Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Friday, April 14, 2006

Iran: A proud people willing to assert the rule of law

AP: Distracting attention from American fascism

ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer got it wrong again.

Iran is willing to resolve issues. Yet, America refuses to sit down and discuss Iranian offers to recognize Israel.

Now, the AP has shifted gears and implying fantasies. Will the AP wake up, or do they want more non-sense?

Follow-up [ Click Comments ]

* * *

The issue is the US and Israel refuse to cooperate with Iran. Iran has attempted to discuss recognition of Israel.

Now, the AP twists words around, notice they say "appeared", which is not an affirmative statement:
"He also appeared to again question whether the Holocaust really happened."[ Click ]

Here's where the AP got it wrong: Iran's President is using an If-then statement

On Friday, he repeated his previous line on the Holocaust, saying: "If such a disaster is true, why should the people of this region pay the price? Why does the Palestinian nation have to be suppressed and have its land occupied?"

Hey, idiots at the AP and ALI AKBAR DAREINI

  • A. Can you read? Obviously, you have trouble.

  • B. Do you understand an if-then statement? Obviously, you have trouble.

    Let's look at the IF-statements used in the BBC Report: [ Click ]

    * * *

    Lesson for ALI AKBAR DAREINI and AP

    Let's review what an if-then statement is: It is a conditional statement. It means that "suppose" something were a premise; it does not assert that it is or is not true. Rather it is speculative.

    This is like saying, "If the AP had a good editor, would it catch this?"

    Does that statement say, "The AP has a bad editor"? No, it simply says, "why are we getting this mess; yet the AP says it is a good source of information."


    Again, let's look at the IF-statements used in the BBC Report: [ Click ]

    Got it, so how an if-statement works?

    * * *

    Now, let's try this when it comes to the Iranian statements on Israel and the US.

    First here's the quote, "If such a disaster is true, why should the people of this region pay the price? Why does the Palestinian nation have to be suppressed and have its land occupied?"

    Second, let's apply the if-then rule: "If such a disaster is true" -- is the premise: Meaning, "Let us start with the premise that the Holocaust is something. . ."

    That's all that he's saying. He disagrees with the excitement, especially given that Israel has abused it's "woe is me" approach to essentially do the same to other: Attack them, go on the offense, and refuse to work with the US to ensure that Iran and the US recognize Israel.

    * * *

    So let's try this again: When the Iranian president says, "If such a disaster is true, why should the people of this region pay the price? Why does the Palestinian nation have to be suppressed and have its land occupied?"

    Again, this is what was said as reported by the BBC: [ Click ]

    This is what he is saying:

    1. Let's presume -- for the sake of argument that the Whining that Israel makes about it's history is true, and forget the fact that the Israelis are killing people in the Middle East, just for the sake of argument;

    2. If that premise is true -- that the Holocaust is real -- what right does that give to Israel to then turn around and abuse others?

    3. If we put aside the issue that Israel is refusing to cooperate with the US and Iran on ensuring that Iran recognizes Israel, what is to be said of the wider destruction Israel has brought to the Palestinians?

    4. Given the US and Israel accuse the world of wrong doing -- and use the Holocaust as the basis to say, "Whatever we do in the Middle East must e put up with. . ." -- what sense is there to discuss with the Americans and Israelis "peace" when their idea of "peace" is to bring war?

    5. If we start with the Premise that bad things happened in Europe; why does the Middle East have to suffer the consequences: Namely, Israel invading other countries; Israel refusing to work with Iren; and Israel and the US calling "war" peace?

    6. If we start with the premise that bad things happened in Europe -- why does the Middle East have to be the area that Israel gets to "take out its aggression" for what happened before?

    * * *

    Let's consider what the Iranian view is: That the events related to what did or did not happen in Europe in WWII are put above religion and all other things.

    In the Iranian view, this is a myth: That the events in Europe take precedent over all other things; and it is a myth that what happened justifies all actions that the Israelis may take against all other people.

    It is a myth that these events have taken on a life of their own to justify lawlessness, abuse, and attacks on others, even lies.

    When a story about the Holocaust -- grows so large that it is larger than all things, and is used to justify abuse, lawlessness, war, and carnage around the globe -- then that story about the Holocaust is larger than reality: It is a myth.

    This is not the same as denying the Holocaust. Rather, it is calling the Holocaust -- as it is -- more than what it is, and asks us to believe that the Holocaust is the justification for more destruction.

    That kind of justification -- which the Israelis, Americans, and world use -- is what myths are all about: When one story is then used to justify other things, but those things should not be justified.

    Here's what he is quoted as saying,
    "They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets," he said. [ Ref ]

    The myth isn't the Holocaust -- the myth is that "the story of the Holocaust now justifies other abuse around the globe."

    The Iranian President is being misquoted in order to mobilize another illegal war. Where there is no evidence of WMD in Iran, the American leadership will simply mobilize the American public to want more -- more than they want peace.

    If Americans truly want peace, why are they reluctant to sit down with the Iranians to accept their repeated offers to recognize Israel?

    Indeed, they are frustrated -- Israel relies on the history of the Holocaust in Europe to justify abusing people of the Middle East. Why should anyone put up with that?

    Again, the Iranian President's view is that if/given/since/because this happened in Europe -- the Holocaust -- then why isn't Europe taking care of the resolution?

    The people of the Middle East have attempted to dialog, but the Americans refuse to discuss recognition. They now want to know: What is stopping the rest of the world from resolving this matter; and getting the Israelis to live "in their back yard"?

    The Iranian President's view is that the world doesn't want to have the Israelis. Whether this is true or not -- about what the world does or does not want -- is irrelevant. The issue is this is how Iran looks at the situation.

    America's problem is that it doesn't want to look at the situation from the perspective of others; rather, it want's to impose a solution with force, going so far as to say -- while they invade illegally with military power -- we're doing this because of what happened in WWII.

    That excuse is no longer valid, especially when the Iranian efforts -- to discuss recognition of Israel, in 2006 -- have been rejected.

    Rather, it is clear -- in the view of the Iranians -- that the Americans and Israelis are not serious about peace, do not want to take action to recognize Israel, but are merely using Israel and what happened in history as an excuse to abuse others, abuse power, and cause problems outside the region where the original abuses occurred.

    I'm not asking that you agree or disagree with that view, nor accept what the Iranians are saying as valid. That is how they view things.

    America's problem is that it refuses to consider that other people are not willing to embrace the Holocaust as a pretext for them to cower, tolerate illegal invasions, and be fed a pack of lies that "we're about peace," while the efforts by the Iranians to bring peace -- with recognition of Israel -- are rebuffed.

    To the Iranians, the Americans and Israelis are delusional and not serious about peace; rather, they would rather fight and spread problems.

    The Iranians would prefer that this problem -- however America wants to define it, or what excuse it uses to spread chaos -- be something that is thrown back into Europe where the people who crated this mess are forced to deal with it, rather than letting the abuse spread around the world.

    IN the Iranian view, this is a no-brainer; this is simple logic; and it is arrogant for Americans and Israelis to have the world buy the story of "what happened in Europe in WWII is an excuse for Americans and Israel to force the world to be abused."

    * * *

    Again, this is what was said as reported by the BBC: [ Click ]

    Not to be combative or anything, but would someone please provide a quote that explicitly states that Iran is denying the Holocaust?

    The only thing I've seen is that the Iranian President has used an IF statement, as reported in the BBC.


    1. "If European countries claim that they have . . ."

    2. "If someone were to deny the existence. . ."

    3. "If someone were to deny the myth . . ."

    4. "If you [Europeans] committed this big crime, then why . . ."


    This is not the same as denying the Holocaust; rather it's a method of debating.

    He’s saying these things to provoke you . . . .: When you are provoked, you are reacting, less capable of thinking. That is what he wants. He is putting you in a reactive mode.


    Here's what the Iranians said about what they hoped others would understand:
    [ Click ]

    If you find a better quote -- other than the BBC reports -- that explicitly states that the Iranian President is denying it, I'll look forward to reviewing it.

    If only Americans were to put as much attention on their laws as they put on foreign words -- what an amazing rule of law America might have.

    America and the AP would rather -- as was done before the illegal invasion of Iraq -- spew forth non-sense and hype.

    Not impressed. Please adjust your calibration system. It needs to be corrected.

    * * *

    Here's the point of the Iranian President: It makes no sense to whine about the Holocaust in the 1940s, when the real abuse continues in the Middle East. Today.

    We can’t change the past. But we can address today’s issues. But the US and Israel refuse to do so. When given a chance, the Americans and Israelis refuse. That is at the heart of the contempt for the Americans and Israelis.

    Yes, there are disagreements – disputes – long standing hatred – over issues of who was there first; who has greater claims to land. But those are issues that will have to be resolved later. Right now, the Americans won’t even come to the table. “How can we work with the Americans?”

    Clearly, Israel and the US have not learned. Rather, the US and Israel are using the "sympathy over the Holocaust" to get the world to assent to war crimes in Iraq, abuse of power at home, and to continue to arrogantly defy the laws of war and treaties."

    The message from Iran is simple: If the Israelis and Americans are going to embrace a fiction that the world -- because of what happened in Europe in WWII -- has to now bow down do them, they are wrong.

    The Iranians are no better or worse than any other people. However, the more that the US and Israel refuse to cooperate with those in the Middle Easter who have long been here the less sympathy the world should have for the US and Israel.

    Moreover, the fact that the Israelis and Americans are at odds with the principles they assert -- namely, security, peace, and recognition of Israel -- the Middle East has to defend itself.

    The US and Israel conspired to spread lies bout Iraq; and there is no reason the Iranians should stand back and let the same thing happen to Iran.

    In Iran's view, the US and Israel are already planning to invade; and there's no reason for Iran -- or anyone else in the Middle East -- to "put up with" the arrogance of the Americans and Israelis.

    Here's the key point: The Middle East is not the play ground of the US or Israel. If they US and Israel refuse to assent to the rule of law; and they continue to spread lies; and they refuse to discuss peaceful solutions, what option do the people of the Middle East have -- other than to rely on like measures which the American openly talk about?

    Again, the issue is for the AP to cover: Why is the AP ignoring the will of the people of the Middle East? Their land has been taken; and the US "talks about" peace, while at the same time it actively engages in war crimes.

    The AP is not neutral. Rather, the Iranians know full well that they may be attacked. The issue is: When you are likely going to be attacked, do you play nice -- and still get attacked -- or do you take the conflict to the heart of the problem?

    At this point, American and Israel have not woken up. They keep playing the "woe is me card" all the while refusing to discuss recognition of Israel with the Iranians.

    The US continues to rattle the saber over Iran. Yet, the US refuses to discuss and engage in peaceful approaches.

    What option do the people of the Middle East -- other than standing up for themselves -- have in asserting their right to be left alone?

    Israel and the US refuse to recognize the right of the people of the Middle East to be left alone.

    The US and Israel have a problem: they advocate war, and would like to have their citizens believe "they are under attack." this is non-sense.

    The Iranians do not have to bow down, especially when the US shows it is militarily weak, and that the US openly ignores the non proliferation treaty.

    As with Iraq, the US and Israel continue to make accusations.

    The issue with the Americans and Israel is one of simple respect: Why should the People of the middle east continue to assent to the arrogant abuse of power, especially when they have attempted to open a dialog, and the Americans have refused?

    The people of Iran do not have to assent to the bullying. they are proud people, just as the Americans and the Israelis. The problem is that America and Israel want the world to bow down to their abuse. The Iranians are not going to do that.

    America's problem is that it refuses to accept that it is not longer the victor of WWII. Rather, America has become the fascist empire it once destroyed, and would like the world to believe the opposite.

    The easiest way to annoy your opponent -- which the Iranian President well shows -- is to say things that will provoke America. Congratulations: America is ruffled by petit things, all the return for refusing to work with Iran. This is caused by America and their refusal to cooperate. Nothing more. Look in the mirror.

    Congratulations, AP. Iran knows how to lawfully assert power merely by denying something that most annoys the Americans and Israelis. This is a sign that America and Israel are easily manipulated, all the more reason to have confidence this will inspire the people of the Middle East to stand up to the barbaric treatment they are force to endure simply because what happened in Europe.

    It's time to draw the line. Is America willing to work with Iran to recognize Israel?

    If not, then Iran is prepared to take military action to pre-emptively defend itself -- just as America claims it has the right -- to end this non-sense.

    The problem is that the AP continues to selectively pretend it is reporting, all the while we -- the readers -- now realize the AP has chosen sides: To defend a fascist regime in the White House and pretend the rest of the world should go along with it.

    Iran is not an employee of the AP. The AP and the White House have not woken up.

    Iran is not going to let the Americans and Israelis get away with it.

    If the AP was a credible news source, why would you bother to report non-sense?

    The world will do things to provoke America and the Israelis for one reason: They can, and the Americans are unable to contain themselves.

    They do this for one reason: It shows America is reacting to pettiness, and unable to rise above the issues.

    Iran shows that it is far more powerful than the weak-minded Americans, easily ruffled, and ready to wage war, even when they have no legal foundation for war.

    Iran is ready to wage war. They are ready to force a discussion. America refuses.

    Iran is ready to go after what America really says it values: Does it really mean what it says about Israel, or is America going to do something else?

    Iran is fully prepared to find out and force the Americans: Put your money where your mouth is, defend Israel, and watch the entire Middle East turn into a huge sea of turmoil.

    What caused this? One person: George Bush and his refusal to assent to the rule of law; his refusal to work with Iran to get Israel recognized; and his refusal to ensure the US is defended on 9-11.

    Bush is delusional. He has insufficient power and forces to defend Louisiana, much less Iraq. There’s no credible basis to believe he’s serious about bringing peace to Israel. He refuse to talk. The moment that the US is distracted, the crisis in Iraq sill simply spread.

    Iran doesn’t have to do anything. It merely needs to wave it’s hands, and the fools in America and Israel while sign the siren song.

    If America was truly powerful, it would simply walk into Teheran and impose terms. But America can’t do that. Iran knows this. And Iran does not plan to cooperate with those who refuse to peacefully resolve issues.

    Iran is powerful because it means what it says. America and Israel are weak because they are not straight shooters. The Middle East knows this.

    The threat to security in the middle east is George Bush. He and his White House staff are no different than the fascists in Europe. Their problem is they accuse all others of being fascists. We saw the results in Iraq: more evidence of the White House staff delusion.

    America embraces fascism. America says it is opposed to authoritarianism. If Iran were to apply this rule, give the world one reason why the US and Israel should not be wiped off the map as the US says should have been done with Hitler.

    The world is tired of dealing with bullies. The issue becomes: Will Iran be the ultimate protector of the American citizen’s security; or will the US and Israel have to actually be wiped off the map to rid the world of the barbaric fascist who refuse to assent to the rule of law?

    Congress refuses to act. The world is told to put up with it. Why would they, especially when they have the power and means to refuse to assent to the spreading lawlessness which this Congress and White House openly embrace.

    If America was the land behind freedom, the Congress would take lawful action against the President and force him to assent to the rule of law – just as this White House forced the world to take action in Iraq.

    The way forward is: Will America freely choose to assent to the rule of law and lawfully force the President to assent to that law; or does it require a nation like Iran to compel America to do what it refuses to do on its own?

    If America was serious about accountability, it would bring charges against the President for his war crimes. America does not choose to act. A reasonable person would conclude that America is unwilling to assent to the standards it imposed on Hitler. Iran is willing to do so.

    America has laid waste to Iraq. Iran is fully prepared to attack and destroy what is the source of the current problem: the US and the Israelis. America refuses to discuss peaceful solutions. What alternative do the free people of the world have other than to use the same forces which America freely uses in violation of the laws of war?

    Free people are allowed – under the laws of war, when laws of war are violated – to reciprocate and violate other laws. America violates the sovereignty of other nations without a good reason. The world and Iran may lawfully reciprocate and do the same to Israel. they might even lawfully do the same to the US.

    Is this what they want? Of course not. But what alternative do they have, other than to do what the US wants: For them to grovel.

    We've seen the images. The holocaust is now a tired excuse. It is old. The real crime is despite "the big lessons" of the Holocaust, the US is now using that as a basis to impose other abuse on others.

    White House staffers are delusional: The American President, and no other nation or leader, is the real war criminal, and the real mirror image of Hitler. For the White House to assert otherwise is merely evidence of their delusion.

    * * *

    The issue is: Will the world understand the difference between “if” and “may” and what is at the other extreme: Will and imminent. America uses the word “if” and “may” to justify more abuse.

    The Iranians will no longer play that game. They will use force, just as Americans have already illegally done.

    American brought this on itself: It refused to assent to the rule of law. The free people of the world may lawfully violate the same laws of war and bring the same war – which America has illegally brought to the Middle East – to the streets of Israel and to the American homeland.

    Is this what American prefers, or would you like to have a serious discussion about recognizing Israel?

    America, your leaders do not want to discuss peace. They prefer to hold you in front of them, hiding, unwilling to be statesmen.

    America, your leaders are no better than scared, frail children hiding behind their snow forts. Iran has a large tractor and is ready to roll over your snow fort.

    America, you refuse to assent to the rule of law. You refuse to discuss peace.

    What other option does the world have?

    You give them no other choice.

    Do you want the rule of law and peace; or do you want someone else to make you want that?

    * * *

    No, I do not advocate violence. Rather, I would hope the world sit down at the table.

    Yet, who’s being hypocritical: The Americans spread lies to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq; then whine when others attempt to assert themselves in the face of this abuse of power.

    You have no right to silence others when they are forced to assent to military power; they have the lawful right – under the Geneva Conventions – to lawfully defend themselves. If America chooses to wage illegal war, then others may also violate the same laws.

    That is not advocating violence. It is merely citing what the laws of war permit. If you do not understand that, then you should let the world look to other leaders who are willing to be civilized, not barbaric and reactive as you are.

    You react for one reason: You are not thinking. That is your weakness. This is why America is losing in Iraq. America moves without thinking. It enjoys being manipulated.

    Americans are a threat to civilized society. They embrace barbarity, and would have us believe it is peace. Americans are dangerous people, willing to lie, and they embrace non-sense to justify abusing others. Their Congress embraces non-sense to avoid asserting the rule of law at home and in the White House.

    Where there is no civilized rule of law, and the American leadership refuses to peacefully discuss Iranian overtures to recognize Israel, Americans must accept that your leaders would rather wage war, than accept that they have no power to compel others to assent to their barbarity.

    Free people are only free if they are willing to fight for their freedom. Americans are willing to embrace fascism because they are afraid to stand up for themselves, use their mind, or asset the rule of law at home. It is not the job of the “rest of the world” to be the dumping ground because you refuse to resolve your issues at home.

    This is no different than what happened in Europe in WWII. The Europeans refused to resolve the issues and make peace. Rather, they shifted attention, and made the “rest of the world” deal with issues which the Europeans refused to address: Your hypocrisy in the use and abuse of power; and the refusal to bring a civilized society to your own land. Rather, you want to use power and military force to make everyone assent to your non-sense. That is at the heart of the abuse which drove the Romans to destroy Jesus.

    How ironic that the very man who inspired peace – and stood up to tyranny – is on this Good Friday the basis to which the Americans justify a war of aggression around the globe. Hitler did the same. He said – as was inscribed on the SS officer’s belt buckles, “God is with us.”

    That is a myth. God is not with America. God is against the abuse of power.

    The myth that Americans rely on is the false belief that the world should accept what happened in Europe in WWII as the excuse to continue that aggression against all people. That is wrong.

    The Iranians are not willing to buy that myth. Nor is the world. American may be powerful, but it no longer has the moral authority to justify this abuse.

    If America had moral authority, it might lawfully assert the rule of law at home; and it would accept an overture by the Iranians to recognize Israel.

    Because America refuses to be civilized, there is no reason America or any other nation should expect the people of the Middle East to be civilized in return.

    Lets practice If-then

    If you desire this war to end, then you must accept that you are part of the problem; and then you must lawfully move to assert the rule of law at home, and peacefully embrace those who desire to bring peace, not wage war against them.

    To compel others assent to your standard, you must first demonstrate that standard is worthy of your assent.

    But you refuse.

    You leave the world with no other option but to wage war -- a war that you prefer over peace.

    That is not a threat. It is your choice.

    You wished this.