When America goes to war or plans one, media scoundrels march in lockstep.
Articles, commentaries, editorials, and broadcasts feature Washington handout-style journalism.
Managed news misinformation substitutes for truth and full disclosure. Readers and viewers are deceived and betrayed.
For years, Iran and Syria have been targeted for regime change. Independent governments aren't tolerated. Puppet ones are planned to replace them. Scoundrel media play leading roles.
On May 24, The New York Times headlined "Iran Nuclear Talks End with No Deal."
P5+1 talks failed as expected. Washington bears full responsibility. Deal-making isn't at issue. It's portraying Iran as uncooperative for added justification to wage war.
"The six wanted a freeze on Iranian production of uranium enriched to 20 percent purity, which is considered a short step from bomb grade."
In fact, it's a giant one to 90% required for weapons making. It's especially so without intent to produce them.
Medical isotopes and other peaceful applications require 20%. NPT provisions permit it. Iran fully complies. Washington and Israel are serial violators. Their belligerence threatens humanity. Tehran threatens no one.
EU lead negotiator Catherine Ashton said "very intense and detailed discussions (left) significant differences" unresolved. They'll remain so in future meetings. A June 18-19 Moscow one is planned. Nothing substantive will change.
"We will maintain intensive contacts with our Iranian counterparts to prepare a further meeting in Moscow," Ashton announced.
Iran's chief negotiator, Saeed Jalili said:
"Of the main topics in using peaceful nuclear energy is the topic of having the nuclear fuel cycle and enrichment. We emphasize this right."
"This is an undeniable right of the Iranian nation....especially the right to enrich uranium." If P5+1 nations negotiate in good faith, "we will, of course, welcome some offer to cooperate on."
Iran didn't go to Baghdad to surrender. Its position won't change in Moscow. Washington demands it. The Times left that and other key issues unaddressed and/or misreported.
On May 26, Reuters headlined "Iran has enough uranium for 5 bombs: expert," saying:
The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) claims "Iran has significantly stepped up its output of low-enriched uranium and total production in the last five years (to provide) enough for at least five nuclear weapons if refined much further."
David Albright heads ISIS. He impersonates a nuclear expert. He's a former pseudo-UN weapons inspector. Former Iraq chief weapons inspector Scott Ritter called him a "nuclear expert who never was."
His "track record (reveals) half-baked analyses derived from questionable sources....He breathes false legitimacy into these factually challenged stories by" claiming fake credentials.
Albright founded ISIS. It's self-serving. It shuns truth. He fronts for power, privilege, and war profiteers. He's part of Washington's anti-Iranian agenda. In Iraq, he played the same role. He's a pro-imperial opportunist.
In June 1996, he appeared once as as a pseudo-Iraq weapons inspector. His role was political, not scientific. He observed and regurgitated what Washington wanted to hear. He's doing it now on Iran. His credibility is sorely lacking. He has none.
Claiming Iran is able to produce five bombs is inflammatory and misleading. All nations with commercial reactors produce enough uranium and plutonium for bomb-making. Only a handful, in fact, do it.
Iran isn't one of them. That's the headline not featured. Instead, deceptive ones heighten tensions for war.
IAEA head Yukiya Amano represents Western, not global interests fairly. He serves Washington's anti-Iranian agenda. On May 25, he claimed inspectors found Fordo plant enriched uranium traces up to 27%.
Around 90% is needed for bomb-making. Iran purifies to 20%. Most amounts are around 3.5%. Traces signify nothing. Iran's main stockpile complies with what it claims. No weapons development or production evidence exists.
At times, over-enrichment occurs. It's normal, not unusual or cheating. Technicians adjust accordingly. IAEA inspectors should have left it unmentioned.
Media scoundrels, of course, jump on it in headlines. Many readers don't go beyond a few paragraphs to know it's insignificant.
On May 25, a Washington Post editorial headlined, "Iran's hard bargain," saying:
Iran rejected Western "confidence-building measures." It demanded rights Washington rejects. "(E)xtended negotiations will only benefit Iran."
"What’s most concerning about the Baghdad talks is that they failed to show that the regime of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has made a strategic decision to strike a bargain."
"Instead, Tehran sought something for nothing: acceptance by the West of its uranium enrichment in return for assertions that it is not seeking nuclear weapons and promises to cooperate with international inspectors."
"In fact, no 'right' to process uranium exists under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty."
Iran wants (and deserves) to be treated like other countries with commercial nuclear operations. It complies fully with NPT provisions. Washington and Israel are nuclear outlaws.
Iran's operations are more intensively monitored than any other nation. Washington and Israel prohibit inspections for good reason. Massive cheating would be found. Imperial powers never tell all or say they're sorry.
NPT permits uranium enrichment as long as countries agree to rigorous monitoring. WP editors better check their sources. They, in turn, need to find another line of work.
Yousaf Butt is a nuclear physicist. He's a Federation of American Scientists consultant. In January, his Foreign Policy article headlined "Stop the Madness," saying:
"Despite all the hype, Iran's nuclear program has yet to violate international law. It's time to calm down, think, and above all halt the rush to war."
"The IAEA considers 20 percent enriched uranium to be low-enriched uranium and 'a fully adequate isotopic barrier' to weaponization."
Iran complies. It does nothing illegal. NPT doesn't prevent a nuclear weapons "capability" or "option." Dozens of nations have it.
Singling out Iran is for political reasons. It's not about legitimate fears of an illegal weapons program in the hands of a country threatening to use them.
The key red line Iran won't cross is "diverting" nuclear material for weapons production. Numerous experts and independent reports "affirmed (for) years that they have no evidence (of) any such program."
Multiple rounds of sanctions "go far beyond anything related to its nuclear program."
The hype about it is political. It has no scientific basis whatever.
Washington Post editorial assertions are false, misleading, and inflammatory. Iran is legally entitled to pursue its nuclear program.
P5+1 proposals were disingenuously one-sided. Unreasonable demands were made. Nothing was offered in return. Western good faith wasn't present in Baghdad. It's an oxymoron. It doesn't exist.
Tehran negotiated responsibly. Not good enough, said Washington. Prove a negative was demanded. Refuse and be blamed for Western obstructionism.
Multiple rounds of discussions won't change things. WP editors think the "slide toward war remains desirable. Iran cannot be granted much more time to build and install centrifuges."
Washington is infested with hotheads. WP editorial and op-ed writers are among them. They have lots of scoundrel media company. Promoting war makes it more likely. Body counts and vast destruction don't matter.
Nor for USA Today. It's post-Baghdad editorial headlined "How the US can win at nuclear poker with Iran," saying:
"There's an old poker saying that if you look around the table and can't figure out who the chump is, it's you. Too often in high-stakes negotiations with rogue states such as North Korea and Iran, the U.S. has looked a lot like the chump as it tried to curtail those nations' nuclear weapons programs."
"(O)nly a sucker could be confident that....Iran really, really means" what it says.
Scoundrel media report this way. Managed news duplicity substitutes for real news, opinion and analysis.
Media liars bear full responsibity. So does Washington for failure, not Iran. Tehran can't succeed without a willing partner. It hasn't had one in decades. It has the worst of all relationships now. Obama itches for more war post-election.
He feigns negotiations while planning it at the same time. Munich and Hitler's Non-Aggression Treaty with Soviet Russia come to mind. Washington and Israel are no different. Hawks in both countries are especially worrisome. They're bent on aggression and won't accept less.
In response on May 22, the Tehran Times headlined "Iran must take firm stance at Baghdad talks, saying:
For years, Iran "bravely resisted" unreasonable demands to halt its peaceful nuclear program. Tehran believes pursuing it is a legitimate right. It's "non-negotiatble."
At the same time, Iranian officials try to build trust and resolve differences. They negotiate in good faith. In return, they're rebuffed, stonewalled, and betrayed.
It's up to Washington to break the deadlock and end sanctions. They're harsh and unfair. Short of capitulation, tug-of-war diplomacy won't end. Hillary Clinton said Tehran must "close the gaps. All of our sanctions will remain in place and continue to move forward" for the duration.
They're about making Iran's economy scream. They're not for its legitimate nuclear program. That's red herring camouflage for bigger fish to fry. At issue is installing puppet leaders Washington controls. War looks likely to try.
Negotiating with America accomplishes nothing. It never did before and won't now. "Therefore, resistance seems to be the only option left for the Iranian side to convey its message to the West and to uphold the inalienable rights of the Iranian nation."
America and Israeli want imperial dominance. Iran wants to live free in peace.
Sovereign states deserve that much and more. Wars won't end until enough of them unite and resist. If not soon, they'll continue and expand dangerously.
Never in history has one nation devoted so much firepower to global death and destruction.
Saving humanity depends on restoring peace and stability before it's too late to matter. There may not be much time left to do it.
|< Prev||Next >|
Other articles in Politics
Jeffrey Goldberg and The Israeli Defeat 29 July 2014
Anti-Semitism & Netanyahu's War 29 July 2014
The Cold War Never Ended 29 July 2014
T minus 28 months and counting 29 July 2014
US plays decisive role in Israel’s attack on Gaza 28 July 2014
When BBC Calls, Don’t Answer.. 25 July 2014
The 17th day – may it be the last 25 July 2014
Operation Security Bottom 25 July 2014
Drug-War Nonsense from a U.S. Commander 25 July 2014