*Iran -- Rumors of War?*

* Iran -- Rumors of War? *
* {col. writ. 10/7/07} (c) '07 Mumia Abu-Jamal *
* *
* *
There are forces in this country and in this world that are expending energy to ensure war with Iran.

That's right -- Iran.

Many of those forces were the same ones that suckered the nation into Iraq, with media - megaphoned fear- mongering.

Iran has become the feared bogeyman of the hour; the latest in the simplistic media projection of 'bad guy.'

And, just as in Iraq, the media's demonization of the leader becomes reason to destroy, attack, bomb, and occupy a nation.

"He's a bad guy!" "He's a ruthless dictator!"

Doesn't this sound familiar?

Famed scholar and linguist, Noam Chomsky, interviewed recently by radio host David Barsamian, gives a powerful example of the impact of media upon us. Chomps explained: "Take a classic example, Germany. Under the Weimar Republic, Germany was the most civilized country in the world, the leader in the sciences and the arts. Within two or three years it had been turned into a country of raving maniacs by extensive propaganda--which, incidentally, was explicitly borrowed from Anglo-American commercial propaganda. And it worked. It frightened Germans. They thought they were defending themselves against the Jews, against the Bolsheviks. And you know what happened next." *{Fr.: Barsamian, David, Targeting Iran (San Francisco, Ca.: Open Media/City Lights, 2007),p.47}*

And speaking of brutal, ruthless dictators, the U.S. backed Shah of Iran used his secret police, Savak, to drench the earth with blood and terror. But, to the U.S., /he/ was cool.

Has the nation learned nothing from the Iraq debacle?

The U.S. Senate recently passed a non-binding resolution supporting the partition of Iraq.

It makes a certain diabolical sense; the U.S. bombed it, invaded it, overthrew its government, and replaced it with puppets of their liking -- all this, not now being successful, why not shatter it into threes?

This argument is now being made, not by rabid neo cons, but by so-called 'liberal' Democrats.

Why? Because imperialism is a truly bipartisan American project.

The newest target may well be Iran, despite the fact that if Iran is indeed more influential today, it's because of the U.S. invasion, occupation, and near destruction of Iraq.

In sum, Iran was strengthened by Iraq's fall.

The U.S. has a Middle East policy driven by fear and ignorance.

It is reactive, emotional, and driven by faith --not reason.

Those are dangerous forces to justify war, and unworthy of a nation that considers itself a superpower.

Super in power, but petty in reasoning.

--(c) '07 maj