February 1, 2012

Totalitarian/Fascist Regimes In America, Israel, England, And Iran All Want World War III

"Our military’s officer corps has become a culture of Petraeus worshiping yes-colonels who pine to become yes-generals. The only warriors who count anymore are the bull feather merchant marines who conjure the pro-war propaganda that their echo chamberlains in the media pawn off on us as “news.” Our country has become the abject servant of the American Pentarchy, that cabal of sandbox generals, bathtub admirals, beltway bandits, AIPAC rats, Warlord Fauntleroys, New American Centurions, post-modern Praetorians, Long War legislators, Dr. Strangeloves, G.I. Joe Six-Packs, Pavlov’s dogs of war, patriotic psychopaths and other oligarchs whose narrow self interests and well-funded efforts have made the long dreamed-of permanent American security state a reality. The military-industrial complex that launched our reign as a superpower is about to grind it to a bitter end." - Commander Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy (Retired), "Wars of Diminishing Returns," January 3, 2012.

"It is important to realize that Iran would never launch a pre-emptive strike on Israel because the Iranians know that the US/Israeli response would be devastating. However, if Iran comes under attack first, all bets are off. Iran will defend itself. A counter attack on Israel cannot be ruled out because Iranian leaders understand clearly (even if the American people do not) that the crisis has been manufactured, on Israel’s behalf.

We must rally to prevent such a war. Peace activists must now marshal every asset for peace that we possess. The American people need to know the truth. This is a phony crisis. Yet the danger is very real. Now is the time to speak out with all of our strength. Tomorrow could come too late." - Mark H. Gaffney, "Behind the Deepening Crisis with Iran: the Real Story Versus the Cover Story," January 7, 2012.

"We have different interpretations of religion. We have fascist interpretations and totalitarian interpretations, and we also have democratic interpretations. What happened to Iran after the Revolution was a totalitarian interpretation of Islam." - Iranian journalist and prominent political dissident Akbar Ganji on Harry Kreisler's "Conversations with History," in October 2006.

"An attack on Iran by the United States or Israel will likely add to the ranks of the regime's supporters. Just as a divided population came together to confront the Iraqi invasion, Iranians of all stripes will unite in opposition to an attack. The upshot will be a stronger, more cohesive, and more militant Islamic Republic. In the words of Mohammad Khatami, Iran’s reformist former president and a harsh critic of some of Iran’s current leaders and policies, “If there should one day be any military interference in Iran, then all factions, regardless of reformists or non-reformists, would [unite] and confront the attack.” Iranians interviewed by Reuters, Radio Farda, and the Campaign for Human Rights in Iran made the same argument. “A war will unite the regime, and it will also force many to unite behind a regime they don’t even support” said a 56-year-old woman living in Tehran. “What else should we do, [cheer] for Israel, which would kill our countrymen working in the nuclear sites?” Similarly, a Tehran-based journalist who said he sympathized with the opposition Green Movement wrote that, “[Iranian] society will not welcome any country that attacks its soil.”

An attack on Iran will not only bring Iranians together under the current regime; it will also unite them in support for a decision to acquire nuclear weapons. At this time the evidence suggests that Iranian leaders are developing and acquiring the technology that would enable them to produce nuclear weapons. However, the evidence also suggests that they have not made the decision to proceed with a concerted attempt to establish a nuclear weapons program. An attack on Iran will damage, but not destroy, Iran’s nuclear program. Even if it targeted Iranian nuclear facilities and was limited in scope, an attack will most likely be interpreted by Iranians as a declaration of war, an attempt at regime change, and a determination to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear technology or enrichment capability of any nature. It will also convince them that accelerating that drive and ultimately possessing nuclear weapons is the only way to safeguard their regime and their country from future attack." - Annie Tracy Samuel, "Attacking Iran: Lessons from the Iran-Iraq War," Policy Brief, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, December 2011.
Totalitarian and militaristic governments depend on crises and foreign threats for their survival. As Iranian journalist and political reformer Akbar Ganji told Conversations host Harry Kreisler in October 2006, "When there is a crisis, the first thing that gets damaged and gets harmed is democracy. . . When you face dangers and crises, civil liberties go down and security measures go up."

The totalitarian and fascist elements in the shadow governments in the United States, Israel, England, and Iran, all benefit from the politically manufactured U.S./Israeli-Iranian crisis.

An attack on Iran by the United States, Israel, and England will ensure the survival of all four regimes amidst a collapsing world economy and low public approval rating. All four regimes are ruled by evil rats and snakes. World War III is their ticket out of the hell they've all created. The disgusting and shameless leaders of all four regimes might as well be on the same team and working for the same ends.

"One of the features of a fascist regime," said Ganji on the Conversations with History program, "is that it completely suppresses all civil societies and creates a society with one voice." This is what has happened to America and the West, where the voices of peace and freedom like Ron Paul, Alex Jones, and Occupy Wall Street dissidents are driven out of the political discourse.

In a totalitarian society, "culture completely is reduced to advertisements and propaganda. Education is reduced to propaganda," says Ganji. He added: "When you suppress civil society you reduce people to small particles," and in this state, "they have no characteristics of their own."

Ganji said that the rise of the social power of the Internet and other media communications has constrained the reach and authority of totalitarian regimes, and minimized the negative role played by the totalitarian enemies of freedom in the 21st century . He said:
"Once you have multiple voices then the probabilities of having a fascist regime would be reduced. And the telecommunications revolution has provided us with such an opportunity. You can broadcast the voice of the opposition via satellite, internet, cellphones, and all these means of communication."
Ganji also said that intellectuals and journalists in the West should not paint the Middle East in one brush. There are anti-fundamentalist voices in Iran and across the region who have been sidelined because of the threats against Iran and Islam, which incite the forces of fanaticism and totalitarianism. He said:
"As of now, we cannot be heard, our voices are not heard by the people of the world, we cannot have them hear us. If the world wants to have a peaceful world, then the West must hear the peaceful and democratic voices of the region, and must take these voices seriously. The West consumes all its time to and focuses on the voices of fundamentalism. The picture that the West has from the Middle East is an ideological picture. They produce an image from this region that is completely false. It looks like that this region is just full of fascists and terrorists. But in this region you have many democratic movements and many democratic forces. Many Muslims have a democratic outlook, and give democratic interpretations of Islam, but they're not heard in the West, and you don't see these interpretations in the West."
The best and most civilized way of ending the totalitarian Islamic Republic of Iran and putting the Islamic fundamentalists back in their caves is by calling off the threats and acts of war against Iran, and letting the Iranian reform movement take care of business.

Real democratic change in Iran can only be achieved from within Iran. The constant outside pressure from Israel and the United States destabilizes the political legitimacy of Iranian reformers and ties their hands. In that state they cannot mobilize the energy and spirit of Iran's young people, who represent half of the population of Iran.

Israel and the United States are sending Iran's young generation to their doom by taking a war stance against the regime and making constant threats.

Attacking Iran is the surest way of killing hope for freedom in Iran and guaranteeing that Iran's tyrannical religious rulers retain absolute power over Iranian civil society and the Iranian people.

The international critics of the Islamic regime will be doing it a huge favour by allowing Israel and the United States to attack Iran and justify their crime in the name of global security. Annie Tracy Samuel, author of "Attacking Iran: Lessons from the Iran-Iraq War," says:
"Military action against Iran, and even the continuing threat of attack, is likely to give the Islamic Republic a new lease on life. Its devoted supporters will be strengthened and mobilized, and it will enjoy the additional support of those who will join in condemning and retaliating for an attack. Threats of a possible strike, and certainly a strike itself, substantiate and animate the security narrative Iranian leaders have been propagating for years: that the West is determined to raze the Islamic Republic. They have mastered the art of using the threat of attack, signs of Western hostility towards Iran, and even invasion to consolidate their power. Further, the more likely an attack appears, the more determined Iranians will be to acquire a nuclear weapons capability. The policy of attacking and threatening Iran has served as the lifeblood sustaining the Islamic Republic. We have yet to see how the regime might sustain itself without it."
Totalitarian officials and propagandists in Israel and the United States who are calling for a war against Iran are probably secret supporters of Islamic fundamentalism and the Islamic Republic of Iran. If they hated Islamic fundamentalism so much then they wouldn't stoke the fires which ignite the passions of Islamic fanatics and ensures their survival as a political and religious force in Iran and the Muslim world.

Those of us who truly hate Islamic fundamentalism and the Islamic Republic of Iran must continue to call for peace and negotiations between America/Israel and Iran.

The only way to undermine the forces of totalitarianism and barbarism in Iran is by undermining the forces of totalitarianism and barbarism in Israel and the West.