Twisting the Intel to Fit the Politics
The New Generation of Hypocrisy on Iran
by TED SNIDER
Though the recent nuclear talks with Iran ended with an apparent 
whiff of progress, and though the two sides have agreed to meet for 
further technical negotiations this month and then for political level 
talks next month, the U.S. continues to approach Iran with a hostility 
that can barely contain its hypocrisy.
The current generation of hypocrisy has three faces: Iran as a terror threat, 
Iran as a nuclear threat, and Iran’s need to be monitored.
At the end of 2012, an astonishing and little noticed bill became law in 
America. The bill declares Iran’s terrorist presence in Latin 
America. The bill gives the go ahead for the State Department to provide a 
strategy to address the threat of “Iran’s growing hostile presence 
and activity in the Western Hemisphere”. It declares that the Quds Force of the 
Iranian Revolutionary Guard has boosted its presence in 
Latin America and that there is now “direct Iranian government support 
of Hezbollah activities” in South America.
The bill passed both houses and was signed into law by Obama on December 28.
According to Alex Main of the Center for Economic and Policy 
Research, the US government has produced no evidence for these claims. 
Despite the lack of evidence, Iran’s terrorist presence in our 
hemisphere is now official. At the recent AIPAC conference, Vice 
President Joe Biden echoed these assertions. Iran, he said, is “using 
terrorist proxies to spread violence in the region and beyond the 
region. . . . For too long, Hezbollah has [plotted] against innocents in 
Eastern Europe to East Africa; from Southeast Asia to South America. We know 
what Israel knows: Hezbollah is a terrorist organization”.
American accusations that Iran is using Hezbollah as a terrorist 
proxy in Latin America are not new. In the 1990′s, America blamed 
attacks on the Israeli embassy and a Jewish community centre in 
Argentina on Iran. Then, as now, the claim was that Hezbollah was 
responsible for the bombings and that Iran was responsible for 
Hezbollah. But political scientist Stephen Zunes says that “Despite 
longstanding investigations b Argentine officials, including testimony 
by hundreds of eyewitnesses and two lengthy trials, no convincing 
evidence emerged that implicated Hezbollah”. As for Iran, William 
Brenick, who was chief of the political section of the U.S. Embassy in 
Buenos Aires and the primary Embassy contact for the investigation of 
the bombing, told Gareth Porter that the U.S. claim that Iran was behind the 
attack was based on a “wall of assumptions”.
But the only thing more shocking than the new law’s baselessness is 
its hypocrisy. The hypocrisy takes two forms. First, it is America, not 
Iran, who is engaging in terrorism in the other’s region. The Obama 
administration has admitted direct responsibility for a barrage of cyber 
attacks against Iran. The now best known is Stuxnet, the computer virus that 
infected Iran’s centrifuges and sent them spinning wildly out of 
control and then playing back previously recorded tapes of normal 
operations which plant operators watched unsuspectingly while the 
centrifuges literally tore themselves apart. And Stuxnet, it turns out, 
was only the beginning. The New York Times has revealed that 
Obama ordered sophisticated attacks on the computers that run Iran’s 
nuclear enrichment facilities. A virus much larger than Stuxnet, known 
as Flame, has attacked Iranian computers. This virus maps and monitors 
the system of Iranian computers and sends back intelligence that is used to 
prepare for cyber war campaigns like the one undertaken by Stuxnet. 
Officials have now confirmed that Flame is one part of a joint project 
of America’s CIA and NSA and Israel’s secret military unit 8200.
And America has been involved in not only cyber terrorism in Iran, 
but assassinations too. Since the beginning of 2010, there have been at 
least three assassinations and one attempted assassination of Iranian 
nuclear scientists. Two senior officials in the Obama administration 
have revealed to NBC news that the assassinations have been carried out 
by the People’s Mujahadin of Iran, or the MEK. They also confirm that 
the MEK is able to carry out these sophisticated attacks because it is 
being financed, armed and trained by the Israeli Mossad and that the 
assassinations are being carried out with the awareness of the Obama 
administration.
But secondly, and more brazen, is the hypocrisy of the U.S. accusing 
Iran of terrorism in Latin America. How hypocritical is that accusation? Just 
check the living memory of virtually any country in Latin America. Ask 
Guatemalans about the coup that took out Jacobo Arbenz. Or ask 
Brazilians about the one that removed Goulart from power. Ask the 
Guyanese about Cheddi Jagan, or the Cubans about the attempts on 
Castro’s life. Ask Chileans about Salvador Allende, or Panamanians about Manuel 
Noriega. Ask the mourning Venezuelans about the attempted 2002 
coup of Hugo Chavez. Most recently, listen to the people of Honduras and Haiti 
and Paraguay. Ask many of these people too about the death squads and reigns of 
terror that followed the American coups.
So the first face of hypocrisy is the accusation, without evidence, 
that Iran is engaged in terrorist activity in our region, in Latin 
America, when it is we who are engaged in terrorist activity both in 
their region and in Latin America.
The hypocrisy is not limited to Iran as a terrorist threat, but 
continues into a new generation of hypocrisy regarding Iran as a nuclear 
threat. The directorship of the CIA has passed into the hands of the 
recently confirmed John Brennan. As part of his testimony before the 
Senate Intelligence Committee, Brennan said that the regime “in Tehran 
remain[s] bent on pursuing nuclear weapons . . . “.
The hypocrisy of Brennan making this assertion is much more glaring 
and foreboding than that of the many others in government and media that make 
that assertion. Brennan is the head of the C.I.A. But the verdict 
of the intelligence community is precisely the opposite of the assertion that 
Brennan made in his senate testimony. A National Intelligence 
Estimate (N.I.E.) represents the collective conclusions of the top 
analysts of all of America’s many intelligence agencies. The government 
knows what the N.I.E. tells it. If the N.I.E. doesn’t say it, then 
government officials, including Brennan, don’t know it. The 2007 N.I.E. 
said with “high confidence” that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons 
program in 2003. That conclusion has been “revalidated every year,” 
according to Ray McGovern. The most recent N.I.E. delivered by the 
intelligence community provides even “more evidence to support that 
assessment,” according to sources of investigative journalist Seymour 
Hersh. General James Clapper, who was responsible for preparing the 
N.I.E., said that “the bottom-line assessments of the [2007] N.I.E. 
still hold true. We have not seen indications that the government has 
made the decision to move ahead with the program”. When Senate Armed 
Service Committee chair Carl Levin asked General Clapper if the level of 
confidence that Iran has not restarted a nuclear weapons program was 
high, Clapper answered, “Yes, it is”. Hersh quotes a retired senior 
intelligence officer as saying “none of our efforts–informants, 
penetrations, planting of sensors-leads to a bomb”.
The history of the C.I.A. is, unfortunately, replete with examples of directors 
lying to the President and the Congress about what the C.I.A. knew. But those 
lies were always told by them to defend and protect 
their agency and to insist that the C.I.A. was right. In his testimony, 
Brennan lied to the senate by deceptively saying that the best analysis 
of the agency he heads is wrong. The director of the C.I.A. testified 
that Iran is bent on pursuing nuclear weapons by dismissing the 
conclusions of the C.I.A. he directs. And that is hypocritical. It is 
also foreboding. Brennan, like Tennet before him with regard to Iraq, 
twisted the intelligence to fit the politics.
The third face of the current generation of hypocrisy on Iran is the 
hypocrisy on monitoring Iran. Recently, the United Nations General 
Assembly voted by an overwhelming 174-6 to approve a resolution calling 
on Israel to open up her nuclear weapons program to international 
inspectors and to join the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. Only five 
countries joined Israel in opposing the resolution: Marshall Islands, 
Micronesia, Palau (all three of which have compacts of free association 
with the U.S. and never cast their votes at the U.N. inconsistently with 
America), Canada and the United States.
Iran, according to the National Intelligence Estimate, doesn’t have a nuclear 
weapons program. Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear 
Non-proliferation Treaty. And Iran is being closely monitored. However, 
the U.S. still pushes for more, and Iran still faces crushing sanctions 
and constant threat of war. When the whole world, though, asks Israel to have 
her nuclear weapons program monitored and to be brought within the framework of 
the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, the U.S. votes no. 
For the Iranians, this American U.N. vote must be the most glaring 
example of hypocrisy of all.
Ted Snider writes for Rabble.ca and Znet.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/15/the-new-generation-of-hypocrisy-on-iran/


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:laamn-unsubscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:laamn-subscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:laamn-dig...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:laamn-ow...@egroups.com?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:la...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/laamn@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    laamn-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
    laamn-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    laamn-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to