This story, or the lack of a story, surrounding this bold face lie was a formative moment for They Say Nothing! Tired of  watching major distortions slip by unquestioned, we started calling out what we see.  This short video celebrates what we are about and reminds us that the UN weapons sanctions in Iraq actually WORKED.

“The decay that happened in the Iraqi weapons programs was a function of the sanctions…”

Charles Duelfer, Special Adviser to the CIA on Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction

The US government is busy entangling our nation in a struggle with Iran. Our government has only come up with only two approaches to Iran – containment or military confrontation.  We think collaborative engagement on economic and security issues would be the most productive way forward, but anything is better than fighting.  Military action will have horrific results for Americans and Iranians alike.  So this video is also indented to remind us that despite what the Bush Administration said (faithfully repeated by the media), the UN weapons sanctions against Iraq worked.

And we should remember that they worked for in the near future, we just may have to shout down a TV full of defeatists whose only answer is to drop more bombs.

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 Iraqi government assumed jurisdiction over the  Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) today.  The group is listed as a terrorists group by the US State Department and as the Kansas City reports:

The group has strong support among Republicans in Congress, and many neo-conservatives in the U.S. describe them as a democratic alternative to the Iranian theocratic regime.

“It just shows how feckless our list of terrorists is,” said Lawrence Wilkerson, who was former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s chief of staff and is an MEK critic.

“They’re terrorists only when we consider them terrorists. They might be terrorists in everybody else’s books. … It was a strange group of people and the leadership was extremely cruel and extremely vicious.”

Supporting this group for five years has undermined the US’s moral stance against terrorism.  The invasion of Iraq provided us a great opportunity to  increase the credibility of the War On Terrorism. If we broke up the MEK (a group fighting one of our ‘enemies) in an open process that determined the relative guilt and innocence of its members, we could have provided a model for other countries to follow.

Instead we made ourselves look like state sponsors of terrorism and for what?  Kissinger would have used the MEK as a bargaining chip to get Iran to back off its nukes.  But our present leaders didn’t even to that.  They protected these guys for some wild hope a group despised in Iran for fighting with Saddam at the end of the Iraq-Iran War could lead a revolution.

This is another example of fantasy foreign policy and should be roundly criticized.  But it is not too late to round these people up and start a process of trying them in an open fashion that allows all parties fair representation.  This is the best way to protect innocent MEK, punish the terrorists, prove our intentions and improve relations in the region.

The Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) is and has been a terrorist organization.  They have a long history of bombing attacks and assassinations including Americans. They are listed as a terrorist organization on the US State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FOTs).  The United States has a long standing position of fighting terrorism and any state that supports them.  Yet the MEK is allowed to operate in Iraq.  The US State Department just announced that the Iraqi government will not disband the group when the new U.S.-Iraqi forces agreement takes effect and they assume jurisdiction over the camp.

Voice of America reports:

In a talk with reporters, State Department Deputy Spokesman Robert Wood said Iraqi officials also assured the United States there will be no effort to forcibly repatriate the rebels to Iran despite calls for that from Tehran.“We’ve talked to the Iraqis about the Mujaheddine-e Khalq in Camp Ashraf, and they’ve committed to us that they would deal with these people according to the Iraqi constitution. They would not force anybody to return to Iran, and we believe that to be the case, that they don’t plan to do that. And we’ll go from there,” he said.

The US government continues to support a group who is a major irritant to Iran. We wonder why Iran supports Iraqi insurgents when we continue to protect and possibly support the MEK? Do we expect anyone in the Middle East to take our War on Terror seriously when we do nothing to stop this group? What benefit does the MEK bring to the US?  Are these terrorists really worth undermining our credibility and stirring up hatred in a country that we need to work with?

How many US service men and women died as a direct result of our support for these people?We should have the courage to live up to our commitments and remove these people from Iraq.  We can show the region and the world that we are serious about stopping terrorism and creating peace in the region.

The country remains problematic to say the least but places of coordination and cooperation are evident.  Of course, the opposite is true.   The following applauds a couple of positive developments while criticizing their obstructionist actions.   Our hope it to help foster a more nuanced debate about the country and its role in the world.

The Good -

Iran just sent ships to patrol the waters off Somalia for pirates.  This precisely the type of responsible action that the world needs to see from Iran. The country has the potential to be a stabilizing force in the region.  They need the oil to keep flowing as much as any other country and the world should encourage their taking some responsibility to ensure it happens.

Iran is also asking Pakistan to clamp down on terrorism. This region is enormously complicated but to ignore Iran makes our task harder.  Iran does not want to see the Taliban return and we should learn to work with them to create peace.   Of course, we need to define what a responsible Iran would do and then ensure that they act accordingly.  But should they follow that path, the country could be a great asset.

The Bad –

Iran shut down the Center For The Defense of Human Rights, headed by Shirin Ebadi, for “issuing reports, holding press conferences, and writing to international organizations.”    Repression of this type is clearly outside international standards of behavior and are a clear indication of how far the government is from protecting its people.  Access to information and the right to question information is a basic human right and one of the UN Millenium Development Goals.  Iran can and should uphold them.

Iran also refused to attend a Paris conference intended to increase cooperation amongst Afghanistan’s neighbors.  It seems that Iran was offended by comments French President Sarkozy made in favor of Israel.  This is the impetuous Iranian behavior that the world should condemn.  The Iranian government routinely makes violent, absurd statements about Israel and Iran should be criticized for it.  And the last thing they should do is pull away from their international responsibilities in order to fume about their right to be extremist.

Someone just sent me this interview and his new book Robert Baer who argues that Iran is a growing power who the United States can either work with or fight for the next three decades.  We should realize that we are already working with Iran in both Iraq and Afghanistan; admitting it would allow us a great many options in the Middle East.

We can rope Iran into the world of nations. If we listen to what we want, progress can be made. Iran wants to be a regional power. They are the only Middle Eastern country (besides Israel) with the ability to field a competent army, navy and air force. Iran has the capacity to become a stabilizing force in the region and they are no longer the irrational actors of 1979 but now act in a concerted fashion to bolster their national power. Iran is a country that can make a real and positive difference in the Middle East.

The US doesn’t care who pumps the oil or whether Sunni or Shiia are in ascendancy. We want peaceful governments that sell oil in a reliable and reasonable fashion. Iran could make this happen and we don’t have any viable option.

Iran is ready to fight and will have no difficulty shutting down shipping in the Persian Gulf and oil refinery in Saudi Arabia. To fight Iran is to shut off the spigot in the Middle East and trigger a global recession like the world has never seen. Is simply isn’t worth it.

Dear President-Elect Obama,

We at TSN! congratulate you on your inclusive and innovative victory. We believe that you have vision and drive to make the country more prosperous, peaceful and egalitarian. We encourage you to strongly pursue those ideals. America’s current challenges present a historic opportunity to build a 21^st century economy and foreign policy agenda. This country remains the most dynamic and diverse on the planet and your victory has reminded the world that America is still capable of inspiring optimism and hope.

But our obstacles are huge and despite recent events many people remain opposed to change. For instance since the end of the Cold War, our foreign policy has too often served the needs of our energy markets. The aggressive War-On-Terror has not changed this and our strategic choices in the Middle East, Africa, Northern Europe and South America remain based on access to oil and gas.

We believe that America can produce all the energy we need from a combination of local and renewable sources. Ten years from today the US should not have to import any oil from the Middle East. This achievement will leave us free to make vastly different foreign policy choices, and provide us with a chance to usher in a new phase of human governance. Setting this goal now will allow us to refashion our policies to begin creating that future today.

Because we can produce our own energy, our Middle East policy can now start from a vision of a stable, peaceful and just Middle East that includes Israel but lacks US warships and soldiers. This simple ideal can form the basis of an international framework against which all actions can be judged. Aggression or hatred from any country can be identified and censored as the world community raises expectations of Middle Eastern governments. Every nation does not need to be democratic but they must treat their people according to international standards and live peacefully with all their neighbors.

Our goal in the region will be to complete our nation building projects, stop buying oil and find someone else to police those waters. Europe and Asia buy more oil from that region yet only the American people pay to keep the shipping lanes secure. This does not serve us, the region or the world. Long term security should be handled by the regional powers, perhaps in a Middle Eastern version of NATO. After all, their need to sell their carbon fuels is greater than our need to buy them, for we can find other fuels sources easier than most of them can transform their educational and economic systems.

A first step in building this future is to imagine different relationships with some of these countries. Of course, we cannot just forget history. But if we want to stop spending our hard earned money to send our children to die protecting corrupt, venial and violent governments, we have to first imagine that the region can build stable governments, diverse economies and once again make positive contributions to the world.

For instance:

• Iran sits between Iraq and Afghanistan and has already played positive and negative roles in both conflicts. Guaranteeing Iran’s security will go a long way towards encouraging Ayatollah Khameni to help us stabilize the region. Iran is power hungry but not suicidal. They want the world community to recognize their influence and in return for the right fawning, they will give up their nukes and stop funding terrorists. And what option do we have? Every military leader asks us not to commit troops to combat unless we have a clear, achievable objective with an identified exit strategy. Do we really want to ignite another long directionless war just to bomb nuclear facilities that are in unknown underground bunkers beneath the range of our weapons?
• Saudi Arabia supplies us with a great deal of oil and helps stabilize global oil markets. But they also provide the majority of radical Islamists funding and propaganda. This country exports more teachers of violence and hatred that any other nation in history. They target poor population and foster hatred and fund tactical abilities in Muslim communities around the globe. Some estimates run as high at 90% of terrorist funding comes from Saudi Arabia. The Sunni insurgents who have killed most of our soldiers in Iraq were funded by Saudi Arabia, yet America can’t criticize our ‘friend’. The Saudi Royal Family is tied to the radical religious forces and to stay in power, the Royal Family must support their wars. We can now be honest about this and acknowledge that their cheap oil is not worth their support of  terrorism.
• Pakistan is the major force destabilizing Afghanistan. The Taliban is their proxy and they promised to stand down while we destroyed the Taliban as long as we did not put the Northern Alliance in power (the Iranian and Russian backed factions). Of course, we beat the Taliban. But the day we failed to stop the Northern Alliance from inhabiting Kabul is the day we started fighting Pakistan. This area is a mess. It will not be easy to fix but we can start by working with Russia and Iran and realize that we are presently sending arms and money to the very country we are fighting.
• Israel is an important ally who we will continue to support but that support does not mean that we must follow the dictates Israelis most hawkish, militaristic citizens. There are many strong Israeli voices for compromise and peace. The United States should draw on the full range of Israeli perspectives to have open and honest discussions about the best way forward. We must work with Israeli visionaries instead of only the militants.

America can remove the target from our back. The military has done an admirable job fighting the enemy and they will continue to play an important role. But only removing the source of anger will complete this job. Our policy choices have been based on oil, rather than security. We have a historic opportunity to step back and think about what will make us truly secure.

We must remove our influence in the Middle East (oil money and military) in a way that leaves behind vibrant, self-determined nations. In other words, we need to complete President Roosevelt’s vision of a post-WWII world. A first step will mean overcoming the naysayers in our own country. Republican Americans are not the problem – many will be on our side – it is big oil and big gun companies and the amount they will spend to keep their faces in the trough.

The oil companies and the Wall Street fat boys they fund will shriek “financial ruin!” The arms companies and the soft politicians they fund will pound “weakness and defeat!” But they are all on the wrong side of history and don’t understand true prosperity or strength.

State craft is the opposite of weakness. Peace requires the courage and conviction of a Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Martin Luther or Jesus himself. No general can compare. When any ‘leader’ claims otherwise, ask to see her tax return – for there the lies will be revealed.

President Obama, you will be able to prevail against the American forces of status quo if you have the vocal support of the people who elected you. If we, the people, have the courage to fight for our convictions, if you have us at your back chanting, praying, voting and investing in our common future – then we can build a new world.

We at TSN! pledge our support.  We will do all we can to have your back.

In answer to the Right’s continuous rant about the US media’s liberal bias, this site will list the media’s more consequential bias – its unquestioning pursuit of corporate interest.  Today’s topic is Iran.

This complex and madding country is routinely covered in the simplest, most aggressive tones by both parties and the US media does little to address the war mongering of our politicians.Politicians forget that the Bush Administration stacked the Iraqi government with the most pro-Iran factions of Iraq. They also don’t mention that Iran’s calling al Sadr off is one of the major factors of the success of the surge.  Our politicians only point out that they are funding and arming some of those fighting against.

We know that Iran is both helping and hurting us but that is too complex to consider.  Who cares if it might save American lives and create a lasting peace in Iraq, it doesn’t fit in our narrative. The politicians won’t say and the media doesn’t make them.

Iran was and is a major help in Afghanistan.  They helped convince the Northern Alliance to fight with us and then to make peace.  Our politicians seldom acknowledge this and no one in media makes them.  Right now, we are only fighting Pakistan in the Afghanistan but if Iran joins in, things could get much worse.  The Taliban is a Pakistan funded proxy.  Pakistan agreed to our removing them as long as we didn’t let the Northern Alliance run the country (Iran and Russia).

We told the Northern Alliance not to enter Kabul. They did and have never left.  Pakistan, through the Taliban, has been fighting back ever since.  We need the help of Russia and particularly Iran if we are to maintain peace in this region.  Will politicians admit how important Iran is to Afghanistan?  Will the US media as them about it?

War with Iran.  American military and political leaders even since Vietnam have said that we should never enter a war that we don’t understand how to win and how to get out.  Yet our politicians, lead by John McCain, have been beating the drum for war in Iran for years.  The military doesn’t want this war because there is no clear way to win or way to get out.  Is the media supporting the military and insisting that politicians live up to their promises and explain how we get out?

Nuclear Iran – Our politicians routinely say that a nuclear armed Iran will attack us or Israel.  They are a country with dozens of warhead pointed at them.  Will they really commit national suicide?  Will they really work so hard to be the second Muslim state with nukes and then just give them to another country?  Do they really seek the destruction of the west or region power? Have nukes given India and Pakistan what they wanted?  Is Iran ready to bear the security and maintenance cost of nukes?  Might they be satisfied with the capacity to build nukes, like 117 other non-nuclear states? Should our international agreements mean something to us?

Should not our media help us negotiate some of these issues?  Reality does not match the sound bite extremism of the US politicians but our media does nothing about it.  They report only what our politicians says, not what is happening on the ground, not what we have done in the past, now what other countries say.  This is the real bias – a massive blindness to alternative views, to paths to peace, to rational perspective on a tricky country.

Jay Nordlinger wrote an opinion piece in the Post last week gently dismissing Scott McClellan’s criticism of the Bush Administration. Harbinger thinks that the US media was tough on the President and that the President is a steadfast decision maker who treasures vigorous debate.

But the rose-colored opinion I found the most funny was Harbinger’s idea that the war in Iraq was necessary. The reason why? WMD, of course, and the possibility that Saddam would someday build some and then someday after that give them to the very people he hated.

If Nordlinger had the guts to discuss oil, water or the pressing need to get our troops out of the Saudi desert, he might be worth reading. But he completes his Pravda-style reasoning by telling us not to worry – be happy – everything will work out in the end. Someday the Middle East will someday build monuments to President Bush.

Thanks, Mr. American Enterprise. Glad to know that creating the worlds’ largest Al Qaeda University will work out in the end. But should we trust Mr. Nordlinger? How can we tell if history’s “final call” will really see this long dehumanizing struggle as worth it?

Perhaps if we imagine what kind of a monument a Middle Eastern country would build for past US Presidents, we will have a better idea of what type of monument President Bush can expect? And because so many of this country’s armchair freedom fighters advocate war with Iran, I thought it would instructive to have Iran build them.

The monument begins FDR for our success in WWII gave us such great opportunities in the Middle East that in many ways our relationship begins there.

• FDR on the Augusta signing an oil deal with Saudi King Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud while tossing overboard The Right to Self Determination.

• Truman, the businessman making a 50%-50% deal with smiling Saudis Sheiks while mini-Churchill retains his 95% – 5% deal by pressing his foot harder into the neck of angry Iranians.

• Eisenhower pushes Iranian statue of liberty into a pit, (or other image of destroying Iranian democracy) while mini-Churchill cheers him on.

• Kennedy smiles and waves to the Arabs while handing a pistol to Israel behind his back. From his feet begins a river that will flow past all succeeding presidents representing the amount of arms funding given to Israel.

• Blind Joe or See Nothing Johnson stands with his back to the growing river of arms covering both his eyes (or playing with Vietnam) as Israel attacks an American Navy ship, its neighbors and builds nuclear weapons.

• Nixon echoes Kennedy’s statue. He smiles and waves at the Arabs with one hand while pushing a massive pile of missiles, tanks and jets over to Israel with the other. The river of weapons widens fast.

• Carter doesn’t know what to do. He faces the growing river and throws up his hands as the Shaw enters the US, our embassy is stormed and our helicopters crash in the desert.

• A terrified Regan runs screaming from Beirut explosions straight into the waiting arms of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. Two more rivers of armaments flow out from his feet.

• George Bush I actually defends Kuwait, stops the rivers flowing out of Regan’s feet and strangles Iraq.

• Clinton echoes Carter. He has the smile of Kennedy but throws us his hands as Arafat, Rabin, Rafsanjani, Netanyahu, Saddam Hussein and King Hussein all yell at the same time and point at each other.

• George Bush II – A question mark that we leave open to suggestions for our readers.

Iran helped broker last Sunday’s peace in Iraq yet neither Iran, the US or Iraq want to let the world know . Who is playing who here?

A week later and few American officials will admit the role Iran played in stopping the violence. We installed a pro-Iranian government in Iraq, ensuring that Iran will have great influence in Iraq for the forseeable future.  It is time for us to admit the reality on the ground and start negotiating a strong peace.

Burying our heads will not get out of the sand.