U.S. backing terrorist attacks against Iran

Stop War on Iran: U.S. backing terrorist attacks against Iran

A Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005, U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources tell ABC News.

more…

Apparently a military strike against Iran may be imminent. If we’re to avoid a repetition of the Iraq disaster - only worse; if we’re to avoid the destabilising of yet another Middle East country by the obsessed Bush cabal; if we’re to avoid delivering death and destruction to thousands more innocents courtesy of the rampaging US war machine, its imperative we act now!

Sign the Petition here: StopWarOnIran.org

And start making plans for what else we can do in the event of war on Iran - particularly so if our government once again gives it support, or even just stands by and idly does nothing. And remember, demos and marches - no matter how large and impressive - simply didn’t work the trick last time.

Now here’s an interesting link: www.caab.org.uk

Will they publish, won’t they publish?

All this fuss about whether or not the MoD will allow the captured Services personnel to publish their stories1 could be seen as a response by the government to public opinion. Well, that’s a good thing, and practically unprecedented for this particular government.

However, there could be a rather more Machiavellian plot at work here. For what all the hullaballoo’s also doing is keeping the issue in the forefront of public awareness. And with the added bonus (for the government and its anti-Iranian agenda) of helping to obfuscate the fact that’s there’s actually very little real meat to this story at all - very little real meat to feed the anti-Iranian propaganda machine that is.

Let’s just remind ourselves of what the story’s all about: a handful of British service personnel were “captured” (why not “detained” or “arrested” I wonder?) by the Iranians in disputed territorial waters, held by the Iranian government for about two weeks, and then released. Whilst in captivity they were subjected to treatment which, when compared to the treatment handed out by certain allies of the UK to arguably illegally detained “suspects”, seems quite reasonable and understandable given the circumstances. One could even argue that the experience these individuals went through should actually be regarded as no more than an occupational hazard, given where they were. So what’s the big deal?

And frankly, I’ve very little interest in hearing, as Faye Turney put it: “I want everyone out there to know my story from my side, see what I went through.”2

Had she been subjected to brutal physical torture, rape, etc I might feel differently, but compare her experience to the experiences of those incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay - not for thirteen days, but for five years plus!

And where’s the ongoing huge press coverage of that, I ask myself?

So they played a few mind games with you Ms Turney? Well, how would you like to spend five years as an incarceree in Guantanamo - or an even more secret CIA prison? And perhaps you should think yourself lucky the Iranians didn’t ship you off to some less civilised State for interrogation; “rendition”, is it called?

For as long as there’s no huge public outcry in the media, and from the government, about the human rights abuses that are daily committed by the “allies” Blair has tied us to we’re hardly in any position to criticise the Iranians for the relatively well-mannered treatment of their detainees.

[Addendum 10.04.07: Read this…

“…we must now look at the behavior of counties [sic] like Iran through the lens of “black sites,” CIA renditions, torture memos, Abu Ghraib, water boarding, habeas-stripping statutes, military commissions, and indefinite detentions. Iran’s 15-day detention of British sailors and marines and the subsequent ham-fisted propaganda stunts by the Iranian government look pretty tame by comparison.”

From the JURIST Legal News and Research]

  1. Browne under fire after media ban - Yahoo News []
  2. MoD ban sailors from selling stories - Yahoo News []

More on the captured Brits

So the MoD is going to let the British sailors and marines captured by the Iranians sell their stories to the press is it?1
Well, it strikes me that this unprecedented and seedy move is probably prompted more by a desire to spin the story out a bit and puff it up into something more than it actually was, just to stir up even more anti-Iranian sentiment.
(And how much of that largesse is prompted by behind-the-scenes influence from 10 Downing Street I wonder?)

For let’s face it, the “ordeal” they supposedly endured was pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things, wasn’t it?
(And just to put this in context… I too have been held at gunpoint and fully expected my time to be ended at that moment. Sure, it was a scary experience, but come next day it’d passed and I’d gotten over it - and I didn’t even have the benefit of a military training!)

Compare it for example to this account…

“…subjecting them to psychological torture day and night. Lights were kept on in their cell around the clock. They endured solitary confinement. They had only thin plastic mattresses on concrete for sleeping. Meals were of powdered milk and bread or rice and chicken, but interrupted by selective deprivation of food and water. Ceaseless heavy metal and country music screamed in their ears for hours on end… They lived through ‘conditions of confinement and interrogation tantamount to torture… Their interrogators utilised the types of physically and mentally coercive tactics that are supposedly reserved for terrorists and so-called enemy combatants.”2

- no, not more Iranian misdeeds, but the hospitality extended by the US military.

Nor let’s forget the treatment handed out by British soldiers to their captives in Northern Ireland until fairly recent times.

I really am getting a bit bored with all the hypocrisy and double standards that both the US and our own government so blatantly indulge.

And before anyone argues that the examples aren’t comparable, just bear this in mind…

From the Iranians viewpoint we could legitimately be described as foreign insurgents fomenting discord and bloodshed in a neighbouring country.

And incidentally, whatever happened to that law Blair’s government recently introduced about “glorifying terrorism”?
From any rational point of view our military aggression toward a nation that represented no threat to us whatsoever surely places the mantle of terrorism upon our own shoulders, a notion reinforced by our overthrowing of the elected government of that sovereign nation by force of arms (an act expressly forbidden by the UN Charter I believe).
Had we not committed such an act of international terrorism those captured Brits wouldn’t have been where they were in the first place. So surely, by endeavouring to cast their experience in a sympathetic light we are in fact glorifying an act of terrorism.

Now I’m no scholar, no academic able to elucidate the finer points of an argument, or persuasively score telling debating points, but I do believe I’m able to distinguish between what is morally right and wrong, and its perfectly clear to me that our entire handling of Middle East situations is somewhat more than tainted with the promotion of self-interest over humanitarian concern and respect for the Rule of Law.
And it seems to me that if we continue on this path the only possible outcome is yet more bloodshed and suffering.

Try, for just a brief moment, to imagine that suffering and bloodshed visited upon your loved ones. The loss of a dearly-loved spouse. Or the body of a cherished son or daughter maimed, disfigured, forever. How would you feel?
So how the hell can we countenance our government visiting this fate upon others, simply because they live on the other side of the world?

We (and by that I mean the government and the media) made such a big fuss about the 7/7 bombings in London yet, thanks to the rogue Bush regime in America and our Prime Minister’s support of them, that sort of experience is a daily occurrence in Iraq nowadays. And we’re responsible. Why? Because we haven’t yet ousted Blair and his kind.
Because we haven’t spoken loudly enough; because we haven’t acted radically enough. Because we’re too wrapped up in our own petty concerns and basically don’t give a toss about anyone else.
So the next time it happens to us, how the hell can there be a great wailing about the suffering of “innocent victims”, for we’re all bloody guilty!
The very least we can do, now that Iran is top of the hit list, is to resist this with every means at our disposal, else we deserve all that’ll be visited upon us!

So disregard all anti-Iranian propaganda you encounter. Complain to the media about the bias and spin. Write to your MP. If need be even become an activist! But do something!

And if the military doesn’t want history to cast them in the same mold as Hitler’s SS, then its about time they conjured up the courage to refuse to obey orders that disregard both International Law and common morality.
Remember the Nazis’ standard excuse? “But I was only obeying orders.” Where the f*** is these soldiers’ and sailors’ humanity?

I often speculate what it would take to put our country back on the right track… why does the film “V for Vendetta” spring to mind I wonder?

  1. ”Naval captives can sell stories” news.bbc.co.uk []
  2. ”My Name Used to Be #200343″ www.alternet.org []

British sailors “stripped” and “blindfolded” in Iran

AFP.com | Agence France-Presse, a global news agency

ROYAL MARINES BASE CHIVENOR, England AFP - The 15 British naval personnel held by Iran told Friday how they were stripped, blindfolded and handcuffed as part of “psychological” intimidation during their detention.

more

Seems to me they can count themselves fortunate that their captors were the Iranians and not the CIA. On the other hand, should Blair have insisted, during the period of captivity, that the precedent set by the US government for the treatment of prisoners be rigorously applied?

Or for that matter the treatment some British squaddies have seen fit to dish out to Iraqis in their own country.

Not totally irrelevant is this superbly insightful article by Gilad Atzmon: Between Good and Evil

US INVADES IRAN territory Today Jan 11- An Underreported Story

US INVADES IRAN territory Today Jan 11- An Underreported Story - Indian-American Org Sam Rao

US troops stormed into an Iranian consulate in Kurdish part of Iraq and seized equipment, computers and personnel. about 6 people were detained as US troops reportedly entered the Consulate of Iran.
As is well known and accepted by International law, Consulates and Embassies etc are over in territory and diplomatic immunity extends to the countries’ representatives & officials.

In a semantic sense, ” the War of Terror” is something most sane people will agree with. However, in the name of the War on Terror, its amazing how international and domestic laws are being totally bypassed.

This act of entering a consulate is definitely an act of War against a sovereign nation.
The “bending of rules” for the war on terror against Al Qaeda- a non government, unofficial entity- doesnot apply as Iran is a Republic and a nation state.

Interesting that this news has been under-reported!

Reconstructing a White House-censored op-ed

ArmsControlWonk: More on the Leverett Redactions

Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann claim that all the passages blocked by the CIA under White House pressure can found in other published articles, mostly quoting senior US officials less critical of the Bush Administration.I can’t prove it, but a plausible op-ed can be constructed from the crib sheet they provide in the New York Times and the redacted op-ed—a plausible op-ed that doesn’t threaten national security unless one goes all Sun-King and conflates the interests of the country with those of Mr. Bush.

Read the full post here…

Iran to replace dollar with euro

Iran to replace dollar with euro - Al Jazeera

The Iranian central bank is to convert the states foreign dollar assets into euros and use the euro for foreign transactions.

“The government has ordered the central bank to replace the dollar with the euro to limit the problems of the executive organs in commercial transactions,” Gholam Hossein Elham, a government spokesman, said on
Monday.

“We will also employ this change for Iranian assets [in dollars] held abroad.”

Elham said that Irans budget would in future be calculated in euros.

“Until now the budget has been calculated according to revenues in dollars but this calculation will now change,” he said.

Oil revenue

The move comes amid pressure from the United States for the UN Security Council to agree sanctions against Iran over its controversial nuclear programme.

The US alleges that Iran is covertly building a nuclear weapon. Iran says that its nuclear programme is purely for civilian use.

Elham implied that the move to the euro would also apply to Irans oil revenues.

“Foreign income sources and oil revenues will be calculated in euros and we will receive them in euros in order to put an end to our dependence on the dollar,” Elham said.

Bankers in Iran have said it has become difficult to receive Iranian-held money denominated in dollars from European bank accounts.

They said that this was because of US pressure on European banking giants not to allow dollar-denominated funds to be sent into, or out of, the Islamic republic.

Watch this one cos it could turn out to be really significant.
Of course, it may just be Iran playing politics and using this ploy as a muscle-flexing demonstration to the US in the escalating Iranian nuclear programme issue.
Nevertheless, it’ll still be worth keeping an eye on this one, and in particular Washington’s reaction

The questions in my mind are, does Bush still have the international support - or even simply US military manpower given the fiascos in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc - to attempt to start yet another war? Or would Israel act as a proxy?

And if Bush did try it again would we (i.e., the UK) support him? My guess is probably not this time. Seems to me that in the short time left to Blair as PM he couldn’t rustle up sufficient support for such a caper either in his own party or in the mass media, and I doubt whether any succeeding Blair lookalike (whatever their nominal political persuasion) would want to run the gauntlet so soon after Blair’s “adventures”.

Or is that just wishful thinking on my part?

For an insight into some of the possible implications should Iran change from dollars to euros, check out this article (discovered courtesy of a seed by NewsVine columnist Claus Jacobsen).

CIA: No Evidence for Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program

(DV) Leupp: CIA — No Evidence for Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program

According to Seymour Hersh’s latest New Yorker shocker, the CIA has found no evidence of a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program. The White House, given a draft assessment in the fall, has been “hostile” to the agency’s report.

Now why would that be? Why no sighs of relief? Why no, “Thank you guys,” and pats on the back for all their careful intelligence work?

I think the answer’s obvious to anyone who’s been paying attention. Dick Cheney and his neocon acolytes who still dominate Middle East policy (David Wurmser, Elliott Abrams, Stephen Hadley, Stephen Cambone, Eric Edelman, Elizabeth Cheney, with Abram Shulsky, David Addington and John Bolton in supporting roles) have a certain view of what constitutes good intelligence. It’s at variance with the view more widely held among those of us in what they dismiss as the “reality-based community.” That includes many intelligence professionals.

more…


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License.