Freedom Rider: Phony Nuclear Disarmament

 nukesby BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley

President Obama sent a near-declaration of war to Iran, all wrapped up in greetings for the Iranian New Year. The message may have looked like “a smiley faced video” in which the “president appeared to be very amiable and wished peace, love and harmony,” but was actually “nothing more than a well executed propaganda ploy intended to give him cover on the day he announces his true intentions.” Then he told Europeans, ''As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven.'' Beneath the charm, “Barack Obama repeats the worst, most untruthful and belligerent policies of the Bush administration.”


Freedom Rider: Phony Nuclear Disarmament

by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley

Obama repeated almost word for word Bush administration policy on the need for missiles in Europe.”

President Barack Obama has an amazing ability to convince people that he intends to do what they want, even when he intends to do the exact opposite. It is a skill that he honed during the presidential campaign that he is now using expertly as president. He managed to sell himself as the peace candidate when in fact he has every intention of continuing the expansion of the American empire.

Most recently he has used his expert communication skills to declare that he will eventually make war on Iran. He has never said those words, and he even sent a smiley faced video greeting for Nowruz, the Iranian new year celebration. The president appeared to be very amiable and wished peace, love and harmony to the Iranian people. Yet the much discussed greeting was nothing more than a well executed propaganda ploy intended to give him cover on the day he announces his true intentions.

Obama tells outright, bald faced lies about Iran in order to make an attack palatable to progressives, who actually never need much of a rationale to capitulate to the wishes of their idol. Iran is painted as an aggressor nation because it chooses to exercise its right as a sovereign nation and signatory to the Non Proliferation Treaty to develop nuclear energy.

Progressives never need much of a rationale to capitulate to the wishes of their idol.”

Obama is so smooth in planning his attack that he even makes it appear that the United States is willing to pursue nuclear disarmament. During his recent trip to Europe he announced that he and Russian president Medvedev would embark on a plan for mutual nuclear disarmament. Headlines raved that the president was willing to give up nukes, but as always even a cursory reading informed those wise enough to be skeptical that he means no such thing. In a speech in Prague he said, ''Make no mistake: As long as these weapons exist, we will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies.'' Just in case anyone got carried away with the announcement he added, “This goal will not be reached quickly – perhaps not in my lifetime.” So much for a nuclear free world.

Not only did Obama make clear that he didn’t mean what soft hearted, useful dupes think he said, he repeated almost word for word Bush administration policy on the need for missiles in Europe. ''As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven.''

It was once left to Condoleezza Rice, queen of the bizarre, semi-insane statement, to insist that Poland and the Czech Republic were threatened by the prospect of a nuclear Iran. Now Barack Obama repeats the worst, most untruthful and belligerent policies of the Bush administration. The devious plan is breathtaking in its simplicity. Obama will point to his nuclear proposals, and his new year’s charm offensive in order to claim that he is a lot nicer than George W. Bush.

The Iranian government has no reason to be impressed with America’s empty gestures. Iran has fairly and reasonably requested that the United States address its grievances before relations can be normalized. The United States overthrew the democratically elected government of Mohammed Mossadegh in the early 1950s. America’s then ally, Saddam Hussein, launched a nearly decade long war against Iran in the 1980s that included the use of chemical weapons. In 1988 the United States navy shot down an Iranian passenger jet and killed 300 people. Economic sanctions continue to take their toll on the Iranian economy.

Needless to say, the only nuclear power in the Middle East, Israel, didn’t get a mention in the president’s remarks.”

The American people will be told none of this history. They will be told that the president made nice and the mean, crazy Iranians slapped his loving, outstretched hand. They will not be told that the United States senate failed to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Needless to say, the only nuclear power in the Middle East, Israel, didn’t get a mention in the president’s remarks. Israel is estimated to have hundreds of nuclear weapons. No one is certain how many exist because that nation’s nuclear program is unacknowledged and uninspected.

Obama should get credit for gall if nothing else. Most Czechs are opposed to having American nuclear weapons on their soil, and yet Obama told them he would do precisely what they don’t want, while also claiming he wants to end the existence of nuclear arsenals.

Many people who turned up their noses at Bush’s crass bullying swoon over Obama’s slick words. America is still the enemy of the rest of the planet and is not to be trusted. In fact, the mistrust should be greater now that a smart, charismatic imperialist has replaced a stupid, despised one. Nuclear arms reduction should be pursued but the United States can’t take the lead. Its motives are not honest and its true intent is clear. Only a smart imperialist can make plans for war while claiming to make plans for peace. If the Iranians are unimpressed with Mr. Obama it is because they are paying attention. The only question is whether or not enough people in this country are smart enough to do the same thing.

Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.Com.




Your Thoughts

Margaret, I don't want to believe what you say. But actions speak louder than words and Pres Obama's actions show NO Change. His actions are speaking loud and Clear. Same ol crap!

Russia won't forget..

Nice piece Mrs. or Miss. kimberly... unusually longer than your previous offerings.
I suppose Mr. Pres hit the right nerve.
Yes, Medvedev is the acting president, but Putin is still running the country, similar to what we have in the United states.
New face, same regime ideaology and purpose. And one can be assured that Mr. Putin, ex Krimilin Meister, has not  forgotten the US's betrayal of Stalin following the 2nd WW. When the vast oil reserves were discovered in Iran, they booted Stalin from his promised and  hard earned sphere of influence land grab and overturned the aformentioned Iranian Government with a fake US supported revolution. Not to mention the US creation of the Al Qaida to help defeat Russia in Afghanistan. And knowing how and why the 1st WW began surely makes one shiver
when the looming shadows Histories mistake's and fully unaquired pursuit's are cast.... matter how much glimmering light that pepsident smile emits.

 I guess it's appropriate

 I guess it's appropriate that a well known 'baller' would be a master of the headfake.  But somehow Europeans, though they may be less familiar with basketball than we are,  may be catching on to this ahead of us.  I see Obama's 'nuclear initiative' as such a headfake.   There is no way that Russia is going to agree to diminish its nuclear capacity as long as Nato continues to encircle Russia and extend its presence and control deep into Asia.  If anything, Obama has intensified those activities, so Obama's proposal re. nukes was not serious as a proposal about nukes or about Russia.  So what was it about then?    I'd say it was a baldfaced attempt to give the US some semblance of high moral ground vis-a-vis Iran.  Why would the Obama administration need that?   When are nations most concerned about moral appearances?  Right before they go to war.
'Progressives' seem determined to read tea-leaves for clues about Obama.  They talk about Obama as a zen master, suggesting that there are complex hidden meanings and that if we would all just be patient and sit nicely on our hands, Obama would guide us into a Golden Age.  I'd say that there is a much simpler explanation for the 'complexities' of Obama; he talks out both sides of hhis mouth.  He says one thing and does another.  Or he does one thing and then does another that contradicts it.He's pulling a fast one, many fast ones.  His policies are even more deeply corporatist and imperial than W's were, if anything,  with one huge difference:  he doesn't face Opposition.  If anything, much of the right wing sings his praise louder than his own party.

Spot on, epppie

Justin Raimond does a fine job of skewing these hypocrites, "Progressive Warmongers." Liberals Rally Around Obama's War."
As President Barack Obama launches a military effort that promises to dwarf the Bush administration’s Iraqi adventure in scope and intensity, the "progressive" community is rallying around their commander in chief as obediently and reflexively as the neocon-dominated GOP did when we invaded Iraq. As John Stauber points out over at the Center for Media and Democracy Web site, the takeover of the antiwar movement by the Obamaites is nearly complete. He cites as a prime but not sole example:"
Lou:  Obama is much more dangerous than Bush.  Bush was an effective bully but an ineffective propagandist.  Obama is more malleable than Bush and 10X more effective propagandiist.  What do you say about an "anti-war" candidate who not only escaltes war in Af-Pak, but praises one of the most brazen and heinious war crimes in the history of the world as an "Extraordinary Achievement?
I fear we are heading for a "perfect storm" of cataclysmic events:  the unraveling of the phony "surge" (read ethnic cleansing/bribes) in Iraq as the money train for the Awakening Councils dries up, an attack on Iran by Israel, (and possibly Syria and Leb. too, take your pick); the further escalation of war, human displacment and suffering and radicalization in Afg-Pak that will destabilize Pak-India relations, the realization that Obama's wealth transfer to the Oligarchs was insufficient to prime the capitalist pump (no $$ for social safety net, more bailouts for the Oligarchs),  and further deterioration of the economy/job-loss.  All the classic ingrediments for a war, for proto-facism, militarism.  While the Western Propaganda machine  gives us wild-eyed analysis and fearmongering regarding Iran's program or intentions.  The US and the West continues to invest billions into advanced nuclear weaponry. Those "bunker busting" "tactical" nukes, afterall, is the Bush/Obama/Zionist military solution for Iran  At some point in time, the lies will collapse unto themselves.  I'm thinking round about July 2009?

It is disturbing

how low the level of discourse regarding the situation with Iran is, even among many thinkers on the left whose opinions are spot on most of the time. This article is a refreshing dose of reality. It seems very few Americans, and noone in the MSM, have ever read the NPT. I hear generally anti-war progressives insist regularly that "we must find a way to stop Iran's enrichment of uranium." Clearly, far too many people have no understanding of the realities underlying the situation, which include Iran's desire to develop nuclear power to free up oil for exports, and their absolute right to do this under the treaty we initiated and signed. The deeper history of American intervention in the region is of course not understood, nor are the catastrophic, world-altering consequences of an (overt) attack on Iran. Most Americans, and their media, seem only too happy to buy into the "Mad Arab" archetype so skillfully manipulated by the last administration to generate support for its disastrous interventions in the region. (Yes, I know that Iranians are not Arabic.) This willful ignorance on the part of so many is paving the way for America the Good to destroy what is left of the world economy on behalf of Israel and the oil barons. You would think this last set would have learned something from the massive reduction in Iraqi oil on the market since our last intervention. We are ruled by delusional sociopaths.

Iran's Rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

This is an excellent article, but in it Margaret Kimberley takes a conservative position regarding Iran's rights as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.  Kimberley believes that the NNPT precluded its non-nuclear weapons signatories from embarking on nuclear weapons development programs, period.  But under the treaty, the quid pro quo given by the non-nuclear weapon signatories to the treaty in 1968, to not develop nuclear weapons, was contingent on the quid pro quo given by the five nuclear weapons signatories in 1968, to undertake good-faith negotiations to eliminate nuclear weapons entirely.
And since the United States has manifestly not been trying to undertake good-faith negotiations to eliminate nuclear weapons entirely, Iran has the right, under the treaty (not to mention under the universal law of self-defense) to develop nuclear weapons.

"Lions and Tigers and Bears" "Oh My!

Well... I knew it wouldn't take long for a white man, woman or child to get snatched up as we head into Spring/Summer and for the media to fall all over itself "reporting it." And I'll be damned, we ain't even hit Summer yet.  We've gone from focusing on "terrorists" and "insurgents" to "pirates!"  "Lions and tigers and bears..."  The latest rescue and tough love by Pres. Obama viz the "Somali Pirates", combined with drone attacks on the day after he's sworn in, the "residual" forces in Iraq for "their protection," and the ESCALATION of the war in Af-Pak and the continued attempts to encircle Russia and expand NATO  shows the Democratic Brand is eager to show the voting public and the world how big their cahones are.  The media made sure we understood "smooth-as-silk" Obama PERSONALLY gave the order to take out three grizzled Somali "pirates" to demonstrate Obama's bona fides. How quickly historically impoverished Amerikkkans forget that DemocRats have either started or escalted more wars than Rethugs.
In a nation of uncritical thinkers, it's hardly surpising how so-called "educated and intelligent" people know NOTHING about the RAPE of the Somali Coasts by Europeans, Japanese and others, how the industrialized world has turned into a toxic waste dumping site.,1518,594457,00.html
It's a deadly combination when the most militarily powerful nation on earth is populated by a bunch of syncophants, pussies, and moral hypocrites.  The same bitches and pussies who think it's okay to dump toxic, industrial waste, steal and deplete fishing stocks while intimidating local Somali fisherman, and ("Lord Have Mercy") dump f***king NUCLEAR waste are the same punks and wimps who'd shot or sue their neighbor for a tree branch encroaching on their property, or expect to headline Larry King or Matt and Meredith crowing on and on about how Buffy or Tyler got salmonella poisoning.  But f***k the Somali's, they're just another dark-skinned, rabble rousing "failed State." Like the Iraqi's and others "Let them eat depleted uranium."   And sadly, most Negroes in the US of A feel and think the same way. They still rely on the MSM for their "news."
It's amazing and frankly fruitless to convince 97% of Amerikkans of the propaganda perpetrating as news.  The Primacy of Self is the polestar of moral and intellectual analysis in Amerikka, especially when looped with the "American Exceptionalism" religion. Given the intellectual and moral deficit in Amerikka, be sure of this, "The Obama Brand is just getting ramped it."  Ironically, it just might be left to those White Christian Nationalists, gun loving syncophants of Limbaugh to bring out the pitchforks.  Hell of an irony, given that Obama is serving their interests, but their brute racism, ignorance and xenophobia won't permit them to discern it.  Yes, we are truly f*****ked. 
Barack Obama, he who is "heaven sent," posessed of the moral compass and spine of the jelly fish taking over the oxygen deprived wastelands formerly known as "seas" and "oceans" REFUSES EVEN AN IOTA of balance, equity, equilibrium regarding the plot of the Somalia fisherman.  Not a word about their plight, just tough guy talk and more "failed state" pretexts for "liberal interventionism." And not a peep out of the Good Black Christians who's remedy no doubt is to "pray on it."  Nothing from Obama but, "Yeah, we capped them M****f***r's, don't f**k with the US of A."  And, oh by the way, "how do you like my dog?"  "He's much cuter than them Somalians, don't ya think?
Amerikka, the most militarily powerful country on the planet populated by some of the biggest moral hypocrities and pussies on the planet.
p.s.  NPR said "there's a glimmer of hope in the economy" according to Admininistration officials.  Never mind the ripple effects of the coming auto industry bankruptices or that Citi and the rest of banksters are gouging us with jacked late fees or credit card interest rates or "pay day loan" lending schemes, or that people are spending less.  We'll get to that when we get to it, what's important now is that you believe the bankster bailout scheme is working, okay? And, also that the banksters might need just a few more trillion to prime the pump. This is the Wall St. Journal folks not the World Socialist Website,  I'll cite them in a subsequent entry. Ciao.


Wonderful website and comments. 
We call NPR national propaganda radio in my house.  I heard a similar comment, perhaps the same story, about the rebounding economy in Cleveland.  "The work has picked up at one tool and die company in Ohio", an auto parts company in Cleveland.
They interview one employee, oh yeah "orders are coming in". Guess why- fewer competitors because so many have gone out of business. "Welcome to the economy of Darwin."  Despicable!
I can refute npr and corporate media all day with some members of my family and they still say, oh but Obama is so articulate!  I give up and hope they just keep watching Dancing with the Stars.

Exhibit "A" from Chris Floyd "Them Darkies deserve to die"

Embedded Bellwether: The Paper of Record Prepares the Public for More Slaughter

Written by Chris Floyd


Noam Chomsky, among others, has noted how faithfully and thoroughly the corporate American media advances the agenda of the state, achieving a near Pravda-like degree of servitude without any need for the kind of overt, direct control once practiced by Pravda's Soviet masters. This is done, in large part, unconsciously; that is, most of the practitioners (and all of the owners) of the corporate media share the same assumptions and values of the nation's ruling elite. They don't have to be told to believe what the elite believe; they believe it already.
Naturally, there are factional rivalries among the elite, played out most vividly every four years in the presidential campaigns, where two candidates with mutual assumptions and values split hairs over side issues to get their faction to take a turn at the top; and thus various bits of the corporate media tend to line up more closely with one faction over the other. But on the core values of the modern American power structure -- the use of overwhelming violence to achieve political ends (chiefly, the predominance of the American elite over world affairs as far as possible); the primacy and privilege due to wealth, and the burning need to preserve that primacy at the expense of everyone else, if need be; and the ineffable, ineradicable, mystical goodness of the imperial state, which can never really sin nor err, except, perhaps, from the misapplied excess of its own forever-good intentions (liberating the oppressed, safeguarding national security, etc.) -- there is no genuine disagreement. For the American elite, the principle of governance that Richard Nixon and George W. Bush openly adopted -- "If the president does it, it's legal" -- is always operative on a larger scale: "If America does it, it's good, or was meant to be good, even if it does turn out wrong every now and then" (generally due to the perceived "incompetence" of the particular faction in power, or perhaps the ingratitude and unworthiness of the recipients of America's benevolence.)

With these shared values reaching across the bipartisan divide in politics, and suffused throughout the commanding heights of American society (and through much of general population as well, especially the doctrine of America's mystical goodness), it's no wonder that a high degree of consensus -- a widespread "conventional wisdom" -- is so readily formed on the major issues of the day. Of course, this conventional wisdom shifts over the years, as the agendas of the elite factions shift in response to various events and trends; but at any given time, it is so powerful and pervasive as to be almost invisible.

One of the great bellwethers of conventional wisdom is of course the "paper of record," the New York Times. The paper's factional leaning is well-known -- it tends toward the extremely tame, pro-empire, pro-oligarchy center-right stance known rather laughingly as "liberalism" in the United States -- but that has never prevented it from performing its duty as a pipeline for the propaganda of power. One of the most vivid examples of this was the paper's key role in preparing the public mind to accept, even applaud, an act of naked military aggression against Iraq -- even though this murderous campaign was led by rivals of the Times' factional soulmates among the elite.

Now the Times' faction has one of its own in power, which doubtless makes the stovepiping of propaganda even easier, more congenial -- indeed, even more unconscious -- for the great Gotham bellwether. A story in Monday's paper is a good case in point. Written by C.J. Chivers, embedded with American ground troops in Afghanistan, it shows the "liberal" paper preparing the American public to accept, even champion, a bloody escalation of the conflict -- including a subtle "justification" for the great increase in civilian casualties that will come with Obama's "surge" in Central Asia.

In the horribly stilted, obfuscating prose that characterizes so much of the Times' writing -- especially the more propagandist pieces -- Chivers tries to have it both ways, readying reader for more bloodshed while dangling sugar plums of "hope" to ease the coming pain:
In short, the conflict of Afghanistan is evolving from an "older war" in which a limited number of American troops and airplanes and missiles killed people in a somewhat limited geographical area to a "newer war" in which a greater number of American troops and airplanes and missiles will kill even more people in a somewhat larger geographical area. This will also result in more Americans being killed, but somehow, the extension and expansion of precisely the same failed strategy that has led to the present deteriorating position -- "invigorating" the war, as Chivers calls it -- will make things more "hopeful."

The story is filled with lots of "savvy" tactical talk and "light at the end of the tunnel" boilerplate from military sources that will be dismally familiar to anyone with the slightest memory of the Vietnam War. But what is perhaps most ominous is a passing observation thrown in toward the end of the story, where Chivers rides through a rural Afghan village with soldiers from Company C of the First Battalion, 26th Infantry. First -- 20 paragraphs into the piece -- Chivers finally notes that some of the villagers are less than enamored of the liberator's presence in their land:
The "takeaway" at the end of the story seems clear: In order to win through on the president's agenda of hope and transformation in Afghanistan, we must brace ourselves for some tough fighting -- and high costs -- as we face down a ruthless enemy that uses old women and young children to stalk and kill our troops.

So, as the death toll mounts in the coming months and you hear all those overwrought sob stories about "slaughtered civilians" -- including the emotional handwringing about "women and children" among the unavoidable collateral damage that occurs when you are trying to do the right thing for a bunch of ungrateful Muslim wretches -- just remember what the New York Times has told you: some of those collaterals were probably packing heat. They deserved to die. This good, hopeful, progressive war need not trouble your conscience at all.