You know sometimes it drives me absolutely bonkers when so-called “journalists” fail to report on obvious, easily-discoverable and CRITICAL facts about current events.
The looming war or strike or conflict with Iran is clearly something that affects the entire globe. Yet journalists consistently forget to mention something absolutely critical about Iran’s potential to acquire/develop/build nuclear weapons.
The ultra-short version:
The SUPREME LEADER of Iran (yes that’s his title) is the guy with all the power NOT the president. And the Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa which SPECIFICALLY forbids Iran (and Iranian scientists) from ever building, acquiring or using a nuclear weapon. Ever. (Another link here).
It is against the law to even criticize the Supreme Leader in Iran. People have gone to jail for making even oblique remarks that seem critical of him. It is pure lunacy to think that the Revolutionary Guards, the regular Iranian military or any other government agency is going to contradict one of his fatwas.
Is this ever mentioned in the western press? Almost never.
Longer version:
Iran is a kind of a democracy but it is set up on theological lines and therefore the religious leaders have the ultimate power in the country. Every Friday in the capital of Tehran a sermon is given which is essentially the “baseline” for which all Iranian religious/political doctrine is established. In other words, this sermon is always the de facto official government policy.
The official position of the guy who GIVES the Friday sermon is extremely prestigious. Last Friday (November 9) one of the higher-ranking clerics who run the country gave the sermon, excerpted below:
The very idea of an atom bomb is forbidden, the very deed is a sin.
I don’t know how much clearly the religious rulers of Iran need to make it that they have zero freaking interest in owning, building or using a nuclear weapon.
It’s a little difficult to understand the force of law that a fatwa from the Supreme Leader of Iran conveys but you’d think even an ignorant martini-guzzling journalist could figure out by the title that it carries a little more weight than the office of (just the) president of Iran.
Let’s put it this way. The current president of Iran and every other president since the 1979 revolution can’t even run for office without first being approved by the Supreme Leader – he can’t even get on the ballot.
Other related forgotten points:
1) Iran is/was a signatory to the NPT. Again you don’t have to be a lawyer to read that it clearly states the development of nuclear energy for civilian, non-military purposes is EXPRESSLY and CLEARLY permitted.
Only four countries in the world are NOT signatories: North Korea, Pakistan, India and Israel. Wow exactly the nations we would want to be running around with unsupervised and unmonitored nuclear weapons!
- The IAEA has said about 5 bajillion times that Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon. Because of this (and a couple of other reasons including this fun nugget), the Peace Prize winning director of the IAEA, Mohammed ElBaradei has been the victim of many “dirty tricks” campaigns by the United States to try to get him out of the position.
- The question of why exactly Iran needs nuclear power plants since it is sitting on a gigantic amount of petroleum and natural gas.
Couple of relevant facts:
A) Iran imports gasoline, about 4 billion dollars’ worth in 2005 alone. Rising oil prices affect Iranians just like it does Americans, so much so that the Iranian parliament just passed a bill to get people to drive less:
The plan would commit the government to expand railways and public transportation, take ageing cars off the road, and convert gasoline-powered cars to dual-use vehicles that can run on gasoline and liquefied gas (LPG). It also calls for improved highways, more stations to sell liquefied gas, the manufacture of cars that run on LPG and support for the production of hybrid and electric cars, and greater fuel efficiency in general, “Etemad-i Melli” reported.
The framework bill urges the government to help create conditions that will dramatically reduce the flow of private vehicles on city streets. It advocates a goal of making buses and other public transport responsible for 75 percent of all city traffic.
Wow what an insane world when the Iranian parliament has a rational approach to rising fuel costs! If the American Congress tried to encourage the “expansion of railways” or getting 75% of people in cities to use buses they would be laughed at on every talk show.
So why does Iran need to import gasoline at all? Because it can’t refine the petroleum it has into gasoline. As mind-boggling as it sounds, Iran actually sells crude oil to other nations who refine it and then re-imports it back as gasoline (as well as kerosene, diesel, jet fuel, etc).
Why doesn’t it build more refineries? Well for one thing building a refinery is incredibly expensive. And all the (ludicrous) sanctions against Iran make this an even more difficult task.
Last summer when the Iranian government raised the price of gasoline from (approximately) 12 cents a gallon to 40 cents, there were riots in the street.
And as a corollary to the non-stop fun parade going on next door in Iraq, there is a thriving black market where Iranians are smuggling a lot of that domestically-refined Iranian gasoline into Iraq to be sold for a mega-profit.
4) The neocons and others who openly want to overthrow the Iranian government know and have been planning on squeezing Iran’s gasoline shortage crisis to foment civil unrest for years:
According to him, if and when imposed economic sanctions hit Iran, gasoline imports could halt and the result would definitely be civil unrest.
Amir Mohebian, a conservative analyst criticizes the Ministry of Oil’s officials and their approach towards gasoline crisis and believes that gasoline is Iran’s weak point that United States is using to put more pressure on Iran and the impact of the sanctions over the country’s possible social unrest.
Got it? First you deny them the ability to build refineries, then you deny them nuclear energy, then you squeeze their ability to import gasoline, then there are riots and civil unrest and magic, presto the evil Iranian government is overthrown (or at least seriously weakened).
That isn’t just a neocon fantasy, members of the American Congress have openly advocated such a course of action:
Under the proposed legislation, any company that provides Iran with gasoline or helps it import gasoline after the end of the year could lose its access to U.S. customers.
“This is becoming the critical weakness of the Iranian government, meaning its dependence on gasoline,” Kirk said in a telephone interview. “The riots show the gasoline shortage is a growing danger to the Iranian regime and a diplomatic opportunity for Western countries to force Iran to adhere to international nuclear rules.”
Yes force it to adhere to the “rules” which is the NPT which says it can legally develop nuclear energy for civilian use.
How ludicrous is it that the American government is officially trying to punish companies from selling GASOLINE so that the average Joe in Iran can get to work?
As far as I can tell thank goodness this bill never passed into law.
Bonus “fun fact”: The current Supreme Leader of Iran was nearly killed and is permanently disabled after an assassination attempt in 1981 by the MEK. As such he is even MORE revered and often referred to as a “living martyr”.
You might remember the MEK as the terrorist organization which is sheltered and funded inside of Iraq by the United States government despite the Iraqi government’s efforts to prosecute them for human rights crimes. More Bush terrorist-loving-if-they-are-against-Iran facts can be found here.
And now you know what the western press will rarely tell you.
Pax
By the way, you may be wondering how nuclear energy power plants in Iran would reduce refined petroleum fuel usage in the country.
The short version is that a lot of Iran’s power plants operate on either diesel or gasoline. More information here.
Pax
Hi soj, always nice to see you here. If our country really is insane enough to go to war with Iran I will blame bushco but even more, much more I WILL blame our news(ha)media here.(and no doubt our spineless Congress)
It is almost unbelievable how inane and stupid our news media including so called investigative journalists have become. But their propaganda isn’t just inane it’s dangerous.
Merci. Gosh I put this diary on the orange site as well and 1) got hunted down by the ever-jolly DHinMI who apparently can’t handle something I wrote uh, 18 months ago? about Serbia and 2) a whole lot of comments about how we can’t trust Iranian ayatollahs not to lie.
I always think it’s hilarious in some sense that there just HAS to be black and white on every issue. Like it’s impossible Hitler could’ve been FOR better gas mileage while at the same time being a genocidal dictator. Or Cuban people don’t have good healthcare while simultaneously some are jailed for criticizing Fidel Castro.
The world just ain’t that simple. And while I haven’t got much love for the ayatollahs running Iran it doesn’t mean what they say is a “lie” just because they’re nasty people. The fatwas and sermons against atomic weaponry have become institutionalized – these things don’t just turn on a dime. The Iranian people are supporting the government in the FACE of sanctions partly BECAUSE of the no-nuke weapons promise.
Or my favorite armchair analysis (from our so-called liberal buddies over there) is that if Iran has nothing to hide, why play footsie with inspectors?
Hmm didn’t I hear that about a guy named Saddam once? Jesus it’d be funny if it wasn’t so serious.
Pax
Kudos. I’ve avoided the orange place going on 2 years now.
Iran is facing up to peak oil but
We need the big lie starting with Cheney
In the event of an attack on Iran, we’ll open a second Pandora’s box
but the good people over at Arms Control Association find
A witches’ Brew. Why A Military Attack is Not An Optionread it thru to the end.
excellent diary, but you must be a glutton for punishment soj.
this says all you really need to know about the big orange julius [just another minor kiosk in the great dlc mall]:
like, we can trust this administration? what planet do these maroons live on?
l wouldn’t be surprised to see the persistent myth of a suitcase nuke as part of their repertoire.
pakistan?…anyone?…<crickets>
a complete waste of time, bandwidth, and energy to go there, imnsho.
lTMF’sA
Actually, I’ve been having fun going over there and observing the cognitive dissonance that is taking place. Remember that :”This site exists to get Democrats elected”? Now that they got what they wished for, it is fun to see them trying to make sense of the Dems betrayal (and I sure throw a few good punches at them :0)
Again merci to all for the comments HERE on this site 😉
Yah it’s kind of weird for me to see where the “Big Orange” site has gone. Boo is just as “old” as I am in terms of visiting there and is a more eloquent writer so he can probably chronicle this better than I.
At one point it actually was small enough it WAS a community. Those were “warm, fuzzy” days of course and I realize there’s a difference between a dinner party for 6 friends and feeding 600,000 people en masse. So yeah I know it has to have its own agenda, with a focused “message’ and that invariably someone, somewhere isn’t gonna like that.
So they want to focus on electing Democrats and not say figuring out the connections between FBI informants and 9/11. Ok, that’s a choice. BUT…
But what I do NOT understand is the encouragement or at least open tolerance of so much INtolerance and the nasty, brutish way infighting is regularly permitted with some people having much more influence and power than others. Every diary or story or topic is like throwing a piece of meat into a circle of hungry wolves and all the small dogs just go hungry.
I guess an even shorter version of what I’m trying to say is why is it always so NASTY over there? On every topic and every subject? Why has that been institutionalized?
That’s what I don’t understand. It’s like there’s this undercurrent of bitterness and resentment towards those who once denigrated him and now his attitude is of triumphant judgementalism, a kind of “in your face, you were wrong and now I’m right” and so he hires/acquires others to manage the site with similar attitudes.
But isn’t it always the case that those who are absolutely DRIVEN to succeed are goaded on by the ghosts of those who said they never could? It’s not such a stretch to imagine a short guy from a dirt poor country, from a family who once had prestige and standing was then transformed to another poor immigrant family in a state chock full of them having a burning drive to rise up and make a name for himself. After all it’s no secret his party conversion came only AFTER he was bitterly disillusioned with the other one. In other words, he became a Democrat out of REVENGE against a betrayal in his eyes by the Republicans.
It would’ve been nice if one of the earth mothers here on BT or elsewhere would’ve been the leading light and prime mover for a site like DK but as I said, it always seems those with a burning sense of having to prove themselves are the only ones who can push themselves beyond their own limits, to flog a political website until it IS a force to be reckoned with alongside traditional media.
I guess in other words it takes a fascist to get the trains running on time and a Prussian to organize an army. A dictator really IS the most efficient form of government, the problem is I think I (and most of you here on BT and thousands elsewhere) prefer a more democratic, participatory style of doing things including the operation of political blogs.
Well that’s my two cents 😉
Pax
What the hell do you expect? for somebody who has openly criticiezed this country for going to war for oil, to advertize as he does, for Chevron, you know that he will sell his soul to the Devil. And when people realize that he does, he needs the bouncers to come in to action, so he can ban them and keep his site running smoothly.
But like all dictatorships, they do come to an end. And so will his.
is a rare skill it seems. People always have a reason for their opinion. Sometimes it is a valid point. Sometimes it is a lack of information. Sometimes it’s stupid or greedy.
I have a tendency to take up the unrepresented side of a debate if I think it has any valid points, even if I have overriding reasons to disagree with it. It can be a lot of fun to watch the reactions.
The lie has (almost?) become received opinion. BBC World Service about two nights ago in a news report: I paraphrase, ‘Evidently Iran is working to make a nuclear weapon…’ or something like that. My ears twitched.
Where did this lie begin? Of course, like all lies, at the beginning. It so disturbing that the Europeans seem largely to have bought into it. What is the purpose of the whole exercise? They know that a rational Iran would seek a nuclear weapon: 1, Israel has them; 2, Pakistan has them; 3, the U.S. has them; 4, the U.S. respects lesser countries which have nuclear weapons like Pakistan, Israel, North Korea! I’d say they just don’t want Iran to have the means to enrich uranium because it would then become a competitor on the world market when the demand for enriched uranium increases because of oil depletion.
Well big lies always get propagated because they have a kernel of truth. I saw Michael Moore say that on Charlie Rose back in 2003 and he was discussing another big lie but the concept remains the same.
The kernel of truth is that the people running Iran are not very nice people. They do a lot of very nasty and harsh things against a lot of innocent and persecuted people.
Therefore trying to say anything against the big lie is portrayed as “defending” the rulers of Iran and therefore being “on the side of” the ayatollahs or being a supporter of them or any other such nonsense. It’s a reptilian argument and it seeps into people’s psyches, even those who have left or progressive political viewpoints.
Essentially public debate has been reduced to the level of American Idol. McCarthy would be a greenhorn amateur today if he rose from his grave. And that is sad and tragic.
Pax
And worse, the sanctions and saber-rattling rhetoric only strengthen the leadership in Iran, by restricting the interactions of the rest of Iran’s population with the rest of the world. And severely hampering the Iranian people’s ability to push for reform from within — because just like in this country, when there is a threat from outside (real or perceived), people tend to get more conservative and defensive, and less apt to take risks in challenging the internal status quo.
A huge percentage of the Iranian population is quite young, and very interested in more cultural interactions with the West. The potential there for a stronger democratic society developing is very high — if they are allowed to do so at their pace, and in their own direction, which is not likely to look like a Western democracy in all aspects.
Carrots would work so much better with Iran, and be so much less bloody and expensive, than any saber-rattling or stick. But we have a government run by playground bullies who would rather pick a fight, just to make sure everyone else in the school knows how tough they are — who view negotiation as backing down and admitting weakness, and therefore look at any disagreement as an apocolyptic struggle between the Forces of Good and Evil(TM).
And so many sources of news in the West are totally ignoring the facts — that Iran has repeatedly said it doesn’t WANT nuclear weapons, that the IAEA has found no evidence that Iran is pursuing anything more than what the NPT allows, and even that proceeds slowly, and that for all his bluster, Iran’s president has no power to do anything as insane as starting a war.
(I didn’t know the anti-nuclear-weapon statement was actually a fatwa, though. That’s pretty impressive, really, as a statement of policy.)
Soj,
It`s still always nice to hear your essays.
It sounds more like a voice of reason than an advocacy.
That`s what makes you special. I believe I`ve told you this before, but here`s another reminder. Don`t stop.