ISIS Attack Exposes Anti-Iran Propaganda

An ISIS-claimed terror attack in Iran killing a dozen people shows how dishonest the U.S. government has been in lumping Iran in with terror groups that it has aggressively fought, as ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar explains.

By Paul R. Pillar

For Americans fed a diet of rhetoric about Iran that constantly links it to the sending, not the receiving, end of terrorism — in which “the leading state sponsor of terrorism” is the adjectival phrase routinely affixed to Iran, and in which official rhetoric such as President Trump’s speech in Riyadh mashes Iran together with Sunni Islamist terrorism of the ISIS variety into one undifferentiated blob of evil — the deadly attacks today in Tehran generate much cognitive dissonance.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, sitting under a portrait of his predecessor, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

But however disorienting this news may have been, it is true. An obviously well-planned operation struck at the heart of Iran, at its parliament and the monument to the Islamic Republic’s founder. At least a dozen people were killed and dozens more injured. The credibility of the claim of responsibility by ISIS is enhanced by the group’s posting of video footage from the attack.

For anyone looking beyond rhetoric and at reality, the attack is no surprise. Iran has been one of the staunchest and most active foes of ISIS. Probably the main reason an attack like this had not happened any earlier is the difficulty that ISIS has had in finding recruits among Iranians.

Iran has, partly with its own personnel but mainly through material support of clients and allies, been a leader in combating ISIS, especially in Iraq and to a lesser extent in Syria. Many Iraqis give Iran, with good reason, the main credit for saving Baghdad from ISIS when the group was making its dramatic territorial gains in northern and western Iraq in 2014.

If the United States could overcome its current hang-up about doing any business with Iran, it would find a worthwhile partner in many aspects of counterterrorism, especially as far as the fight against ISIS is concerned.

There has long been a willingness, and a necessary awareness of shared interest, on the Iranian side.

In September 2001, immediately after the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington, both Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and then-President Mohamed Khatami strongly condemned the attacks. Expressions of sympathy in Iran for the American victims included candlelight vigils and observing a minute of silence by tens of thousands of people at a sporting event.

Two weeks after the attack, Khatami stated, “Iran fully understands the feelings of the Americans about the attacks in New York and Washington.” Khatami correctly noted that American administrations had been at best indifferent about terrorist attacks in Iran since the revolution of 1979, but that Iranians felt differently and were expressing their sympathies accordingly.

Condolences or Sanctions?

We wait to hear from the Trump administration the kind of expression of sympathy and solidarity that commonly is offered to foreign nations that have become victims of major terrorist attacks. We should not hold our breath while waiting.

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani celebrates the completion of an interim deal on Iran’s nuclear program on Nov. 24, 2013, by kissing the head of the daughter of an assassinated Iranian nuclear engineer. (Iranian government photo)

The Iranians certainly aren’t. They have experienced a long history of American postures toward Iran, in the context of a common terrorist threat, that have ranged from indifference at best to door-slamming at worst. In the first few months after 9/11, Iranian officials worked cooperatively and effectively with U.S. officials to midwife a new regime in Afghanistan to replace the Taliban.

The Iranians thought this could be the beginning of further cooperation against a common threat. But then the United States slammed the door shut, as George W. Bush declared an “axis of evil” in which Iran was lumped together with North Korea and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

The principal perpetrator of terrorism in Iran over the past four decades has been the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), the Marxist/Islamist cult/terrorist group that prior to the revolution had claimed Americans among its victims. Thanks largely to the MEK’s activity, Iran necessarily has had much experience in countering terrorism. Khamenei lost the use of his right arm when he was injured by an MEK bomb in an assassination attempt in 1981.

The U.S. handling of the MEK in recent years has seen the U.S. Government succumbing to a well-financed lobbying campaign on behalf of the group, with that campaign winning much support for the group in the U.S. Congress and the group eventually being removed from the U.S. list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. If the crippled Khamenei exhibits some reflexive anti-U.S. sentiments, do you suppose this history has something to do with it?

Right now, on the very day of the terrorist attacks in Tehran, the United States Senate is scheduled to take its first vote on a bill that would impose still more sanctions on Iran. It appears the most immediate American response to the attacks will be sanctions on, not sympathy for, the victim.

In the months ahead, Iran may take actions outside its borders in response to the attacks. The United States, ever since 9/11, has claimed a right for itself to be ruthlessly aggressive in the name of responding to terrorism, lashing out with force while sometimes being little restrained by collateral damage or international law (not to mention its own constitutional requirements).

Iran may see a need to be more aggressive in places such as Iraq or Syria in the interest of fighting back against ISIS. Will the United States grant Iran the same kind of slack it grants itself? Or, as has been customary in opposing anything Iran does and taking no account of exactly what interests are being advanced or threatened, will the Iranian responses be denounced as more “nefarious,” “malign,” and “destabilizing” behavior?

Paul R. Pillar, in his 28 years at the Central Intelligence Agency, rose to be one of the agency’s top analysts. He is author most recently of Why America Misunderstands the World. (This article first appeared as a blog post at The National Interest’s Web site. Reprinted with author’s permission.)

55 comments for “ISIS Attack Exposes Anti-Iran Propaganda

  1. MEexpert
    June 8, 2017 at 16:58

    The attack in Iran is definitely an MEK operation. ISIS generally attacks in areas that are not very well guarded. MEK used to target government buildings, such as the Parliament as in 1980, and the clerical regime. With MEK involvement the hand of Mossad and the CIA is obvious. This was an attack to hurt the regime not the people.

  2. Typingperson
    June 8, 2017 at 16:54

    The USA does not care about fighting terrorism. Rather, this country uses bogus threats of terrorism to further its agenda of USA world hegemony. While arming and funding terrorists. In Syria and elsewhere.

  3. June 8, 2017 at 12:36

    Suspicion would be on Mossad and CIA involvement.

  4. MEexpert
    June 8, 2017 at 09:00

    The attack in Iran was from with in. That means MEK (Mujahidin e Khalq) has joined forces with ISIS. MEK, obviously, can’t take credit for it because that will put them on the terrorist list again. So the quick ownership of the attack by ISIS. Of course, this collaboration means that Israel and CIA are behind this attack.

  5. June 8, 2017 at 08:54

    A pathetic state of affairs, now with Trump’s ignorant, supposedly sympathetic statement about the Iran attack by IS, then with sanctions by Congress voting immediately. And Americans have no clue that US is the reason for ISIS. Tina’s comment that she never felt more afraid with Trump in office strikes me as typical American me-me focus, what can the Middle East people be feeling on a daily basis living in the chaos and destruction unleashed by the US since the Iraq invasion? Trump is showing himself as clueless as every American president, joining the warmongers in rhetoric. Sad.

  6. john wilson
    June 8, 2017 at 05:57

    I think these attacks in Iran by ISIS (if it was them) are the very first seeds of regime change. You can be certain that America and or Israel had a hand in it. The regime changes we have seen in Libya etc all started with a small attack or a demonstration that got mysteriously out of hand. In all these countries there are groups of people who think they should be in charge of the country and want to change the entire way of life, usually for religious reasons. Where there are free and fair elections these people don’t stand a chance of even getting a low percentage of the vote but the ‘West ‘ is always there in the background fermenting trouble. Saddam Hussein for all his alleged faults, ran a very successful secular state and he did this by keeping the religious nuts in their place. When the Americans decided to have him murdered Iraq became a basket case. My advise to Iran would be to come down hard on these agitators from the beginning and give them no quarter.

    • mike k
      June 8, 2017 at 10:46

      Sunni terrorists don’t need a lot of excuses for attacking Shiite Iranians. Once you get religious fanaticism going, reasons and logic go out the window. Those trying to use these berserkers for some rational purpose always end up getting burned by these crazies they can’t control.

  7. Zachary Smith
    June 8, 2017 at 00:44

    Right now, on the very day of the terrorist attacks in Tehran, the United States Senate is scheduled to take its first vote on a bill that would impose still more sanctions on Iran.

    I’m not going to waste my time contacting either one of my Indiana Senators, for Israel totally owns both of them. On issues not concerning that craphole of a nation, they’re both in the pocket of Big Corporations. Todd Young is unbelievably awful, but that goes with the “R” label by his name. Donnelly is just as bad on all the major issues, and poses as a Democrat when doing so doesn’t inconvenience Big Corporations or Israel.

    Regarding the attack, I wonder if the US and Saudi Arabia aren’t trying to provoke Iran into doing something rash. Some action which would allow all the old sanctions to be put back in place, and possibly even to justify a full bore attack on that nation so as to make Israel supremely happy.

  8. MKhattib
    June 7, 2017 at 23:15

    I hate to tell Pillar that his measure of “preparedness” by Iranian security forces leaves much to be desired judging by the daylong standoff at the Parliament building.Not surprising that Pillar begins laying the groundwork for the Iranian regime to step up its military activities in the wake of the attacks saying “in the months ahead, Iran may take actions outside its borders in response to the attacks.“Iran may see a need to be more aggressive in places such as Iraq or Syria in the interest of fighting back against ISIS,” Pillar said. His comments are instructive since the mullahs are likely to use the attacks as an excuse to step up their fights in Syria in to preserve the Assad regime and Yemen to continue destabilizing the border to Saudi Arabia.

    • mike k
      June 8, 2017 at 10:31

      Why are you so hostile to Iran?

    • MEexpert
      June 8, 2017 at 16:19

      You are obviously a Wahhabi. Iranian security forces had to be careful because there were other people around in both places. The fact it took them so long does not mean they were not prepared. The Iranian security forces wanted to keep the casualties to a minimum and also wanted to capture the terrorists alive.

  9. Sleepless In Mars
    June 7, 2017 at 21:55

    “Quoting Einstein out of context, they say that good and evil are relative; that there are no moral absolutes. They lie. Only two laws are needed to change the entire universe: never use initiatory force, and never cheat. The people who run our world constantly break both.

    “Science is magic explained…”

    “My pocket dictionary defines evil as ‘bad, harmful.’ But that’s only half the story. Evil needs to be intentional.”

    Terrorism is cheating. They are incompetent. We never cheat, which is why we never lose. We’re always sinning because you have to make this life livable. The White House silence of the lambs game is based on a Russian ideal.

    • mike k
      June 8, 2017 at 10:38

      Are you really this confused, or is there some purpose in your rambling non sequiturs? Maybe you need to come down to Earth and get more sleep?

  10. JM
    June 7, 2017 at 19:02

    Hopefully, the Orange One’s itchy thumbs will bring him down sooner than later. Even better if Siri could post tweets that he angrily blurts out.

  11. June 7, 2017 at 18:45

    Great comment, mike, propaganda poisoning. We should use that term to make points, “You’ve been poisoned by propaganda. It’s like arsenic, acts slowly and builds up.” I tell anybody it’s lies about Russia, Syria, Iran; give them some facts, tell them to do some research, don’t swallow propaganda. We just have to keep at it. Most of the propaganda swallowers just sit pop-eyed in front of the TV. I’ve told people RT gives better news than CNN or MSNBC.

    • Bill Bodden
      June 7, 2017 at 18:46

      Wesley Clark Calls for Internment Camps for “Radicalized” Americans by Murtaza Hussain –

      • evelync
        June 7, 2017 at 21:25

        I agree with you that the Wes Clark I now listen to on TV is not the Wes Clark I remember back from 2004, who was against the War on Iran and also against the War on Iraq and kept warning us that the use of force should be a last, last, last resort.

        But during the lead up to the 2016 presidential election I was hearing Wes say things on TV that I really disagreed with and did not recognize him as the person I knew him to be (or thought I knew him to be) in 2004.

        Not sure what’s really going on with the people who are part of the madness in Washington DC.
        I hope I’m wrong now about General clark but I agree that internment camp madness is unacceptable.

        • Bill Bodden
          June 7, 2017 at 22:00

          The fact that Wes Clark ran as a Democrat (or a Republican) could be taken as a warning that he wasn’t to be trusted.

          • Realist
            June 8, 2017 at 04:09

            Wesley Clark has always seemed either a bit unstable or too opportunistic to trust. He ran as a Dem, he unmasked some dangerous goals set by the neocons in the Junior Bush administration, but he was just as big a warmonger who nearly started WWIII as Clinton’s top general in Europe during two wars against Serbia (in Bosnia and Kosovo).

    • mike k
      June 7, 2017 at 19:14

      Thanks Jessica, I’m not above appreciating a little pat on the back now and then.

  12. evelync
    June 7, 2017 at 17:25

    Where is Wes Clark when we need him? :) :) :) He co-founded 2 years after he ran for president in the Democratic Primary. One of his principal initiatives was to Stop the War on Iran. He described Iran as a multicultural country of 80 million people.
    We’ve had a gnat up our asses ever since we and the Brits fomented a revolution against Mossadegh, the democratically elected president of Iran in the 1950’s, because, apparently they wanted to control their own oil and Shell/BP et al weren’t very pleased about that……
    And we can’t get away from defending that wrong headed regime change episode.
    Complete capitulation to our agenda id demanded around the world.
    This video featuring Noam Chomsky in the 1980’s explains it pretty well, I think:

    • Bill Bodden
      June 7, 2017 at 18:45

      evelync: You would be well-advised to check out Wes Clark before you put more faith in him. During the war in The Balkans when he was chief honcho for NATO he ordered British General Sir Michael Jackson to oppose Russian forces that had moved into the area. Jackson refused saying he wouldn’t start World War Three – Gen Sir Mike Jackson: My clash with Nato chief –

      • evelync
        June 7, 2017 at 21:11

        Thank you Bill. I have always been concerned about NATO and what went on in the Balkans. Back then I was not paying very much attention to stuff and when Wes Clark ran for president I wanted to believe that Clark wasn’t part of wrongdoing but I always wondered about it. Clark himself told a story about avoiding a bloodbath when he and his junior officer entered a building where “the enemy” was holed up and his junior officer placed his own forearm across the chest of the so called “rebel” leader and said “it’s over” – and that stopped a bloody battle.
        So I wanted to believe General Clark was a good actor. And then when he was fired by William Cohen, Clinton’s SOS, I thought maybe he’s trying to stop something bad….but I still worry about the bombing of the radio station and our involvement altogether in that bloodshed. so thanks….I’ll read the article from your link.

  13. Bill Bodden
    June 7, 2017 at 16:32

    This new appointment won’t help:

    “Trump Is Sending a Murderer to Do a Diplomat’s Job: Trump just put Michael D’Andrea—the man who invented so-called “signature drone strikes”—to head up intelligence operations in Iran. ” By Robert Greenwald –

  14. mike k
    June 7, 2017 at 16:31

    The irony of the greatest terrorist nation on Earth claiming to fight a war on terror is beyond the theater of the absurd. How do they get people to believe this stuff? It’s a little like slow poisoning someone with arsenic in their food. You start with small amounts (little lies) until they gradually become used to the off taste, then you can slowly increase the dose to really giant portions of bull shit, that your victim swallows without a clue they are being fatally poisoned. Propaganda is like that. Our dosing begins in childhood.

    • Dave P.
      June 7, 2017 at 19:45

      mike, excellent comments. you said a lot in a few lines. ” . . .Our dosing begins in childhood”. How true. I know it from my own home here. My wife, a Hillary fan, who grew up during 1940’s, and 50’s (McCarthy Era, nuclear scare, and all that) in the Great Lakes State kind of believes in all the Lies about Russia, these Monsters at CNN, MSNBC, and other channels have been telling 24/7. I grew up in a democracy where I was taught that all World Nations are our friends.

      What they are doing to Americans with Russia Gate will have it’s own consequences.
      And now this Iran terrorist attack, happenings in Syria, Saudi Army threatening Qatar. It is looking omnious.

  15. Bill Bodden
    June 7, 2017 at 15:53

    The United States, ever since 9/11, has claimed a right for itself to be ruthlessly aggressive in the name of responding to terrorism, …

    and the best place to start that campaign is to go after the terrorists in the national MSM, neocon think tanks, and Congress.

  16. Realist
    June 7, 2017 at 15:44

    Why is the author not connecting the dots to the present crisis in Qatar which is being assailed, and threatened with imminent invasion, by all the other Arab Gulf states because it dared conduct diplomatic relations with Iran and Hamas? No, the idiotic fabricators of reality in Washington would prefer to blame that crisis on “Russian hackers” yet again. Are they mad? Do they think the rest of the world is populated by morons?

    • Bill Bodden
      June 7, 2017 at 15:56

      Are they mad?

      There is an abundance of evidence to support an affirmative answer to that question.

  17. D5-5
    June 7, 2017 at 15:33

    Trump’s bravado over Saudi Arabia’s actions re Qatar currently is not only at odds with the US military establishment. Apparently SA felt encouraged by Trump and his munitions deals to make its current demands of Qatar, including threat of invasion. The region is thus continuing to fracture, what the German FM warned of yesterday, in disapproval of Trump policies. Trump simple-mindedly thinks he has created a union of allies to SA–UAE, Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen–to deal with “the terrorist problem.” Instead, Iran and Turkey move to support Qatar, the US is floundering, having a large base conducting air ops against ISIS currently in Qatar, the Saudis are eager to drive up oil prices, and Syria today announces “red lines” regarding US activities in the south-east Syria desert at al Tanf. Meanwhile, Lavrov states that he doesn’t recognize “de-conflict zones” versus “safe zones” in Syria. Into this mess an upcoming silly orange tweet or two?

    Recommended: today’s Moon of Alabama commentary on the Qatar-Saudi Arabia fiasco, as usual including the comments.

  18. mike k
    June 7, 2017 at 15:24

    The US government and it’s media propagandists are blatant liars that care nothing about the millions of human lives they are destroying. What more can one say about these vicious, evil people? Either we see them for what they are, or we join the clueless, deluded masses and become complicit in these horrible crimes. The military is a machine to turn human beings into mindless robots who kill on command. Is this nightmare what we were born on Earth to endorse and carry out?

  19. Drew Hunkins
    June 7, 2017 at 15:20

    “Right now, on the very day of the terrorist attacks in Tehran, the United States Senate is scheduled to take its first vote on a bill that would impose still more sanctions on Iran.”


    the United States Senate is scheduled to demonstrate once again for the millionth time just how obsequious it is to the Zionist Power Configuration in America…

    • John P
      June 8, 2017 at 11:07

      Right on Drew. I think the Zionists who influence the media, government and elsewhere are in a panic. The internet has opened communication doors which have influenced people, mainly younger people, to research Middle East history, and investigate BDS etc, and has brought more people to understand what is really going on. Likewise it has influenced some in the other direction. I feel that Zionists know the Zionist ambition has to be complete soon or it’s doomed. Israel is doing what it can to cause chaos in the region and take eyes off it’s illegal land appropriation. As for Saudi ambitions, who would want to live under their terms or religious influences.
      Certainly Iran’s support of Hezbollah in it’s war to remove Israeli occupying forces from Lebanon’s territory south of the Litani river was quite legal. It’s fight against ISIL and Saudi Wahhabi influences is quite appropriate.

      • Drew Hunkins
        June 8, 2017 at 15:21

        You’re no doubt correct, the pro-Israel power bloc is terrified over the power of the internet. What’s happened over the last several years is extraordinary in some respects, it reminds me of what it must have been like in the Dark Ages when Gutenburg’s printing press first hit the scene.

        But in some ways the internet’s vast resources at the touch of a button have confused and deluded certain sectors of the proletariat. It’s our job as activists, intellectuals, journalists and just plain old committed folks to parse all this and lay it out in an organized coherent form.

        The internet has definitely broken through the Zionist Power Configuration’s stranglehold on the Western mass media, absolutely. The ZPC wields a tremendous amount of influence in Washington but it’s always crucial to remember that it can and must be challenged. They’re not omnipotent, they can be defeated, but it’s going to take a massive amount of enlightenment and dedication. As you well know, they still hold a considerable amount of sway throughout the country.

  20. Drew Hunkins
    June 7, 2017 at 15:09

    Such a gigantic joke that the Washington imperialists profess to “fight terrorism” while doing everything in their power via the mass media and other operatives to demonize, harass and encircle the few states that are genuinely taking on the salafist-jihadist terrorist lunatics, namely, Iran, Syria and Russia. Iran, Syria and Russia have been waging the good fight, regardless of all the b.s. you may have been hearing or reading in the establishment press.

    Our ruling class in Washington and its bought lapdogs at NPR, ABC, WaPo and NYTimes, etc. incessantly heap contumely on the few heads of state who are truly waging war on the Saudi-Zio funded and supported terrorists. Meanwhile a few weeks ago our own elites in Washington brokered a billion dollar deal to send more arms and military hardware to the Saudis!

    This all would be comical if it weren’t daily killing scores of innocent people across the Middle East, Maghreb, and south central Asia, and also in London, Paris and elsewhere in the West.

    • Rob Roy
      June 7, 2017 at 16:50

      Thanks, Drew. I get tired of saying such things to friends and family and being looked at askance. Nice to know others out there agree. The true axis of evil: The USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia. The best countries on board with reality: Iran, Syria and Russia, may they prevail in the face-off with the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia. Everything we hear about Iran, Barshar al Assad, and Putin in the MSM are lies.

      Thanks as always to consortium news for keeping us informed.

      • Drew Hunkins
        June 7, 2017 at 17:28

        And thank you Rob Roy.

        Your predicament sounds very familiar as I too get the stink eye from certain folks when I even utter the most basic and fair point about any of our “wild-eyed enemies!”: Russia, Iran and Syria. For example, if I say something innocuous (and true) like how Putin’s essentially presided over for several years now a state in which the vast, vast majority of the population is doing much, much better on a whole host of life indicators than it was under the Western connected oligarchs in the 1990s I get skepticism and barely concealed disdain.

        • Peter Loeb
          June 8, 2017 at 10:17


          Thanks to Drew and others.

          Many of us feel that we cannot express what we
          learn. It is a stultifying way to live. Like trying to
          breathe where there is no air.

          —-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

      • tina
        June 7, 2017 at 22:15

        Remember 1953, Kermit , yes that is a name, Roosevelt, along with the Dulles bros, and the CIA and MI6 brought down Mosaddegh, sorry for the not correct spelling, and we installed the glorious Shah of Iran and restored their principality? Yes, indeed I do remember that. Now , we enlightened westerners reap the colonialism, the hatred toward the other, that we have sown. And we just love the oil, cannot forget about the oil

        • Bob Loblaw
          June 9, 2017 at 03:37

          Twas the CIA who coined the term blowback in predicting the Iranian aftermath of sacking Mossadegh.

      • MEexpert
        June 8, 2017 at 03:07

        Thank you Rob Roy. I have been saying for a number of years, that real axis of evil consisted of the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia, but nobody would listen. When the US removed the MEK from the terrorist list, she became complicit in MEK’s actions. Now MEK has joined the ISIS. This attack was from within Iran and that means MEK, which will eventually lead to the CIA.

    • Gregory Herr
      June 7, 2017 at 18:40

      Thanks Drew. The U.S. at best “looked the other way” while ISIS gained strength. (I personally believe their growth was fostered). Iraq accused the U.S. of dropping supplies (, and said the Americans were not serious about airstrkes against the faction. The Russian intervention beginning in September 2015 did more in a few weeks to thwart ISIS than what the U.S. had supposedly been doing in the 11 months prior. The U.S. definitely looked the other way as ISIS smuggled oil to Turkey. Russia had to point it out.

      • Drew Hunkins
        June 8, 2017 at 15:29

        Great points Mr. Herr.

        What’s noteworthy is that virtually any military aid or military hardware that’s ultimately dealt over to the Saudi Kingdom is an indirect way of funding the Wahabi fanatics. Even Killary admitted this elementary truism in one of her more candid emails that was discovered in the trove that Wikileaks obtained.

    • Cal
      June 7, 2017 at 19:11

      The Saudi-Israel noose on the ME is ‘tightening’…….

      The US sanctioning Qatar will raise oil prices—-which will be good for Saudi as their war chest to finance all their operations from Yemen to ISIS while also keeping up the subsidizing of the Saudi society/ population from oil profits is running very low.

      Why did Saudi instructed ISIS to attack Iran ? …one excellent reason would be to use ISIS as a false flag for any US, Isr, Saudi, covert operations and attacks. Another of course is to create even more death and terror from an ‘extra’ enemy to weaken the resolve of the Syria loyalist.

    • tina
      June 7, 2017 at 22:52

      And so many people who posted here said “Killary” would be a war monger. I do believe DJT is not of sound mind, and therefore, he is more unpredictable, and , just because he is pissed off one morning, all hell breaks loose. Life would be great if all of us could just smack the person, lover, husband, wife, child, boyfriend, girlfriend, just smack them , and get them out of the way of my life. I have never felt more in danger since January 21, 2017 .

      • Sam F
        June 8, 2017 at 06:38

        Clinton has already said that she would have intervened militarily in Syria by now. Give up the excuses for Hillary; you know by now that she was indeed a warmonger.

        • Drew Hunkins
          June 8, 2017 at 10:26

          Excellent points Sam F.

    • Sam F
      June 8, 2017 at 07:18

      It is quite astounding that the USG is so extremely dishonest as to support ISIS and AlQaeda and their allies in Israel and Saudi Arabia, and accuse their opponents in Iran and Russia of “terrorism.” Indeed all three branches of the federal government and the mass media are corrupt liars to the maximum extent possible, completely bribed and owned by zionists/KSA/MIC/WallSt.

      However, I would be more cautious of the use of the word “terrorism” than is common. This is a military technique not an ideology, and it is also used often by the US and allies. The US mass media never speak of the genuine grievances of the “extremists” which must always be accommodated to avoid war. No one can support the hideous acts of war (by the US or its “terrorists” or their opponents) but these are not the causal issues.
      1. The hideous acts are always on both sides. We are urged to look at the casualties of only one side and to take that side.
      2. Whenever there are serious grievances, the most extreme on each side resorts to violence, but there are extremists and tyrants on both sides. It is the non-extreme element of each group that must negotiate solutions to the grievances.

      We should remain above the fray, considering the grievances rather than the violence. Consideration of the real grievances introduces complexity and invites the false criticism that one supports terrorists, but it is the only path to peace, other than choosing sides randomly and fighting wars forever, which so far has led the US only to defeats.

      But clearly the US government and mass media are not part of any solution to any foreign problem, and must be thoroughly purged and reconstructed even to restore democracy here.

      • MEexpert
        June 8, 2017 at 16:13

        This nothing new Sam F.

        If you read the American history and the battles between the white man and the Indians, you will notice that when the white man won it was called a great victory. But when the Indians won, it was called a massacre.

        The barbarism of the west is justified by calling the victims terrorists. People can digest it better. The MSM is complicit in this. They have wall-to-wall coverage when the victims of violence are western countries and Israel. But when the victims are Muslims (mostly Shias) from Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, or Iran you will not see much coverage in the mainstream media and even some internet sites. There have been brutal killings of Shias in Pakistan and Iraq by Al-Qaeda, Pakistani Taliban, and ISIS but you hardly read it in the mainstream media.

        • Sam F
          June 8, 2017 at 21:10

          Yes, there is a very long history of such one-sided propaganda and incitement of fear and revulsion by groups in conflict, but the recent use of the term “terrorist” is especially deceptive in pretending that those who use that method of war actually have no actual beliefs or grievances, and even more deceptive when the opponents are supporting proxies using the same method of war.

          Of course no one should expect to negotiate directly with head-choppers or more modern killers, but rather to examine the history and grievances, and set up debates of the actual issues with the most rational emissaries of their group. Even an almost purely militant group should be able to field some advocates able to verbalize their goals and options, answer questions, and explore the non-military options in an unbiased debate process. That would no doubt reveal much detail lost in the demonization rhetoric, even if no solution is clear.

    • Dr. Ibrahim Soudy
      June 8, 2017 at 12:04

      “The real axis of evil consists of the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia” …….I agree but also add to them Russia, Iran, and Syria…….Please go talk to the PEOPLES of those countries and you will know. I will say it again in block letters…PLEASE GO TALK TO THE PEOPLES OF THOSE COUNTRIES AND YOU WILL KNOW………….It is well past time for the people of the Muslim World to stand up and take charge of their own destiny………Right now, the Zionists control the West and use it to reshape the Middle East as they please according to the Oded Yinon Plan. Russia is in it to revive its imperial role competing with the West. Iran is in it to revive its imperial past in regional dominance competing with Saudi Arabia. Syria is in it because of Iran and the Assad dynasty treating Syria like it is a Family Fiefdom just like Saudia Arabia, Jordan, etc etc………..Time for Muslims to stand up and take charge of their own destiny…………..

      • Dave P.
        June 8, 2017 at 14:21

        I do not agree at all with you on that regarding Russia. In the Muslim World, Iranians (we called them Persians) are the most educated, informed, sophisticated with an ancient civilization. If we had let them alone since 1979, the ruling Mullahs would have been out by this time. If we had not toppled Iranian Democracy in 1953 and installed Shah, there would have been no Mullahs in power at this time. And this very educated couple at the Head in Syria is probably the best Middle East has, if we had only left them alone since 2001, may be they would have some reforms implemented as they intended to do.

        Syria is a Secular State. I hope, it stays that way.

      • Drew Hunkins
        June 8, 2017 at 15:12

        Nice try Soudy.

        Putin enjoys an 80% approval rating. And this is occurring while much of the print media in Russia is against him. Also, much of the 20% who are “anti” Putin are actually pro-Putin per se in that they assail Putin for not being hard enough on the hegemonic West, they see Putin as capitulating to Washington’s imperial ambitions.

      • Dave P.
        June 8, 2017 at 16:52

        Soudy: I forget to include that if you have not read already, it is worth reading this very interesting article by Thomas Harrington in Counter punch. Link below:

        The article tells who has been doing to whom, and what, in The Middle East. Regarding Russians , I remember way back during 1950’s, and 60’s during Soviet Period when they built Aswan Dam in Egypt and all that – to win friends. It seems like the Soviet Union (or Russia) wasted lot of money in Third World Countries for nothing. It is also apparent that the Russians never learnt the business sense of British, U.S. , and other Western World Nations to exploit those Third World Nations in Asia, Africa, or South America.

        Regarding Imperial ambitions in the Middle East, you can also look at their neighbor Turkey – Former Ottoman Empire.

      • MEexpert
        June 9, 2017 at 02:06

        For an educated man, you show very little knowledge of what is happening in the Middle East. Egyptian people did take charge of their destiny and what happened. With the help of the US and the Saudi Arabia, the military staged a coup and overthrew the democratically elected government of President Morsi. The Bahraini people tried to take charge in their country and Saudi Arabia moved in and suppressed the uprising. The US and the UK also backed the Bahraini regime. I can go on country by country but I hope you get my point. The Saudi Arabia, Israel and the US and the west want to control the entire Middle East and its oil. Iran and Syria have refused to bow down to western dictates so they become targets of regime change campaign.

Comments are closed.