Comment on this article |
Email this article |
Manufacturing Crisis Irresponsibly
by Stephen Lendman
30 May 2014
Manufacturing Crisis Irresponsibly
by Stephen Lendman
It's longstanding US policy. Enemies are invented when none exist. War on terror duplicity continues.
It's fake. It creates fear. It's used to justify the unjustifiable. It's to advance America's imperium. One country after another is ravaged and destroyed.
Ukraine is in the eye of the storm. So is Syria. Iran's turn awaits. Washington wants its sovereign independence eliminated.
It wants pro-Western stooge governance replacing it. Iran's nuclear program is peaceful.
It has no military component. It never did. Claims otherwise are Big Lies. Sixteen US intelligence agencies once said so. No longer.
They dispel notions about a weaponized Iranian nuclear program. They do annually. It doesn't matter.
Neocons infest Washington. Big Lies about Iran's nuclear policy persist. They do so despite public knowledge otherwise.
Iran's nuclear program is entirely peaceful. It wants it kept this way. It deplores nuclear weapons. It wants a nuclear-free world.
It wants peace. It abhors war. Managed news misinformation claims otherwise.
Iran opposes violence and instability. It wants rapprochement with all nations. Especially hostile Western ones.
Ongoing P5+1 talks continue. So do efforts to subvert them. By Israel most of all. Netanyahu knows Iran's program is peaceful.
So do other Israeli hardliners. It doesn't matter. They want a Middle East rival eliminated. They want regional hegemony.
Mossad-connected DEBKAfile (DF) spreads Big Lies. Iran is a prime target. On May 24, it headlined "The Big Charade: Nuclear diplomacy is a flop, the finale is secretly postponed to 2015."
"All hands on board the project for proving that Iran is amenable to dialogue and concessions on its nuclear program worked overtime this week to mask the truth, which is that negotiations were going nowhere," said DF.
Mid-May talks ended inconclusively, it added. It failed to explain why. Washington keeps raising the bar.
New demands are made. Ones unrelated to Iran's nuclear program are introduced. Doing so shows bad faith.
DF blames Iran. It does so irresponsibly. It claimed Obama officials "reached two important decisions." To change the earlier agreed on July deadline.
To "postpone (it) to January 15, 2015." Israel calls it "extremely problematic."
Iran's agreement "not to use its advanced IR2 centrifuges for rapid uranium enrichment…was valid for only six months," said DF.
According to its "military sources," Iran "will be able to reach the nuclear threshold in two to three months' time, i.e. by July-August."
Last year, Netanyahu claimed about the same thing. DF claims Obama wants congressional approval to attack Iran unilaterally "if Tehran (is) found cheating on its nuclear commitment."
He won't use it, claimed DF. It said nothing about Iran's peaceful nuclear program. It hyped nonexistent threats.
It's longstanding Israeli policy. It's like Washington's policy. Duplicity defines them.
On May 23, the IAEA said transparency measures "have been implemented by Iran as planned." It's fully complying with P5+1 interim agreement terms.
"Iran's engagement with the agency, including the provision of information, and the Agency's ongoing analysis is helping the agency to gain a better understanding of Iran's nuclear program."
Political analyst Gareth Porter calls Iranian nuclear program tensions a CIA-Mossad plot.
His new book titled "Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of Iran Nuclear Scare" discusses it.
It covers the history of Iran's nuclear program. It includes declassified US intelligence reports. Congressional speeches and documents. IAEA information.
It dispels anti-Iranian hype. Irresponsible fear-mongering. It shows Tehran's program is entirely peaceful.
No evidence whatever suggests otherwise. Plenty proves Iran's program has no military component.
Journalist Andrew Cockburn interviewed Porter. Questions focused on his new book.
He asked if Iran ever had a nuclear weapons program. In his book, Porter showed claims were "based on false history and falsified records."
They bear "no resemblance to the essential historical facts." For example:
"One would never know from the narrative available to the public over the years that Iran had been prepared in the early 1980s to rely entirely on a French-based company for enriched uranium fuel for its Bushehr reactor, rather than on enriching uranium itself," said Porter.
"Nor would one learn that the Reagan Administration sought to strangle Iran's nuclear program, which was admitted to have presented no proliferation threat, in its cradle by pressuring Germany and France to refuse to cooperate in any way."
Doing so forced Iran to the "black market." It defied "unilateral US policy." Doing so was deliberately misinterpreted.
According to popular narrative Big Lies, it showed Tehran sought nuclear weapons.
History was reinvented to claim it. About the Iran/Iraq war. With regard to chemical weapons use.
US claims that both sides used them were false. Iraq alone did so. Not Iran. According to Porter:
"(T)he evidence is very clear that Iran never used chemical weapons during the war." Claims otherwise are Big Lies.
Since the early 1990s, "senior Iranian officials (made) cogent arguments against nuclear weapons based on strategic grounds…"
Where did fake US evidence come from, asked Cockburn?
Falsified intelligence, said Porter. In 2004, it "appeared mysteriously." Supposedly from an "purloined (Iranian) laptop…"
Porter learned otherwise. Exiled Iranian "terrorist organization Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK)" fabricated them.
They gave them to German intelligence. Mossad was involved. It uses MEK. It does so "to launder intelligence it (doesn't) want attributed to Israel."
"Israel (is) the only country…known to have a special office responsible for influencing news coverage of Iran’s nuclear program."
It hypes nonexistent threats. It proliferates fake evidence. It does so about Iran's peaceful nuclear program.
Why did IAEA earlier believe Iran had a secret nuclear weapons program and may still have one, asked Cockburn?
IAEA was "crucial," said Porter. Because it's allegedly neutral. Mohamed ElBaradei headed the agency from December 1997 through November 2009.
He dismissed anti-Iranian evidence. Of suspicious origin, he believed. Things changed under Yukiya Amano.
Washington chose him. According to Porter:
"A WikiLeaks cable from July 2009 reveals that Amano promised US officials he would be firmly in their camp on Iran in return for American support of his election as director general."
" 'In their camp' could only have meant that he would support the publication of the intelligence dossier - based entirely on intelligence reports and documents from Israel - that ElBaradei had refused to authorize."
Its November 2011 publication was well-timed. It supported Washington wanting "crippling international sanctions" imposed.
"How do you compare the performance of the US intelligence community on Iran with its record on Iraq," asked Cockburn?
"The same political and institutional dynamics drove both failures," said Porter. Big Lies substituted for truth.
"(T)he most ambiguous evidence" about Iran's intentions was twisted to fit US policy.
Misinformation became facts. Iran's peaceful nuclear program was called heading toward becoming weaponized.
"In other words," said Porter, "intelligence followed the policy, not the other way around."
Hard evidence about Iran's peaceful program was suppressed. So was everything contradicting Washington's official narrative.
Claims about Iran having an earlier nuclear weapons program and stopping it were falsified.
Nothing suggests Tehran ever had such a program. Plenty shows otherwise. It was systematically buried.
It bears repeating. Big Lies substitute for hard truths. They proliferated under Bush and earlier administrations.
They continued throughout Obama's tenure. They do so irresponsibly.
"How (have major media) comported (themselves) with respect to Iran," asked Cockburn?
They've been "virtually unanimous," said Porter. They regurgitate official lies. Due diligence is nonexistent.
Fact-checking is verboten. Late 2007 and early 2008 New York Times and Washington Post misinformation was deplorable.
It was "(s)ome of the most egregious," said Porter. Its sole sources were Bush administration officials.
It substituted rubbish for hard truths. It's the same today. Fiction substitutes for fact. Iran is irresponsibly vilified.
How will Iran bashing affect P5+1 talks, asked Cockburn?
"It creates serious obstacles," said Porter. It lets Israel manipulate US policy.
Claims about an Iranian "breakout" are falsified. They repeat with disturbing regularity. Neocon think tanks do so.
So-called experts are well-paid to lie. Reliable analysts are ignored. Obama is "intimidated by…breakout" misinformation, said Porter.
"(F)ear-mongering propagandists may well succeed in pushing the United States into a situation of increased tension with Iran…"
Including possible military confrontation. It's what Netanyahu "long sought," Porter stressed.
It's madness if happens. It assures regional conflict. Perhaps global. Washington's agenda risks the worst of all possible outcomes.
Fascist regimes operate this way. America is by far the world's worst. Peace hangs by a thread. Perhaps humanity's survival.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.
This work is in the public domain