At the UN General Assembly Obama and Netanyahu failed to produce any evidence that Iran is building a nuclear bomb, and filedalso to substantiate their claims that even if Iran builds a bomb, it presents a threat to world peace which cannot be “contained.”
Instead, we are offered a replay of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. On October 10, 2002, the United States House of Representatives voted to attack, invade and occupy a sovereign, oil-rich nation in the Middle East that did not attack us and did not pose a threat to the American people The case against Iraq was built on flimsy and fraudulent evidence. That’s common knowledge – now. But it was common knowledge then. Many are trying to rewrite the history of the Iraq war. The people who led us into a war based on lies want us to believe that the intelligence community was duped. They don’t want us to ask questions, because they don’t want to be held accountable. Those repeating the myth that America was duped are perpetuating one of the biggest hoaxes in American history. Colin Powell infamous February 5, 2003 presentation to the Security Council– a presentation mainstream U.S. media patsies reported as convincing, was built on coerced confessions, lies, illogic, forged evidence, fear-mongering, and an interest in stealing Iraq’s oil. Iraq did not pose a threat to the United States. Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Destruction. Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. The world was not duped. Bush and Blair were not fooled. The propaganda line suggested that Saddam had “bluffed” about having WMD. But there’s just one problem with this claim: Saddam Hussein never claimed to have WMD, but , as everybody knows, repeatedly denied that this was so. It was obvious at the time. The evidence was in publicly available reports for anyone who cared to look. The bottom line is that it wasn’t Saddam Hussein who lied about Iraq having WMD; it was the U.S. and British governments.
The case against Iran is just as flimsy. The media’s failure to examine it is unconscionable. The New York Times and Washington Post actually issued mea culpas in 2004 for failing to ask rigorous questions about the U.S case against Iraq. No lesson was learned, apparently. Instead of questioning the case against Iran, the media appear to be helping to make the case for war. On this year’s anniversary of 9/11, the Associated Press in a cynical attempt to manipulate a public already over-manipulated with 9/11 remembrances into supporting a war, had an “exclusive” story that the International Atomic Energy Agency, which oversees inspections under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), had “received” new intelligence about Iran’s bomb-building, from the U.S., Israel, and “at least two other Western countries.” The AP’s sources - six anonymous diplomats. The Arms Control Association comments on the AP report " the new evidence should also be understood within the context of the activities that the agency has already documented and has already pressed Iran to explain. Evidence of computer modeling that could have taken place more than two years ago is far from the threshold of proof that is necessary to say that Iran has developed a rapid breakout nuclear capacity. Nor does it suggest that Iran has crossed a U.S. “red line” that could prompt a resort to military force."[SOYMB emphasis]
How can we avoid future wars if we don’t understand how consent was manufactured for a war against Iraq? The media are feeding American and Israeli WMD ‘propaganda’ again to lead into war with Iran
Instead, we are offered a replay of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. On October 10, 2002, the United States House of Representatives voted to attack, invade and occupy a sovereign, oil-rich nation in the Middle East that did not attack us and did not pose a threat to the American people The case against Iraq was built on flimsy and fraudulent evidence. That’s common knowledge – now. But it was common knowledge then. Many are trying to rewrite the history of the Iraq war. The people who led us into a war based on lies want us to believe that the intelligence community was duped. They don’t want us to ask questions, because they don’t want to be held accountable. Those repeating the myth that America was duped are perpetuating one of the biggest hoaxes in American history. Colin Powell infamous February 5, 2003 presentation to the Security Council– a presentation mainstream U.S. media patsies reported as convincing, was built on coerced confessions, lies, illogic, forged evidence, fear-mongering, and an interest in stealing Iraq’s oil. Iraq did not pose a threat to the United States. Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Destruction. Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. The world was not duped. Bush and Blair were not fooled. The propaganda line suggested that Saddam had “bluffed” about having WMD. But there’s just one problem with this claim: Saddam Hussein never claimed to have WMD, but , as everybody knows, repeatedly denied that this was so. It was obvious at the time. The evidence was in publicly available reports for anyone who cared to look. The bottom line is that it wasn’t Saddam Hussein who lied about Iraq having WMD; it was the U.S. and British governments.
The case against Iran is just as flimsy. The media’s failure to examine it is unconscionable. The New York Times and Washington Post actually issued mea culpas in 2004 for failing to ask rigorous questions about the U.S case against Iraq. No lesson was learned, apparently. Instead of questioning the case against Iran, the media appear to be helping to make the case for war. On this year’s anniversary of 9/11, the Associated Press in a cynical attempt to manipulate a public already over-manipulated with 9/11 remembrances into supporting a war, had an “exclusive” story that the International Atomic Energy Agency, which oversees inspections under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), had “received” new intelligence about Iran’s bomb-building, from the U.S., Israel, and “at least two other Western countries.” The AP’s sources - six anonymous diplomats. The Arms Control Association comments on the AP report " the new evidence should also be understood within the context of the activities that the agency has already documented and has already pressed Iran to explain. Evidence of computer modeling that could have taken place more than two years ago is far from the threshold of proof that is necessary to say that Iran has developed a rapid breakout nuclear capacity. Nor does it suggest that Iran has crossed a U.S. “red line” that could prompt a resort to military force."[SOYMB emphasis]
How can we avoid future wars if we don’t understand how consent was manufactured for a war against Iraq? The media are feeding American and Israeli WMD ‘propaganda’ again to lead into war with Iran
No comments:
Post a Comment