Mission & Name
US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
After Killing Millions of Iraqis, Zionists Push
America for Killing Millions of Iranians this Time
Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, October 7, 2013
PROVE WHAT YOU DON’T HAVE
Prove that you don't have what I
believe you have! That was an exact demand made on Saddam Hussein.
He scoffed. That brought "shock and awe", and Saddam was hanged on the
mother of all ropes.
Prove that you don't have weapons of mass
The neocons sold the logic of that empty demand
and the American public bought it.
Prove that you don't have what
you don't have! That demand not only hung Saddam, it slaughtered "1,455,590"
Iraqis in the US war and occupation of Iraq.
How does anyone prove
that he doesn't have what he says he doesn't have?
Saddam didn't have
WMDs. He said he didn't, and the brilliant masters of untruth insisted
that he prove it.
One amazing feature of this whole scenario is that
so few people saw through the faux logic, and those who did were universally
"By way of deception thou shalt do war" is the Motto of
Israel's assassination and spy agency, Mossad, exposed by Victor Ostrovsky.
Now, fast forward. CBS Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer reports: “Rouhani
(Iran's new President) says that Iran does not want and is not pursuing a
nuclear weapon. Does anybody take that at face value?”
four approaches one can reasonably take to Rouhani's statement:
It can be taken at face value, (2) It can be questioned, (3) It can be
ignored, or (4) It can be rejected.
Those who insisted that Iraq
prove that it didn't have what it said it didn't have simply rejected (4)
Iraq's denial, which cost a million and a half lives and trillions of
CBS Schieffer actually asked a question (2): "Does anybody
take that at face value?"
It's a bad question since the answer is in
the question. It's a rhetorical question looking only for a "no".
It's a stupid question that deserves a "yes", which Schieffer would either
ignore (3) or reject (4).
Being a TV anchor, Schieffer is unlikely
to ignore it. Look for how he will reject (4) someone saying he will take
Rouhani's statement at face value.
Peter Hart writing in FAIR
perfectly identifies what should be. He says, "Actually, the burden of proof
should be the other way around: Politicians who claim that Iran has such a
program should have to prove it."
This can't be emphasised enough.
Several TV anchors and a number of op/ed columnists have claimed that Iran
has nuclear weapons or is working on developing them.
This is where
proof should be demanded. If you believe this myth, more than likely
invented by Mossad or Israeli Americans, then it's your responsibility to
A Fox news report held that "President Obama announced
Tuesday that he's directed Secretary of State John Kerry to pursue a new
round of talks with Iran over its nuclear program."
reference to Iran's "nuclear program". The headline, however, distorted even
their own report: "Obama directs Kerry to pursue talks with Iran over
nuclear weapons deal."
Deceptively, Iran's "nuclear program"(for
nuclear power and medical use) has been converted, by Fox, to "talks...over
a nuclear weapons deal."
The revisionist tactic of referring to a
legitimate nuclear program for peaceful purposes at home have been
repeatedly labelled "nuclear weapons".
If one can believe President
Obama's verbal gestures toward diplomacy with President Rouhani, the world
might have a way to avoid more unnecessary slaughters.
It won't be
easy with the designation of Secretary Kerry as US appointee. His excessive
Zionist compassion won't allow him open-minded diplomacy unless Obama has
the courage to resist the Israelis.