Tags

, , , ,

I wrote this week’s TPC column two days before the US Empire almost got what it deserved from Iran; the warheads reigned down about the same time that my article was published. Very few people, especially in the US Empire know or care about the truth in these matters (or any others). In response to the TPC bit, a comment was left (by a good guy, generally in favor of truth) which repeated some of the same propaganda that I pointed out in the column. Here, knowing more, I will [address] it:

What? This murderous thug was in Baghdad as a diplomat? [Trump was not in Baghdad; Soleimani was, in fact, there and as a diplomat, requested by the SOVEREIGN government of Iraq and apparently with Trump’s tactic approval]. The guy was in Baghdad planning the next mischief of the Iranian-backed militia after they had attacked the American embassy the day before following the attack the previous week in which several Americans were killed. [There was no attack on the US Imperial Green Zone fortress embassy. With the other “attacks,” we play ultra-loose with the definition of “American,” no?]. He was not home in Iran having breakfast with his family. [Most fortunate for his family, less so for associated IRAQI government officials that he was with]. He was behind enemy lines in a war zone. [He was requested and welcomed there by the “enemy.” The war zone was created and maintained by the US Empire]. If he was in civilian clothes he deserved to be treated as a spy and subject to being hanged. [Whatever his attire, he was there at the express diplomatic request of the SOVEREIGN Iraqi government to serve as a mediator].

Tom Ironsides had a similar, if fictional exchange, recently. He, of course, knew more then than we do now. Like Tom said in the story (but in real life), everything you hear from the US Imperial government and the mainstream propaganda agents is a lie, more fictional than any of my stories. The truth about Soleimani’s DIPLOMATIC mission and subsequent murder:

Desperate to justify the US drone assassination of Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo insisted that Washington had made an “intelligence-based assessment” that Soleimani was “actively planning in the region” to attack American interests before he was killed.

President Donald Trump justified his fateful decision to kill the Iranian general in even more explicit language, declaring that Soleimani was planning “imminent attacks” on US diplomatic facilities and personnel across the Middle East.

“We took action last night to stop a war,” Trump claimed. “We did not take action to start a war.”

Trump’s dubious rationale for an indisputably criminal assassination has been repeated widely across corporate media networks, and often without any skepticism or debate.

At a January 3 State Department briefing, where reporters finally got the chance to demand evidence for the claim of an “imminent” threat, one US official erupted in anger.

“Jesus, do we have to explain why we do these things?” he barked at the press.

Two days later, when Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi addressed his country’s parliament, Trump’s justification for killing Soleimani was exposed as a cynical lie.

According to Abdul-Mahdi, he had planned to meet Soleimani on the morning the general was killed to discuss a diplomatic rapproachment that Iraq was brokering between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Abdul-Mahdi said that Trump personally thanked him for the efforts, even as he was planning the hit on Soleimani – thus creating the impression that the Iranian general was safe to travel to Baghdad.

There is much more – the deeper story:

The assassination of Soleimani is the U.S. lashing out at its steady loss of influence in the region. The Iraqi attempt to mediate a lasting peace between Iran and Saudi Arabia has been scuppered by the U.S. and Israel’s determination to prevent peace in the region and instead increase chaos and instability.

Washington has not achieved its hegemonic status through a preference for diplomacy and calm dialogue, and Trump has no intention of departing from this approach.

Washington’s friends and enemies alike must acknowledge this reality and implement the countermeasures necessary to contain the madness.

Action, reaction. There are many reasons why the Iraqi parliament voted to expel the US Imperial military from their (not our) country. The same reasons why the Iranian parliament voted to designate the entire Imperial military a terrorist organization (not much has changed since 1861 in this regard). Time to get out. Past time. Things might be different if these two nations were located between Nevada and Tennessee, but they are not. Leave well enough or ill enough alone.