The Fabricated Threat of Iran


Russia Today sums up the American political climate concerning Iran:

“Iran could attack the United States in a much more fearsome way,” claims CNN. “We have to assume that Hezbollah would be the proxy for Iran and could well carry out the attack,” it specifies.

“Some believe that New York could eventually be on Iran’s hit list,” Fox News scares.

The American media might be exaggerating the Iranian threat as the US military officials say the contrary.

US intelligence, personified by Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lieutenant General Ronald Burgess, officially states that Iranian attack on America is unlikely, saying “The agency assesses that Iran is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict” – unless the US attacks first, the general adds.

Moreover, America’s intelligence community hasruled out allegations that Iran is creating a nuclear bomb a long time ago. The Los Angeles Times reports that 16 special service agencies have all reached the same conclusion.

Sasan Fayazmanesh, from California State University, says similar reports a few years ago were ignored by Washington, because they did not sit well with its ultimate goal in Iran.

“It is an issue of regime change. The National Intelligence Estimate is many years old, it’s first came up in 2007, […] it judged with high confidence that as of fall 2003 Iran has halted its nuclear weapons program,”

he said.

“Nevertheless, when it first came out during the Bush administration, they’ve dismissed [it], obviously the Obama administration is not going by this report either.”

Actually, the US has had a political quarrel with Israel over Iran. Tel Aviv openly demands Washington support and participate in a military attack on Iranian nuclear objects, while the Obama administration has been reluctant on any military action against Iran, hoping sanctions and strong wording will do the same job.

US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey called the idea of an air strike on Iran “foolish”, “destabilizing” and “not prudent.”

For his intractability the general was ostracized by Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, who accused Dempsey of “serving the Iranians.”

However fantastic it might sound, two US Senators, John McCain and Lindsey Graham, sided with Netanyahu against the top brass of their own army.

The layout appears to be intriguing. The US government at the moment does not support a military operation against Iran. The US Army intelligence dissuades from harsh actions against the Islamic Republic.

But the US mass media and some agenda-driven lawmakers apparently know better what is good for America, and are actively sculpting an enemy image of the Tehran regime.

Both our military leaders and our intelligence agencies have repeatedly made it quite clear that there is a blatant lack of evidence that Iran poses any real threat to our national security. Yet, the mainstream media continues to whip up hysteria and politicians in Washington continue their call-to-arms – labeling Iran enemy #1 and demanding US military aggression against the Islamic Republic. My question to the citizens of America is this: whose claims should you allow to mold your views on American foreign policy and Iran? The US military’s top officials and intelligence agencies who have the authority and expertise to make statements regarding threats to our national defense and defensive strategies? Or armchair generals in Washington and the mass media who make decisions based on amassing votes and special-interest support and  keeping their ratings high?

US Military Burns Koran. Gingrich Blames Muslims and Liberals.


The following is an excerpt from an article in Russia Today regarding protests in Afghanistan directed at the US:

Thousands of protesters in Afghanistan rallied against the US this week after discovering that Americans had charred and purged copies of the Koran. President Obama was quick to extend an apology, but some of the GOP want things the other way around.

“I wish to express my deep regret for the reported incident,” Obama wrote this week to Afghan President Hamid Karzai.“I extend to you and the Afghan people my sincere apologies.”

Gingrich responded to the president’s attempt to qualm anti-American sentiment by insisting that Obama is in the wrong for trying to make peace with people whose religion has been ridiculed by US troops. American officials are calling the Koran incident inadvertent, and, nonetheless, Gingrich says there is no point in the president saying he’s sorry.

“There seems to be nothing that radical Islamists can do to get Barack Obama’s attention in a negative way and he is consistently apologizing to people who do not deserve the apology of the president of the United States period,”Gingrich told supporters during a campaign stop Thursday in Washington State.

“This destructive double standard whereby the United States and its democratic allies refuse to hold accountable leaders who tolerate systematic violence and oppression in their borders must come to an end,” Gingrich added in a statement.

Administration spokesman Jay Carney told reporters early Thursday that Obama’s apology was “wholly appropriate, given the sensitivities to this issue, the understandable sensitivities.”

“His [Obama’s] primary concern as Commander-in-Chief is the safety of American men and women in Afghanistan, of our military and civilian personnel there,” said Carney. “And it was absolutely the right thing to do.”

Gingrich said hours later that things should be reversed, in his opinion. “It is Hamid Karzai who owes the American people an apology, not the other way around,” said the speaker.

“And, candidly, if Hamid Karzai, the president of Afghanistan, doesn’t feel like apologizing then we should say good bye and good luck, we don’t need to be here risking our lives and wasting our money on somebody who doesn’t care,”he added.

You’re right Mister Gingrich, what was Obama thinking? We spent billions of dollars on the war in Afghanistan, investing a decade of our precious time invading their country and we are the ones who have to live with the burden of killing tens of thousands of the Afghani people and desecrating their dead bodies. They should be apologizing to us. I mean, what were we supposed to do not invade their country and kill their people?  If they can’t understand our glorious reasons necessitating our continual war against their country then they don’t deserve us.

All sarcasm aside, however, Gingrich is actually right on two counts here:

1. The United States’ foreign policy is indeed plagued by double standard. We impose sanctions and threaten military aggression against Iran because we think that maybe they could have nuclear weapons in the future – yet we have the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, with no move made towards disarmament, we remain the only country to have ever used a nuke with a nuclear program with even less transparency than Iran’s and we’ve been involved in two wars of aggression in the last decade while Iran has engaged in . . . zero. We spout on and on about how much we love democracy, how we want to bring it to the rest of the unenlightened world, and about how our wars abroad will spread democracy but we give foreign aid to dictators around the world – in fact, we give more foreign aid to Israel’s enemies than we do to our ally, Israel. We talk about how our national defense is under constant threat yet we have the single most aggressive foreign policy in the world resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of foreign civilians.

2. We do not need to be in Afghanistan risking our lives and wasting our money. Because it is a waste: in both of our country’s time, resources and human lives. We need to bring our troops home out of harm’s way and let the Afghani people run their own country.

My only question, though, is this: If our military is “inadvertently” burning Korans are they inadvertently burning Bibles as well? Maybe we should demand that Afghanistan apologize for our military’s hypothetical Bible burning as well.

The American Corporatocracy


In an article published by Russia Today, Ron Paul states that the United States is “slipping into fascism”:

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul slammed America’s system of governance at a rally in Kansas City, saying businesses and government are pushing the country into twenty-first century fascism.

But before you start picturing fair-skinned, blue-eyed CEOs and bureaucrats running amok and with their right arms held high, calm down. What the outspoken Texas Republican meant was fascist corporatism – an economic model most prominently seen in Mussolini’s Italy of the 1920s to the 1940s. Fascist economic corporatism involved government and private management of full sectors of the economy – which Paul says is par for the course in today’s America.

“We’ve slipped away from a true republic,” Paul told thousands of his supporters at the rally. “Now we’re slipping into a fascist system where it’s a combination of government, big business and authoritarian rule, and the suppression of the individual rights of each and every American citizen.”

His words, which a few years ago might have been dismissed by most, rang loud and clear in Kansas. Paul’s rally coincided with long-established Missouri and Kansas GOP events – from which many attendees actually slipped away to hear Paul deliver his speech. Drawn out and bled dry by ongoing and expensive overseas military campaigns, Americans are more and more receptive to a foreign policy of peace, which is what Paul promises to deliver.

The presidential hopeful echoed words already once delivered to the American people – by their president. Dwight Eisenhower said, in his farewell address to the nation, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

The disastrous rise, it seems, has happened. In 2009 alone, the United States was responsible for almost half of the world’s total military spending – 46 per cent, or 712 billion US dollars. Since then, the figures have only grown, to the point that American military spending now exceeds that of China, Russia, Japan, India, and the rest of NATO combined. The US has more than 700 military bases in 130 countries around the world.

But, one might ask, can’t the American government – which oversees the world’s highest gross domestic product – afford some extra military spending?

The simple answer is: no.

The wealthiest nation also happens to have the biggest national debt in world history. With the dollar acting as a global reserve currency, the Federal Reserve leaving the printing press running around the clock, and manufacturing and production being outsourced to cheap foreign labor markets, the US economy looks more like a Ponzi scheme. And as former president George W. Bush told his Argentine counterpart Nestor Kirchner, “The best way to revitalize the economy is war, and the US has grown stronger with war.”

But Americans are tired of war – and are tired of waiting for the magical day when war will magically revive the economy. Which is why Ron Paul may have found the perfect note to strike with voters as he continues to fight in the Republican primaries.

Lets examine Ron Paul’s claims point-by-point:

Big government

According to the U.S. National Debt Clock our nation’s total liability per taxpayer is $1,039,057. That’s right, over one million dollars per taxpaying individual. Our national debt accrues an annual interest of $11,971 per citizen. Our national debt is nearly 15.4 trillion dollars and our unfunded liabilities are 117.7 trillion. RT is not exaggerating when they state that we have the “biggest national debt in world history.”

Big business

Thanks to our out-of-control inflating government instead of a true free market we have government-enabled corporatism. The result is this:

Note how in nearly twenty years the bottom 50% of families have experienced no growth, the next 50-75% has experienced minimal growth and. all the way at the top, the top 10% has experienced tremendous growth. Not convinced?

The bottom 80% (aka, the vast majority of Americans) owns only 7% of America’s financial wealth while the top 1% owns nearly half of all financial wealth in America. This is a trend that has continued for decades as the few elite on the top continue to consolidate more and more of the wealth. Liberals may be tempted to take a socialist approach by increasing taxes on the rich for redistribution of wealth but this only serves to fatten government even more – which means that ultimately that money will be funneled right back to serving the rich’s interests. Instead we must minimize government in order to starve corporatism.

Authoritarian rule

The recent HHS mandate provides a clear example, in which the executive branch has forced companies to provide a product (contraception) free of charge to anyone. The mandate doesn’t even meet any need even remotely requiring federal intervention since, according to Obama’s own administration 99% of women in the United States have used birth control. No issue of accessibility here; this is nothing more than abusing government powers in order to enable cost shirking. Not to mention the violations to religious freedom posed by the mandate.

Suppression of individual rights

One must look no further than the NDAA which authorizes the executive branch to label as a terrorist and then detain anyone, including American citizens, indefinitely and without a trial. President Obama has promised never to use this power against Americans (a promise with no legal value) but with the Enemy Expatriation Act in the works that promise may be irrelevant is the EEA allows for the stripping away of citizenry of anyone deemed a threat to the state. Then, of course, there are the repeated attempts at censorship of the internet from Kill Switch, to SOPA and PIPA, to a new bill yet to be disclosed brought forward by the same people who failed to limit your rights of free speech with the aforementioned bills.

Indeed, even from the few examples listed it would seem that, more and more, our precious home has been commandeered by keynesian economics, consolidation of wealth and property, and tyrannical usurpation of power by the government. It is up to the individual citizens to stand up and be counted and demand a return to the principles of our Constitution and Jeffersonian democracy while we still live in a “Land of the Free” or this trend will never be reversed

Enemy Expatriation Act


William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake! – A Man for All Seasons

Recently, Obama signed the NDAA into law, authorizing the indefinite detention of anyone, including US citizens on US soil, without trial under the pretext of potential terrorism. However, the president vowed to never use his new power to detain a US citizen without due process because that would be against the “spirit of America.” With the introduction of the Enemy Expatriation Act Obama’s promise, however, may be rendered irrelevant. If the bill, currently being passed through Congress, passes in its current form it will let the government strip away citizenship from any person engaged in hostilities, or supporting hostilities, against the United States. The law is brief, but in short it warrants the US government to strip nationality status from anyone they identify as a threat. With the power granted by the EEA to strip away citizenship and by the NDAA to indefinitely detain without trial literally anyone could be whisked away on government whim, representing an American despotism in direct violation of our constitution and, indeed, the spirit of America as it was meant to be according to our founders.

The story can be found at Russia Today. Unfortunately a google search of “enemy expatriation act” yielded only the one major news outlet as of the publication of this post. No mainstream media outlet has picked up the story of one of the greatest threats to American liberty, possibly in the history of our country. No CNN, no Fox, nothing.

Its a sad commentary on the state of American public discourse when the most reliable news source I can find on US affairs is Russia Today.