The Lost Soul of the United States of America

Secretary Hillary Clinton’s self-congratulation over American leaders’ unanimous disapproval of the intended burning of Muslim religious texts misses out the truth about American society and politics, and the crisis of its fundamental values.

The mass furore over the construction of a Muslim community centre blocks away from Ground Zero is symptomatic of a serious malaise. Public sentiment often manifests in funny ways, but what is worrying is that this has not very seriously bothered many of America’s stout guardians of values, its face-saving rhetoricians.

Protestors against the construction are not terrified by the prospect of bombs hidden away in the mosque’s secret chambers, but are offended by the symbolism of it, and this sheer audacity of America’s alienated Muslim minority.

The name ‘Ground Zero mosque’ is an inaccurate, exaggerated and dramatic construct indicative of the desire by some elements to exploit the widespread Islamophobia in the U.S in order to obstruct a venture essentially courageous and needful.

I say ‘needful’ because of its true symbolism that has escaped many who have been swept away by the tide of Islamophobia. If any community has borne the brunt of what happened on 9/11, it is the Muslims. Not only do they suffer America’s wars in tottering Afghanistan and devastated Iraq, but also the assault on civil liberties jeopardizing Muslim identity globally, Islamophobia in all its facets_ discrimination, racial profiling, stereotyping, bias and a sightless demonization campaign. The construction of an Islamic Community Centre could be America’s conciliatory overture to the marginalized Muslim community, its initiative to start the healing process. The Centre could function as a sacred space for a victimized community to work to restore its true image and ethos, to highlight the role and contribution of Islam in society, and to actively engage with the American community. The United States, priding itself for its liberalism, must yield that necessary sacred space.

President Obama’s outright support to the venture may help salvage his personal image among the Muslims, but it offers little consolation in the face of stark realities Muslims in America have to grapple with. A recent opinion poll shows over 53% Americans hold Islam in a very negative light_ and the government cannot shy away from responsibility for having contributed substantially through its propaganda machinery to rising anti-Islam sentiment in the U.S since 9/11. The American public is almost exclusively informed on national and global issues by influential media giants run by powerful lobbies. The indicators of rising Islamophobia in the U.S speak loudly about the media’s relentless campaign of dehumanizing and othering of the Muslim persona, and its failure to justly differentiate between a religion followed by billions and the actions of individuals in a particular context who claim to belong to it.

Even more telling is General Petraeus’s take on the matter. In his view, what makes the heinous task of burning scriptures worrying is its consequences that may threaten the U.S military abroad. By this logic, it is the consequences for men in uniform that render the act wrongful, not the act in itself; not the hurt this barbarism will wreak on the sentiments of billions of Muslims worldwide, not that this atrocity flies in the face of the most basic values of human civilization and violates the most fundamental rights of billions. Petraeus’s sentiment was echoed in what White House representative Robert Gibbs said of the matter: that ‘any type of activity that puts our troops in harms way would be a concern to this administration.’ Again, the reprehensibility of the act lies almost exclusively in the fact that it may endanger the lives of American troops. The logic exposes the narrow, narcissistic, nationalistic arrogance that puts the bloated Self over its perceived Other; that makes some lives more valuable than others, ‘óur values’ more inviolable than ‘theirs’.

There has been great concern and speculation in the U.S media over the death of an American soldier in the wake of an uprising in Southern Afghanistan sparked by the news of the 9/11 burning plans. The General shudders to think of what may happen if the images of burning sacred books end up being ‘used’ by terrorists to ‘incite violence.’ He forgets that it is not the ‘use’ of the resulting images that is the trouble, but the act in itself. And any Muslim knowing this could happen in the heart of the United States of America cannot but feel confounded over the state of a nation that allows that to happen.

The United States must stop presenting its warmongering as a result of misguided and ill-advised policies as if it were a clash between ‘our’ values and ‘theirs.’ It must get real and face the fact that it is not hated for its values, but for the lack thereof.

Petraeus enlightens with an analogy that the proposed act is like the Taliban’s, and that ‘The Taliban do the same (burn sacred books?!).’ This sweeping statement again takes as given the myth that the wars going on are about values, religions, scriptures and not policies. The Taliban’s fight never has been about American, Western or Christian values. The logic used here implies that if it was not for images being used to threaten American interests, deranged fanatics like Terry Jones may attack and insult what is most sacred to Muslim sensibility, stab in the softest part, strike where it hurts most and crush the very heart and soul of the world’s 3 billion Muslims! The Taliban may be a reviled demon everybody loves to spit on. However, by attempting to strike a comparison between this global enemy and the despicable lunatic from Florida, Petraeus makes the contrast in their respective moral standing only too obvious.

Because, for a Muslim who takes his religion seriously, it is inconceivable to desecrate or even disparage any religious scripture or symbol. It is a core Islamic belief to acknowledge the Divine origin of all revealed religion. The Quran says: “Do not revile those who they invoke apart from God.. .” (Surah Anaam, verse 108). Muslims_ or even the Taliban for that matter_ cannot by any means respond to Jones’s lunacy in equal measure for the demand their faith makes on them. The universalism and pluralistic vision of Islam originating in its basic texts revealed 1400 years ago sets a standard that secular, liberal American society would take ages to reach. The fact that it can allow sick-minded hate-mongers like Jones to not only exist in society but actually propagate and promote their devilish cult with impunity while conventional self-congratulatory lip-service to pacify a minority’s raw sentiments goes on in the backdrop, ought to explode the bubble of what the U.S ‘stands for’. It ought to lead to a serious rethink, for it is about the very soul of America.

Maryam Sakeenah is a student of International Relations based in Pakistan. She is also a high school teacher and freelance writer with a degree in English Literature. She is interested in human rights advocacy and voluntary social work and can be reached at: Read other articles by Maryam.

67 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. mary said on September 9th, 2010 at 8:30am #

    The MediaLens editors enquire –

    “Obama’s efforts to reach out to the Muslim world”
    Posted by The Editors on September 9, 2010, 4:01 pm

    “This episode risks undoing all of the Obama administration’s patient efforts to reach out to the Muslim world, and the irony is that Mr Obama has made his own distaste for the burning crystal clear.” Jonathan Marcus, BBC Diplomatic Correspondent

    Does Marcus mean Obama’s patient efforts to reach out to the Muslim world with his killer drones?:

    “Missile attacks by US drones in Pakistan’s tribal areas have more than trebled under the Obama administration, research by the BBC Urdu service shows.

    “Compared with 25 drone strikes between January 2008 and January 2009, there were at least 87 such attacks between President Obama taking office on 20 January 2009 and the end of June 2010.

    “More than 700 people have been killed in such attacks under Mr Obama, compared with slightly fewer than 200 from under his predecessor, George W Bush.”

  2. Rehmat said on September 9th, 2010 at 8:46am #

    It’s just a part of Zionist conspiracy to force Muslims to accept the official 9/11 lie so that when Israel pulled the next 9/11 false flag operation, Ben Obam would not be able to find an excuse not to bomb Islamic Republic.

    Would the Jew-controlled mass-media would remind the Americans that far more Muslim died inside Twin Towers (over 125) than Jews (0)?

    According to the 9/11 victims list – sixty Pakistanis died as the result of September 11, 2001 terrorist attack – which according to Jew historian Dr. allan Sabrosky. One of the victim was Mohammad Talat Hamdani 23 – A Muslim from Pakistan. He was not inside the WTC but rushed inside to save the victims after the terrorist attack – but died attempting to save others – leaving wife and a child behind.

    Hamdani, NYPD cadet/lab. technician, was on his way to work when he saw the Twin Towers burning and decided to change his daily route to head to the Twin Tower where he thought he would be doing his citizen-duty as a Muslim to help people in need. However, he was killed when the North Tower collapsed under its own weight.

    Within hours of his disappearance, Hamdani family was questioned by FBI agents while the Zionist-controlled mainstream media included his name in their phoney ‘terrorist list’ – highlighting Salman’s religion (Islam) and nationality (Pakistan). The family was harassed by anti-Muslim goondas on almost daily basis.

    However, after the Zionists’ ‘Islam-bashing’ purpose was served – Hamdani was honored by the NY Governor and the Dubya Bush in 2002 without identifying him a Muslim……

  3. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 10:20am #

    > Would the Jew-controlled mass-media would remind the Americans that far more Muslim died inside Twin Towers (over 125) than Jews (0)?

    The estimated numbers of dead Jews on 911 are between 270-400. You’re just being confused. There were a few Israelis who died, but many more Jews. You’ve got it mixed up.

  4. 3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 10:32am #

    PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 10:20am #

    “The estimated (sic!!!) numbers of dead Jews on 911 are between 270-400 (sic!!!).”

    I for my part find this “estimation” quite strange…

  5. bozh said on September 9th, 2010 at 10:39am #

    Don’t read this, please!!!!
    Muslims as whole and imams are devoted to asocialistic; i.e., layered structure of society and governance.
    Uncle sam loves such people. And he has the will of iron! Obama has been ordered in name of US glory, expansionism, troop safety, chick raising, etc., to support islam’s mosque construction!
    Obama knows he’d lose mns of votes, but US being a nation of laws, what even ucle cld do, but say yes!
    He’s probably assuring O that he’d remain president! Remember, uncle wanted bush over gore, and what uncle wants uncle gets!
    Palin is already been told that she’s pain in the neck. He said beck can talk all he wants: he will never govern anything more than his fantacy basement.
    Besides, all this talk about mosque, makes everybody forget oodles and oodles of bad news.
    And santa is coming soon! To every …… tnx

  6. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 11:14am #

    Both estimates of Jewish deaths at the WTC on 911 seem to me unlikely.

    Given the types of businesses and other organizations housed at the WTC, one would expect some number of Jewish persons to be among those occupying the building that morning.

    However if the number of Jews killed approached the numbers offered by Mr McNally, I believe much more would have been made of 911 as an “anti-Semitic Hate Crime”.

    “Gentlemen, start your search engines”

  7. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 11:47am #

    Here is the list victim names of 9/11, where according to all evidence on the ground WAS AN INSIDE JOB TO FRAME MUSLIMS. Anyone with more than two brain cells KNOWS that.

    Don’t forget that modern terrorismwas pioneered by the ZIONIST JEWS where took many lives before the erection of the apartheid state in PALESTINIAN’s land including many British officers. So, people who are familiar with the history of terrorism know who are behind terror of 9/11.

  8. Maien said on September 9th, 2010 at 12:05pm #

    America (excepting the few humans who reside in that part of the world) hasn’t had a soul for a couple of centuries, even as ‘final gasps’ do escape that archipelago of decay and the stench of stupidity. Canada is not far behind.

    We know what America is. How long will its’ leaders use the millions of useful idiots/minions who have far too much money, muddied rationale and a well trained, dangerous level of hatred/stupidity. There is a reason that you do not give 5 year olds access to dangerous weapons. Something will go wrong.

    Those with the money and the guns have taught themselves that they are superior and therefore entitled. So powerful have they become that they are no longer able to see that they are the “useless eaters” themselves.

    For thinking humans, America having a soul was questioned as the genocide of the native population … of Turtle Island, began. So, if current information is acknowledged then we know that Israel with no borders ( it is not a country but occupied land) is the actual ruler of America. Or to use the vernacular, America is the Israeli’s bitch and she really really likes it that way.

  9. 3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 12:06pm #

    teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 11:14am #

    “Gentlemen, start your search engines”

    No need to. PatrickSMcNally must have known the source of his “estimation”, so all that is needed is to give us that source, nothing else. PS: Of course if it is his own work, he should tell us how he had arrived at it. Even Raul Hilberg told us clearly how he did his maths:

  10. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 12:24pm #


    In July 1954 Egypt was plagued by a series of bomb outrages directed mainly against American and British property in Cairo and Alexandria. It was generally assumed that they were the work of the Moslem Brothers, then the most dangerous challenge to the still uncertain authority of Colonel (later President) Nasser and his two-year-old revolution. Nasser was negotiating with Britain over the evacuation of its giant military bases in the Suez Canal Zone, and, the Moslem Brothers, as zealous nationalists, were vigorously opposed to any Egyptian compromises.

    It therefore came as a shock to world, and particularly Jewish opinion, when on 5 October the Egyptian Minister of the Interior, Zakaria Muhieddin, announced the break-up of a thirteen-man Israeli sabotage network. An ‘anti-Semitic’ frame-up was suspected.

    The trial established that the bombings had indeed been carried out by an Israeli espionage and terrorist network. This was headed by Colonel Avraharn Dar –alias John Darling– and a core of professionals who had set themselves up in Egypt under various guises. They had recruited a number of Egyptian Jews; one of them was a young woman, Marcelle Ninio, who worked in the offices of a British company.

  11. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 1:31pm #

    Opened the “victims & heroes” link so graciously provided by Shabnam. A quick skim of the first column, first page reveals upwards of a dozen names which appear to be typical Yiddish, German or Polish-derived names common among the US Jewish population. However they were a minor fraction of the names on that column.

    Three columns on a page, scrolling down I saw three pages. So I think two to three hundred would be a reasonable guesstimate; more than that I’d want to see documentation.

    Next I’ll open 3BC’s link…

  12. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 1:38pm #

    3BC’s link wouldn’t open, could be my browser. Decided not to open the link in your last post, Shabnam, because not directly related to current discussion. I have no doubt the info you post is accurate; I have in my files dozens of comparable examples of Isreali criminality and covert action.

    If any reader is unclear about the facts, I suggest you go ahead and open the link.

  13. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 1:40pm #

    > Here is the list victim names of 9/11, where according to all evidence on the ground WAS AN INSIDE JOB TO FRAME MUSLIMS.

    Well that had once been an interesting speculation and may for all we can guess turn out to be true eventually. But as it stands most of the truther arguments have fallen flat. I can’t take any pleasure in that since I had devoted a couple years to going over all of it with the thought that some breakthrough might be found. But as it stands truthers have shown themselves to not be very swift and it is more likely that the historical verdict will remain that 19 Arab hijackers carried out suicidal crashes.

  14. 3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 1:50pm #

    PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 1:40pm #

    So at last PatrickSMcNally has shown his true colors: he sticks to the official myth…

  15. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 1:54pm #

    well the Truther arguments may have fallen flat (or not, too intricate for me) but they haven’t fallen any flatter than the Official Version. I find your guess that the “historical verdict” (sic) will “remain” (sic) unduly biased in favor of the Official Conspiracy Theory.

    This is the kind of case Rosemarie J refers to in her comment on the Mosk article: he who can afford the best comedians laughs last.

    Who or what lies behind the events of 911 is less important than who/what lies behind the invasions/occupations of Iraq & Afghanistan, the demonization of all things Muslim, and the push for a First Strike on Iran. Fortunately James Petras and others have provided us with the answer to that one.

  16. 3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 2:05pm #

    teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 1:31pm #

    That was a count of “names which appear to be typical Yiddish, German or Polish-derived names common among the US Jewish population”, not of Jews…

  17. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 2:06pm #

    > the Official Conspiracy Theory

    That’s a meaningless thrown around by truthers. The phrase “official story” only has meaning if we are talking about something put out by government officials. Now it is true that after 911 the Bush administration attempted to claim that Saddam Hussein was behind 911. That was an “official story” in the true sense, and that official story fell apart with the Kuwaiti incubators a long time ago. But there is no such official story today. What exists is an “orthodox consensus” that has taken form slowly over the last 9 years and has been argued by diverse individuals, most of whom have no official capacity anywhere. That orthodox consensus may still prove to wrong, but it’s been holding up a lot better than any of truther claims so far.

    > Who or what lies behind the events of 911 is less important than

    I can readily accept that. But I wasn’t the one who brought the truther claims out of the woodwork here.

  18. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 2:26pm #

    P McN, your “orthodox consensus” may be holding up for you, but it’s no more credible to me now than it was when the Kean Commission first started peddling it. And if you can remember that far back, the Commish was an Official, US-gov’t created body.

    It was bs then and its bs now.

    So who are these “diverse individuals” you find so credible?

    BTW, how is your campaign to rectify things in Iran coming along? You really didn’t expect anybody to believe you were really concerned about defects in governance of that far off land, did you? How could a smart fellow like you fail to realize that nothing said or posted on an English language webpage could possibly be of help to anyone in Iran? That the only impact of your parroting of the Hillary Clinton propaganda line would be to help prepare US public opinion to accept/support a First Strike on Iran?

    Doesn’t it make you at all uncomfortable to find yourself part of the same scam as that nutcase in Gainesville FL?

  19. 3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 2:52pm #

    teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 1:54pm #

    “Who or what lies behind the events of 911 is less important than who/what lies behind the invasions…”

    This kind of reasoning is usually typical of Chomskyites…

    PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 2:06pm #

    This “orthodox consensus” (just like “the will/consensus of the international community” and the like) is just the so-called “manufactured consensus”. I think that forums like this one should be a place where people express their own thoughts about things, not hiding behind opportunistic labels like that…

  20. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 2:57pm #

    {not be very swift and it is more likely that the historical verdict will remain that 19 Arab hijackers carried out suicidal crashes.}
    Damned with the historical verdict, only a fool believes this nonsense. All evidence on the ground shows that 9/11 terror WAS AN INSIDE JOB, otherwise more than 1000 architects and engineers would have not demanded a truth seeking conference on the issue because residue test showed that 9/11 terror was designed by a country who has advanced laboratory system. Thus, the story that few persons, we are told Arabs, with $2 box cutter took over the airplanes and hit the buildings is HOAX. According to experts the buildings should have not gone to the ground in the first place, and if did (unlikely) should have not followed demolition pattern. Furthermore, building 7 was not hit, yet due to explosives put in the building before the arrival of the airplanes followed the same pattern as other buildings which were hit.
    The invasion of Iraq was unlikely without 9/11 terror attack, therefore, those who designed and implemented the 9/11 terror knew that the perceived enemies of Israel will be targeted for ‘regime change’. They had a plan, and still do, to attack majority of Muslim countries including Iran, Iraq, even Sudan, which is important for the erection of “greater Israel’ according to ODED YINON and A Clean Break.
    All events followed the 9/11 attack points to those terrorists who stole Palestine using Modern Terrorism. The Zionists believe they can dominate the world using TERRORISM. The 9/11 terror attack has brought 100 percent benefit for the Zionist Jews and Israel, but only deaths and destruction for Muslims all over the world. Osama was killed in 2001 yet the terrorists still tell us we will arrest him. You are stupid not us. There is no Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is THE UNITED STATES.
    You must be a fool to believe the official story meaning “19 Arabs with $2 knife cutters”. Don’t forget that the SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES’ AIRPORTS ARE UNDER THE CONTROL OF MOSSAD, LIKE THE WHITE HOUSE, THE SENATE, CONGRESS, AND ……

  21. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:09pm #

    okay, 3bancan,
    guess you missed all the dustups I’ve had here on DV with Chomsky fans like Max, J Hammond et al?

    So why do you claim that to be less interested in the endless back and forth about 911 “Truth”, which will never be resolved as long as the ZPC has money to hire expert snowjob artists, than in the nature, scope and power of the ZPC itself, is “typical of Chomskyites”?

    I don’t see that any progress is being made toward a final Left consensus on 911, but I DO see some change, minor so far but measurable, in weaning some of our “coalition partners” away from the Chompsky/Zunes/Plitnick/et al “Warferoyl” myth. For instance, after I sent a complaint to Ramzy Baroud, Palestine Chronicle no longer features a Chompsky quote on the front page.

    ME, a CHOMPSKYITE? you gotta be kidding:)

  22. Deadbeat said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:09pm #

    but also the assault on civil liberties jeopardizing Muslim identity globally, Islamophobia in all its facets_ discrimination, racial profiling, stereotyping, bias and a sightless demonization campaign.>

    Islamophobia is a weasel word that doesn’t accurately describe the situation. People are not “fearful” which is what phobias are. They’re reactions is due to Zionist indoctrination.

    It is utterly cowardly, shameful, and misleading to maintain a false mindset in order to conceal the influence that Zionism has on U.S. society.

  23. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:14pm #

    > how is your campaign to rectify things in Iran coming along?

    What campaign? Your imagination is running out of control again. I had simply pointed out that you, and quite a few others, had adopted a sort of “Brezhnevite” attitude towards Iran. After Khrushchev was booted out the CPUSA and some splinter groups which came from there essentially went to sleep at the wheel just being happy with putting out the best make-up for Brezhnev. When Gorbachev tore it all down, their whole world came apart and they seemed in a state of shock.

    Several board members here seem to take a similar attitude towards Iran, except that now they can’t even make the argument that the state which they’re beholden was ever a revolutionary workers state (whereas the old Brezhnevites did have that as a valid argument). Any serious comparison between Georgia and Ukrainia on the one hand and Iran in 2009 will have to conclude that there the attempted “Green Revolution” clearly drew more popular support than the earlier “Rose” and “Orange” scams. One doesn’t have to endorse the “Green Revolution” or make any assumptions about who really won the election to see this an important difference. Many arguments made about the Iranian election of 2009 have centered on a poll by the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation which reported that 27% polled had said “don’t know,” 22% gave no answer, 14% said they’d vote for Mousavi, and 37% Ahmadinejad. I’ve seen some people like Petras cite those figures as evidence of more than a “2-to-1” margin in favor of Ahmadinejad, but that’s not what the poll figures really imply. It’s absurd the way that you neo-Brezhnevites invest so much in binding all forms of anti-imperialism to faith in Ahmadinejad’s electoral victory.

    Like I’ve said before, Russia has effectively deterred any likely military attacks on Iran for the foreseeable future. With a nuclear plant functioning in Iran, even one which serves totally non-military purposes, the likely outcome of any major bombing Iran will be nuclear clouds over Israel. That pretty well rules out any such rash actions. What is more likely to emerge further down the road will be the Ayatollah Gorbachev path for Iran.

    I’ve noticed that several of you neo-Brezhnevites like to twist the meaning of the Gorbachev road for Iran by equating it with the National Endowment for Democracy. That is a complete falsification of things. Gorbachev was not funded by George Soros, he rose to power as a native revisionist within the Soviet bureaucracy. The “Rose Revolution” in Georgia was made by the NED more than a decade after Gorbachev had thrown the USSR under the bus. Defining the future of Iran as one that will take the Gorbachev path has nothing to do with the NED. It will be a home-grown phenomenon, just like Gorbachev was.

  24. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:17pm #

    3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 2:05pm #

    teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 1:31pm #

    That was a count of “names which appear to be typical Yiddish, German or Polish-derived names common among the US Jewish population”, not of Jews…

    So what’s your point? Go ahead, research every name on the list, find out the religious affiliation, or if non-Judaic, check the parents’ religious background.

    I made what seemed to me a reasonable ballpark guesstimate based on what seemed to me a reasonable sample. You want a scholarly study? offer me a scholarly fee and I’ll do one for you.

    You feeling OK today? you seem a little confused. ??

  25. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:19pm #

    >I think that forums like this one should be a place where people express their own thoughts about things

    Has anyone tried to block you from doing such? It’s just a fact that the multiple attempts by truthers to string together an argument have turned out to be repeatedly full of holes. I already made allowance above for the possibility that perhaps the current orthodox consensus will be eventually be shown as wrong. But truthers have not done a good job of that yet. There isn’t much else which can be said.

  26. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:22pm #

    Islamophobia is led by the ZIONIST JEWS in the United States and in major Western Countries. The imposter, BERNARD HENRI LEVY, leads Islamophobia industry in France where number of IRNANIAN STOOGES, from the opposition, are giving this racist and war monger a helping hand. The group who is organizing rally against the planned Islamic Center is by the Zionists. Organized hared against Muslim is led by the zionist Jews around the world.

  27. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:23pm #

    Patrick McN is undoubtedly the slickest hasbarat to appear on this site since I’ve been reading it.

    If you think the NED, CIA & Mossad had/have nothing to do with the attempts to destabilize Iran, and to demonize it so as to make US/Nato/Izzy sanctions seem “reasonable” to the US public, I have a nice bridge I’ll make you a good deal on. No money down, just your soul:)

  28. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:27pm #

    > So who are these “diverse individuals” you find so credible?

    Well since we’re talking here about lots of different people all I can do is give a sample. This page by Dave Thomas

    carries links to several of his debunkings of Richard Gage. I’m not enough of an expert on structural engineering to really deliver a deciding opinion, but it’s clear that things are not as simple as Gage (who also is not a structural engineer) tries to make them sound.

  29. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:39pm #

    > If you think the NED, CIA & Mossad had/have nothing to do

    You’re just dishonestly twisting words once more. I simply pointed out that the scale of protests in Iran at the time of the election of 2009 can definitely not be accounted for by referencing CIA/Mossad/NED and the like. We have a clear standard of comparison with the level of popular mobilization in the “Rose” and “Orange” “Revolutions,” and it’s clear that the Iranian protests were much wider. I also pointed out that the polling, which Petras himself cites, actually suggests something different from what Petras implied it did. Go ahead and exercise your Gus Hall option by pretending that all of this can just be accounted for referencing CIA/Mossad/NED, but it really can’t. But you sound more like the type who buys his bridges from people like Brezhnev and Gorbachev.

  30. bozh said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:54pm #

    The label “islamophobia”, as u pointed out, is not, to me also, an elucidatory term.
    ?all observers wld agree that islam is a great ally of the govt such in US, jordan, egypt; ergo, a friend to those people who most condemn it or express fear of it.
    Islam is very loyal to a layered structure of society and governance.
    I’ve just, i think, said this today s’mwhere.

    Christian and mosheic cults mostly hate islamic cult and cannot fear that much as even tiny israel can defeat all muslims let alone arabic.
    Of course, they evoke great perils coming from it but avoid like plague to describe how islamic countries can hurt us.

    Cults are devoid of any sanity when dealing with other cults and people who do not belong to cults and what can one do worse than hate your enemy. Bettter is to respect an enemy and assess what an enemy can do to you and get ready for battle if necessary.

    It appears that one component– dominant one, i think– of codemnatiom of islam is deep christian and mosheic hatred against the newest baby on the block. And we are stuck with this insanity forever? tnx

  31. 3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 4:00pm #

    teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:17pm #

    Iwas really not interested in how many Jews died there. I was interested in how PatrickSMcNally came to that “estimation” – and he has still not given an answer.

    PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:19pm #

    PSMN misunderstood what I said: “I think that forums like this one should be a place where people express their own thoughts about things, not hiding behind opportunistic labels like that…” In other words, imho he should state his own opinion about that event, not explain what everybody knows – the orthodox consensus and its future…

  32. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 4:24pm #

    The protest was mainly limited to e NORTH OF TEHRAN, the well to do residents, and the University students where majority of them are pro liberalism like Akbar Ganji who received $500,000 from CATO institute for his services to the West where David Kock, a right wing libertarian and billionaire, sitting among its board members and quietly is funding Tea Party.
    Akbar Ganji is supported by the Zionist including Chomsky. Akbar Ganji after his award from CATO took a picture with Chomsky and wrote a stupid paper to glorify liberalism and neoliberal market economy, Freidman’s style. If the protest was so widespread, then what did happened to it? Are they afraid to protest? Or they are afraid to be exposed that not many people are with them? Why have the ‘leaders’ not been arrested where many Iranians are demanding authorities to arrest these fools. Karrubi has charged authorities with false killing and rape charges where was fabricated by two journalists who wanted to obtain Visa to the West and was given to another Iranian Journalist who has close relations with the ‘human rights’ organization in the business of overthrowing government of the West. Both Journalist now are living abroad, one is working for BBC. The false story told a case of rape and murder of a woman, TARANEH MOUSAVI, killed by the authorities. This manufactured story was widely used by Karrubi, A LIAR, but he had no evidence to prove his case although he repeatedly said pressured put on him, he will present e evidence regarding the case, but he never did. Recently, a journalist who told the story to the West in the beginning revealed that the story of Taraneh Mousavi was HOAX.

  33. 3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 4:49pm #

    teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 3:09pm #

    “okay, 3bancan,
    guess you missed all the dustups I’ve had here on DV with Chomsky fans like Max, J Hammond et al? ”

    No, I didn’t miss them. I came here just on that topic, because I saw a link on Palestinethinktank. Kudos to you, DB and Hayate…

  34. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:00pm #

    Please be acquainted with the “Iranian opposition’ group are supported by the Zionist lobby.

    Akbar Atri, a close associate of Ganji, spoke at his celebration party for Ganji’s release from the prison where was held at Harvard University in 2006. In that night, he supported Iraq war and Afghanistan war at a time where the majority of American people were against the war especially Iraq war.

  35. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:06pm #

    > and he has still not given an answer.

    I simply posted a couple of links above to a few of the very standard kinds of news items which anyone can look up for themselves. If they’re not showing it’s becuase this board sometimes delays the posting of messages which contain links.

    > In other words, imho he should state his own opinion about that event

    I already stated whatever opinion I have, but I’ll repeat it for those of you who are slow:

    “Well that had once been an interesting speculation and may for all we can guess turn out to be true eventually. But as it stands most of the truther arguments have fallen flat. I can’t take any pleasure in that since I had devoted a couple years to going over all of it with the thought that some breakthrough might be found. But as it stands truthers have shown themselves to not be very swift and it is more likely that the historical verdict will remain that 19 Arab hijackers carried out suicidal crashes.”

  36. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:15pm #

    The historical verdict , according to WikiLeaks, is that Ben Laden is alive and lives in Pakistan. This hoax can be believed only by the fools. We say ood luck. However, we are not the ones, therefore, we tell them go to hell terrorists and liars.

  37. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:24pm #

    Great White Father McNally thinks it’s up to him in his Superior Wisdom to tell the Iranians how to run their country. Even if the only possible effect of his Pukka Sahib moralizing is the exact opposite of what he claims to desire.

    It won’t wash, McNally; we’re on to you and your game. You and your “orthodox consensus”:) But you’re slipping: a few days ago I assumed anyone with your knowledge of Marxism and of Soviet& Trotskyite history must be a leftist of some variety. Now however the scales have come off my eyeballs & see you for what you are, as revealed by what you’re trying to do.

    According to you, Oh GWF in heaven she be, the Iranians have no reason to worry because the Tooth Fairy alias Medvedev can be counted on to nuke the State of Israel if they launch a strike on Iran.

    Did you really expect anybody to buy that one? Especially people who tend to be suspicious of the State Dept/AIPAC line?

    All this crap about the “green” bunch of sellouts & traitors being bigger than the “orange” & “rose” US/Izzy sponsored same is irrelevant. What IS relevant is that you as a USian have no goddam business trying to meddle in Iranian internal affairs. Who thuff kdo you think you are, Queen Victoria? Teddy Roosevelt?

    Rhetorical questions. Nothing you say will affect the course of internal developments in Iran, so why are you babbling on? Only one answer makes sense: you’re working as part of the ZioImperial propaganda apparatus, trying to help justify the US/Izzy campaign of sanctions and other hostile acts aimed at Iran, and to prepare US “progressive” circles to accept what ever Obummer & Netanyahoo decide to do.

  38. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:25pm #

    Okay, 3bancan, no problem:)

  39. teafoe2 said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:40pm #

    Iran continues conquest of Latin America
    Written by Belén Fernández

    Yesterday in Washington, D.C, I encountered a Bolivian immigrant named David who had just returned from a trip to La Paz in order to verify that Evo Morales was not in the process of expropriating his house in his absence and who informed me that other world leaders were taking advantage of Morales’ minimal education level to fill in the gaps with their own ideologies. It turned out that the list of usual culprits had been expanded to consist not only of the presidents of Venezuela and Ecuador but that of Iran, as well, whose first ambassador to Bolivia met with Morales this week.

    The opening of Iranian diplomatic offices in South America has been of special concern in recent years to the Israeli Foreign Ministry and the U.S. State Department, prompting them to produce such things as “secret reports” about Iranian acquisition of regional uranium and to alert Jewish travelers to their potential kidnapping at the Caracas airport as part of a joint Hezbollah-Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps scheme to transport hostages to Lebanon via the weekly Caracas-Tehran flight on IranAir. (Despite the seeming logistical simplicity of the scheme, it is apparently more difficult to carry out than, for example, assassinations of Hamas leaders in their Dubai hotels.)

    My companion David noted that he was not so much concerned by the possibility of reaching Tehran by air from La Paz with only one connection in Damascus but rather by the accumulation of U.S. enemies as Bolivian allies when the country had already been sufficiently incapable of defending itself prior to being taken over by legions of uneducated farmers. A 2009 Jerusalem Post article entitled “The ‘other’ America: A perfect terror breeding-ground”, which takes care to mention the postwar flight of many Nazis to Central and South America, meanwhile explains that “[d]isenfranchised and marginalized regions are prime targets for fundamentalists and fanatics of all kinds” in their recruitment and training endeavors but fails to mention past Israeli training of regional paramilitaries.

    As for past cooperation between Iran and South America, Israeli and U.S. claims of Iranian involvement in the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish community center in Buenos Aires as revenge for Argentina’s cancellation of nuclear technology contracts have been countered by journalists attentive to details such as that Argentine-Iranian negotiations to resume cooperation in fact continued even after the bombing, which suggests that revenge may have instead been the priority of a non-Iranian party.

  40. 3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:43pm #

    PatrickSMcNally’s source is of course the zionazified Wikipedia:
    “There are theories that 9/11 was part of an international Jewish conspiracy. According to Cinnamon Stillwell, another myth popular with 9/11 conspiracy theorists[119] is that 4,000 Jewish employees skipped work at the World Trade Center on September 11. This was first reported on September 17 by the Lebanese Hezbollah-owned satellite television channel Al-Manar and is believed to be based on the September 12 edition of the Jerusalem Post that stated “The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem has so far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attacks.”[120] Both turned out to be incorrect; the number of Jews who died in the attacks is variously estimated at between 270 to 400.[121][122][dead link][123][124] The lower figure tracks closely with the percentage of Jews living in the New York area and partial surveys of the victims’ listed religion. The U.S. State Department has published a partial list of 76 in response to claims that fewer Jews/Israelis died in the WTC attacks than should have been present at the time.[125][126] Five Israeli citizens died in the attack.[127]”

  41. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:47pm #

    Two Jewish centers in Argentine, including the buildings of Argentine-Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) and Delegation of Israeli Argentine Associations (DAIA) were destroyed in a bomb explosion on July 18, 1994 leaving 85 people dead and more than 250 others injured.

    According to reports released at the time, the explosion took place after a bomb-laden car crashed into the buildings in a suicide bombing.

    Two years prior to the blast, an explosion took place in the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires on March 17, in which 22 were killed and dozens, mostly Argentines, were injured.

    Despite firm evidences that the explosion took place within the AMIA building and the rejection of the suicide bombing theory, subsequent developments– including legal proceedings in the case, relevant investigations, charges leveled, evidences and confessions — proved the existence of a pre-planned conspiracy by international Zionism and Argentine agents….

  42. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:56pm #

    > McNally thinks it’s up to him in his Superior Wisdom to tell the Iranians how to run their country.

    Cranking out more lies, as usual. I simply am willing to tell whatever passes as a “Left-wing” here in the USA that they will do better to avoid the neo-Brezhnevite course which makes anti-imperialism depend upon unabashed apologetics for religious dictatorships. There’s no need tot ake that into the realm of telling Iranians anything. It’s the neo-Brezhnevite “Left” in the USA which is making itself out to be fools.

    > the Iranians have no reason to worry because the Tooth Fairy alias Medvedev can be counted on to nuke the State of Israel if they launch a strike on Iran.

    Even better than that, the likely fallout of any actual bombing of active Iranian reactors will be a radioactive cloud over Israel. That’s the best form of insurance that one is likely to get.

    > Nothing you say will affect the course of internal developments in Iran, so why are you babbling on?

    It’s been stated multiple times, so why are you babbling on? The fallout of having an alleged “Left” invest itself in the Iranian mullahs the way that Gus Hall attached himself to Brezhnev is likely going to be the same as what Hall got: a big fat egg on the face. Anti-imperialism should never have to depend upon such romantic attachments to either a Brezhnev politburo or Iranian Ayatollahs.

    > Only one answer makes sense: you’re working as part of the ZioImperial propaganda apparatus

    I could spin a similar charge in your direction without much difficulty, but I’ll stand by what I’ve said already instead. You don’t so much come across as an agent of Iranian propaganda (the way that two others here clearly do) but rather as someone whose ideas of “Leftism” are frozen in time with Leonid Brezhnev and Gus Hall. You’re essentially acting out the pre-perestroika days to eternity but attempting to transfer the point of allegiance from the Soviet politburo over to the current Ayatollahs. I don’t really see any cause to think that you were ever recruited as an agent by anyone. You’re just deluded in the same that Hall was.

  43. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 6:06pm #

    > PatrickSMcNally’s source is of course the zionazified Wikipedia:

    No, actually everything which is mentioned in that Wiki passage is simply based upon reports in the media. In the links I gave above I listed a few pieces, neither of which came from Wiki which I just found by doing a search. You’ve provided here a very good example of the kind of truther-idiocy which has done much to discredit the truthers. I had responded to a poster who was repeating the lie that no Jews were killed on 911. I did a fast internet search of my own and easily came up with reports about Jewish casualties being somewhere in a range of 270-400. Instead of backing off of the obviously stupid claim about “no Jews Killed” and moving on to something else you start trying to turn this into an argument. That’s why clowns like you are called “troofers.”

  44. PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 6:08pm #

    > However if the number of Jews killed approached the numbers offered by Mr McNally, I believe much more would have been made of 911 as an “anti-Semitic Hate Crime”.

    How so? The estimates which I quickly through out from memory recall and which were widely reported in differeent places

    would only imply that between 9-14% of the victims were of Jewish background. In what way would that allow for charges of “antisemitism”? These numbers are actually in a normal range of what would expect, in proportion to Jewish employment in the area. What would then justify the charges of “antisemitism”?

  45. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 7:18pm #

    {The fallout of having an alleged “Left” invest itself in the Iranian mullahs the way that Gus Hall attached himself to Brezhnev is likely going to be the same as what Hall got: a big fat egg on the face. Anti-imperialism should never have to depend upon such romantic attachments to either a Brezhnev politburo or Iranian Ayatollahs.}

    Only an imposter, Bernard Henri Levey and HOPI, both islamophobic and against Islam, will say such a nonsense. There is no left in Iran, I wish there was. The Iranian left from the earlier generation is residing abroad and the majority of them are with the Zionists and imperialist propaganda campaign. The majority of left are against Palestinians but are willing to work with Israelis. Almost all do not believe in socialist system anymore and are embedded in neoliberal market economy like you do. You cannot fool us Mr. Agent.
    Iran is the country whose action is matched her words and for the past 32 years stood with Palestinians against Zionism; because Iranian government believes Zionism is the fascist of our time and must be confronted with. Iran has always said she wants to have a better relations with the United States based on mutual interest not as a puppet. Israel and its fifth column, including the LEFT, are against such a relations and has they have used all their tools to sabotage such a relations between the two country because the Jewish Lobby including the LEFT believes such a relation is damaging to Zionist expansionist policy. Iran is a natural ally of the United States compare to Israel where, contrary to Zionist Chomsky who presents Israel as an asset, is in fact a liability.
    You must provide names of those Iranian LEFTISTS or organizations that have done 1/10 of the Iranian government against Zionism and imperialism but has supported Palestinian people beyond rhetoric. Give me a few examples otherwise you are talking nonsense. You have to present names or get lost because your argument is very similar to agents who come here to introduce DIVISION among people who support victims not the Zionist terrorists and their puppets. Iran is under the threat by the zionism supported by the LEFT, because the left organizations and parties are let by JEWISH who claim are Anti imperialism which is a lie. The majority of them are fighting against Islam and resistance groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas not Zionism or imperialism, HOPI is one example who were forced out of the anti war organization. The Jews for the past few centuries have been the allies of the West working as agents for the British imperialism to bring down the Ottoman Empire, and as an agent of French Empire in Algeria, and other Arab countries as spies. The LEFT has supported the Zionist entity for the past 62 years fooling ignorant people. Jean Paul Sartre who refused the Nobel Prize because of Vietnam; he accepted an award in ISRAEL by the Zionists in late 1970s and ignored the Palestinian genocide by the Zionists, because he was a Zionist as well. The “mullah” talk is very similar to enemy of Iran at the service of Islamophobia industry.
    Those who have Persian skills can read the following post to see how Iranian Left abroad are so desperate because there is NO left in Iran.

  46. Deadbeat said on September 9th, 2010 at 7:30pm #

    Apparently PatrickSMcNally got his information about the 2009 Iranian elections from Wikipedia. However he left out this paragraph…

    A post-election national poll was conducted in late August and early September 2009 by the American polling agency, World Public Opinion, which is affiliated to the University of Maryland. Of the initial 46% respondents of the poll, 27% did not state their chosen candidate, 55% said that they had voted for Ahmadinejad. Both Mr Karroubi and Mr Rezai received minimal support. 87% of respondents replied that they had voted compared to 85% according to the official figures, which is within the margin of error provided. Also, the survey found that 62% of Iranians had “strong confidence” in the election result whilst 64% expressed a similar feeling towards the incumbent president. This finding almost exactly matches up with the proportion of the vote that Ahmadinejad received.[63]

  47. 3bancan said on September 9th, 2010 at 8:15pm #

    PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 6:06pm #
    “Instead of backing off of the obviously stupid claim about “no Jews Killed” and moving on to something else you start trying to turn this into an argument.”
    Where did I say that no Jews were killed??? I just wanted to know how you got that weird “estimation”. Your source is probably the same as Wikipedia’s. Isn’t it strange that the “exact” (sic!) number of deaths is “known”, but the Jewish deaths are given in this most weird “range of 270-400”??? As far as I can tell the Jews don’t bother to count goy deaths, but their own are sacred to them.
    Urbandictionary:troofer: “Noun- Term of abuse used by Bush supporters against anyone who is openly disbelieving of the Bush Administration’s heavily propagandised 9/11 fairytale. The term is used most often in a derogatory way as an ad hominem by neocon trolls in order to avoid dealing with the facts, commonsense, and supporting links presented by 9/11 sceptics”…

  48. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 8:22pm #

    Shahid Alam in “Military Metaphysics and the Native Informer” writes:
    The think tank, whose operations are underwritten by the UK government to the tune of £1 million, has links to the neoconservative Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC). Together their members run The Spittoon, a blog where under various pseudonyms they smear opponents, mainly antiwar, pro-Palestinian voices (one frequent contributor is Alexander Hitchens, son of Christopher, who is trying to forge a career in the lucrative ‘terrorism expert’ industry). Its members also publish on Harry’s Place, a notorious Zionist weblog that has been described as ‘a hard right wing hate site…the UK equivalent of the US’s Little Green Footballs’. The think tank also maintains good relations across the Atlantic where Nawaz was earlier hosted by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a spinoff of AIPAC, the leading Israel lobby institution.
    Harry’s Place defines itself:
    Harry’s Place defines itself as centre-left and was supportive of the 2003 invasion of Iraq[5], the concept of liberal interventionism[6] , and liberal dissident movements in the Islamic world. It is a supporter of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict[7]. It is highly critical of Islamism [8] and of what it characterises as totalitarian, pro-Islamist and antisemitic tendencies on the left.[9] [10] Nick Cohen noted that the blog was one of few places where it was being pointed out that “a section of the left has allied with religious fundamentalism”. [11]
    Harry’s Place was campaigning against “Execution of Sakineh Ashtiani” who was on trial for murder of her husband. The Zionist war mongers, Bernard Henri Levy, Kushner, SarKozy and number of other Zionist who*es in addition to IRANIAN ‘OPPOSIITON’ GROUPS including the LEFT were using this trial as a propaganda campaign to spread LIES against Iran like the centre-left, Harry’s place.
    Please notice the name of the IRANIAN LEFTIS???? from Opposition, Maryam Namazie, from Worker Communist Party of Iran next to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq and others which APPEARS at HARRY’S PLACE.

  49. shabnam said on September 9th, 2010 at 8:47pm #


    Please notice the FAKE photo of stoning in the following link where was made by the ‘socialists’ to attack Muslims who were demonstrating in support of Palestinians against the Zionists. These Iranian leftists are in the service of the West working in racist organization such as EX-MUSLIM funded by the Western intelligent agencies.

    Maryam Namazie from Workers-Communist Party of Iran and a member of HOPI is Spokesperson of the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain which aims to break the taboo that comes with renouncing Islam.

  50. lichen said on September 9th, 2010 at 9:41pm #

    A recent leaked document put out by the Iranian revolutionary guard shows that, indeed, they have fixed elections. Patrick is right; there is a real, genuine, native opposition there. How pathetic and disgusting that people want to pretend that both that doesn’t exist, and that some arabs/muslims hadn’t rightfully fought back against the crimes of the US empire against them; the millions killed by sanctions, &etc. The right wing pro-government conspiracy theorists are not an authority and know nothing.

  51. hayate said on September 10th, 2010 at 12:14am #

    lichen said on September 9th, 2010 at 9:41pm

    Slipping in that ole hasbara, eh, israeli.

    Nobody here buys it- get yourself a real life.

  52. hayate said on September 10th, 2010 at 12:20am #

    Looks like it is that time again to post some factual info about the Iranian 2009 elections to dispell the lies by the zionist/israeli sayanim and hasbarats here:

    Riding the “Green Wave” at the Campaign for Peace and Democracy and Beyond

    by Edward S. Herman and David Peterson

    There are many problems with the Campaign for Peace and Democracy’s “Question & Answer on the Iran Crisis,” issued by the CPD on July 7, and widely circulated since then.1

    The CPD adopted this format, it tells us, because “some on the left, and others as well, have questioned the legitimacy of and the need for solidarity with the anti-Ahmadinejad movement,” and the CPD believes “those questions need to be squarely addressed.”

    We believe, on the contrary, that the CPD’s 13 questions-and-answers do little to clarify issues related to Iran’s June 12 presidential election and its tumultuous aftermath, and even less to help leftists and “American progressives” decide how they should respond to them.

    As we try to show below, when stripped of its didactic format, this Q&A amounts to little more than an emotional plea to its target audience to surrender what remains of their leftist instincts (long under siege in the States, and shrinking rapidly), and join its authors2 for a ride on the “green wave” of yet another color-coded campaign that fits well with one of their government’s longest-running programs of destabilization and regime change. We believe that any “confusion” felt by the left and “American progressives” towards these events is a confusion that has been sown by our would-be instructors.3

    Go to the link for the rest.

  53. hayate said on September 10th, 2010 at 12:22am #

    Chutzpah, Inc.: “The Brave People of Iran” (versus the Disappeared People of Palestine, Honduras, Afghanistan, Etc.)

    by Edward S. Herman and David Peterson

    It is almost a commonplace, at least for the real — as opposed to the cruise-missile — left, that the flow of information, opinion, and moral indignation in the United States adapts well to the demands of state policy. If the state is hostile to Iran, even openly trying to engage in “regime change,” and if it is supportive of the state of Israel, no matter what crimes Israel may commit, and if it doesn’t like the populist president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, and supports his overthrow and a follow-up “demonstration election” by the local elite, the media and many intellectuals will follow the state agenda, even if they must indulge in mental somersaults. In the case of Iran, the Israeli state and its U.S. supporters are also eager for regime change, so the somersaults on the Iran menace are wilder yet, with large injections of chutzpah.

    This chutzpah is in full bloom in a full-page ad in the February 7 New York Times and February 9 International Herald Tribune addressed to Barack Obama, Nicolas Sarkozy, Dimitry Medvedev, Gordon Brown, and Angela Merkel: “How Long Can We Stand Idly By and Watch the Scandal in Iran Unfold?”1 The ad was sponsored by “The Elie Wiesel Foundation For Humanity,” and signed by 44 Nobel Prize laureates, 42 of them men and a substantial fraction Jewish. The ad attacks Iran’s “cruel and oppressive regime” for its “shameless war against its own people” and its “irresponsible and senseless nuclear ambitions [that] threaten the entire world,” and calls upon Washington, Paris, Moscow, London, and Berlin, the UN Security Council, and “important NGOs” to impose “harsher sanctions” on Iran, and adopt “concrete measures . . . to protect this new nation of dissidents. . . .” “They must know that we are on their side,” the ad implores. “All of us who care must offer our full support and solidarity to the brave people of Iran.”

    This open letter is a shameless and demagogic call for foreign intervention in Iran, for destabilization and subversion, and, above all, for war — although three of the signers (including Wiesel) are past recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize2 — and the text could have been written by the Foreign Office of the state of Israel. Indeed, Wiesel himself is an unabashed protagonist for Israel, having long proclaimed his unwillingness to make a public criticism of that country (“I never attack, never criticize Israel when I am not in Israel”3), so that we can rest assured that his “Foundation for Humanity” will never proclaim its solidarity with any humans living under the Israeli boot. The Wiesel Foundation did not sponsor a full-page ad in the New York Times to protest Israel’s shameless and criminal onslaught against the Gaza Palestinians in early 2009, which in just three weeks killed some 340 children, a greater number than the aggregate of protester deaths in post-election Iran.4 Nor will it sponsor an ad that criticizes the irresponsible buildup of nuclear weapons that Israel has accomplished outside the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and that pose a much clearer threat to the world than that posed by the still nuclear-weapon-free Iran, which is under steady threat of attack by Israel and by a U.S. leadership that says “all options” remain on the table. That Wiesel and his “Foundation for Humanity” could get 43 other Nobel laureates to sign this hysterical, hypocritical, and morally degraded war-call is a sad indication of the state of the reigning Western intellectual culture in 2010.

    Go to the link for the rest.

  54. hayate said on September 10th, 2010 at 12:23am #

    The Iran Threat in the Age of Real-Axis-of-Evil Expansion1
    by Edward S. Herman and David Peterson

    It is intriguing to see how whoever the United States and Israel find interfering with their imperial or dispossession plans is quickly demonized and becomes a threat and target for that Real-Axis-of-Evil (RAE), and hence their NATO allies and, with less intensity, much of the rest of the “international community” (IC, meaning ruling elites, not ordinary citizens). If and when the need arises, any bit of news that is damaging to the targeted state will be fed into the demonization process — and in the marvelous propaganda system of the West, the grossest distortions will be swallowed and regurgitated without much guilt or apology, even upon the exposure of exceptional gullibility and dishonesty.2 The dishonesty, gullibility, double standard, and hypocrisy are handled with an aplomb that Pravda and Izvestia could never muster in the Soviet era.

    Thus, Iran is a threat, for one thing, because it has relations with the Iraqi Shiites, has supported them in the struggle within Iraq, and may even have supplied some of their factions with training and weapons.3 Of course Iran is a neighbor of Iraq, was invaded by it in 1980, with generous U.S. help provided to then-ally Saddam Hussein, and Iran obviously has an important political stake in the outcome of any struggle for power in Iraq. But only the United States has a right to invade and fight in Iraq and provide arms to the Iraqis of its choice. As a superpower with dominant military capability, and unlimited chutzpah, it has Aggression Rights, acknowledged by the IC, and the UN Security Council, who not only did nothing to oppose the 2003-2010 invasion-occupation of Iraq, but quickly sanctioned the U.S. right to manage the occupation, in contrast with its indignant vote and action to force the Iraqi eviction from invaded and occupied Kuwait in 1990. This is the imperial double standard in action, and Iran, trying to interfere in Iraq, despite the IC and Council’s approval of the U.S. aggression and conquest, is clearly out of order. The aggressor may have made false or inflated accusations about Iranian interference, partly to cover over its own aggression-resistance problems, but also to prepare the ground for its next planned aggression, that against Iran itself. This is not discussible in the establishment U.S. media.

    Iran is also a threat because it is hostile to Israel, objects to what Israel has been doing in Palestine and Lebanon, and is a local power rival to Israel. But Israel, like its patron, has Aggression Rights, and is free to invade Lebanon, as it did on a massive scale in 1982 and 2006, without penalty. And it has ethnic cleansing and even slow-motion genocide rights, which it has been exercising in Palestine for many years, with U.S. and EU support. During its last few days in Lebanon in 2006 before its final withdrawal, Israel dropped a million cluster bombs in the countryside in an act of state terrorism and crime against humanity that would have produced huge outrage and possibly sanctions if carried out by a state that was not a U.S. client. The same is true of its assault on the Gaza Palestinians in December of 2009, where this very civilian-oriented campaign against an essentially defenseless population was openly supported by U.S. officials and hence presented no problem for Israel except for some damage to its image as “a light unto the Nations” (Anthony Lewis4).

    Go to the link for the rest.

  55. mary said on September 10th, 2010 at 1:35am #

    For the record and as a reminder..

    On 3 July 1988, over the Strait of Hormuz, Iran Air Flight 655, a civilian airliner was shot down by US missiles fired from USS Vincennes commanded by Captain Rogers killing all 290 passengers and crew including 66 Iranian children.

    Three years after the incident, Admiral William J. Crowe admitted on American television show Nightline that the Vincennes was inside Iranian territorial waters when it launched the missiles.

    Commander David Carlson, commanding officer of the USS Sides, the warship stationed near to the Vincennes at the time of the incident, said that the destruction of the aircraft “marked the horrifying climax to Captain Rogers’ aggressiveness, referring to incidents on 2 June, when Rogers had sailed the Vincennes too close to an Iranian frigate undertaking a lawful search of a bulk carrier, launched a helicopter within 2–3 miles of an Iranian small craft despite rules of engagement requiring a four-mile separation, and opened fire on a number of small Iranian military boats.

    America has never apologised to Iran or admitted responsibility, agreeing to pay compensation amid international pressure.

  56. Don Hawkins said on September 10th, 2010 at 3:17am #

    A serious rethink on the soul of America when should we get started? Tonight on Larry King 9:00 pm Eastern Stephen Hawking and Robert Spitzer a PHD will talk about stuff. Here’s a heads up on what Robert Spitzer think’s.

    Hawking went and did it this time alright saying science can answer questions about the beginning that used to be the providence of religion. I see this morning the pastor in Florida say’s he was lied too, really. I wonder the creator, God when creating the heaven and Earth to summon the forces needed to do that a simple wave of the hand using maybe what we human’s mere mortals call science, religion, knowledge or is that looking at it in the wrong way. I’ll bet this theory of everything could take a few more years to understand but known knowledge say the last 14 billion years not a blink of an eye the age of the Universe slow and sure no rolling of the dice so to speak. Now us human’s a blink of an eye and not even that have been very busy beavers indeed the last one hundred years and it does appear we start using reason, knowledge not illusion work together and stop burning fossil fuels and soon or the theory of everything will stay just that a theory maybe other life forms in the Universe will answer that question not us human’s as we will not be here off to the stars like the dinosaurs. Anyway going to use gravity and pour me a cup of coffee and turn on the tube and see how the rolling of dice is going this morning.

  57. Don Hawkins said on September 10th, 2010 at 3:38am #

    Sent this yesterday to the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot.

    Such minds,

    And so far the reason this will not happen is……?

    The question is not what you look at but what you see.

    Forbidden knowledge
    Governments today, talk of “cap-and-trade-with-offsets”, a system rigged by big banks and fossil fuel interests. Cap-and-trade invites corruption. Worse, it is ineffectual, assuring continued fossil fuel addiction to the last drop and environmental catastrophe or the end of the human race as we know it as a start, drums,saxophone, trumpet, base guitar, there is a solution not for all our problems but a start we will work on the others the solution therefore requires a rising fee on oil, gas and coal – a carbon fee collected from fossil fuel companies at the domestic mine or port of entry. All funds collected will be distributed to the public on a per capita basis to allow lifestyle adjustments and spur clean energy innovations. As the fee increased, fossil fuels will be phased out, replaced by carbon-free energy and efficiency. Farming practices Worldwide will begin to change and those that needed help will get help. Will we all live happily ever after no but it will be a start.

    The earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and in triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of the dot on scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner of the dot. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Sagan


  58. shabnam said on September 10th, 2010 at 5:23am #

    Who pays for the loss of life in Iran? by: Kourosh Ziabari

    Since the victory of Iran’s Islamic Revolution in 1979 which toppled the U.S.-backed regime of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran has been facing with devastating and agonizing financial sanctions of the United States and its European allies who didn’t favor the post-revolutionary Iran’s doctrine of confrontation with the superpowers and its denial of Western liberal democratic values.

    The 1979 revolution which put an end to 2,500 years of imperial monarchy in Iran was pivoted on theocratic and ideological values which the sumptuous, thrilling West usually tends to dislike and rebuff. Under the spiritual leadership of Imam Khomeini, Iranians declared that they wouldn’t need the support of Western and Eastern superpowers, will stand on their own feet and only seek to realize a political regime which establishes its bases and principles in accordance with morality and Islamic solidarity.

    Iran’s ideological disagreement with the West and its efforts to fulfill independence as an Islamic state, however, cost for the Iranian people heavily. First of all, the United States spurred its regional puppet, the late dictator Saddam Hussein, on to launch a massive, crushing war against Iran so as to push the country’s newly-established political regime to annihilation. The 8-year war demolished Iran’s infrastructures irreversibly, caused irreparable damages to country’s economy and left more than 350,000 Iranians dead.

    The 8-year resistance of the Iranian people, however, rendered the plans of the U.S. and its Baathist ally futile. Iran rose from the rubbles of 8-year war with Iraq and set out to emerge as a regional superpower gradually. Iranians recreated the country’s war-torn economy once again, renewed the obliterated infrastructures, appeased the pains of the families of 350,000 martyrs with compassion and brought hopes to the hearts of those who had come to think that a political state with the ideological pillars of Islam would be impossible to survive.

    The animosity of the United States and its cronies, however, didn’t seem to be ending. In 1984, the United States approved its first set of sanctions against Iran which would prohibit Washington from selling American weapons to Tehran. During the presidency of Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, the sanctions got tougher and broader. In April 1995, President Bill Clinton issued a total embargo on U.S. dealings with Iran, banning every kind of financial transaction with the war-hit country. In 1996, the United States Congress passed the Iran–Libya Sanctions Act under which all the foreign firms and companies that provide investments over $20 million for the development of petrochemical projects in Iran would be penalized. The most inequitable and unreasonable sanctions against Iran, however, were those which would were endorsed in 1995 and disallowed the aviation companies around the world to sell aircrafts and repair parts to the Iranian airlines directly.

    Iran’s aviation fleet which is chiefly comprised of Russian low-quality Tupelov and outdated Airbus and Fokker planes is one of the most vulnerable fleets in the world which suffers from increasing dilapidation and is considered to be highly at risk due to the unjust sanctions which are imposed against the country.

    In December 2005, BBC World published a report in which it was expressively stated that Iran’s civil and military aviation fleet is undergoing intense safety setbacks. The report came after an Iranian Air Force C-130E military transport aircraft crashed into a residential complex in Tehran, killing 128 people including 68 reporters and journalists that were supposed to cover a military drill off the country’s southern coast on the Persian Gulf.

    Two years earlier, a Russian-manufactured Ilyushin Il-76 transporter plane crashed in southeastern Iran, killing 302 passengers and cabin crew.

    Iran has experienced several deadly air accidents in which hundreds of innocent civilians lost their lives. On July 15, 2009, the Caspian Airlines Flight 7908 heading from Tehran to Yerevan crashed near the village of Jannatabad in northern Iran, killing 168 passengers and cabin crews. Among the dead were all members of Iran’s national youth judo team members and several other prominent persons including a former parliament member and the wife of Georgian Ambassador to Tehran.

    On July 24, 2009, another deadly plane crash happened in Iran which cost the life of 16 people. While attempting to land, the plane skidded off the runway and broke into a wall, killing 16 out of 153 passengers and crew members who were aboard the plane.

    Unfortunately, the frequency of deadly plane crashes in Iran has been so high that made Iran’s aviation fleets one of the most insecure and unsafe ones in the world. Tens of people die each year as a result of a childish altercation which seems to have no rational basis. The United States has failed to dictate its political will to Iran and resorts to this failure as a pretext for punishing its people.

    The United States and its European allies who boast of themselves as being the harbingers of human rights and liberty have obliviously forgotten that they are simply human beings who lose their lives as a result of the sanctions which they’ve devised. The civilian passengers who are destined to die in the insecure flights of Iran’s aviation fleet are the victims of those who have long trumpeted in our ears that they’re the sole defenders of human rights. If the life of each human being is respectable, then who is responsible for the lives of these hundreds of people who pass away before the eyes of the so-called international community which is always alert to caution about the violation of human rights in Iran and other independent countries? Isn’t the life of these people who get in the dilapidated Russian planes of Iran’s fleet and embrace death to the most extreme point of imagination respectable that you’ve deprived them of having the opportunity to experience a safe and secure trip? If you’re at loggerheads with the government of Iran, what’s the fault of its innocent civilians whom you’re punishing collectively?

  59. shabnam said on September 10th, 2010 at 5:39am #

    Thank you Mary for reminding people about US crime against Iranian people that claims is ‘supporting’.

    The shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655 by AMERICAN cruiser U.S.S. Vincennes killing all 300 passengers on board, many of whom were children is viewed war crime by majority of people in the world, has not forgotten.

    The shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655 by the cruiser U.S.S. Vincennes marked the end of an eight-year-war between Iran and Iraq, a war that in all probability started with the help of the US government and was certainly prolonged by the US and Israel as part of the policy of dual containment of Iran and Iraq. As I have explained elsewhere, in the eight-year war the Reagan Administration tried to prevent Iran from winning the war against Saddam Hussein by providing him with intelligence, extension of credit and, indirectly, weapons (for a full discussion see The United States and Iran: Sanctions, Wars and the Policy of Dual Containment). The US also established full diplomatic relations with Hussein’s government, lifted trade sanctions against Iraq, and imposed economic sanctions against Iran. In addition, the US closed its eyes to the use of chemical weapons by Iraq in the war, and, indeed, supplied Saddam Hussein with chemical compounds that had multiple uses, including making poison gas.

    Haven’t Iranians people paid enough already for their refusal to be a client state?

  60. shabnam said on September 10th, 2010 at 5:53am #

    Iran Air Flight 655 (IR655) which was a commercial flight operated by from Bandar Abbas, Iran to Dubai. The aircraft flying IR655 was shot down by the U.S. Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes between Bandar Abbas and Dubai, killing all 300 passengers and crew aboard, including 38 non-Iranians and 66 children, 8 of them less than 2 years old. The Vincennes was inside Iranian territorial waters at the time of the shoot-down. According to the U.S. government, the Iranian aircraft was mistakenly identified as an attacking military fighter. Unfurtunetly the United States government however has, to date, never officially apologized to the Iranian People.

  61. Don Hawkins said on September 10th, 2010 at 6:20am #

    Ever heard of the kind of money you can’t run out of? Is there such a thing and if so is it god’s work. Probably more on the lines of monkey business and the gang I mean greatest minds in human history do they have imagined self-importance, the delusion that they have a privileged position in the universe no they don’t think in such a way well sometimes we the people just maybe go along with the delusion that they have a privileged position in the universe as we live like dog’s in a prison for the mind. Of course the question comes up do any of us have a privileged position in the universe good question maybe tonight at 9 PM Eastern can shed a little light on the subject.

  62. shabnam said on September 10th, 2010 at 8:05am #

    Iranian communist/socialist’s cooperations with HARRY’S PLACE, a zionist pro war group.

    Harry’s Place is a British blog founded in November 2002 by ‘Harry Hatchet'[1] to support the invasion of Iraq that was then in the offing.[2] Harry’s Place has a strong pro-Israel orientation and its bloggers were later among the founders of the Euston Manifesto network,[3] a key centre of the ‘pro war left’.[4] Its activities include mainly attacks on critics of Israel, with a special focus on the left and mainstream Muslims organizations. Its comments section licences — even invites — abuse against political opponents.
    The website has a strong Zionist orientation: it serves as a platform for individuals with strong pro-Israel views. Following judge Richard Goldstone’s report on the war crimes committed during Israel’s 2008-2009 assault on Gaza, HP blogger Gene Zitver republished an article by Moshe Halbertal from The New Republic that tried to discredit the report

    ‘Democracy Promotion’ in Iran
    On 5 August 2009 David Toube posted photos and videos of himself wearing a T-Shirt which reads ‘I’m blogging for Iranian democracy’ with a link to Harry’s Place underneath.[37] The website has been aggressively promoting Iran Solidarity, a new organization set up by Maryam Namazie (Workers-communist party of Iran) of the Council of ex-Muslims of Britain, with support from an assortment of New Atheist luminaries, neocons, and some British and international liberal voices.
    Relying exclusively on Israel lobby’s regime-change brigade (Kenneth Pollack, Patrick Clawson, Michael Rubin), Michael Ezra of HP tried to cast doubt on the legacy of Mohammad Mossadegh — the popular Iranian prime minister overthrown in the 1953 CIA coup — questioning his democratic credentials and the causal links between the coup and the Islamic revolution of 1979.

    PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS WHO*RE OF ZIONISM, MARYAM NAMAZIE, compares Islam to Apartheid South Africa but she completely forgets about the present apartheid state, Israel. These ‘socialists’ cooperate with the Zionists and have no problem with genocide in Gaza, crimes against humanity in Iraq yet ‘Islam’ is the main problem of our world today, a Zionist/imperialist’s agenda. embedded

    What is the difference between Koran burning and scarf beating in the streets of London? Maryam Namazie, member of the Workers-Communist party of Iran and as spokesperson of EX-MUSLIM, funded by the Western intelligent agency, has focused her activities ONLY on Islam not ALL religion according, leaves out socialism all together, to Zionism/imperialism’s agenda.
    THIS IS THE KIND of POLITICAL ACTIVITY IRANIAN SOCIALISTS DO, fighting against Islam to help the Zionist/imperialists’ war mongers. Namazie gives No words on Apartheid Palestine but only on Apartheid South Africa where was an issue more than a decade ago. No words on massacre and rape of Muslims in Iraq by American and Zionist forces, no words on Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine, Somalia, Pakistan, Sudan and elsewhere. No words on Palestinian women’s freedom, on Iraqi, Afghani, Pakistani Women’s freedom.


  63. teafoe2 said on September 10th, 2010 at 1:41pm #

    Db, vocabulary quibble: >”Islamophobia is a weasel word that doesn’t accurately describe the situation. People are not “fearful” which is what phobias are.”<

    my dictionary gives two definitions of "phobia", one related to fear, the other "aversion to or intolerance of" something. "Homophobe" is defined as "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against".

    I think the term "Islamophobe/phobia" is most often used in both senses to convey both fear of and hostility to, often with an added connotation derived from the way "homophobe" is used, emphasizing the "hostility".

    Seems to me often used to characterize characters like Elie Weasel and Christofer Hitchens, as a counter to charges of "Islamofascism" etc. ??

  64. Deadbeat said on September 10th, 2010 at 2:14pm #


    I hear you. My point is however that this term “Islamophobia” seem to be used as a diversion from Zionism which is the cause of the “phobia”. In other words “Islamophobia” describes the outcome rather than the source. In that sense I see the word “Islamophobia” as a way of weaseling out of confronting and identifying the true condition.

  65. teafoe2 said on September 10th, 2010 at 2:18pm #

    PatrickSMcNally said on September 9th, 2010 at 5:56pm #

    > McNally thinks it’s up to him in his Superior Wisdom to tell the Iranians how to run their country.

    Cranking out more lies, as usual…<

    I fail to see what I said that can be fairly described as "lies".

    It is a fact that you have chosen to support the "Green Revolution" movement in Iran, claiming that it has more legitimacy than the elected government. Meanwhile you deploy a hoary debating gimmick by trying to turn this into a discussion of Gorbachev vs Breshnev, asserting that Gorbachev had no Western support as he rose to power in the KGB as the protege of his predecessor as KGB head, who in all probability was "turned" by the CIA well before Gorby thought up the Glasnost/Perestroika gimmick to mask his intention to adopt the Can't beat 'em, so join 'em adjustment and turn the USSR over to the tender mercies of Ronald Reagan et al.

    But that's another discussion. I raised the issue of your efforts to persuade people that these "Greens" in Iran deserve to be supported by US progressives, and that "progressives" should join the US State Dept and the Izzy Embassy in denouncing the elected government of Iran as akin to fascism.

    I myself have taken no position on the relatively progressive or relatively reactionary character of the elected government of Iran. I have simply maintained that Iranian internal affairs are no business of any US citizen or US resident, or any citizen/resident of any Nato member or other former or present Colonial Power.

    Yet you continue to claim that my position somehow adds up to "Breshnevism".

    What else could one expect from a seasoned Cold Warrior? What but a pile of Victor Navasky/Daniel Singer "Marxism"? What but a crock of White Colonialist crap about which Iranians are the "good guys" and which ones the Bad Guys?

    So now that they don't have the Soviet Union to kick around, they've launched a new Cold War against all things Islamic in general , and against Iran in particular.

    With Mr McN. taking over from Navasky et al as the provider of Left Cover for ZPC/US Militarist ideological warfare.

    Same ol' same ol', only the names have changed.

  66. teafoe2 said on September 10th, 2010 at 2:26pm #

    DB, how about “Islamophobic Zionist propaganda”?

    Because the Islamophobic aspect of the Zionist narrative is only one aspect of it? One that is especially visible right now, dominating MSM discourse, what events are chosen as “news”?

    Hey, I just coined a word, I think I’m the first: “Iranophobia”?

    No? How about “Iran-baiting”? “Iran-baiters”?

  67. bozh said on September 10th, 2010 at 2:57pm #

    My parrot [whom i use as a memory jogger-jerker-prodder] parrots back to me so: Bozh, why you constantly dwell on the millionth cause; i.e., ‘zionism’ as a cause for ills that befall us and not, say, tenth [in time and significance order] cause or even better, THE FIRST CAUSE for ALL ILLS THAT EVER HAPPENED TO US OR EVER WILL HAPPEN TO US?

    I told him that ‘jews’ are ruining my beloved canada and that’s all i care about. And the parrot replied: do u think complaining wld stop ‘jews’ from getting canada and US?
    Why don’t u stop complaining and vote for the communist party! And not only vote, but join it? And i will! tnx