Is Iran a victim of propaganda?
Will Conroy, '12 | Staff Reporter
Issue date: 12/11/09 Section: Opinion
"Jumping the gun" is an understatement when describing what's taken place over the past couple weeks concerning Iran's "secret" nuclear facility near the ancient city of Qom, as many are quickly mounting up for war.
On Sept. 23 at the U.N. meeting in New York City, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gave a speech attacking the U.N. for their biased support of the injustice and the monopolistic, imperial aspirations of the U.S. and others. Afterward, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who earlier had called for a boycott of the speech, expressed his outrage toward Iran and that the U.N. gave the "Holocaust-denier" the opportunity to speak.
The next day President Barrack Obama, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy uniformly jumped on Iran and demanded they "come clean" on their new plant. They said this despite the fact, according toPress TV, that Iran had days earlier agreed to the demands of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that inspectors be granted permission to check out the new facility.
According to theLondon Guardian, on Sept. 30 U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector and IAEA Inspector General Mohamed ElBaradei found that there was no credible evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, rejecting claims made by German and British Intelligence. Ironically, according to Xinhua, on Oct. 4 he said, "Israel is the number one threat to the Middle East given the nuclear arms it possesses" noting their refusal to sign non-proliferation treaties and to allow inspections into their nuclear installations for 30 years. ElBaradei continues describing his surprise of the hype surrounding Iran's nuclear program as if it were the greatest threat to the world.
Despite sanctions and pressure from NATO, Iran has continued the development of their nuclear facility. The lack of any actual threat hasn't stopped others from calling Iran exactly that. According to Haaretz, senior NATO officials just this past week have called Iran "a potential threat to the peace and security of the entire world." According to Reuters, Robert Gibbs, Obama's chief spokesman, has said that, "Our patience and that of the international community is limited, and time is running out." I am sure that Iran's strategically relevant location, both militarily and more importantly economically, have nothing to do with recent western reactions.
Iranian ambassador to the IAEA Ali Asghar Soltaniyeh claims Iran is the victim of deliberate negligence that is part of a hidden agenda of western countries - a strategy which entails attempts to "jeopardize the spirit of cooperation of Iran with the IAEA as well as to create a pretext for sanctions and other measures." His response is justifiable and the scenario plausible, especially given the increased competition for oil between eastern and western nations that could develop into a "economic war," as described by Robert Fisk in an article for the Independent titled "The Demise of the Dollar."
His assertion is accurate given the consistent attempts to destabilize the region. Reports like that from the London Telegraph in February,March and May of 2007 have identified the CIA's involvement in "Black Ops," which funds terrorist militant groups in an attempt to destabilize the Iranian regime. More recently these black ops have been blamed for the attack in Iran that killed 42 people Oct. 18, which included top generals of the Revolutionary Guard, at a meeting to promote ethnic unity. The Jundullah group, who later claimed responsibility for this attack, is understood to have been funded and trained by American and Britain intelligence officers in nearby Pakistan as a part of these kinds of black operations, according to the Telegraph and ABC news.
"The truth is they've had it for a long time, and the U.N. has known about it and they're just stirring up fears," Congressman Ron Paul said in reference to the facility, drilling the "fear mongers" and their attempts to drum up support for the military-industrial complex by instigating wars.
R-GA Sen. Saxby Chambliss and R-SC Sen. Lindsey Graham were quick to call for military action on Fox News, arguing that we can slow them down with sanctions but "a full-out military strike is what it would take." On Oct. 13 former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton joined in the war-mongering, arguing that Israel using nuclear weapons is the only deterrent. It's frightening to see what a little media hype can do.
Views like these have been fueled by a smear campaign led by the media and numerous politicians against Ahmadinejad, distorting some of his remarks in an effort to depict him as "crazy" and extreme. He has been made infamous throughout much of the west for supposedly denying the holocaust and calling for Israel to "be wiped off the map." The contexts sound extreme, something that is to be desired when trying to legitimize a war. Theactual translation, which can be found at Antiwar.com, of the popular "wiped off the map" quote in question is, "Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."
Ahmadinejad has had to repeatedly defend himself against false claims such as these. In aninterview with Katie Couric the day of the U.N. meeting in New York City, he attempted to clarify what he has said in the past and believes to this day. He said that in the name of the holocaust the U.N., Europeans and the Zionist regime created a myth, the myth being the Zionist regime that runs the region known as Israel, and he questions the mystery and secrecy surrounding some of the events that took place. He argued that the formation of Israel was part of a broader, racist agenda - a Zionist regime he believes that should be eradicated, not annihilated as many have insinuated. "If the U.N. and European nations want to compensate the Jews for a horrendous crime that Europeans committed, why not compensate them with land in Europe?" he says.
After talking with Ahmadinejad at the U.N. meeting, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil told theAsia Times, "What I wish for Iran is what I always wanted for Brazil - a peaceful, civilian nuclear program."
Something must be done about these Brazilian extremists! After all, why should countries independent of our own be allowed to advance, in this case with extremely beneficial and peaceful nuclear power?
It would seem that Obama and his administration are playing from the same playbook of the previous administration. The same tactics were used to start the Iraq war and the war in Afghanistan, when faulty intelligence was deliberately released and hyped up to wage an unconstitutional war. What's next, war with yet another top oil producing country that throws trillions of dollars more at the corporate lobby and defense contractors rather than towards education, energy, poverty and efforts to actually stimulate the economy? Venezuela is primed for the picking.
On Sept. 23 at the U.N. meeting in New York City, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gave a speech attacking the U.N. for their biased support of the injustice and the monopolistic, imperial aspirations of the U.S. and others. Afterward, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who earlier had called for a boycott of the speech, expressed his outrage toward Iran and that the U.N. gave the "Holocaust-denier" the opportunity to speak.
The next day President Barrack Obama, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy uniformly jumped on Iran and demanded they "come clean" on their new plant. They said this despite the fact, according to
According to the
Despite sanctions and pressure from NATO, Iran has continued the development of their nuclear facility. The lack of any actual threat hasn't stopped others from calling Iran exactly that. According to Haaretz, senior NATO officials just this past week have called Iran "a potential threat to the peace and security of the entire world." According to Reuters, Robert Gibbs, Obama's chief spokesman, has said that, "Our patience and that of the international community is limited, and time is running out." I am sure that Iran's strategically relevant location, both militarily and more importantly economically, have nothing to do with recent western reactions.
Iranian ambassador to the IAEA Ali Asghar Soltaniyeh claims Iran is the victim of deliberate negligence that is part of a hidden agenda of western countries - a strategy which entails attempts to "jeopardize the spirit of cooperation of Iran with the IAEA as well as to create a pretext for sanctions and other measures." His response is justifiable and the scenario plausible, especially given the increased competition for oil between eastern and western nations that could develop into a "economic war," as described by Robert Fisk in an article for the Independent titled "The Demise of the Dollar."
His assertion is accurate given the consistent attempts to destabilize the region. Reports like that from the London Telegraph in February,
"The truth is they've had it for a long time, and the U.N. has known about it and they're just stirring up fears," Congressman Ron Paul said in reference to the facility, drilling the "fear mongers" and their attempts to drum up support for the military-industrial complex by instigating wars.
R-GA Sen. Saxby Chambliss and R-SC Sen. Lindsey Graham were quick to call for military action on Fox News, arguing that we can slow them down with sanctions but "a full-out military strike is what it would take." On Oct. 13 former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton joined in the war-mongering, arguing that Israel using nuclear weapons is the only deterrent. It's frightening to see what a little media hype can do.
Views like these have been fueled by a smear campaign led by the media and numerous politicians against Ahmadinejad, distorting some of his remarks in an effort to depict him as "crazy" and extreme. He has been made infamous throughout much of the west for supposedly denying the holocaust and calling for Israel to "be wiped off the map." The contexts sound extreme, something that is to be desired when trying to legitimize a war. The
Ahmadinejad has had to repeatedly defend himself against false claims such as these. In an
After talking with Ahmadinejad at the U.N. meeting, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil told the
Something must be done about these Brazilian extremists! After all, why should countries independent of our own be allowed to advance, in this case with extremely beneficial and peaceful nuclear power?
It would seem that Obama and his administration are playing from the same playbook of the previous administration. The same tactics were used to start the Iraq war and the war in Afghanistan, when faulty intelligence was deliberately released and hyped up to wage an unconstitutional war. What's next, war with yet another top oil producing country that throws trillions of dollars more at the corporate lobby and defense contractors rather than towards education, energy, poverty and efforts to actually stimulate the economy? Venezuela is primed for the picking.