We're in a conversation aimed at forming a new political combination. Inspired by Josh Ruebner's tragicomic effort to pierce the veil on AIPAC's influence in Congress, Grant Smith of IRMEP talks about the real nuclear "hegemon" in the Middle East (Israel) and about AIPAC's myrmidons. [emphasis mine]
Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.) sponsored
an amendment to the foreign operations bill that would prevent the Export-Import
Bank of the United States from providing loan guarantees to companies selling
refined petroleum to Iran. According to the Washington Report on Middle
East Affairs, Kirk is the top 2008 recipient of pro-Israel
political action committee (PAC) contributions [.pdf]. Kirk received $91,200
in the 2008 election cycle, bringing his career total thus far to more than
$221,000. Kirk’s AIPAC-sponsored sanctions legislation passed the House Appropriations
Committee on June 23. While tactically positioned as a rebuke to the crackdown
on Iranian election protesters, the measure is only the most recent of a raft
of long-term AIPAC-sponsored
sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program. Israel contends Iran is secretly
developing nuclear weapons under the auspices of a civilian program, though
no hard evidence has emerged. Yet one illicit nuclear arsenal in the region
has been positively identified.
Exactly why the MSM is plastering the Iranian protesters all over every news channel. We need to take care of Iran for the sake of good Iranians, who will thank us with flowers, just as we need to ignore the bad Palestinians, for the sake of the good Palestinians, who need to get themselves together and quit hating their children so they can have a nice state. Qui Bono?
its a tricky one. on the one hand, the coverage humanizes the iranians and thus makes it harder to argue that we need to indiscriminately kill many of these same people in order to save them. (remember the first step in selling a war is to the american public is the dehumanization of the other). i am aware that they will strain or fudge an argument, e.g. it will be establishment targets, it will be precision bombing, etc. on the other hand, the iranians perhaps unwittingly have also through establishment foolishness and the public nature of the backlash presented their enemies with a means for building an international consensus (read western) that will deny them a technological capability they are entitled to under NPT (even the demonstrators would be foolish to give this up) and revealed internal schisms that will certainly be exploited by external forces over time. from the english language protest signage and tweets, etc, it is clear that some are open to or desirous of external involvement, and may over time avail themselves. my advise to the iranians is to be alert and mindful of implications.