FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Pot and the Kettle

“Fear not those who argue but those who dodge.”

Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

How can an offer to hold a televised debate be a “diversion” from anything? Yet, that’s what the White House has said about President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s challenge to George W. Bush.

“Talk of a debate is just a diversion from the legitimate concerns that the international community, not just the US, has about Iran’s behaviour, from support to terrorism to pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability,” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.

There was a time when “spin doctors” could at least make their flimflam appear reasonable. The balderdash that now comes out of Washington doesn’t even pretend to appeal to reason.

A reasonable response to the challenge by Iran’s president would be to accept the challenge out of a sincere desire to expose whatever deception the USA is convinced that Iran is guilty of.

When challenging President Bush for a televised debate, The Iranian president said, at a news conference in Tehran, that he wanted to give the public in the United States and elsewhere a chance to listen to the Iranian views on a number of global matters.

Are the neo-conservatives in Washington afraid of a public airing of Iran’s views? Americans keep boasting about liberties and freedoms, including free speech. What are we afraid that the world might hear if an Iranian were to speak freely?

“The debate should go uncensored in order for the American people to be able to listen to what we say and they should not restrict the American people from hearing the truth,” said Iran’s president.

Why doesn’t President Bush take Ahmadinejad to task by challenging the Iranian position on developing nuclear power and Iran’s presumed desire to develop nuclear weapons? Why wouldn’t he welcome the opportunity to show Americans and the rest of the world that they have a legitimate concern about Iran’s support for terrorism and pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability?

If he thought he had a case, President Bush could easily use such a debate to rally American and global public opinion behind him. He might even convince other Arab countries that Iran is the miscreant.

The fact that Bush has his stooges deceiving the public about Iran’s offer to debate publicly makes it pretty clear that Washington’s case concerning not only Iran’s nuclear plans but Iran’s position on “a number of global matters” is less than convincing.

If Iran’s president clearly lost such a debate, Ambassador Bolton, President Bush’s rotweiler at the UN, should have no difficulty convincing the Security Council to approve sanctions.

If sanctions weren’t enough to gain compliance by Iran with the world’s position on Iranian nuclear development, a televised debate won by President Bush would almost assure approval of almost any action the US might take to reign in Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

With the irrational spin about how Iran’s offer is a diversion, the US refusal to entertain such a challenge becomes clearly the real diversionary tactic. But then Washington’s spin doctors are experts at diversions.

The pot has been caught calling the kettle black. Not only that; just as Hezbollah whipped one of the strongest militaries in the world, Ahmadinejad has scored a victory over Bush without ever taking the podium.

PAUL BALLES may be reached at: ballesp@batelco.com.bh

 

 

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
William Blum
Anti-Empire Report: Unseen Persons
Lawrence Davidson
Missiles Over Damascus
Patrick Cockburn
The Plight of the Yazidi of Afrin
Pete Dolack
Fooled Again? Trump Trade Policy Elevates Corporate Power
Stan Cox
For Climate Mobilization, Look to 1960s Vietnam Before Turning to 1940s America
William Hawes
Global Weirding
Dan Glazebrook
World War is Still in the Cards
Nick Pemberton
In Defense of Cardi B: Beyond Bourgeois PC Culture
Ishmael Reed
Hollywood’s Last Days?
Peter Certo
There Was Nothing Humanitarian About Our Strikes on Syria
Dean Baker
China’s “Currency Devaluation Game”
Ann Garrison
Why Don’t We All Vote to Commit International Crimes?
LEJ Rachell
The Baddest Black Power Artist You Never Heard Of
Lawrence Ware
All Hell Broke Out in Oklahoma
Franklin Lamb
Tehran’s Syria: Lebanon Colonization Project is Collapsing
Donny Swanson
Janus v. AFSCME: What’s It All About?
Will Podmore
Brexit and the Windrush Britons
Brian Saady
Boehner’s Marijuana Lobbying is Symptomatic of Special-Interest Problem
Julian Vigo
Google’s Delisting and Censorship of Information
Patrick Walker
Political Dynamite: Poor People’s Campaign and the Movement for a People’s Party
Fred Gardner
Medical Board to MDs: Emphasize Dangers of Marijuana
Rob Seimetz
We Must Stand In Solidarity With Eric Reid
Missy Comley Beattie
Remembering Barbara Bush
Wim Laven
Teaching Peace in a Time of Hate
Thomas Knapp
Freedom is Winning in the Encryption Arms Race
Mir Alikhan
There Won’t be Peace in Afghanistan Until There’s Peace in Kashmir
Robert Koehler
Playing War in Syria
Tamara Pearson
US Shootings: Gun Industry Killing More People Overseas
John Feffer
Trump’s Trade War is About Trump Not China
Morris Pearl
Why the Census Shouldn’t Ask About Citizenship
Ralph Nader
Bill Curry on the Move against Public Corruption
Josh Hoxie
Five Tax Myths Debunked
Leslie Mullin
Democratic Space in Adverse Times: Milestone at Haiti’s University of the Aristide Foundation
Louis Proyect
Syria and Neo-McCarthyism
Dean Baker
Finance 202 Meets Economics 101
Abel Cohen
Forget Gun Control, Try Bullet Control
Robert Fantina
“Damascus Time:” An Iranian Movie
David Yearsley
Bach and Taxes
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail