Why no Iranian guests on Sunday talk shows

Later On

It’s very strange that Sunday talk shows, ostensibly to explore political questions, never have an Iranian as guest. Glenn Greenwald reports at The Intercept:

Sunday morning news television is where Washington sets its media agenda for the week and, more importantly, defines its narrow range of conventional, acceptable viewpoints. It’s where the Serious People go to spout their orthodoxies and, through the illusion of “tough questioning,” disseminate DC-approved bipartisan narratives. Other than the New York Times front page, Sunday morning TV was the favorite tool of choice for Bush officials and neocon media stars to propagandize the public about Iraq; Dick Cheney’s media aide, Catherine Martin, noted in a memo that the Tim-Russert-hosted Meet the Press lets Cheney “control message,” and she testified at the Lewis Libby trial that, as a result, “I suggested we put the vice president on Meet the Press, which was a tactic we often used. It’s our best…

View original post 574 more words

Is Iran rational?

Fareed Zakaria

By Fareed Zakaria
Thursday, April 9, 2015

At the heart of the concerns surrounding the deal with Iran is a simple question: Is Iran rational? For many critics, the answer is self-evident. The Iranians are “apocalyptic,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has often said, warning that you can’t “bet on their rationality.” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has declared, “I think they’re crazy.” Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon restated his opinion recently that the Iranian government is a “messianic and apocalyptic regime.”

And yet, these same critics’ preferred policy is one that relies on Iran’s rationality. The alternative to the deal forged by Iran and the six great powers is not war, they insist, but rather to ratchet up pressure and demand more concessions from Tehran. So, this crazy, apocalyptic band of mullahs, when faced with a few more sanctions, will calmly calculate the costs and benefits and yield in a…

View original post 661 more words

Yemen & The Congress of Reaction

Dispatches From The Edge

April 3, 2015

While the ostensible rationale for Saudi Arabia’s recent intrusion into Yemen is that the conflict is part of a bitter proxy war with Iran, the coalition that Riyadh has assembled to intervene in Yemen’s civil war has more in common with 19th century Europe than the Middle East in the 21st.

When the 22-member Arab League came together at Sharm el Sheikh on Mar. 28 and drew up its plan to attack Houthi forces currently holding Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, the meeting bore an uncanny resemblance to a similar gathering of monarchies at Vienna in 1814. The leading voice at the Egyptian resort was Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal. His historical counterpart was Prince Klemens von Metternich, Austria’s foreign minister, who designed the “Concert of Europe” to insure that no revolution would ever again threaten the…

View original post 1,336 more words

A Prophecy Come True? Israeli Official Called for ‘Sunni Coalition’ in 2012 Interview

UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM

Sunni Vs. Shia–a Plan to Ensure the Legitimacy and Stability of the Israeli Occupation

In August 2012 the former Shin Bet (Israeli Security Service) Director and commander-in-chief of the Navy, revealed Israel’s intention to create a Sunni vs Shia coalition to form against Iran and other Shia Muslim factions in the region. In an interview with Charlie Rose, Ami Ayalon stated that for the existence of Israel it is “Very important to create a Sunni coalition”. He goes on to explain by Sunni coalition he means:

“Turkey, with Egypt, with Jordan, with Saudi Arabia understand that the major conflict is with SHIA, led by Iran”.

It is worthwhile noting that this interview is from 2012, and in 2015 a coalition of the above countries has essentially been formed in recent weeks to attack the Shia Houthis in…

View original post 275 more words

Is Senator Tom Cotton Taking Money from Defense Industry?

OK, Fine.

Huffington Post:

“A letter written by Arkansas Republican Senator Tom Cotton and signed by forty-six other senators was sent to the Iranian leadership earlier this week that threatens a possible international agreement that the Obama administration is attempting to reach. With the deadline looming on March 24th this has seen as active sabotage and possibly even treason in a move that has never been seen by the Senate in the entire history of the United States.”

Snowden-story reporter Glenn Greenwald’s publication The Intercept reported on Monday, March 9th:

“Tomorrow, 24 hours later, Cotton will appear at an ‘Off the Record and strictly Non-Attribution’ event with the National Defense Industrial Association, a lobbying and professional group for defense contractors.

“The NDIA is composed of executives from major military businesses such as Northrop Grumman, L-3 Communications, ManTech International, Boeing, Oshkosh Defense and Booz Allen Hamilton, among other firms.”

More:

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/09/upon-launching-effort-scuttle-iran-deal-senator-tom-cotton-meets-defense-contractors/


TYT Network

(Updated…

View original post 1 more word

Why a ‘Bad’ Deal with Iran Is Better than No Deal at All

I am old enough to remember when, back in 2006, I argued that the United States should let Iran keep 164 centrifuges in stand-by mode during talks. Do you know what people said? “164 centrifuges? Are you mad? You are giving away the store to the Iranians!” Well, now Iran has more than 15,000 centrifuges (that we know about) in at least two sites.

The people arguing now for a “better” deal at some later date are the same people who in 2006 said 164 centrifuges was way too many and, that if we just held out long enough, we’d haggle the Iranians down to zero. Look what that got us.

 

Read the full article here:

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/03/11/why-a-bad-deal-with-iran-is-better-than-no-deal-at-all-tom-cotton-letter/

Also check this out:
https://100wordz.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/sanctions-cannot-stop-the-iranian-nuclear-program-only-a-deal-can/

 

 

Netanyahu enters never-never land

Fareed Zakaria

By Fareed Zakaria
Thursday, March 5, 2015

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress was eloquent, moving and intelligent in identifying the problems with the potential nuclear deal with Iran. But when describing the alternative to it, Netanyahu entered never-never land, painting a scenario utterly divorced from reality. Congress joined him on his fantasy ride, rapturously applauding as he spun out one unattainable demand after another.

Netanyahu declared that Washington should reject the current deal, demand that Tehran dismantle almost its entire nuclear program and commit never to restart it. In the world according to Bibi, the Chinese, Russians and Europeans will cheer, tighten sanctions, and increase pressure — which would then lead Iran to capitulate. “Dreams do come true, if only we wish hard enough,” said Peter Pan.

We have some history that can inform us on the more likely course. Between 2003 and 2005, under another practical…

View original post 666 more words