The Iran Charade So They Lied Again

[fishman3811]

So they lied again. And again. Despite the fact that the Bush administration knew quite well that its very own intelligence estimate stated quite clearly that the Iranian government had halted its work on building nuclear weaponry, Mr. Bush told the world not more than two months ago that Iran was risking World War Three if it continued said work. On Monday, December 3, 2007, an report from Mr. Bush's own government said quite clearly that its intelligence proved that Iran halted nuclear arms work four years ago. Despite this knowledge, the Bush administration and its enablers in Congress have continued to move the United States closer and closer to war with Iran.

Of course, the fact that the White House has been lying for at least four years about the dangers of Iranian nuclear weaponry comes as no surprise to many of the world's citizens. After all, it was this very same administration that invaded Iraq on the basis of lies regarding Iraq's nuclear ambitions and its long lost weapons of mass destruction. What is somewhat surprising is the response to Monday's news from the White House. According to national security adviser Stephen Hadley, everything that the White House has said up to now about Iran's nuclear intentions was not wrong. Indeed, according to Hadley, it only proves that gathering intelligence is "notoriously difficult." Furthermore, in the White House's estimation, this revelation proves that the White House was right and that the US is correct to continue threatening war and encouraging sanctions. You know, just to keep Iran in line. Now, I don't know about you, but this argument sounds very similar to Bill Clinton's line about what constituted having "sex with that woman." In other words, they got caught in a lie and now the Bush White House and its allies in the government and media are using facetious arguments to justify those lies.

Will it fly? If US politicians like Joseph Lieberman and the government Israel have anything to say about it, it will. Israel has already essentially dismissed the report and continues to insist that Iran is very close to possessing a nuclear weapon. In addition, the recent appointment of Iraq war architect and propagandist Paul Wolfowitz to the State Department office that deals with other nation's WMD may be an indication that some type of story creation a la the yellow cake lie of 2002 is already in progress. Even if this doesn't occur, the ongoing spin by the White House to make Teheran's cessation of nuclear arms activity a continuation is enough to convince me that Bush and Co. are still keeping an attack on Iran on its front burner, despite the hopeful and confused commentary by former CIA analyst Robert Baer that appeared at Time.com on December 4, 2007. In this odd little piece, Baer puts forth the supposition that George Bush himself was behind the release of the intelligence estimate. Why? To forestall and attack on Iran, of course. Essentially, Baer writes that Bush is against attacking Iran because of the situation in Iraq-where he repeats the latest Washington line that things are "looking up"-and because the White House is afraid Israel will be attacked if Iran is. I'm not sure where Mr. Baer has been or what prescriptions he may be on, but the possibility of Israel being attacked because of Bush's bellicosity has never been a concern of Bush in the past and if, Tel Aviv's statements since the release of the intelligence estimate are any indication, it doesn't seem to be a concern of Tel Aviv now. In the New York Times, a different story is emerging-that the intelligence estimate "holds up to scrutiny, but they (various experts) acknowledge that some conclusions seem to have been thinly sourced." This statement sounds like an open door to more spin. As for the situation in Iraq, Mr. Bush certainly wasn't too concerned about destabilizing it in 2003 when he invaded.


Anti-Invasion and Anti-Tehran-HOPOI and Stop the War UK

Meanwhile, in the British segment of the movement against war with Iran there is a debate over whether or not those groups and individuals opposed both to a US/Israel attack on Iran and the theocracy that currently rules that country can be part of the national Stop the War UK Coalition. Some of those forces, now coalescing around the group Hands Off the People of Iran (HOPOI), recently had their petition to join that coalition rejected. The reasons for this decision are murky, with the Stop the war Coalition claiming that HOPOI is hostile to its aims and is seeking to set itself up as an alternative to Stop the War UK. HOPOI's response to the rejection and explanation is that Stop the War UK includes dozens of groups with differing agendas on several issues but all of them are opposed to the occupation of Iraq and any attack on Iran. How, they wonder, is HOPOI any different? Furthermore, HOPOI claims the exclusion is political and revolves around some prominent members of Stop the War UK being apologists for the Iranian mullahs.

This argument is somewhat reminiscent of the debates that took place among leftists regarding the Soviet Union and China during the post Cold War era of the twentieth century. Like that argument, it has the potential to divide a movement that needs to remain united. After all, many of the groups in Stop the War UK are leftist, as are the groups currently making up HOPOI. Divisions precipitated by different tendencies on the left in antiwar movement around Vietnam occasionally caused confusion not only amongst the Left but also among the general population opposed to the war. Indeed, the support for the Soviet Union by some left formations probably caused some folks to not participate in the movement. Similarly, a perception by the general population opposed to war with Iran might not participate in a movement that appears to align itself with the government in Tehran-even if it doesn't in actuality.

The groups in HOPOI are anti-imperialist first and foremost. This means that before everything else they are opposed to an attack on Iran and its people. They oppose US imperialism and Israeli aggression. As noted above, the group is composed of small communist organizations and also oppose the theocracy in Iran, considering it to be antidemocratic and a betrayal of the revolution against the Shah. At one time the People's Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI) might have been considered to be in an allied camp with HOPOI, but in recent years the PMOI's work with some of the neocons in the United States and rumors that it works with various US intelligence agencies has insured HOPOI's opposition to the group, despite the PMOI's publicly stated opposition to a US invasion.

For those of us in the US and western Europe, our primary concern should be preventing war with Iran. This may mean making temporary alliances with groups with whom we disagree on several points, but to allow those differences to supersede opposition to an invasion would not only be foolish; it would be doing Washington's work. Perhaps HOPOI's conference in London this weekend will make progress toward alleviating some of the problems it is experiencing with Stop the War UK.

Ron Jacobs is author of The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather Underground, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs' essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch's collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. His first novel, Short Order Frame Up, is published by Mainstay Press. He can be reached at: [email protected]

fishman3811 Reviewed by fishman3811 on 12-10-2007. The Iran Charade So They Lied Again So they lied again. And again. Despite the fact that the Bush administration knew quite well that its very own intelligence estimate stated quite clearly that the Iranian government had halted its work on building nuclear weaponry, Mr. Bush told the world not more than two months ago that Iran was risking World War Three if it continued said work. On Monday, December 3, 2007, an report from Mr. Bush's own government said quite clearly that its intelligence proved that Iran halted nuclear arms Rating: 5

[Anubis10012007]

I was just watching FOX News and the guy they had as a guest, I believe a former CIA agent said that he wouldn't be surprised if Iran tested a nuclear weapon tomorrow, which is December 11th. Reminiscent of 9/11?

L.A.S.F

[Delta9 UK]

Pffft - won't matter.

If Iran don't get nukes then a false flag dirty bomb is on the cards I mean - it will be obvious, right?

[fishman3811]

Fucking FOX news is still spewing out fucking garbage as usual.If we said the sky is blue FOX news will bring out some expert that says its actually red and our eyes are lying to us.

[snowblind]

wow americans has finaly be informed to what the rest of the world have seemed to have known for quite a while *cough*wild goose chase*cough*

i wish that america would just have the balls to say, look we dont like you and we want your oil so were gonna shoot the shit out of your people and steal you economic stability because were the world police, for countries with something we want.

then we wouldn't have to go through this retarded rigmorol of properganda that anyone with 4 brain cells can see through.

fuck you murdock.

[medicinal]

Hey, I'm with the fuck you Murdoch thing allright. It's amazing how many people can't see the forest for the trees.

[killerweed420]

Fuckit too many people on the planet anyway lets just nukeem and weed the population out a little.

[Ozarks]

Fucking FOX news is still spewing out fucking garbage as usual.If we said the sky is blue FOX news will bring out some expert that says its actually red and our eyes are lying to us.

Shoot the messenger, brilliant, you can't change the facts with propaganda or dirty words.:thumbsup:

WASHINGTON â?? Twenty-one commanders of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps are the top scientists running Iran's secret nuclear weapons program, says the man who exposed Iran's nuclear weapons program in 2002.

On top of that, the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate published last week saying Tehran shut down its weaponization program in 2003 failed to mention that the program restarted in mid-2004,] said Alireza Jafarzadeh, an Iranian dissident and president of Strategic Policy Consulting.

The scientists working on the alleged civilian nuclear centrifuge program are IGRC commanders, said Jafarzadeh, who was providing a list of names to the press on Tuesday. But their intention is not a nuclear energy source for civilians.

"It's the IRGC that is basically controlling the whole thing, dominating the whole thing," Jafarzadeh told FOXNews.com. "They are running the show. They have a number of sites controlled by the IRGC that has been off-limits to the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and inspectors, including a military university known as Imam Hossein University. ... That site has not been inspected. They have perhaps the most advanced nuclear research and development center in that university."

Jafarzadeh said the 2003 decision to stop the weaponization program, which was operating in Lavizan-Shian, a posh northeast district of Tehran, was not Iran's own. The site had been exposed by the opposition, the National Council of Resistance on Iran, in April 2003 after revelations of several other nuclear sites that could be portrayed as dual purpose facilities. Lavizan-Shian could not, he said.

"The regime knew that this is not the site that they can invite the IAEA ... this site was heavily involved in militarization of the program," Jafarzadeh said. "They were doing all kinds of activities that were not justifiable. So they decided before the IAEA gets in â?? and it usually takes four to six months before they can go through the process and get in â?? use the time and try to basically destroy this whole facility, and that's what they did."

Jafarzadeh said the Iranians razed the buildings, removed the soil, cut down the trees and allowed the IAEA to inspect the Lavizan-Shian site, which had been turned into a park by June 2004. He noted that the regime acted as if it had succumbed to municipal pressure to open a park with basketball and tennis courts and that is why the area had been flattened.

Jafarzadeh said that "in a way it's correct for the NIE to say that in late 2003 the weaponization of the program was stopped, and they said it was due to international pressure. But they failed to say that it restarted in 2004" in a location called Lavizan 2, he said.

Lavizan 2 "has never been inspected by the IAEA," Jafarzadeh added.

Jafarzadeh's comments preceded a call by President Bush on Tuesday for Iran to explain why it had a secretive nuclear weapons program, and warned that any such efforts must not be allowed to flourish "for the sake of world peace." The NIE noted that Iran continues to enrich uranium, which can be turned toward making a weapon if the country wanted to pursue that end.

"Iran is dangerous," Bush said after an Oval Office meeting with Italian President Giorgio Napolitano. "We believe Iran had a secret military weapons program, and Iran must explain to the world why they had such a program. ... Iran has an obligation to explain to the IAEA why they hid this program from them.

"Iran is dangerous, and they'll be even more dangerous if they learn how to enrich uranium," Bush said. "So I look forward to working with the president," Bush said, referring to Napolitano, the Italian leader, "to explain our strategy and to figure out ways we can work together to prevent this from happening for the sake of world peace."

Bush's remarks followed a press conference by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad praising the latest NIE as "a step forward" for U.S.-Iranian relations, and suggesting an "entirely different" situation could be created between the United States and Iran if more steps like the report followed.

"We consider this measure by the U.S. government a positive step. It is a step forward," Ahmadinejad said. "If one or two other steps are taken, the issues we have in front of us will be entirely different and will lose their complexity, and the way will be open for the resolution of basic issues in the region and in dealings between the two sides."

But Jafarzadeh said Iran can't be trusted, and suggested that the U.S. intelligence community was duped by plants placed by the Islamic regime to provide disinformation about its programs.

"There are two extremes" for explaining the NIE's reversal from 2005, the last report on Iran's weapons program, said Jafarzadeh. One, career types in the Bush administration issued the analysis for purely political reasons, like wanting to hurt the administration, keeping rapprochement open or removing the military option from the table.

"The other one is it's not political at all, it's just basically deceit ... by the regime â?? that they managed to get so-called 'defectors' to make the Americans and the intelligence community believe that what happened in late 2003 was actually a decision to totally halt the program. They sold it that way to the Americans. ... They are like a fox, the animal is famous in Iran for being tricky. So it's very possible that it was well-orchestrated by Tehran, and they succeeded in at least getting that sentence from the intelligence community in the report."

In August 2002, Jafarzadeh, then-spokesman for the National Council of Resistance on Iran, revealed the name of the Natanz nuclear site, which the Iranian government since has acknowledged and which is subject to IAEA inspections.

Because of its integral relationship to Mujahedin-e Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian resistance group, NCRI is deemed a terrorist organization in the United States, despite calls by several members of Congress to remove its designation from the State Department list.

NCRI also is on the British and European Union terrorist list, placed there at the start of the decade by Western countries trying to improve relations with Tehran. Last week a British judge ordered NCRI to be removed from the British list. Pressure also is on the EU to drop MEK.

Nonetheless, NCRI and Jafarzadeh, working independently, have concluded that Iran did shut down its nuclear weapons program in 2003 but restarted it a year later, moving and hiding equipment to a variety of sites.

Mohammad Mohaddessin, NCRI's foreign affairs chief, told The Wall Street Journal in Tuesday's editions that some of the equipment was moved to another military compound known as the Center for Readiness and Advanced Technology, to Malek-Ashtar University Isfahan and to a defense ministry hospital in Tehran.

The facility was broken into 11 fields of research, including projects to develop a nuclear trigger and shape weapons-grade uranium into a warhead, the paper reported.

"They scattered the weaponization program to other locations and restarted in 2004," Mohaddessin said.

"Their strategy was that if the IAEA found any one piece of this research program, it would be possible to justify it as civilian. But so long as it was all together, they wouldn't be able to."

FOXNews.com - Dissident: Iran's Top Commanders Are Nuclear Weapons Scientists - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum

[mfqr]

Shoot the messenger, brilliant, you can't change the facts with propaganda or dirty words.:thumbsup:



FOXNews.com - Dissident: Iran's Top Commanders Are Nuclear Weapons Scientists - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum

I'm sure you are kidding when you are posting this article from FOX News, which is a response to the report that came out from Al Jazeera. You really believe that FOX is telling the truth? I don't buy it for one minute. I've been pretty suspicious of this whole Iran thing for quite some time now, and I've just been waiting for the real news on it to get out (the Al Jazeera article). This is just a fighting response, so that the Bush administration can eventually invade Iran. The other article from Al Jazeera would make it very difficult for them to justify going to war with Iran, and thus this piece of propaganda comes out to lie to you, in support of going to war with Iran. Isn't the fact that this article was posted on December 11th, 2007 just a bit strange to you? It's obviously an article to combat the other one. Maybe if this article came out before the Al Jazeera one it wouldn't be so obvious that someone is pissed off about the article from Al Jazeera, because it won't allow them to invade Iran.

Go ahead and support the war... because war is great and glorious, right? This is from FOX News for christ's sake... I'd trust Al Jazeera over FOX News.

Did you not learn from the lies that they used to get into Iraq? Were there any nukes there? I'm very sorry that they've swayed you to believe their lies... really, I am. But because there are so many people like you who are swayed by their propaganda... they will eventually invade Iran, which is a beautiful country by the way, and keep waging their war against Islam. Learn from the previous lies! There's nothing to show you that they are creating nukes in Iran! It's all just propaganda. Where's your proof, FOX News?

[Ozarks]

You can read the same story from several different news sites if the "FOX NEWS" boogey man is the part that scares you.