Tehran International is doing its best to spin the Iran Nuclear story.  Outgoing CIA Director Michael Hayden is certain that Iran continues to develop weapons yet this paper chose to single out and amplify the fact that Hayden could not prove that Iran has decided to produce the weapons.  This article takes the Director’s comments out of context to deliberately throw smoke over this issue by claiming the CIA says there is no proof of weapons.

YNet had a more accurate describe of Gen. Hayden’s comment:

Shifting to Iran, Hayden said that the country steadily is producing low-enriched uranium and soon will have enough to create highly enriched uranium — the fuel for a nuclear warhead. The CIA does not have clear intelligence saying that a decision has been made, but the agency is aware of the amount of uranium Iran has produced so far.

Have no doubt that Iran is developing the technology to build the weapons, for it makes good strategic sense.  But it is not at all clear how important this program is to them or what might entice them to curtail it?  Or whether they might  switch to capacity program (join the other 17 non-nuclear countries that have the ability to build them)?  Or how they might be brought into the community of responsible nations so possession won’t be a problem?

Answering these questions will tell us how to proceed but, like the US media, the Iranian international media seems to favor simple stories that actually obfuscate issues by glossing over critical information.  The world needs media that pursues the interests of the common people over those of governments or corporations. Rarely, do we get what we need.

The media discussion of the Clinton Confirmation hearings seems to focus on the Senator Luger’s request for more transparency surrounding Bill Clinton’s various endeavors. I agree with that we need more transparency but wish our national debate could go a bit further and consider how well Clinton and the Republicans got along.

The Real Story

I only watched the first half of each session (morning and afternoon) but Senator Clinton not only enjoys a strong rapport with many members, but they also share similar concerns. Like Luger, Clinton wants to focus on WMD and she seems quite willing to work closely with the Committee to make progress. Like Clinton (and Sec. Gates) Luger wants to re-invest in the State Department and sees an essential role for State in maintain our safety and security.

That is a significant change from the last eight years and although neither was specific about the size of the shift, the door seems open for the State Department to return to prominence and there seems to a corresponding likeliness that State and Congress will be able to work together.

This seems like the story we should be focusing on. First by celebrating the possible return of a working government and then begin to do our part by asking and all Senators to define specifics and how much investment and a list of priorities.

My Perspective on Bill Clinton Disclosure

I am concerned about Clinton’s dealings. The Republicans are right to push for transparency. We need more of it, all the time, for everybody. It is high time we deal with ex-President’s and their staff making bundles of cash by selling influence. James Baker III was still working for the Carlyle Group (investing in weapons and reconstruction companies) when he led the Iraq Study Group.

This doesn’t mean he did anything wrong, but shouldn’t we have cared what investments he was making in Iraq? Might they influenced his decisions or at least created that impression in interested parties? Do you think that he was approached by any such interested parties? Of course, he was – all the time and probably still is – just as Bill Clinton is and George Bush is about to be.

There is everything right with transparency as long as we apply it to everybody equally – and the more the better. This is a unique opportunity to create new expectations of ex-Presidents and White House staffers. They don’t retire anymore but often work for many long years. Ex-Pres’ stay on the payroll and we protect them, so we should know what they are up to.

Claiming that paying taxes is unpatriotic sets a horrible example for a nation with as many military commitments and financial challengs as we face.  I hope the people of the US point out to this Gov. Palin that Americans support our troops with our taxes. Without taxes, our troops wouldn’t have armor for thier vehchiles or healthcare when they are injured.  We should also remind her that the support for education that she desires will come from taxes. 

We should also point out that getting the government out of commerical banks hair (thank you President Clinton for caving in to a Republican Congress) is what lead our present financial crisis?  There are many things to pick apart in this presidental campaign:

• Neither candidate has discussed how to build a  new energy market in the US
• Neither canidate has a credible description of what we face in Iraq, Afghanistan or Iran
• Neither candidate has demonstrated a through understanding of our financial situation

Read the rest of this entry »

When will it stop?  When will the US get journalist who actually know the background of the stories they write and follow them up with rigorous research and balanced reporting?  We continue to suffer under pundits posing as journalists.  Are they lazy to think things through? Are they bought off by one side or the other? Do they not know the difference between a press release and a news article? This country will not move forward until we ignore these lazy, corrupt ignoramuses and insist on real news.

Take for instance,NewsMax’s “Correspondent” Ronald Kessler’s article on the McCain / Obama tussle over Henry Kissinger’s suggested approach to Iran. Henry Kissinger has long supported talks with Iran and any honest review of this exchange might discuss what McCain was trying to achieve by simplifying his opponents opinion.  Or it might discuss draw out the differences between the three candidates suggested approaches to Iran.

But Kessler jumps on the partisan band wagon and assumes that McCain’s mischaracterization of Obama’s position is his actual opinion. It allows Kessler to delve right into free advertising for McCain but does nothing to clarify the difference between the two men and even less to address the difference between our two countries.
The nation is focused on this election and I would like to see our media focused on lifting the debate to help us deal with complex issues like Iran.  Instead we get writers who take our candidates simplistic positions and simplify them.

Anyone who has followed three men’s position on Iran would know that only one has consistently talked about bombing them, did a dance about bombing them. Obama and Kissinger have long been pushing negotiations, so no matter how their approaches may differ, Kissinger is closer to Obama than McCain.

Does Kessler let us know this? Does he explain their positions? No. He probably thinks seriously about our position on Iran, but you can tell from the lazy, flippant way he wrote this article.  Like Rush Limbaugh admits in private, “it’s just entertainment. It doesn’t mean anything.” Selling our country for a quick buck, thanks.

Who provides better information? Criticized as everything from anti-Semitic to pro-terrorist in the US, Mearsheimer and Walt, authors of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, gave a lecture in Tel Aviv to a packed house on Thursday.

Reactions ranged from critical to supportive, but no one called them terrorists or anti-Semitic, which concretely demonstrates the difference between a national debate (what Israel has) and corporate propaganda spooge (what the US has). Those who raise fair and important questions about US policy are not welcomed here.

Challenging ideas do not become part of the fertile intellectual environment that helps us ‘lead the world.’ They are attacked by a massive, asymmetric assault from dozens of big-wallet monkey boys who know exactly how to earn another banana. Israel’s open and engaged reception of these ‘controversial’ authors shames America.

The low-level and poor quality of our national debate could be considered a war crime. The pundits yelling at us couldn’t care less about you and me, and our country will continue to be an international bully as long as we listen to them.

By the way, here is what Mearsheimer and Walt had to say about Iran:

“There is only one country in the world that is putting any pressure on the U.S. to attack Iran, and that is Israel,” Mearsheimer told a packed lecture hall at Hebrew University, according to the Jerusalem Post. “And it is putting enormous pressure on the US.”

He added, “Inside the United States, it is pro-Israel individuals and groups who are almost wholly responsible for pressure being brought to bear on Bush and Cheney to use military force on Iran. The idea that the lobby and Israel don’t put huge amounts of pressure on the U.S. is contradictory to the evidence.”Walt said he believed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s call for Israel to be wiped off the map is not actually a call for genocide. “I don’t think he is inciting to genocide,” Walt said in Jerusalem, according to Ha’aretz.

3000 candidates were excluded from Iran’s March parliamentary election for having records. “Alireza Afshar, head of election headquarters, did not elaborate on what kind of record they had.” This legal technique is slightly better than having the Guardian Council strike candidates for no reason as they did to 1,300 in 2004. But this is precisely the kind of top down control that will keep Iran on its confrontational path.

With inflation and unemployment rising in Iran have many people looking for change. Many Iranians also disagree with their government’s willingness to provoke Europe and the US. The people of Iran should be allowed to speak and I hope the international community will pay see this act as:

1. The repression of popular opinion by a minority government concerned about maintaining control

2. Evidence that Iran is NOT a country of ‘religious radicals’ or “beyond reason” but rather peopled by a proud, educated populace interested in a making a living in a peaceful world.

The best way for Iran to achieve its political and economic ambitions is to listen to the will of its people and allow the free expression of their economic and political aspirations. For the people of Iran, as do the people of the United States, remain the best hope for their country.

Dr. Kissinger’s Washington Post editorial states clearly that we need to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons and lays out which technologies we need to track. But the articles buries his ideas about how to stop Iran from pursing those technologies.

In the last third of the article he states,”I have long argued that America owes it to itself to explore fully the possibility of normalizing relations with Iran.” He advocates negotiations and trade over sanctions and bombs.

He goes on to say that “what is required is a specific vision linking assurances for Iran’s security and respect for its identity with an Iranian foreign policy compatible with the existing order in the Middle East.” Iran is not run by mad men seeking Armageddon but by people who want power and influence in the region. This is precisely the kind of country that will negotiate.

Given that China is tripling the amount of oil it buys from Iran and Russia’s stated support, it grows increasingly less likely that aggression will even work. The best way ensure these weapons are not built is to ensure Iran’s security, promote prosperity (we should get a nice slice of the Iran-Russia-China pie) and then use our deepening ties to learn what is actually happening in the country and then use that knowledge to ensure the weapons programs stop.

TSN! hopes that Dr. Kissinger and other opinion and policy experts continue this line of argument for another brutal war is the last this country or planet needs and it is clearly not our best strategic option. To this point our media has done a very poor job of pursuing peaceful options but it is not too late to start.

Our nation continues to ignore this national shame while international resentment and resistance builds against us. How can this happen in a nation of laws with a free press? Shouldn’t reporters be camped outside the gates aching to know the fade of these dying men? Living by rule of law means that the law applies equally to everyone, even our enemies. If these men are guilty of attacking this nation, then let them rot in a hole. But if they are not or we cannot prove they are, we must let them go.

Holding these men illegally has done more damage to our country than these poorly trained foot soldiers could ever hope to do. And they will do far more damage as starving martyrs inspiring another wave of hatred against us then they could ever do with the Taliban.

The whole world is watching these men slowly die; our friends grow distrustful of us and our enemies use this to call us hypocrites and worse. We have ignored this at home but planned ignorance is no way to deal with a challenge as grave as this. Who will believe our call for democracy and the rule of law after the world watches us let these men die. The only country not paying attention is our own. How can this great country lock these men up for years in conditions harsh enough that they are willing to starve themselves and we do not care. Shouldn’t our free and open press be questioning this? Shouldn’t they lead the debate on this men and all the torture that has gone on under our good name? We must stop terrorism but creating martyrs is no way to do it. And even if it were, would be worth trading the 21st century for the 1st?