The Neo-Con Lie Machine Rolls On....
"The same network of think-tank analysts, media outlets, and government officials who brayed for war in Iraq have set their sights increasingly on Iran. Savvy as ever, they remain focused on consolidating public opinion and seem to be monitoring anti-Iran sentiment closely. Weekly Standard Deputy Online Editor Michael Goldfarb darkly warned in July that opponents of another Mideast war “shouldn’t be too surprised when [the] 60 percent [of Americans] opposing a war with Iran starts to dwindle—it has dropped five points in just the last six months.”
In late August, NYU professor and Afghanistan expert Barnett Rubin related that a Washington source had told him that the same neoconservative institutions that urged the country into Iraq were preparing to “roll out a campaign for war with Iran” after Labor Day. According to Rubin’s informant, “evidently they don’t think they’ll ever get majority support for this—they want something like 35-40 percent support, which in their book is ‘plenty.’”
Writes Justin Logan in his must-read article in the new edition of the anti-war magazine The American Conservative.Part of the neo-cons' campaign to get their "35-40 percent support" for an attack on Iran is to spread lies and misinformation about the country, aided and assisted by so-called 'left' blogs, highlighting alleged human rights abuses in the country.
And when it comes to smearing Iran, little thing like facts go out of the window. The picture above, in the words of the press release of Frontpagemag.com "shows a teenage girl buried before being stoned to death for alleged sexual offenses. The stoning took place in Iran.” The picture has been been appearing all over the internet as part of the neo-cons' campaign. How could we not think of bombing a country where such appalling scenes can be witnessed?
That is, of course, what the Shock and Awe brigade want you to think. But there's only one thing wrong with the picture. It's a fake. The stoning that it depicts, as the blogger sadlyno reveals, takes place not in Iran, but in a 1994 Dutch film called 'De Steen', directed by Mahnaz Tamizi. The 'teenager girl' is an actress called Smadar Mosinos.
In the weeks ahead we can prepare ourselves for a daily diet of lies and propaganda about Iran, as the warmongers try to get their "35-40 percent support". As I've said before on many occasions, it's easy to know when a neo-con is lying. He/she opens his or her mouth. And, I should also add, puts pen to paper or starts typing on a computer keyboard. Believe me, it really is that simple.
from Neil Clark
One important thing with I'm not agree for this article is when Rory you say this Daniel Pipes is a zionit.
ReplyDeleteNo he's a neo conservator; the most lyers people we actually know ih States with all connections for destabilisation of Europe and also in Israël.
Those people as Pipes or his friends Alain Jean Mairet and Oulhabib are really not an once Zionists.
And use thos adjectif to them make everybody thinking Zionists are that! It's wrong, totaly wrong!
Zionism is coming from those comrads which use to create kibboutzim movment. They're zionists.
This amalgam of zionism with Pipes is not the right. He's an agent of CIA. This is the point.
Thank you for your comments, Christine.
ReplyDeleteThose who I consider as Zionist are ones who, in one form or another, promote the idea of 'Eretz Israel' or Greater Israel, requiring the annexation of land from Palestine and surrounding countries.
Such an annexation cannot be done without war.
Pipes & Co are certainly in the group referred to as neo-cons but they also represent views such as AIPAC which has a powerful influence over US foreign policy and the pressure for a war against Iran.
These people are extremely dangerous. If they are not Zionists then it would be a good thing for Zionists to denounce them and top totally dissociate themselves.
I, personally, am unclear where Benn Gurion-style Zionism ends and the aggression of people like Pipes begins. Ben Gurion had a very low opinion of Palestinians and Arabs and said some very contemptuous things about them.
As I say, though. If Zionism is meant to be unaggressive and these people do not represent Zionism then it is vital that they are disowned and condemned by those who consider themselves to be 'true Zionists' ... whatever that might mean.