a strategy for spooks, but also for many of those who exercise their civic duty. At least they are getting out to vote. More than one can say of those who will not be shedding any tears in Gabon.
BAK
Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:07 AM
A very comprehensive article Eric, absolutely excellent. My congratulations to you. Finally, a western journalist who is telling it like it is about Iran.

Regards
Michael Lesbowicz
Tuesday, June 23, 2009 6:09 AM
Let's get some things straight: despite what they pretend, NOBODY in the west gives a flying fart about the people of Iran, and the oppressive reign of terror the Islamic regime and the satanic Mullahs have inflicted upon Iranians. All the U.S. and other western countries want, is a compliant puppet regime that will sell out its own people to western interests. Nobody in the west wanted a powerful and modern imperial Iran. They were perfectly happy with the Islamic revolution knocking back Iran a few centuries in terms of development, and making it look like a European country of the dark ages. The only beef the west has with the mullahs is that they do not bend over and follow orders from the west.

There is no such thing as a completely natural and internal regime change. All regime changes are fingered from the outside. The Islamic terror regime in Iran will go, whenever the higher powers decide it is time for them to go.

In fact, the U.S. and Israel in particular, are desperate to keep someone like Ahmadinejacket in power. He is of benefit to them, because he gives the west an excuse to confront Iran, like Margolis correctly pointed out. Other than that, I want to see the evil lying satanic Ahmadinejacket go, and be replaced by someone like Mousavi, for the benefit of people in Iran, not for the benefit of the west.

Life in Iran under the Islamic regime is a nightmare. Crime is out of control. Drug abuse is out of control. Prostitution is out of control. Inflation is through the roof. There is no free speech. Iranians have no personal freedom under the rule of the Mullahs. The media is heavily censored. Police brutality is rampant. Iran is almost reaching Saudi Arabian levels in its poor treatment of women as second-class citizens. The current Islamic terror regime in Iran is the closest thing to fascism in the Middle East. The Shah might have been a U.S./Western puppet but the real reason the west had a beef with him, was because during the last years of his reign he stopped bending over and following orders from the west, which is the real reason they got rid of him. Western media keep spewing out nonsense about how evil the Shah was, but not one single word is mentioned about the hundred times more evil Mullahs and the crimes they commit against Iranians.
philmar
Tuesday, June 23, 2009 1:49 PM
" Crime is out of control. Drug abuse is out of control. Prostitution is out of control. Inflation is through the roof. There is no free speech. Iranians have no personal freedom under the rule of the Mullahs."

Hmm, the gov't can't be clamping down too hard on personal freedoms if there is ample drugs, prostitution and crime.
BAK
Thursday, June 25, 2009 5:57 AM
@ "Hmm, the gov't can't be clamping down too hard on personal freedoms if there is ample drugs, prostitution and crime." well put :D
Michael Lesbowicz
Thursday, June 25, 2009 11:49 AM
WRONGLY PUT!

You are confusing two completely different things and missing the point. The point is, they don't clamp down where it really counts: on the aforementioned inflation, drugs, prostitution and crime. They do however make life a living hell for ordinary Iranians. There is no personal freedom in Iran. The government literally dictates how you have to dress, talk, walk and act. I grew up there. I know. In terms of being fascist police states, the U.S. and Iran have surprisingly much in common. People in Iran routinely get executed for crimes that at the very most would get you a fine in other countries. Stop obsessing about small details and read the whole post.
Allan
Sunday, June 28, 2009 4:33 AM
Women in Iran have more rights than women in Saudi Arabia. Women in Iran own & run businesses, have access to higher education and have the right to drive. Women can't even drive in Saudi Arabia. Speaking of crime have you ever visited Pakistan ? I have stayed in both countries and compared to Iran both Pakistan & Saudi Arabia are in the stone ages. Iran is no role model of democracy and has it's own social problems but which country in the world does not have social problems? Drug abuse, prostitution and gun crimes are rampant in the U.S. too. Besides, there is no such thing as free speech anywhere in the world - time you got off your island Gilligan.
Darren
Tuesday, June 23, 2009 1:10 PM
The people commenting here are missing the point, if they say this article isn't balanced. There is such a biased view in the American media that by their standard, this article seems biased.

"In an act fraught with symbolic significance, a suicide bomber blew himself up at the mausoleum of the father of Iran's Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, while unrest continued across Tehran in defiance of a ban on demonstrations." - Yahoo! news

This kind of comment is ridiculous. If there was such a bombing on an American target, it would have been labled an evil terrorist action, but because it was in Iran, it was an action "fraught with symbolism."

Thanks to eric for providing some couterbalancing to the terrible media coverage of the situation in Iran.
Lavrenti Beria
Tuesday, June 23, 2009 5:20 PM
You are absolutely correct. As one might expect from the mentality prevalent in the West - and this particular critique is probably more germaine in respect of secular bacteria like Obama or Sarkozy of France, who today from on high denounces the burqa - this whole thing has degenerated into a Western inspired protest on behalf of "women's rights"! If these are the instincts that now drive this movement, and they would seem to be, I wouldn't be able to manage very much sympathy if the Iranian government were to bash in the heads of each and every one of these counter-revolutionary filth.

You might find yourself taken with the articles at CounterPunch by Paul Craig Roberts that I referenced above.

transparency
Tuesday, June 23, 2009 1:21 PM
To all those who hope and pray this will change something in Iran. You are all wrong. The Islamic Republic was and will always be a sharp thorn in the eyes of the envyers. If you want to count on the Westerners and Zionists to change the Democratically elected government and freely selected Islamic Regime, You and your Masters in the West are dreaming. This Islamic republic is made to stay. Will never weaken or lose in any present and futute battles. No matter how much the West tries to please the so called Israeli lobby in their condemning of the Islamic regime, this will never change. This is from thepersonal perspective.

From the political persepective, the West and the Collection of Nationalities in occupied Palestine called Israel, all did not support
the only Arab democratic elected government in Palestine.
Overthrew the Democratic elected government in Algeria.
Interfered with money, threats and influence in the Lebanese elections.
All support the inheritance of power in arab and african dictatorships. Why, because those arab countries are willing to bend over for israelis.
The Biased Italian government opened its Embassy doors to the injured protesters with tons of hospitals available, but not dare even thinking of doing the same in the Gaza Holocost.
The french and Africa is a long story.
The British for anyone who reads, are the ones who started all the mess in the middle east.
The Americans.WOW. I don't know where to start or finish. From the COUP of the elections Recount, or the coup of 911...

Take my advice everyone. Nothing will change because the west has always decieved its people and allies. From the Gulf of Pigs in Cuba, to Monafiqee Khalq in Iran, to the Kurds.....

Today is the day when everone will see Iran emerge out of this crisis, surprisingly STRONGER

Dik
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 2:39 PM
I thought it was a very good article... a few comments:

Saan:
I've followed Margolis for a decade or so and I think his articles are well balanced. Being rather simple, I separate the world into "good guys" and "bad guys". I expect different things from either faction. When a dictator, aka nasty ruler, is supported by the 'good guys' they (the good guys) are greatly diminished.

Fred Varua:
You missed the point... whether the percentage is 80 or 150, it is still much higher then the 30% common to western democracies. If they are not the 'good guys' then I expect some shenanagans (sp?)

Dik
bts
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 7:08 PM
In the past US wanted regime change in Iran. But now I think US just wants to overthrow Ahmadinejad. It's not about regime change anymore, Obama made that clear. Besides Ahmadinejad is not the head of state or somebody who is very important to the regime.

In 2005 and earlier, US was always organizing boycott campaigns against Iranian elections (they do this through exiled opposition groups) US dismissed Ahmadinejad as irrelevant after Ahmadinejad won the 2005 elections. US dismissed the Reformists as irrelevant when Reformists won in 1997.

But this time US encouraged Iranians to participate in the election and vote for Reformists. All the sudden we start hearing the words "Iran's democratic elections"

Obama didn't say it out loud, but obviously Obama doesn't want to work with holocaust-denying Ahmadinejad because it's a political liability. Obama would prefer anybody as long as it's not Ahmadinejad, even if the alternative is a criminal like Mousavi who was Iran's prime minister during the 1980s, the period of Iran's cultural revolution and mass executions.
hyperbolus
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 8:52 PM
An excellent column, especially valuable because "our" Western (i.e. capitalist, imperialist, Zionist) media is very nearly unanimously hostile to Ahmadinejad, the Islamic Republic, and the Iranian Revolution. What's happening in Iran? The revolting/decadent/corrupt Iranian (or rather Tehranian) bourgeoisie (or rather their offspring), manipulated by foreigners and especially the sinister Rafsanjani and his cronies (including Mousavi--my definition of "reformer": someone eager to grab state assets, the public trust, the common-wealth, for himself and his "friends"), are trying (and failing) to overthrow the vanguard of the Revolution supported by the majority of the population (who really voted for Ahmadinejad). This is something the U.S., Israel, and Saudi Arabia want(ed), but they won't get it. And that should encourage everyone resisting capitalism and imperialism.
jeff
Sunday, June 28, 2009 10:20 PM
Great article Eric, as usual. I have just today begun reading you online, (usually reading your article in the Sun) What they exclude is very telling.
Ahmadinejad's greatest luck has gone unmentioned - the death of Michael Jackson. The American people have other preoccupations now, and any percieved Iranian transgressions will soon be forgotten. It would be a terrific time to pass a military spending bill, or invade a country - it will go unreported.
Darren
Monday, June 29, 2009 10:53 AM
A bit of good luck for Iran, but the american people have a low attention span anyway. Plus I'm sure that the american media will find some way to bring back attention to iran after the michael jackson thing blows over. For instance, now the iranian thing is apparently all about women's rights.
WHITEHUNTER
Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:56 PM
Iran, Iran, Iran. What has Iran ever done to the rest of the world that is soooo bad ? Iran has never started a war and pretty well minds it's own business. But Iran is a target because of it's oil just as an elephant is a target for poachers because of it's ivory. Israel is obsessed with Iran because a nuclear Iran can stop Israel's brutal ravaging of the middle east. 9/11 was carefully staged by Israel's Mossad that duped the unsuspecting Americans into believing that they were in danger of Arab terrorists, kinda like the reichstag fire. Sadam had all these terrible weapons of mass destruction and the cowboy from Texas told Americans that they would head them off at the pass. The fact that 5 Israeli agents were arrested on 9/11 in New Jersey after witnesses saw them celebrating the attack was brushed under the carpet as was Dominick Suter's sudden flight to Israel the day after being questioned by the FBI. regarding those same 5 Mossad agents. I wonder what sort of false flag story they will serve up to the public to justify an attack on Iran. The big question is, will China keep lending America money to start more illegal wars.
sheba69
Monday, July 27, 2009 10:11 AM
What China is to the Far East, Iran ie Persia is to the Middle East. With thousands of years of civilized history and a track record of achievements and attainment, the US or for that matter any of the modern so called democratic, liberal and human rights flag bearers have no business in the prognosis and prescription of the ailment that befalls Iran.

And some of the symptoms of this affliction smells fishy. We all know how the vast resources of Iran's Oil & Gas since the fall of the Shah are no longer in Western control with associated colic pains that are constantly in the hearts and mind of people in the Pentagon/CIA.We want to see the US and its allies awaken from the euphoric dream world of gunboat diplomacy, covert actions and unsavory tactics leading to war and misery for ordinary citizens. If Eric is contributing towards this, so be it. Let him be of any race, religion or color, we must stand up and applaud.

There are currently 28 comments
Comments Commentaries
Currently Ordered By:
Commentaries by Category