Cheney blew off Iran in 2003
For the Love of God Impeach this Man
Lawrence Wilkerson, an aide to Colin Powell when he was secretary of state says that Iran in 2003 offered to help stabilize Iraq and to cut off aid to Hizbullah in Lebanon and to Hamas. Wilkerson says that the State Department was interested in pursuing the offer, which presumably came from reformist president Mohammad Khatami. He says that when the issue was broached with VP Richard Bruce Cheney, Cheney shot down any notion of "talking to evil." As if Mohammad Khatami is evil and Richard Bruce Cheney is not. (Cheney's lies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and connection to 9/11 have gotten hundreds of thousands of people killed).
Because Khatami kept promising that his reforms would make Iranians better off, and because the US rejected all his overtures and left him with no achievements to show for them, the Iranian electorate turned against the reform movement and put Mahmud Ahmadinejad into power, a loud-mouthed braggart of a sort that Cheney's Likudniks could then build up into a bogey man to frighten Americans with. Cheney created Iran as a menace.
What this article doesn't mention is that the rightwing Likud cabal in Cheney's office, such as Irv Lewis Libby, with its connections to the Israeli far right, almost certainly played a key role in this rejection. I think John Hannah was already there then, too. David Wurmser came later, after getting up the fraudulent case against Iraq in the Pentagon "Office of Special Plans" (i.e. foreign policy plumbers) set up by Likudnik Douglas Feith, then the number 3 man in the Pentagon.
Libby is now on trial for lying to the special prosecutor about his role in betraying CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson. Wilson had been working on anti-proliferation efforts versus . . . Iran. She was outed to punish her husband for publicly challenging Cheney's lies about WMD in Iraq.
Cheney is the most fascistic high official in US government in history. He recently implied that al-Qaeda is glad that the Democrats won the mid-term elections, as his way of trying to create the impression that anyone who disagrees with him is a terrorist-loving traitor. But it is Cheney who is the traitor, with his office having betrayed Valerie to the Iranians (and everyone else in the world).
Fascism depends on the creation of straw man enemies said to be dire threats to the Homeland. Iran is a poor weak third world country and poses no threat to the US. It hasn't aggressively invaded another country for over a century. But Cheney needs Iran to substitute for the old Soviet Union, otherwise how could he get you to agree to let him listen in on your telephone calls without a warrant, or let him torture people?
Cheney is the much bigger threat to the integrity of the US constitution than any foreign force. He should be impeached. If lying about a tawdry affair that did not even get to third base is grounds for impeachment, then lying us into a war, slapping Iran's overtures away and setting the stage for another war, and outing a CIA operative certainly are.
At least let us investigate the extent of his crimes.


12 Comments:
This mutual taunting is immature
Come on. I don't see why you should be so critical of Al'Maliki's government. Bush is trying to use it as his puppet government. He wants him to go after the very group who supported his choice to Prime Minister. Maliki doesn't have any means to wage any politic he would want in Iraq, the money is distributed by the Americans. The US has destroyed all the former government structure. The US isn't equipping the new Iraqi army correctly out of fear that it would return its arms against the American troops. But Bush is trying to put all the fault for his failed politic on the shoulders of Maliki. I don't see why Maliki should swallow quietly all what the US/Bush want hime to swallow. I appreciate your analysis and your oppostion to Bush policies, but some of your remarks really fall short. I guess it's the price to pay for writing rapidly. I dont' see any immature statements on the part of Maliki. I just see spin and a dishonnest attitude on the part of Bush along with a very colonial attitude.
What this article doesn't mention is that the rightwing Likud cabal in Cheney's office, such as Irv Lewis Libby, with its connections to the Israeli far right, almost certainly played a key role in this rejection.
Mmm it's a little easy to put all the fault of the US foreign policy on the shoulders of the "likudniks"; US is a big superpower; if they didn't want to go where the Likudniks wanted, nobody could force them to go there. They went in Iraq for they believed in was in the interest of America too. One of the main reason is probably the oil. They are in a geostrategical game in order to grasp oil, or at least controll its distribution and make sure China and or India don't get it. But there are always many reasons to go to war. This is a big decision and you need a lot of convergent interests in order to start it. They used the wish to avenge the 9/11 bombings of the US folks, they used the greed of the militaro-industrial complexe, the demesurated use and need of oil of the American economic and social system, etc. etc.
Well said concerning the need to impeach Cheney (if it is possible to impeach a vice-president, I'm all for it) any way, Bush should be impeached and brought to trial, along with Cheney, Rumsfeld and all their clique, without forgetting Blair, who should be brought to the Hague (So much for the compromission of the "New labour", too bad that this will probably bring the conservative back to power in UK).
Impeach Richard Bruce Cheney
Nancy Pelosi promised that congress would not impeach the president, but she never promised that they would not impeach Cheney. Aside from the high crimes and misdemeanors committed by the vice president's office if something were to happen to the president the nation could not afford to have Cheney be president for five minutes. For in that first five minutes it is likely that he would order air strikes on Iran.
An additional benefit to impeaching Cheney would be that it pull the presidents source of reasoning out from under him. Leaving him exposed to face the world all alone. That would be a sight to see.
As usual, Cheney speaks the exact oppostie of truth. In this case he means "evil doesn't talk to anyone".
Sorry, but it is far easier to impeach a man for withholding comment on an extra-marital affair than for supposed manipulation of intelligence about a war. Cheney has the advantage of many collaborators who can testify that he acted on the *best available information* or out of an abundance of caution to defend the US. Who will go to the witness stand and swear that Cheney committed a willing disgregard for truth or deliberately hype evidence? How would that person pay the rent afterwards? Hoe many of the judges on the Hill would not be absolute hypocrites if they censured Cheney for what they did (and continue to do) themselves?
Thanks to Mr. L. Wilkerson. 'That's sure telling him.' We may seem to be moving like 'snails' in efforts to rid the world of____(fill in the blanks), but let's keep a belief in powerful, non-violent, truth statements to false authorities. I love these honest-to-goodness, good articles. Truth.
Juan,
Thanks for your excellent blog. I had read this story in the Christian Science Monitor yesterday. Here is a link:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0118/p99s01-duts.html
The foreign policy of the United States has been hijacked by a the likes of Cheney and his cabal. These people should be in jail for treason, since they are acting against the interests of the United States.
Cheney is the personnificatin of evil! Thanks to Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush we've moved from quagmire to peering into a black, bottomless abyss in the Middle East.
Keep up the great work!
Ralph Deeds
Birmingham, Michigan
According to the Washington Post, the Swiss intermediary who communicated the Iranian offer verified that it came from the highest authorities in Iran - meaning probably above Khatami.
This offer by Iran was one of at least 6 others, which were all ignored. When repeated Iranian offers of compromise have been summarily blown off by the Bush administration, is it any wonder that Iranians begin to suspect that the nuclear issue is a pretext, and so they refuse to compromise on it and instead adopt a hardline stance?
"Some of Iran’s most seasoned politicians and officials fear that the US and Israel seek nothing short of the country’s break-up. 'I backed talks with the US for a long time but sadly I’ve reached the conclusion they want to cut Iran into pieces,' a diplomat said."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/ccdefc8e-a672-11db-937f-0000779e2340.html
There's simply no logical basis to assume that if only Iran backs down a bit, so would the US. Repeated rejections of Iran's offers of compromise which
included an offer to suspend enrichment and stop supporting the Palestinians should have made it
perfectly clear that forces in the US are actively seeking a confrontation with Iran rather than a peaceful resolution.
David Ignatius at WAPO takes a less confrontational look at Cheney. But I feel your comments are closer to the truth. How can we restrain a runaway Executive branch?
Seems to me, and I may be wrong, but Prof. Cole was simply saying that the Likudniks have driven the US to this policy place and they are prime movers in the US government. The two forces have largely melded...in a Star Trekian mind meld, if you will. Anyway, that's just my understanding of what the professor was saying.
i agree with christianes comments about Maliki, he has a right to defend himself.
And Juan you are extremely offensive. Iran is not some poor third wolrd country. It is the nation of Hafez, of poetry, beauty of love. It is a rich and ancient nation, a culture and peoples who go back thousands of years. We may not have the money wealth right now but we have the spriritual and cultural wealth. Perhaps you didnt mean to sound so arrogant, but the way it came out was so.
Iran is not 3rd world it is an emerging young nation with 70% of the population under 30, and profound geo-strategic importance and advantage. Your description is misleading.
"Cheney is the most fascistic high official in US government in history"
Absolutely. And his discarding of this proposal is a clear demonstration that Iran is our enemy for no other substantive reason than because Bush and Cheney WANT it to be.
Post a Comment
<< Home