factbat.com

In the Miami Herald today they have given their opinion on Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s position concerning relations with Iran and the assertions of Hillary Clinton which she alleges reflects the majority of international sentiment.

The Herald claims that “even before Clinton could appeal for Silva to support sanctions against Iran for breaking the rules of nuclear-proliferation, the Brazilian President offered “this airy dismissal: ‘It is not prudent to push Iran against a wall’”

To which the Herald asks “what wall?” And then claims that “The United States and the world community have made a years-long effort to break down the barriers and engage Iran diplomatically about its nuclear program.” Claiming Iran’s answer was “Talk, talk, defy, defy.”

However, neither the Bush administration nor the Obama administration has done anything but endeavor to dictate to Iran on various policies and blindly support Israel in almost any action they engage regardless of how monstrous it may be, or appear to their neighbors.

The United States political and financial support of Israel cannot in any way be furthering relations with many of the Middle Eastern countries in that region, which is evidenced by the fact that this nation is now embroiled in various military conflicts in the region, and they are escalating with little sign of abating in the next decade.

Unfortunately, President Barack Obama has almost nothing to bring to the bargaining table and instead is merely a puppet of an AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee) bureaucratic machine which typically displays utter disdain toward any entity which even so much as questions their motives. Their coalitions and counterparts routinely accuse skeptics of being bigots, simply for repudiating their many brutalities and racially biased actions.

The international community which the Herald is speaking of has seen fit to ignore Israel’s use of phosphor and mass casualty weapons such as the DIME (Dense Inert Metal Explosive) ordinance which have both been condemned by international human rights organizations, and are being investigated by the U.N. Human Rights Council for their long term biological and carcinogenic effects on entire civilian populations.

Israel is even allowed to bulldoze and murder American activists, such as Rachel Corrie, with impunity, and kill Palestinian protestors -- who are merely throwing small stones -- with tear gas weapons and rubber bullets that are used in a lethal fashion, which is also prohibited by international law when engaging peaceful protestors.

Iran has many times in history felt the sting of CIA covert operations and coups which have destabilized their society and overthrown their duly appointed leaders. However, many of America’s elected officials act as if they take breakfast with Ahmadinejad every morning.

The Untied States memorializes nearly every qualm Israel has, or has ever had, while at the same time ignoring even the most blatant of atrocities against much of the rest of the Middle East. And this incessant posturing by American politicians will only weaken relations with a growing number of countries, and further steel Iran’s resolve to maintain inexplicably autonomous.

The Herald goes on to say that “It (presumably Iran) continued to play for time, engaging ‘negotiations’ even though its secret work to develop nuclear capability constituted an undeniable violation of U.N. rules.” Stating further that “George W. Bush…offered Iran economic and diplomatic incentives (including talks with the United States) in exchange for playing by the international rules of nuclear development.”

However, how can U.S. policymakers expect a country such as Iran to play by rules the United States, Israel, Pakistan, Russia, the UK, France, China, India, North Korea and South Africa do not play by? Moreover, the United States shares nuclear weapons with Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Turkey. Allegedly South Africa, who signed the non-proliferation treaty in 1991, has ceased all nuclear weapons construction, but that is largely debated.

Regardless of what reasoning is proffered in justification of this double standard, it likely bears absolutely no significant relevance to Iran’s international prognosis in the mind of Ahmadinejad. Furthermore, the main contention of the U.N., C.F.R. and other intercontinental security councils appears to be that Iran will suddenly launch a nuclear strike as soon as they can get an atomic weapon built.

However, there is no proof whatsoever that Iran would do anything more than what other countries have done, and that is use them as a bargaining tool.

Furthermore, the only countries who are proven to have employed the use of nuclear weapons are the United States and Israel, and the U.S. has been using them since before Desert Storm as Bunker Busters and other medium and large sized ordinance that are routinely coated, or infused, with Depleted Uranium.

To digress…

Much evidence also shows that the CIA has employed the use of Micro Nukes in various areas of the world, including assertions by Oklahoma City police sergeant Terry Yeakey -- later murdered in 1996, but ruled a homicide -- who told close friends of seeing small, un-detonated, nuclear devices in the Murrah building on the day of the Oklahoma City Bombing, where he witnessed federal agents carting them and other explosive devices to waiting vehicles. Dr. Charles Chumley, Yeakey’s close associate in a private investigation into the matter also died the same year of the bombing (1995) in questionable circumstances when his private plane took a nose-dive into a cabbage field shortly after take-off. Investigators could find no mechanical malfunction.

When one discovers that Timothy McVeigh was still in the military just months prior to the bombing, suspecting foul played by the Feds is not much of a stretch. Furthermore, there are many people who question the official reports of that day, and the conclusion that McVeigh acted alone.

But back to Iran and the Miami Herald’s “opinion.”

The Herald also claims that Obama offered Iran an olive branch “in his inaugural speech last year. ‘We will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”

Wow, Obama really showed some diplomacy there. Certainly was the very least he could do…uh, I mean say. Did the Obama administration ever show any action to back up this half-baked accusation? No, only more of the same quid pro quo that has time and again elicited the same responses from Iran; “Begin to hold Israel accountable for its brutality and blatant disregard for established borders in the region, and stop supporting their war machine…then we can talk.”

The Herald cites the “discovery last September of a secret nuclear enrichment plant inside a mountain near the Iranian city of Qom which underlined that government’s determination to become a nuclear power -- and its perfidy. And given this history, President Lula da Silva’s stance sounds dangerously obtuse and unworthy of a country that aspires to be considered an equal among the world’s leaders.”

So, there is no treachery on the part of Israel -- who, by the way, abstains from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty -- when it claims that it has no nukes?

In the late 80’s Israel claimed that the Negev Nuclear Research Center near Dimona was merely a textile factory. It was not until 1986, after it was exposed by former site technician Mordechai Vanunu to be an enrichment facility for manufacturing nuclear weapons, that Israel admitted it was a nuclear facility, but still stopped short of exposing their “perfidy” when claiming it was merely a “research facility.”

Israel first began secretly researching and building its nuclear weapons capabilities in the late 40’s with covert assistance from France, and has always maintained an “airy” posture of “nuclear ambiguity.” Israel, whenever questioned on the assertion that they possess between 75 and 400 nuclear warheads -- with the capability to deliver them via ICBM, aircraft and submarines -- simply states “Israel will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons to the region.” Which could mean any number of things, but is typically accepted as either; they will not produce them, or will just stop short of being the first to send them raining down on another country.

Regardless of what they are inferring, the fact is that they are hiding their nuclear activities as well as their intentions. Can they expect any more or less form others?

It appears that Iran is merely following the example set by its mendacious neighbors.

The Miami Herald believes that “diplomatic efforts to isolate Iran offer the best opportunity to end this looming crisis peacefully. A successful effort requires the international community to present a united front to oblige Iran to stand down.”

Sure, more force is going to get a peaceful reaction from them. What planet are these people living on? Inclusion in the process, and vilification of their voice and desires are what is necessary to decompressing the volatility of the “crisis.” And any proposals to the contrary belie a cowardly and inept viewpoint on the matter. Intuition would tell anyone with a 5^th grade education that ignoring a proposed threat will not make it go away. Furthermore, neither will exacerbating the threat with pressure cause it to relinquish its position. Especially if it may possess a significant amount of justifiable concerns that are not being addressed, or being overtly ignored.

The Herald even suggests coercing Brazil to act as the liaison of manipulation, and goad Iran into compliance with a dissenting compatriot image, but still voting for a new round of sanctions.

What? is this high school all over again? Or some other Confidential Informant mentality likened to some episode of SCI Miami? It appears these people have been watching way too much television, or drinking too much of their own Kool-Aide. They actually suggest whoring Bazil out to Iran and conscripting their services like some sort of double agent.

When reading the statements by President Silva, illuminating is obvious great deal of integrity -- that likely infuriates Hillary Clinton -- I doubt he would be obliged to play along.

The article actually say’s “Brazil has a seat on the current U.N. Security Council, where its vote on a proposed tightening of sanctions against Iran carries special weight because President Lula da Silva has made it clear he is no U.S. lackey. Support for sanctions by Brazil could go a long way toward persuading Iran that the game is up. Instead, the president’s words give Tehran’s mullahs solace and comfort they don’t deserve and bring the confrontation that no one wants that much closer to reality.”

It truly is astonishing how much sensationalism and doomsday edifice there is in the Miami Herald article. Does not anyone take the time to check the facts and the mountains of data which would alert them to the reality that it is prohibition and exclusionary tactics which reap the most corrupt and destructive effects.

Consider the analogy that if it were to get to the point that only one country had nuclear weapons, the chance that those weapons would be used increases by a factor concordant with the number of proposed targets. This is no reason to go MAD (mutual assured destruction) about the solution. However, it is reason to insist that the leaders of the many nations begin to truly engage the equations, and realize once and for all that pragmatism, and employing a mentality that incessantly expects to legitimize actions which follow an “ends justifies the means” schematic, will result in the entire game becoming a battle of the warheads rather than a battle of the wits.

Quit seeking answers, and begin understanding that they are only a terminal mechanism. For posterity and progress, one must realize that there is only engagement of the question.