Tom Friedman of the New York Times opened up his November 13 column with this:
It goes without saying that the only near-term deal with Iran worth partially lifting sanctions for would be a deal that freezes all the key components of Iran’s nuclear weapons development program
It goes without saying that this is deeply misleading. Iran, as most people following this story are surely aware, is not known to have any such weapons program. There are suspicions, mostly coming from some US and Israeli officials, that the country’s enrichment activities are intended to produce a nuclear weapon. But international inspectors have never found evidence of this, and official US intelligence estimates are that Iran is not currently working on a weapons program.
But many reporters and pundits start from the assumption that Iran is building a bomb. On November 8, ABC World News reported on the Iran negotiations, and the emphasis was, unsurprisingly, on the supposedly nightmarish scenario of a nuclear-armed Iran.
Anchor Diane Sawyer started off:
We turn next to the tantalizing hope tonight that one of America’s adversaries may be about to be less dangerous. The world asking, is a nuclear weapons deal with Iran finally within reach?
It’s doubtful “the world” is asking that question.
Correspondent Martha Raddatz continued, saying that the White House is “clearly seeing this as a once-in-a-generation chance to avoid the nightmare of Iran getting a nuclear weapon.” Raddatz poured it on, claiming that “a nuclear Iran long being what’s kept presidents awake at night.” Does she really think that’s true?
But the most curious part was this: “The big question: Can the world trust this smile?”
As you might expect, the questionable smile was not John Kerry’s, or Barack Obama’s or even Benjamin Netanyahu’s. No, the smile belongs to Iranian president Hassan Rouhani.
Peter: You show for what it is the scripting on Iran that the main stream talking heads are following. Then you bail out with a blank check for even more malicious fantasia. What the heck? Is this just a ruse to make you look like a journalist who is asking hard questions and who is willing to critique his own colleagues? I mean a smile is a fact, but it isn’t one that provides much in the way of how to interpret it. As a smile it looks like a pretty open one, but you end up making it something ominous. Why? And on what basis, the same malicious scripting that you criticize? I wonder. JWC
I think you’ve misinterpreted Peter’s intent, Jay.
There wasn’t any smile ominousity involved, overtly or invertly, on his part.
I agree with Ron. Peter is merely pointing out the propaganda technique of framing which is being used very cleverly here by the elite press and pundits to cast doubt on Iran in two ways:
(1) By repeating the falsehood that Iran is indeed pursuing nuclear weapons, they have gradually established this as a fact.
(2) By constantly posing the question of whether Iran, Iranians, or the rulers of Iran are trustworthy, they gradually cast doubt in the minds of the consumers of their “news” regarding Iran’s credibility.
How has Iran ever been deceitful in the past? They have always been forthright in their hatred of US and Israel and their support of Israel’s enemies (Hamas and Hizbullah). The latter being the only reason Iran is being subjected to this double-standard humiliation. Israel will not rest until Iran ceases its support of its enemies or either the US or Israel bombs the hell out of Iran. The rest is all a political charade!
I think one thing we have to take into consideration, and that is People judge others by their own hear and mind; thus we have the U.S. insisting that Iran is building a weapon and being secret about it, because in fact that is exactly what we did, and will continue to do; build secret weapons to destroy the earth.
Thus we can not ‘trust Iran’ because we are not trustworthy, and really never have been. It was just that when everyone else was been so secretive, it wasn’t an issue or noticeable.
Article by Tom Friedman? Simple. Trash. Dismissed. No need to waste time analyzing it because we already know it will be complete RW nonsense.
I bet, Tom Friedman would dare to make a similar statement about Israel which has over 300 nuclear bombs plus a stockpile of chemical weapons.
However, former Head of Israeli Mossad (1998-2002), British-born Efraim Halevy had the courage to admit that a US-Iran nuclear deal would be good for the Zionist entity. In a recent interview he gave to Jewish website Al-Monitor on sidelines of a conference on Middle East security issues in Istanbul late last month, said that the current US-Iran diplomacy would be good for the Zionist entity in the long run.
“If the Iranians think straight, they must realize it is inconceivable that they would be able to change the basics of the relationship between Iran and the United States whilst maintaining the level of denial and enmity they now have to Israel,” said Halevy.
http://rehmat1.com/2013/11/14/ex-mossad-chief-us-iran-nuclear-deal-is-good-for-israel/
Peter Hart…..You have wasted endless verbiage on defending the idea that Iran seeking a bomb is a bedtime story told by the US and Israel.Well if Iran does get the bomb(making a mockery of all protestations to the contrary)will you lay your job on the line on this bet?See israeli’s will be laying their very lives and existence on the line.I say they get the bomb..you realize your were duped(as so many were on Obama care )and you admit you were dead wrong, in print,and that all your articles were crap.The smoke screens you are laying are a dangerous game.Hope the Iranian mullah ‘s appreciate it.P.s…………So few articles on Obama care.Why??????????
Dear Mr. JWC:
i think the point was clearly made. Mr. Hart gave a big hint by saying : ” But the most curious part was this..” (Mr. Hart then put into quotes what was so curious:) ” The big question: Can the world trust this smile? ”
All that is perfectly clear to me; perhaps you woke up on the wrong side of” Strunk and White” this morning? Clarity is all —-and Mr. Hart was very clear. : )
This is basically a bunch of crap. It wouldn’t matter what kind of expression the Iranian President has on his face Mr. Friedman would have some reason to viilfy him.
Remember it was the US who overthrew a democratically elected Iranian President in 1953. It is Israel who is stealing Palestinian land and illegally occupying them.
The US has a military budget of close to $1 trillion which is more than the top 14 countries combined. Both the US and Israel possess huge stockpiles of Nuclear weapons. Iran has no Nuclear weapons.
To this Jewish Zionist Tom Friedman: F@&k the smile, just show us the facts!
Jay I read with interest your response but I must say it confuses me.You wish me(us) to give the umbrella protection and beliefs afforded us under our constitution to everyone the world over, whether they be communist or a North Korean dictatorship or a theocratic regime like Iran?Surely we slip into the philosophical.Should Hitler if caught , have been afforded all rights under OUR constitution?Or OBL?To believe so deeply in a document that we extend all its rights and privileges to anyone and everyone.Even to those who strive for its destruction.My first response is your daft.My second contemplation of your words will be to contemplate what you say in a faith based- as I say philosophical way.Can a man extend all courtesy’s and respect to a neighbor who means to kill you?In a better world.