IRAN: NO ONE EVER WENT BROKE UNDERESTIMATING THE INTELLIGENCE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

IRAN: NO ONE EVER WENT BROKE UNDERESTIMATING THE INTELLIGENCE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

It is good to see Juan Cole and others stepping back to write about the bigger picture. The pro-Green Revolution people around the world have shown a huge propensity for myopia.

Juan has the following posted today:

The MEK, by the way, has a very substantial lobby in Washington DC and has some congressmen in its back pocket, and is supported by the less savory elements of the Israel lobbies such as Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson. I am not saying they should be investigated for material support of terrorism, since I am appalled by the unconstitutional breadth of that current DOJ tactic, but I am signalling that the US imperialist Right has been up to very sinister things in Iran for decades. ("Washington and the Iran Protests: Would they be Allowed in the US?" by Juan Cole. Informed Comment. June 24, 2009.)

"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people" is attributed to H. L. Mencken. Compare it to Abraham Lincoln's observation that 1) some people can be fooled all the time 2) all people can be fooled sometimes but 3) all people can't be fooled all the time. Now, Mencken's saying isn't absolutely true. Bernie Madoff attests to that. Nevertheless, consider how long it took before a stop was put to Madoff. How long will the vast majority of Americans continue being fooled by hypocritical and arbitrary military, economic, political, cultural, and spiritual neoconservative imperialism and colonialism? (See: "POWER WITHOUT JUSTICE: THE NEOCON-MIND")

Juan goes after the hypocrisy in the U.S. on a number of fronts. That's good. It's exactly what we need. If more people focus in on this approach, the neocons will not get yet another damned and wholly avoidable and unnecessary war.

All wars are damned, wholly avoidable, and unnecessary in the end you know. At the very least, if anyone is fit for death by war, who isn't — meaning who hasn't done wrong? If we each want to be forgiven and not to be tortured to the death of our core beingness, then who are we not to afford forgiveness and mercy? This includes for the recalcitrant and also the recidivistic, who keep kicking themselves for backsliding. Anyway, doesn't the merciful approach make seeing the light that much easier and backsliding so much that much less likely? Isn't it better to put up with the stupidity of the Dick Cheney's of the world while not following them but rather trying to penetrate their thick skulls? Should they just be thrown into the Lake of Fire? Dick can't bomb Iran with help. So, don't help bomb Iran but keep telling Dick why he's way off.

This is why we are to leave vengeance to God. God, being all-knowing, will get it right. Look at it this way though, if we all leave it to God, what will there be to avenge? Ah, the key is revealed. This is the meaning of the Golden Rule. Jesus didn't say it this way, but he'd certainly tell you it's right. It means the same thing he did say. It's clearly implied. Jesus sacrificed his flesh to shed more light upon it and to be sure it never dies but finally wins over everyone left on the Earth. It was such an atoning act (going to the cross) that God saw to it that Jesus was not held by death. This is where many who otherwise makes sense start to drop away.

Are the Gospels a sort of novel? This is what many apparently believe. However, I must say that no one who loves truth as much as is evident in the telling of the Gospels would write the Gospel's as fiction. Jesus did author his life under the direct inspiration of God you know. And people say he never wrote a thing. Semantics

Now, in pretty much a direct attack on what I've been writing, Barack Obama's speech writers worked up the following in reaction to my points (shared by hundreds of millions around the planet whether they been here or not) that the U.S. CIA and other Western and Westernized so-called intelligence agents and militaries have been actively engaged in destabilizing Iran:

This tired strategy of using old tensions to scapegoat other countries won't work anymore in Iran. This is not about the United States or the West; this is about the people of Iran and the future that they — and only they — will choose.

This is thought-termination propaganda. It is designed to get people to repeat Obama lies (and it is a blatant lie). "...old tensions," what is he talking about? Is he talking about John McCain saying, "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran"? How old is that? Is he talking about all the Israeli officials who have been saying that they will attack Iran alone if necessary if Iran doesn't stop doing what Iran says it isn't and what neither the Israelis nor anyone else has shown Iran to be doing and that's building nuclear weapons? Is he talking about George W. Bush ordering the destabilization of Iran? Just how stupid and hypnotized does he think you are? He's not talking about me. I'm not buying his lies. Of course, the old saying is that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

  • Ask Barack Obama whether he issued a Presidential directive for the CIA and DIA and all other covert operatives under U.S. contract or control completely to stop all destabilizing activities against Iran.
  • Ask him when he issued that directive.
  • Ask him how long it is to remain in effect.
  • Ask him what are the triggers.

Will he be caught off guard now that it's out there? It doesn't matter how much they rehearse him or shield him or screen the questions — he's a failure. He can change; but until he does, he's a failure. Is that un-Christian of me? It is if it is without cause or if I'm doing the same thing he's doing. Otherwise, it's my Christian duty to speak out, just the way Jesus did.

Barack said he's "seen courageous women stand up to the brutality and threats, and ... experienced the searing image of a woman bleeding to death on the streets," referring to one young woman's body giving up the ghost. Well Mr. President Barack Obama, have you seen the same thing happen over and over and over in Afghanistan and Pakistan all on account of your orders to murder people — no trials, just speculation at best. Your "collateral damage," Mr. President, makes God struggle to hold his temper with the American people and you. If it were not for some (very, very few) righteous people in America, it would already have been wiped from the pages of time.

Obama, you did get the following right: "...those who stand up for justice are always on the right side of history." Your problem is that you don't know the meaning of the word "justice" else you'd practice it. You're a baby killer, Barack. You make others feel the way you would were your babies blown to pieces. Can you feel the pain and suffering of the parents of the children you've ordered murdered as so much "collateral damage"? Some of them want to cut your heart out, Barack. You're making them fall to that. It's your fault first and foremost here. That's how it is. I don't condone their falling, but you have the greater sin. May God give you the truth for once in life. Your politics stink, your economics stink, and your religion is fake. You're no Christian, Barack Hussein Obama. You're phony, and all your image makers can't do a damn thing to hide it.

Why the American people didn't see right through both John McCain and you is just astounding. It is astounding how selfish they could all be. My countrymen, shame!

You said:

If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect those rights and heed the will of its own people. It must govern through consent and not coercion.

How can you imagine that this garbage is going to fly? You are all over the globe violently coercing left and right. You are causing people to do things they would not otherwise do because of the economic duress you've help to continue with your bailout of the biggest rip-off artist ever to come down the pike. You are using economic duress to get the Pakistanis to murder their own as your proxy for the sake of your imperial ambitions. You're sick, Barack.

You think politics is hardball? Wait until Satan has you.

Have you rescinded the Worldwide Attack Matrix? You have not! All you've done at the most is change the name.

Have you stopped the NSA from spying on everyone in the country? You have not!

Have you called for a Truth Commission concerning 9/11 and to go wherever the leads lead into the past before 9/11 and right up to the present? You have not! You've called it a risk to national security.

Since when are unrepented lies a proper means to achieve security. That's asinine. That's Dick-Cheney talk, the one who literally and verbatim called for the American people to go over to the "dark side" to steal "the prize," as he called it that is Middle Eastern oil. You follow him in that. It's plain to see.

You're an extremely violent and dangerous person, Obama. People who are thinking of you as remotely close to some sort of savior are in a trance, but I'm waking them up to save their souls. They don't know the difference between honey and vinegar.

Paul Bremer, Kissinger's lapdog, was sent over to be the Proconsul of the Empire over Iraq and made law by decree that nationalized oil was over and that laissez-faire capitalism was now being dictated to the Iraqis, who I might add had drafted up their own new constitution that was summarily rejected by the fascists: Bremer, Kissinger, and Bush, et al. So, Mr. President/Emperor for a little season, have you overturned that? You have not! You have rather allowed the rape to continue apace.

The West's oil corporations now control Iraq's oil and really Iraq, since there is no way that you would not go back to war with them if they now stood together democratically to say they are renationalizing their oil as the common resource of all Iraqis equally. Nothing has changed since the day George W. Bush signed the decree literally giving Iraq to Western corporations.

Don't hand us any of that they don't have enough money garbage to invest in the oil fields. The U.S. stole $50 billion that Iraq had in the bank. Give them back what America stole.

Don't hand us that they don't have the expertise either. There are plenty of people in Iraq and around the world, both exiled Iraqis and others, who could handle things without the huge Western oil companies.

Juan Cole covered a number of other aspects of Obama's pathetic talk, so I won't be redundant here. Go read them on his site for yourself (link above). Juan is not prepared to say that the U.S. has been materially aiding terrorists. Well, on this issue, I have to say that I side with Noam Chomsky in his oft repeated and correct observation that the U.S. under its own definition of terrorism conducts state terrorism. There's no doubt about it.

By the way, Noam is a harsh critic of the prevailing "Zionism" in Israel. He wasn't for ethnic cleansing or a "Jewish" state. He was rightly for Jews and Palestinians living in peace in one "state," if his ultimate visions can rightly be called that by today's dark standards. Noam focuses though on U.S. imperial power and takes a great deal of static from racists and ethnic bigots for not blaming everything on the "Jews." Noam's a Jew by the way. He's actually read the Gospels too, not that he understands them beyond a mundane reading.

Here's what he's said:

You can see that in the polls too. I was just looking at a study by an American sociologist (published in England) of comparative religious attitudes in various countries. The figures are shocking. Three quarters of the American population literally believe in religious miracles. The numbers who believe in the devil, in resurrection, in God doing this and that — it's astonishing. These numbers aren't duplicated anywhere else in the industrial world. You'd have to maybe go to mosques in Iran or do a poll among old ladies in Sicily to get numbers like this. Yet this is the American population. (http://www.celebatheists.com/index.php?title=Noam_Chomsky)

Well, Noam, please. You're telling me I haven't experienced. Now just how does your rational and reasoning mind allow you to preclude what you don't know? I heard you being logical before. Why fall down on this?

Why do I bring in these other issues that seem superfluous or irrelevant? The problem with the world is that it's fractured. It isn't able to see the connections. It is true that one must categorize to sort and separate, but one must see where sets overlap and where they don't and which is finally right in total. It isn't what we have in common that matters most. It's getting rid of what separates in terms of right and wrong. That takes dialoguing until truth is the only thing left standing and everyone has relented.

If we join or more properly re-join God, we are one of the righteous ones. How beautiful is that! Otherwise, we are one of many evil ones.

Barack Obama is far from the only one spewing the dung that the West is not doing anything to interfere in Iran. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown had this to say. "Iran's decision to try to turn what are clearly internal matters for Iran into a conflict with the UK and others is deeply regrettable and without foundation." ("UK seeks 'constructive' ties with Iran." Press TV. June 24, 2009.) This is coming from the Prime Minister who wants to keep all the illegalities leading up to the invasion of Iraq a deep, dark secret for the sake of national security. It's not for national security. It's nothing more than to protect racketeers operating as international leaders. Presidents and Prime Ministers lie. They do it boldfaced. It's pathological. It's required for the job of hiding what is behind the curtain so to speak. It's time for them to go!

Change leaders. Do it peacefully. Don't seek revenge. Don't seek to punish. Just take away their power. Do it by refusing to do the evil orders they give. Render to Caesar what is Caesar's, and you aren't his. Turn the other cheek. Don't resist violent coercion. You know where the lines are drawn. They aren't hidden. We all know. That's why there really aren't any excuses.

Finally, regarding citations and links and to be fair, people are borrowing from each other all over the net. Also though, as the saying goes, great minds think alike (it's a figure of speech and not intended as bragging here). A thought can be original with more than one person at a time. Sometimes I'll see something where the author's thinking and mine is uncannily alike even in a long list of thoughts, at least on the mundane level. That said, it isn't practical or necessary that everyone cite every link along a path to an ultimate source. Very often, one reads something and the concept or point doesn't end up in a post until perhaps days later and the post wasn't planned in advance. After reading several hundred (or thousands in my case) posts and comments on a breaking subject, retracing steps to find to cite URL's, etc., isn't always reasonable. Also, one wants to focus on original sources as much as possible. It would fill a page sometimes to show the route taken that ended at the final source. Besides, the main point of this post for instance is preventing war. Who's going to nitpick? If someone reiterates points from many sources and that helps win the day for peace, then hallelujah! I'm not aiming this paragraph against Juan by the way. I'm just thinking about all the similar ideas I've seen out there.

I will say that sometimes I'm behind the curve and sometimes I'm not. This is one of those times that I'm not. Most of what I've written in this series was not triggered by some recently seen post or comment. I've linked to a number of articles and a couple of videos, but I didn't paraphrase language from them that I can recall. Much of my thinking on this subject is original with me regardless of who else has said much the same thing out there.

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
    • More reading:

      "The Class Issue in Iran." Imperialism And Resistance. June 20, 2009.

      "Iran’s Election: Stepping Stone to Over-Throw," by Ardeshir Ommani. ShiaChat.com. June 22, 2009.

      • IRAN

        ...Mousavi's campaign office released a report on "electoral fraud and irregularities" in the poll that gave him just 34 percent of the vote to 63 percent for Ahmadinejad.

        It denounced what it said was "large-scale" official support for Ahmadinejad and spoke of ballot papers being printed on polling day without serial numbers, doubts about whether ballot boxes were empty when they arrived at polling stations and candidates' representatives being banned from vote centres. (See: "Khamenei warns Iran will not back down." Alarab Online. June 24, 2009.)

        Is there proof or just unsubstantiated allegations?

        Regardless, this decision not to hold a new election is prideful rather than smart. They should have had international observers in anticipation of this. They should swallow their pride and focus upon what really matters. If they show themselves to be above reproach, who will attack them?

        Yes, it's not nice; but they won't be harmed by it more than the alternative they created (being attacked). It's bad enough that they even have to hold such coercive elections.

        Well, this shows what the warring in the Bible and the Qur'an brings. It shows the warring that capitalism brings. Why can't they understand and follow Jesus?