Online Journal
Front Page 
 
 Donate
 
 Submissions
 
 Announcements
 
 NewsLinks
 
 Special Reports
 
 News Media
 
 Elections & Voting
 
 Health
 
 Religion
 
 Social Security
 
 Analysis
 
 Commentary
 
 Editors' Blog
 
 Reclaiming America
 
 The Splendid Failure of Occupation
 
 The Lighter Side
 
 Reviews
 
 The Mailbag
 
 Online Journal Stores
 Official Merchandise
 Amazon.com
 
 Links
 
 Join Mailing List
Search

Commentary Last Updated: May 19th, 2008 - 00:48:58


Bush and Olmert planning naked aggression against Iran
By Paul Craig Roberts
Online Journal Contributing Writer


May 19, 2008, 00:13

Email this article
 Printer friendly page

On May 15, the White House Moron, in a war-planning visit to Israel, justified the naked aggression he and Olmert are planning against Iran as the only alternative to �the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

But the White House Moron has the roles reversed. It is not Iran that is threatening war. It is Bush. It is not Bush who is appeasing. It is Iran.

Iran has not responded in kind to any of Bush�s warlike moves and provocations. Iran has not sunk a single one of our sitting-duck ships and has not given the Iraqi insurgents any weapons that would easily turn the tide of war against the US.

It is Bush, not Iran, who sounds like Adolf Hitler blustering and threatening. It is Bush�s American Brownshirts, the neocons, who express the view, �What�s the good of nuclear weapons if you can�t use them.�

It is the US that is funding assassination teams inside Iran and using taxpayer dollars to fund dissident and violent organizations opposed to the Iranian government. Iran is doing no such thing here.

It is members of the Bush Regime and US generals who continue to lie through their teeth about Iranian support for insurgents, for which they can supply no evidence, and about Iranian nuclear weapons programs, for which the IAEA inspectors can find no sign.

It is the US print and TV media that serves the Bush Regime as propaganda ministry for its lies of aggression.

All the war crimes that are being planned are being planned by Bush and Olmert.

What would George Orwell make of the Bush Regime�s position that anything less than a direct act of naked aggression is appeasement?

The Chicago City Council has passed a resolution �opposing any US attack on Iran and urging the Bush Administration to pursue diplomatic engagement with that nation.� But the White House Moron says diplomacy is appeasement. He learned this false equivalence from the neocon Brownshirts whose control over his administration has made America despised throughout the world, with the exception of Israel.

After broadcasting false claims for weeks from US generals and Bush Regime spokespersons that the US has �definite proof� in the form of captured Iranian weapons that Iranians were �responsible for killing American troops,� the great free American media went silent when LA Times correspondent Tina Susman reported from Baghdad: �A plan to show some alleged Iranian-supplied explosives to journalists last week in Karbala and then destroy them was canceled after the United States realized none of them was from Iran.�

A people devoid of a media are sitting ducks for tyrannical government, which is what the US has.

What is the difference between Hitler�s concocted excuses for his acts of naked aggression and the Bush Regime�s plan to use a briefing by General Petraeus, with "captured Iranian weapons" as props, as proof of Iranian complicity in US deaths in Iraq as a means to break down public and congressional resistance to an attack on Iran?

Why has the Bush Regime suffered no consequences for this blatant attempt to orchestrate an excuse for another war?

Why have there been no consequences to the regime for the blatant lies it told in order to attack Iraq?

Why has the Bush Regime suffered no consequences for its violation of US statutory laws against spying without warrants and against torture?

In the US criminal justice system, three strikes and you are out.

For the Bush Regime is there any limit on its lawless behavior?

How many strikes? A dozen? Thirty? Three hundred?

Is there a limit?

Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan�s first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow�s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.

Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor

Top of Page

Commentary
Latest Headlines
The Nakba is our Holocaust
Everybody knows . . .
Bush and Olmert planning naked aggression against Iran
Hunters and soldiers: brothers in arms
The war at the gas pump!
In a casino mentality, the economy goes from bubble to bubble
Torture: A bully's creed
Africa must produce or perish
Lebanon: A victim of foreign ambitions
Pain, injustice and humiliation
Thank you, Lord, for keeping me unhappy!
Why Myanmar should fear us
Anglo-American ascendancy lost in unnecessary wars
Israel�s 60 years of nuclear proliferation
Our cultural heritage
Sami Al Haj in Guantanamo
The problem with America
Spoiled Americans fail the green test
Another American war -- look out, earth
One Bolivia, white and wealthy