War of words on Iran

27.08.2012

 

 by Stephen Lendman

If words could kill, imperial Washington long ago would have returned Iran to its nightmarish Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi days. Propaganda wars rage daily. Tehran is wrongfully called an existential threat. Imagine a country wanting peace accused of belligerent intents. Repeating it enough times gets people to believe it. Big lies have impact. London's Telegraph supplied the latest. More on it below. Perhaps it's connected to what's shaping up to be an impressive August 26 - 31 Non-Alignment Movement Tehran meeting.

Officials from over 100 countries will attend. On August 22, the Tehran Times said over 50 "will participate....at the level of president, prime minister, king, and vice president and this number will probably increase." So far, around 150 delegations will attend. They'll be joined by representatives from about 20 international organizations. "Special guests" are also expected.

Top officials coming include Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Cuban leader Raul Castro, Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, Hugo Chavez, Hamid Karzai, Lebanese President Michel Suleiman, Azerbaijani President IIham Aliyev, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, and Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe among others. Despite heavy Israeli and Western pressure not to come, the UN News Centre said Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will attend. According to his spokesman:

"The Secretary-General looks forward to the Summit as an opportunity to work with the participating Heads of State and Government, including the host country, towards solutions on issues that are central to the global agenda including follow-up to the Rio+20 Conference on sustainable development, disarmament, conflict prevention, and support for countries in Transition."

"With respect to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Secretary-General will use the opportunity to convey the clear concerns and expectations of the international community on the issues for which cooperation and progress are urgent for both regional stability and the welfare of the Iranian people." 

"These include Iran's nuclear program, terrorism, human rights and the crisis in Syria."

Like Kofi Annan, Ban is an imperial tool. He represents Western interests. He had to go or look foolish. NAM is a major international organization. An unnamed UN official said "Ban has no choice but to attend an event of this size and importance." 

He'll use the occasion to lecture Iran on its "international obligations." Last week, he rebuked accurate Ali Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Israeli criticism. Ahmadinijad called Zionism a "cancerous tumor" and Israel an "insult to all humanity." Khamenei repeated the sentiment, saying "the big powers have dominated the destiny of the Islamic countries for years....and installed the Zionist cancerous tumor in the heart of the Islamic world."

He added that "Zionism will disappear from the map." Indeed it will one day by self-destructing. Speaking uncomfortable truths and confronting abusive power draws rebukes. Through his spokesman, Ban criticized "offensive and inflammatory statements." US and EU officials called them "hateful." They accurately reflect the region's real existential threat along with America's imperial presence. On August 19 during Eid al-Fitr prayers, marking the end of Ramadan, Khamenei addressed worshipers at Tehran University. He urged world Muslims to remain vigilant. He discussed anti-Islamic conspiracies, saying:

"The issues of the Muslim world at the current juncture are unprecedented ones. These developments that have occurred in the Muslim world are peculiar, shocking and determine the course of the Muslim Ummah in the future." He called America and Israel enemies of Muslim nations. He cautioned against erroneously misunderstanding their intentions. He expressed hope that Muslim countries follow "proper measures." He said a new era had begun. Muslim states are experiencing "a new situation. It will affect other nations worldwide." He supported Palestinian resistance. He called their struggle "fundamental and important" for world Muslims.

Like Ban, The New York Times represents imperial interests. It's more voice of America than legitimate news and information service. On August 22, it headlined "UN Visit Will Set Back a Push to Isolate Iran," saying:

US and Israeli efforts "to isolate Iran suffered a setback" when word came Ban will attend. Iran "trumpeted" his coming "as a vindication of its defiance and enduring importance in world affairs."

According to US-based independent Iranian scholar Farideh Farhi:

"The extraordinary effort that the Iranian leaders have put into the summit is intended to showcase Iran's global role and offer concrete evidence that the US policy of isolating Iran has failed."

"A case is being made that it is not the 'global community' that has problems with the Islamic republic, as repeatedly asserted by U.S. officials, but merely a U.S.-led-and-pressured coalition of countries."

"And ironically the Obama administration is conceding the point by trying to pressure various leaders from attending the meeting."

Reacting to Ban and Egyptian President Morsi's announced attendance, Netanyahu's spokesman Mark Regev conceded: