“Reports that the Bush administration will put Iran's Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps on the terrorism list can be read in one of
two ways: It's either more bluster or, ominously, a wind-up for a
strike on Iran. Officials I talk to in Washington vote for a hit on the
IRGC, maybe within the next six months.”
Look, whether viewed from a Left perspective or no perspective at
all, the general feeling about US intentions and actions is akin to how
anybody would feel if you woke up and found a 500 pound gorilla in your
bed; there’s not much you can do about it.
What differs are the reasons why, which is the really crucial aspect.
But
I digress (somewhat), for one has to ask why, at very specific times
these rumours of war surface? Where do they come from? And why are
certain kinds of stories picked up by the MSM and others ignored?
Of
course the ‘credibility’ of the source has something to do with it, but
much more important is the context, the setting for the story. It’s
worth comparing the two sets of rumours’ timing: the last time, early
in 2007 ‘coincided’ with a massive propaganda campaign around Iran’s
alleged nuclear ambitions and the US used the UN (via the International
Atomic Energy Agency over which it had significant control) as its
major propaganda vehicle.
The latest one by contrast, is a
‘home-grown’ affair and comes at a time when US control of the IAEA is
not what is was, added to which there are deep divisions within the US
ruling elite about how best to achieve their objectives (see PNAC etc).
“In August … the Senate unanimously passed a resolution
sponsored by Sen. Lieberman, I-Conn., accusing Iran of acts of war
against the United States” [3]
Add the debacle of Iraq, where even
the simplest of objectives; getting hold of the oil, seems even further
away now than ever (this in spite of the fact that when the US invaded
Iraq, it spared the oil ministry whilst deliberately dismantling the
rest of the machinery of state).
The principle ‘hook’ on which the
latest campaign is based, is not new (Iran’s alleged interference in
Iraq) but now it takes centre stage as the nuclear weapons excuse no
longer works.
"We have in front of us an agreed work plan. We
agreed on modalities on how to implement it. We have a timeline for the
implementation." — Olli Heinonen, deputy director of the International
Atomic Energy Agency on Iran’s compliance with the IAEA.[4]
And of
course a compliant media responds just like Pavlov’s dogs; after months
of propaganda about the Iranian ‘nuclear threat’, the ‘threat’ has
disappeared from public view to be replaced by Iran’s “murderous
intent”.
Whenever the US goes on a propaganda offensive, stories
that ‘surface’ about imminent invasion, are part and parcel of the
propaganda war, made all the more believable by the fact that all the
pieces are in place (eg the 7th Fleet in the Gulf etc) for just such a
scenario.
For example, one of the current crop of stories
‘doing the rounds’ concerns itself with details about targetting sites
in Iran and another with US war preparations for the US Fleet in the
Gulf. Both proved to be false, that is to say, be assured that the US
has long had war plans for Iran, so why do these stories appear just
now? (One was picked up by the Daily Kos and eventually denounced as a
fake).[5]
One of the tactics used in Psy-ops (psychological
warfare operations) is planting a story in an out-of-the-way place and
wait for it to be ‘discovered’. This lends credence to the story as it
appears to come from the ‘horses mouth’. The ‘Niger Yellowcake’ fake is
a perfect example of how such stories get spread: ‘originating’ from
within the Italian secret service, the story actually came from Ahmed
Chalabi’s CIA-backed organisation, who fed it to the Italians, who in
turn fed it to both the UK and US intelligence agencies and thus on to
the IAEA, who promptly dismissed it as a crude fake. But the damage has
been done; retractions never make the headlines. Timing is everything,
the Niger Yellowcake fake appeared just before Colin Powell’s
outrageous Powerpoint performance at the UN, which was so awful even
Powell called it “shit”.
But nothing just ‘happens’, forces
have to be set in motion. There are fears to be created; rationales
developed and importantly, ‘feelers’ sent out via a complicit media to
test the waters, gage public reactions to the idea. Lately, we’ve had a
rash of them appear [links], some plainly false, the rest? Well given
all the firepower the US has in the Gulf (enough to take out the entire
planet), it’s not difficult to see all kinds of scenarios which could
serve to unleash it.
“[This] administration or the next will
likely face a terrible choice: appease a nuclear Iran, or bomb it
before their atomic weapons are ready to go.” — Michael Ledeen, [6]
Thus
as the situation in Iraq goes from just plain bad to disastrous for the
US, with its major ‘ally’ the UK, turning tail, it is necessary to
create a diversion, thus ominous threats emerge in the form of
‘eyewitness accounts’ of war preparations.
Meanwhile, the BBC has
been assailing us with endless accounts of ‘our boys over there’ which
is now being described in the following manner,
‘Since the end
of the war in April 2003, troops have been helping to restore essential
infrastructure and services and provide security.’ — ‘Where are British
troops and why?
This is called cleaning up the mess left behind by
these latter-day pirates of capital, turning the illegal invasion into
a foreign aid exercise gone wrong and to add insult to injury, when
read in the context of the article it’s the fault of the Iraqis that it
has all gone wrong! ‘Those ungrateful Iraqis, here we are, laying down
our lives just for your benefit and this is how you treat us!’, but
this is what imperial hubris is all about.
US War Plans Are Nothing New
The
US ruling class have spelt out their objectives many times in many
official and quasi-official documents (eg, the Project for the New
American Century) and the latest, published by the American Enterprise
Institute titled ‘The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots' Quest for
Destruction’ and authored by one of the ‘brains’ behind the invasion of
Iraq, Michael Ledeen, former Iran-Contra player and convicted felon.[7]
“[T]he White House decision to designate at least elements of
Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps as a terrorist organization, using
the president's authority under a September 2001 executive order.” [8]
But
such projects are years in the making and there are alternate scenarios
to be developed because of course, reality intrudes, often in the most
unwelcome manner, for example, Iraq and even though the occupation and
its aftermath ranks as a crime ‘up there’ with the very worst of the
crimes committed by the ‘usual suspects’ over the centuries, the public
have begrudgingly accepted it, mostly out of sheer ignorance of the
facts (thanks to a lying mass media in cahoots with the state) and that
anyway, there didn’t appear to be any way of stopping it.
Logic
dictated that the invasion of 2003 would happen (short of a revolution
aka the 1974 Portugese ‘Revolution of the Flowers’); you don’t move an
army of a quarter of a million all the way to the top of the hill and
then turn around and march all them down just for the hell of it.
But
the old adage, ‘once bitten, twice shy’ would seem to be applicable
here. Given what an obvious disaster the occupation of Iraq is,
especially from a propaganda perspective with all the lies that got
exposed in the run-up and after, to the invasion, that selling yet
another obvious disaster is proving to be extremely difficult, added to
which there are divisions in the ranks, both literally and
figuratively, as to the best way to ‘take out’ those damn Iranians and
their dumb idea that they should be left alone to conduct their own
affairs.
Notes
1. See ‘A Sept. rollout for Iran war’, by David Isenberg, Washington (UPI) Sept. 5, 2007
2. ibid
3.
See ‘We Are Going To Hit Iran. Bigtime’ by Maccabee, Sat Sep 01, 2007.
The story was then picked up by the Daily Kos who in turn published
retractions and explanations, here and here
4. See Note 1
5. See Note 1
6. See ‘Oil and security for Iraq investors’ by Ben Lando, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Sept. 5, 2007.
7.
See the following PDF files: ‘Rebuilding America’s Defenses’, and ‘The
National Security Strategy of the United States of America’ and Vision
20/20.
8. See Note 1
This essay is archived at:
‘(Yet More) Rumours of War and other tales from Psy-Ops Central by William Bowles’
Writings 
It was early in 2006 when the first stories about an ‘imminent’ hit on Iran surfaced with everybody from Seymour Hersh to Michel Chossudovsky wading in with the ‘inside dope’ on the impending attack. 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
