By September of 2002 every would-be mover and shaker in our nation’s capital knew that Gulf War II would begin shortly after President Bush could claim, however implausibly, that international "diplomacy" had failed to get Saddam Hussein to give up his pursuit of nuclear weapons.
Many of them knew that Saddam had given up his pursuit of nukes a decade earlier.
Worse, many of them knew that Gulf War II had already secretly begun, months before, with Operation Southern Focus, a massive pre-emptive "suppressive" air assault against more than 400 "key" targets in Iraq, some of them military.
That massive air assault a war crime, if unauthorized began before Bush even sought the "fig leaf" protection of a congressional or Security Council authorization to use U.S. armed forces if necessary to "disarm" Saddam.
Now, September of 2006, every would-be mover and shaker in our nation’s capital knows that Gulf War III will begin shortly after President Bush can claim, however implausibly, that international "diplomacy" has failed to get the Iranian mullahs to give up their pursuit of nuclear weapons.
Many of them know that there is no "indication" that the mullahs have ever had a nuclear weapons program.
Worse, many perhaps all of them, know that Gulf War II was never about nukes.
Gulf War II was, and Gulf War III will be, about "regime change."
But, the Cheney Cabal discovered early on that the only rationale acceptable to you soccer moms for invading Iran, Iraq, Syria, North Korea et al. would be a) their developing nukes and b) giving them to terrorists.
So, the Cheney Cabal and their media sycophants launched an unrelenting propaganda campaign, falsely claiming that Iran, Iraq, Syria, and North Korea had illicit nuke-development programs.
Unfortunately, at the time, according to inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency, there was no "indication" that any of them did.
So, the Cheney Cabal and their media sycophants launched another unrelenting propaganda campaign, attacking the competency and honesty of IAEA officials.
In the process, the Cheney Cabal corrupted the IAEA Board of Governors, resulting in the passage of several resolutions by the Board that violated the IAEA Statute, the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the U.N. Charter, itself.
Next, the Cheney Cabal corrupted the Security Council, resulting in at least one resolution that also violated the U.N. Charter.
Now comes Iran’s President Ahmadinejad to address the U.N. General Assembly for the second time.
Well, it’s barely possible that Ahmadinejad’s televised performance before the U.N. General Assembly Tuesday (excerpted below) in conjunction with his half-dozen televised interviews may put a hitch in the Cheney Cabal’s gitalong.
You see, although the movers and shakers in our nation’s capital claim to have viewed Ahmadinejad’s address as very helpful to the Cheney Cabal, and disastrous to Iran’s cause, that does not seem to be the view of the rest of the world.
Apparently, the Security Council can only be used to ensure the security and the rights of some big powers.
When the oppressed [Lebanese, Palestinians] are crushed by bombardment, the Security Council must remain aloof and not even call for a cease-fire. Is this not a tragedy of historic proportions for the Security Council, which is charged with maintaining security for all countries?
The question needs to be asked: If the governments of the United States or the United Kingdom, who are permanent members of the Security Council, commit aggression, occupation and violation of international law, which of the organs of the U.N. can take them to account?
Can a Council in which they are privileged members address their violations? Has this ever happened?
In fact, we have repeatedly seen the reverse. If they have differences with a nation or state, they drag it [Iran] to the Security Council and as claimants arrogate to themselves simultaneously the roles of prosecutor, judge and executioner. Is this a just order?
Can there be a more vivid case of discrimination and more clear evidence of injustice?
How long can such a situation last in the world? It is evident that the behavior of some powers constitutes the greatest challenge before the Security Council, the entire organization and its affiliated agencies.
Today, it is undeniable that the Security Council, most critically and urgently, needs legitimacy and effectiveness. It must be acknowledged that as long as the Council is unable to act on behalf of the entire international community in a transparent, just and democratic manner, it will neither be legitimate nor effective.
September 25, 2006