NB: AN UNCLE WALLY DISCLAIMER: Your Uncle Wally does not endorse the
contents or views expressed
in the following article:..........HOOROO !
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=3D9702
September 15, 2006
The Hoekstra-Harman Hoax
How the War Party plans to lie us into war =E2=80=93 again
by Justin Raimondo
For the War Party, deception isn't just a tactic, or even a strategy
=E2=80=93 it's a lifestyle. That's why they're indifferent to getting caugh=
t=2E
Like a hardened criminal arrested for his umpteenth felony, the neocons
see brazen lying as just a routine procedure. Caught red-handed, they
just move on to their next subterfuge, one invariably designed to drag
us into war.
That is the only way to explain what Reps. Peter Hoekstra and Jane
Harman thought they were doing when they released their "report" [.pdf]
on Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program, which =E2=80=93 as the
International Atomic Energy Agency puts it =E2=80=93 is chock full of
"erroneous, misleading, and unsubstantiated information." In a letter
[=2Epdf] to House Intelligence Committee chairman Hoekstra, IAEA official
Vilmos Cserveny takes "strong exception" to "incorrect and misleading"
claims in the report that the IAEA fired an inspector, one Christopher
Charlier, for giving the Iranians a hard time. He was let go, says the
Hoekstra-Harman report, because he went up against an alleged policy
"barring IAEA officials from telling the whole truth about the Iranian
nuclear program," as Hoekstra-Harman put it. This conspiracy theory is
put to rest by Cserveny, who curtly informs the American Congress that
Iran is fully within its rights, under the Nonproliferation Treaty, to
ask for the replacement of one inspector out of over 200 which it has
accepted.
Cserveny points out, as did some in the blogosphere when the report
first came out, that the "weapons grade" enrichment described by
Hoekstra-Harman as occurring at Natanz is a complete fabrication. Why,
it was only last April, Cserveny reminds the esteemed members of the
House, that the inspectors verified a 3.6 percent enrichment rate =E2=80=93
not the 90 percent or more required to qualify as "weapons grade."
The lies pile up, one placed upon another until an edifice of massive
deception is constructed, a narrative that can convince the American
people to go along with the effort to start World War III (or IV, as
some would have it). Iran, the latest target of the regime-changers, is
in America's sights, and we aren't going to let such a paltry
consideration as the facts get in our way. Hoekstra-Harman have no
interest in reality: their "report" is war propaganda, pure and simple.
That's why they shrieked that Iran is "covertly" producing
polonium-210, a substance with "two known uses," one of which is to
produce nukes (the other is to make satellite batteries). Who cares if
Iran is not required, under the terms of the NPT, to provide
information about P-210 production? It sounds scary, and the average
reader =E2=80=93 and reporter =E2=80=93 is not going to know what is entail=
ed =E2=80=93
or that the UN has made an investigation [.pdf] in good faith to
determine the nature and extent of Iran's P-210 production. Instead,
they are expected to swallow the conspiracy narrative woven by
Hoekstra-Harman that depicts the IAEA as the Iranians' willing
instrument. After all, isn't the head of the IAEA named ElBaradei?
Don'tcha know those ragheads are all in on it together?
The War Party has learned nothing and has no regrets, and this willful
blindness is underscored by the latter half of the Hoekstra-Harman duo.
Even as the Democrats rail against the "quagmire" in Iraq, and decry
the conduct of that war, their leaders are intent on dragging us into
yet another conflict, this time much bigger, and with far more mire.
Harman has referred to Israel's murderous assault on Lebanon as
"draining the swamp," and her position on Iran isn't much better: Her
solution to the Iranian problem is to "recruit a much more diverse
group of spies with cultural sensitivity" =E2=80=93 rather than rely on the
IAEA. I see she's learned a thing or two since her "debate" with
Richard Perle at AIPAC's 2005 shindig, when she fell over herself
agreeing with the Dark Prince of the War Party, as chronicled by
Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank:
"Perle drew cheers for denouncing Palestinian anti-Semitism and the
French. Harman mentioned that an aide once worked for AIPAC, called her
audience 'very sophisticated' and celebrated Yasser Arafat's death as
'a blessing.' Debating a hard-liner in front of a pro-administration
crowd, Harman heaped praise on President Bush, calling the Iraqi
elections 'sensationally impressive' and moving to 'applaud' or
'commend' Perle and the administration a dozen times. 'Richard is
right, and so is President Bush,' she said at one point.
"But after half an hour of this, Harman could not keep up. Perle
provoked cheers from the crowd when he favored a military raid on Iran,
saying that 'if Iran is on the verge of a nuclear weapon, I think we
will have no choice but to take decisive action.' When Harman said the
'best short-term option' is the UN Security Council, the crowd reacted
with boos."
Harman and her Democratic colleagues have no dispute with the
Republicans =E2=80=93 and the far-right neocons epitomized by Perle =E2=80=
=93 when
it comes to Iran. Both are determined to protect Israeli interests, at
the expense of American interests, by threatening to go to war if Iran
continues to pursue its apparent goal of joining the nuclear club,
along with its neighbors, Israel and Pakistan. Everybody knows that
what John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt call "the Lobby" is behind
the current campaign to gin up another Middle Eastern war, this time
with Iran. Israel's recent incursion into Lebanon was but a dress
rehearsal for the main event =E2=80=93 which is coming no matter how badly
the Lebanese adventure turns out.
It is coming because there is simply no opposition to the Lobby's
ironclad control of the U.S. Congress. The defense of Israel overrides
and effectively neutralizes all other considerations. It doesn't matter
that a confrontation with Iran will create yet more terrorists
determined to strike at America, it is deemed an act of "appeasement"
to point out that, if we contained the nuclear-armed Soviets for half a
century, we could easily deter the Iranians from attacking our Middle
Eastern allies =E2=80=93 and it is considered beyond the pale to note that
the advocates of war with Iran are serving the interests of a foreign
power, namely Israel, over and above what is clearly in American
interests.
Nuclear weapons are already in the Middle East, and if we're going to
be putting pressure on nations to get rid of their "weapons of mass
destruction," then why not start with the number-one nuclear
recalcitrant in the region? Israel =E2=80=93 which disdains the NPT
altogether =E2=80=93 has hundreds of nukes, and God knows where they're
aimed. The Europeans are worried that the Iranians are targeting their
cities, but who knows whether some future prime minister of Israel
might, in a fit of pique, decide to take out Paris or Rome?
Seriously, though, we can see why Iran wants to acquire at least a
nuclear capability: with Israel armed to the teeth with nukes, and
Pakistan on the eastern frontier, Tehran is surely allowed to defend
itself =E2=80=93 or is that a right reserved exclusively for the Israelis?
The Iranians, too, are concerned about another potential aggressor,
namely us. As U.S. officials continue to issue a steady stream of
threats directed at Tehran, the Iranians can plainly see that North
Korea gets treatment of an entirely different order =E2=80=93 not even a hi=
nt
of a "regime change" policy on that front. In light of America's
self-proclaimed policy of military "preemption," which supposedly gives
us the "right" to attack any nation, anywhere, for any trumped-up
reason, the Iranians would have to be crazy not to develop a nuclear
weapons program, ASAP.
Like a bully spoiling for a fight, the U.S. is pushing the Iranians
hard, and it is only a matter of time before the Iranians push back.
When that battle comes, and the Democrats try to escape their own major
responsibility for the inevitable disaster, remember that they, too,
signed on to the Hoekstra report and joined their voices to the chorus
demanding "action" against Tehran.
NOTES IN THE MARGIN
Check out the Sept. 25 issue of The American Conservative for my
article on the forgotten legacy of 9/11 =E2=80=93 the still-mysterious
anthrax attacks. And read this for the latest on that front:
"Maureen Stevens says the federal government probably knows who killed
her husband. She believes they're not telling because that might reveal
things the government doesn't want revealed.
"Nearly five years after Bob Stevens' death, the first in the anthrax
attacks that terrified a nation, 'I want to know what happened,' his
widow, who's sued the government, said Wednesday from her lawyer's
office. 'I want to go into court and find out what happened. What
information's obviously there. The truth is there.'"
You can say that again, lady =E2=80=93 the truth is there, alright, in
publicly accessible records, including a series of excellent pieces in
the Hartford Courant from several years ago, and a good piece in Salon.
But the FBI apparently doesn't read the American media, and isn't
interested in any case. And if that irks you or in any way causes you
to wonder why, then go check out The American Conservative, read it =E2=80=
=93
and weep. Because, you know, the perpetrators are still at large, and
the public is due for another scare just about now=E2=80=A6
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
.
|
