Saturday, October 15, 2011

"Defies Credulity"

Well, credulity might not have been exactly the word that the distinguished "Iran specialist" was looking for. I won't quibble, though; I get the idea. No one with an IQ north of room temperature could swallow this fable, even if it hadn't been mouthed by that Father of Lies, Preznit Corporate Barry Peace Laureate:
The United States will apply the "toughest sanctions" to further isolate Iran over the alleged plan to murder the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Barack Obama said on Thursday, despite growing scepticism over the amateurish nature of the plot and the apparently shambolic background of the main suspect.

Obama insisted that the US had evidence to back up the allegations, as he said he would not take any options off the table in dealing with Iran - diplomatic code for the possibility of military action. Tehran has vehemently denied any involvement in the plot.

US authorities said on Tuesday they had evidence of a plot by two men linked to Iran's revolutionary guard to kill Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the United States, Adel al-Jubeir, by setting off a bomb in a Washington restaurant.

Speaking at a joint press conference with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, Obama said: "Now those facts are there for all to see. We would not be bringing forward a case unless we knew exactly how to support all the allegations that are contained in the indictment."

In addition to prosecutions, Obama said he would continue "to apply the sort of pressure that will have a direct impact on the Iranian government until it makes a better choice in how it interacts with the rest of the international community".

The State Department revealed on Thursday that the US had been in direct contact with Iran over the allegations. "We are not prepared at the moment to go any further on the question of who spoke to whom, and where, but just to confirm that we have had direct contact with Iran,'' said spokeswoman Victoria Nuland.
Go ahead; click through and read the whole thing. It would be hilarious, except for all the murder and material destruction that Da Prez is lusting after, egged on by the brutal mouthbreathers that constitute a majority of my countrymen. I keep playing letter games with the names; surely "Manssor Arbabsiar" must be an anagram for "maximize GE profits" or something similar, no? Well, how about "Gholam Shakuri," then? Or "Victoria Nuland?"

Then there's Barry, with his Progressive Parent talk: those naughty Eye-ranians are going to be in the Big Timeout until they learn to make better choices. And never mind questioning whether there's any backup for all this crapola: "We would not be bringing forward a case unless we knew exactly how to support all the allegations ..." and blah blah blah. No, fellow Americans, "our" government is just a murderous gang of multiply-proven liars. And we must like it -- else, they wouldn't still be in place. The wind has long since been sown, and it's fall -- time to reap the whirlwind. No one deserves it more than we do.


Phil Marx said...

How is what Iran is alleged to have attempted here any different than when we lob a missile deep into another contry without their permission in order to assasinate one of our targets? - Especially considering that those missiles sometimes murder innocent civilians.

We deal in blood for a living. It just seems so disingenuous whenever we cry out "My God, it's getting bloody here."

Jim Wetzel said...

I don't see any difference -- except that we do it, and do it, and do it, and then do it some more ... all the while expecting the natives to be slobberingly grateful for all the Enduring Freedom™ we're dispensing. Maybe we should stop.

Phil Marx said...

A few years ago, while attending a lecture on terrorism at IPFW, I asked one of the professors who was speaking to clarify something. Those college professors can be quite wordy and confusing at times, so I figured that my simpleton interpretation had to be incorrect. But I asked anyway.

“Professor,” I asked, “it sounds like what you’re saying is that the State, simply by virtue of it being the State, can never launch a terrorist act because it’s statehood automatically legitimizes it’s actions above that level, regardless of whether the same act committed by someone else was itself labeled as terrorism.”

He stammered for a moment to the point that I felt a bit embarrassed for him, then (in a lengthy explanation) went on to say that this was basically correct. The befuddled look on his face as he explained implied to me that he had never really considered how intellectually dishonest such an approach is.

Such is the depth of American patriotism. We love our country so much that we can’t even see how far it has moved away from our own ideals.

Mimi said...

And where are the Marx brothers now that we need them? I can just see Groucho and Harpo cooking up a hilarious skit around this latest idiocy. In their hands, it would be funny. When it's presented as a "serious" situation by our government, it's depressing beyond words.

Phil Marx said...

That's what the Daily Show is for.