Tuesday, May 02, 2006


The U.S. State Department has called Iran the world’s “most active state sponsor of terrorism.”

Is Iran really the world's "most active state sponsor of terror"? Or is this just more hype from an administration that aims to protect the dollar and gain control of Iran's resources? Let's take a look at Iran's supposed sponsor of terror:

In November 1979, Iranian student revolutionaries widely thought to be linked to the Khomeini government occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Iran held fifty-two Americans hostage for 444 days.

Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in
Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.

Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British
novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.

U.S. officials say Iran supported the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed nineteen U.S. servicemen.

Do you think that maybe we shouldn't have overthrown their burgeoning democracy in 1953? Iran had a smudge of democracy and we cleaned it off with Operation Ajax. Kermit Roosevelt and the CIA successfully overthrew the democratically elected government and prime minister of Iraq and installed the brutal and oppressive Shah. Was their occupation and kidnapping of Americans terrorism? Or was it simply a desperate people trying to wrestle back control of their country from one of the mightiest superpowers the planet had ever seen? Why wasn't it considered terrorism when we overthrew their democracy?

Observers say? Observers say I'm a moon expert. I'm sorry but "observers say" is not convincing me that anything is true. Who are these observers? What are they basing their observation on? And even if true, why are they responsible for what Hezbolla does but people claim we're not responsible for what Israel does? How is it different? How is it different when we supply the Israelis with American made bulldozers so they can destroy Palanstian homes? How is it different when we supply Israel with Appache attack helicopters so they can more brutally attack the Palestinians? Why is one considered defense and the other is considered state sponsored terrorism?

It's not like the Palestinians are occupying Israel. The Palestinians are defending themselves and resisting occupation–the Supreme Crime according to Nuremburg. Thanks to U.S. taxpayers the Palestinains are out-gunned and outspent.

Iran still has a price on the head of Salman Rushdie! That's 17 years, folks. I'm supposed to be afraid of a terrorist organization that hasn't managed to kill one guy in 17 years? If they had any sense they'd be enrolling at the school of the Americas and learn all the dirty tricks we taught Noriega and others. You want to scare me, tell me that within ten minutes of putting a price on Rushdie's head he was killed. Seventeen years and no kill? I'm guessing they really don't give a shit if the guy breathes or not. What am I supposed to believe the Iranians are like Wild E. Coyote? Plan after plan ends in failure?

Finally we have the accusation that Iran supported groups that carried out two bombings against U.S. installations abroad. Again, supported is rather vague. Supported as in they cheered when the bombs went off? Supported as in they paid for the bombs? Or supported as in they paid for the bombs, trained the men, and picked the target? Why don't we question why we have these bases everywhere? Is it really worth it? At what expense do we rule over the world? Are we really prepared to deal with the hostility we are creating?

Friends, if this was an example of the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism, we'd be doing great. Imagine the leading terrorist organization has been trying for the past 17 years to kill novelist Salman Rushdie. Apparently Iran's most lethal assassins are no match for a typewriter. They cheered for two attacks against American installations abroad much like we cheered when we overthrew their democratically elected government in 1953 and installed a brutal dictator. Supply arms to Palestinians fighting a brutal and oppressive occupation is state sponsored terrorism. Providing the most technologically advanced weapons of war to the occupiers is a legitimate form of military aid. So it's ok when the U.S. invades Panama, Guatamala, Nicragua, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Chile, China, Russia, Haiti, the Phillipines, Japan, Hawaii, and just about everywhere else. But when Saddam Hussein does it he's a criminal. In a later post we'll look at the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism.

Published in: on May 19, 2006 at 9:50 pm  Leave a Comment  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: