Is the Sky Falling?

So, exactly what's NEW in latest talk about imminent attack against Iran?


Share/Save/Bookmark

Is the Sky Falling?
by Eleanor Ommani
02-Jul-2008
 

Spare us the pain of yet another repetition of the “Chicken Little, the sky is falling” syndrome, as journalist Seymour Hersh so accurately stated about his own writings on Iran during Sunday’s talk show “Late Edition” with Candy Crawley sitting in for Wolf Blitzer. The substance of the latest ‘revelations’ “Preparing the Battlefield”, in the June 29, 2008 issue of The New Yorker, is not more than a re-hash of very old news packaged under an alarmist-intended title. The so-called ‘facts’ do not amount to more than their intended purpose: to further dramatize the threat of military attack against the Iranian people and nation, in the form of the ceaseless psychological warfare, known as psyops, emanating from the western mass media.

It seems one of the motives in writing this latest ‘expose’ of the Bush Administration’s well-financed covert operations against Iran was best illuminated in Hersh’s discussion and retelling of the Pentagon’s version of the Iranian patrol boat incident back in January 2008. “Weariness with the war in Iraq has undoubtedly affected the public’s tolerance for an attack on Iran, but this mood could change quickly”, writes the investigative journalist, citing the Iranian patrol boat incident as a clear example of the “potential for escalation”. Although Hersh referred to a Gallup poll taken last November, when seventy-three per cent (73%) of the Americans surveyed favored economic means and diplomacy to address the issue of Iran’s nuclear program, compared to only eighteen per cent (18%) who favored direct military action, he went on to repeat George Bush’s characterization of the incident as “provocative” and “dangerous” on the day Bush was heading for an eight-day trip to the Middle East. “There was, very briefly, a sense of crisis and outrage at Iran”, writes Hersh.

What was left out of this story was that the purpose of the Bush trip was to gather up support for the Administration’s sagging efforts to bring some of the Arab governments to comply with U.S. foreign policy objectives of isolating Iran so as to increase U.S. hegemonic goals in the region. Furthermore, in repeating only a part of the old news, Mr. Hersh neglected to mention that the Iranian government produced actual audio-video footage of the so-called ‘provocative’ encounter, blowing so many holes in the official version that a week later the Pentagon had to sing a different tune. As we recall, Bush’s efforts, as well as the ridiculous Pentagon version of Navy warships being threatened by five small Iranian speed-boats fell flat on its face, and to this day Iran continues to enjoy a certain stature among its neighbors.

So, exactly what is the NEW news? We have already heard about the ‘secret’ moves of the Bush Administration against Iran, in the form of arming terrorist groups, such as the Jundallah, with links to Al Qaeda and ties to the drug culture via the C.I.A. and Special Operations funding. It is well-known within the Iranian community of the Pentagon’s use and funding of another dissident group camped out in Iraq under U.S. command, the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, known as the M.E.K., while still currently on the State Department’s terrorist list. These two groups, along with a tiny third armed group of thugs known as the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan, PJAK, all receive notoriety and power because of their financial and logistical ties to the U.S. counter-intelligence operations in the Middle East and Asia. Perhaps the real news is the actual figure of Congress authorizing up to $400 million through the secret, but complicit actions of key members of the Democratic leadership in Congress, who were supposed to be making efforts to stymie the Administration’s plans for continuing the occupation of Iraq.

So what are other developments in this article? It is public knowledge printed in all of the mass media outlets that Iraq’s Prime Minister, Nouri-Maliki’s recent trip to Tehran in June resulted in an announcement (for what it’s worth) that the Iraqi government would ban any contact with foreigners and the M.E.K., and further stated that Iraq was not willing to be a staging ground for covert operations against other countries in the region (Iran), much to the disconcertment of Washington.

Hersh’s article spent considerable effort restating the old news about Admiral Fallon having been pushed out as head of the U.S. Central Command over ‘disagreements’ on Iran. What was more revealing was confirmation of our understanding that Fallon’s resignation had more to do with “putting out the fires in Iraq” as Fallon himself has stated, meaning controlling the resistance forces in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting against the continued occupation of the United States and NATO soldiers than it did about attacking Iran.

It seems that the bulk of the military establishment, Fallon and the Joint Chief of Staffs included, along with key policy-makers in the high echelons of the U.S. government had already concluded that expansion of the war from Afghanistan and Iraq into Iran was not possible at this time. In times of the “crisis of ruling for the empire”, who doesn’t know that inter-agencies disagreements, miscalculations of intelligence assessments, and even inner party political fights usually result in some heads rolling? This has been the outcome faced by the Bush Administration, who has been stripped of almost all of the “Old Guard” after nearly eight years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Given the rising tension between Iran and the U.S. these days, which could be read in the price of a barrel of oil, of course, it is politically safer not to downgrade the seriousness of the U.S. threat, but to yield and resound the Washington-Tel Aviv war drum beats serves the conservative causes of the war-mongers in the psyops battleground. It may be worth noting that the day after Hersh’s CNN interview, CNBC, the stock market channel, was giving airtime to John Bolton, a very hawkish neo-conservative, spreading his threat that Israel will bomb Iran’s strategic facilities, at the same time Seymour Hersh was being interviewed on Democracy Now. Why are Bolton and Hersh singing the same song?

Perhaps the real complications come with the realization among both Republicans and Democrats, in and out of the White House, that the United States government has to come up with a strong and convincing excuse, a justification, to the American people as to why they must be willing to expend even more than the trillion dollars of the U.S. treasury that has already been spent in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and perhaps for the next 5 to 10 years. That’s a hard sell.

Eleanor Ommani is a co-founder of the American-Iranian Friendship Committee (AIFC), www.progressiveportals.com/aifc and works with Wespac, NoWar Westchester, and Progressive News Network to promote peace with social justice in Iran and around the world. She can be emailed at Klosrtogod@optonline.net


Share/Save/Bookmark

 
default

Talk of Attack on Iran is Complete, Total, Utter Bullshit

by Jalil Bahar (not verified) on

The regime in Iran operates hand in glove with the BUSH administration. Its public enmity and private amity! Seymour's articles are designed to stir up hysteria ...and nothing else for some small minded internal (US and Iranian) domestic poltical games. THis charade really needs to end soon.

No one has served the Bush regime more admirably than the traitor Mullahs in Iran. Iranian interest in Caspian see down from 50% to <11% (Trillions of Dollars of Oil and Gas ther now being stolen by American and British Oil companies), Full assistance in Afghan and Iraqi invasions, Two new Islamic Regimes in Aghanistan and Iraq, with Shia dominated governments, Billions of dollars of Iranian trade with Iraq and Afghanistan including 250 MW of electricity for Basra, 120 MW to Northern Iraq, Iraqi bazaars filled with IRanian goods...refrigerators, air conditioners, tires, .... (this is while Europe is being asked to Sanction Iran)....Billions of Dollars of American Arm sales to Arabs (being scared by Iran) ...we could go on and on. Lets not be fooled. NO attack on Iran...BUT the repression and oppression of Iranians will continue by Iran's American and British Supported Mullahs...who stole the revolution, stole Iranian people's freedoms, stole Iranian oil wealth, and keep stealing anything of value in Iran from Iranians....The truth is out.


programmer craig

Alborzi

by programmer craig on

The pentagon has told Dubaya such an adventure is not sustainable, the occupation Army is tired of genocide in Iraq

The Pentagon told Bush that the occupation army is tired of genocide in Iraq? Really? :O

 


default

Right on...

by Antibullshit (not verified) on

You are right on the money.This is a pshycological warfare operation.
The goals currently are:

1. Keeping the oil prices high since the oilers in White House (Dubya, Chenney,Condi Rice ...)and their friends are putting pressure on Congress to expand oil drilling in U.S. Any time oil trades down you either get middle east head lines or some bogus group attacks some pipe line in Nigeria!

2. This is to prop up a dying regime in Iran. As the decaying continues with in the regime this bolsters them inside Iran and gives more power to the regime to oppress the people under the guise of imminent war.

Lets not forget that this regime was brought to power by Nato/CIA with a little help from BBC...

There is no need to bomb Iran. All the western powers have to do is to stop importation of gasoline in Iran and the Grand Leader have to go back to riding his donkey...


Internets

Sareh Peeaz or Taheh Peeaz?.

by Internets on

IMO, those who summarily and easily dismiss an attack on Iran are just as pedestrian as those who are fretting about an imminent attack on Iran, meaning that neither camp is either "Sareh Peeaz or Taheh Peeaz".

The fact is that the U.S. has been conducting mock and computer simulated war plans with Iran for a very, very long time. The Israelis have been doing the same, the last one being reported in late spring 2008 over the Mediterranean sea.

I stick by the old adage: "There is no smoke without fire". So the fact remains: If matters with Iran are not resolved regarding the Iranian nuclear issues, there will be both smoke and fire. Lots of it!.


default

There will be no attacks

by Alborzi (not verified) on

You can take the guarantee to the bank. Even Dubaya himself was backing off today. The pentagon has told Dubaya such an adventure is not sustainable, the occupation Army is tired of genocide in Iraq and the situation in Afghanistan is worst than ever. There will be no war, in fact the money that US is spending shows that they want an opposition group in Iran to destabilize the Iranian government not a direct intervention by US. The retaliation by Iran even
as feeble as it would be will make it unacceptable for them. So there will be no war, Seymour is correct though, however pentagon and the generals will push back, not congress or Obama (gutless pokh).


default

MUST READ: An attack on Iran

by abc (not verified) on

MUST READ: An attack on Iran is not imminent.

//www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...

Iran Says Offer is Acceptable 'In Principle'

//www.ft.com/cms/s/0/08569078-47e5-11dd-93ca-...


Fred

A family thing?

by Fred on

Ok no Chicken Little & Fox reminder or mentioning the last time back in 2005 when Seymour said war was  a sure thing that year, but is there any relation to one Ardeshir Ommani who's full time vocation is defending Islamist republic?

Islamist/Anti-Semites and their like minded lefty allies usually keep it in the  family