Posted December 26, 2007

Petie MacKay gets help from the CBC in priming us for an assault on Iran with Canadian support ...

If they can keep up the rhetorical momentum, pretty soon you'll hear people parroting, "Iran is killing our soldiers, you know."

By YayaCanada

Canada's Offence Minion Peter MacKay says Iran is giving weapons to the Taliban (CBC).  Gratuitously, the CBC goes on to say, "It is also the first time the government has admitted that Iranian weapons are being used to target Canadian soldiers."

Interesting choice of words, "admitted", as if it were indeed a fact, and as if the government has been sitting on said fact for a long time.

But even though they quote MacKay as saying "weapons" the writers translate that into "IEDs" because they have to admit that "Most of Canada's deaths have been the result of IEDs"  They don't seem to know that IEDs are crude, homemade bombs, fashioned out of whatever materials are at hand, and typically left at the sides of roads approaching outlying Afghan villages as an impediment to foreign invasion.

If Petie MacKay says something it must be true, eh, and not just blatant propaganda leading up to the most lusted-after war of all.  But what possible purpose can there be for the CBC to extrapolate that Iran is instrumental in the deaths of Canadian soldiers?  Well, it kinda would justify Canada's support for a pre-emptive assault on Iran, so MacKay is probably glad they filled in what he left out.

Good for the CBC, helping the cause along.  Clearly it knows in which direction its trough is currently pointing.

The truth of course is that arms dealers are legion and will sell to anybody (they don't "give" stuff away, as MacKay has suggested), even to the enemy du jour.  So Afghan "insurgents" hardly need depend on Iran for weapons, nor will there ever be any serious effort on the part of NATO to eradicate the poppy crops as long as there's a chance the revenue from it will end up in the pockets of the arms dealers and other contractors in their various home countries.

Conrad Black (NYTimes) may have been inadvisedly dubbed a "lord" by a little old lady wearing pearls and sensible shoes, but he was relatively small potatoes in comparison to the biggest, most powerful earthly lords of all  - the drug lords and the arms lords.

The US, godblessit, is no discriminator of customers. It sells arms to Pakistan all the while accusing it, in concert with its puppet Karzai, of aiding Afghan rebels (NYTimes), and it may well be crucial to recall that the famous term "Iran Contra Scandal" (Wikipedia) wasn't yanked out of thin air.

It's all a lovely, lucrative game, and when Harper says Canada is becoming a "player" he's referring in part to the fact that we too are beginning to show a nifty profit from arms sales (CBC).  Do we really care where they end up?

It sure doesn't seem like a coincidence that MacKay's pronouncement comes just as Karzai and Musharraf are schmoozing together again (NYTimes) almost as if they'd secretly been pals all along. Like MacKay and the CBC, they know their lines and are mindful of from whence cometh their sustainance.

Nobody cares who dies from all of this. Those who advocate for the New World Order - first spoken of aloud and repeatedly by George Bush Sr.(YouTube) -  think there are too many brown-skinned people in the world anyway.  And soldiers - well, if they weren't over there they'd be over here complaining that there are no jobs, and a fair number of them might be sucking up welfare!

Take a look at the graph on this page (Global Issues) and you'll see that the US tops the list for sales in arms to "developing" countries, not caring how they are used. Iran is so low on the list it isn't even mentioned.

Petie MacKay, however, is a good boy who will say anything he's scripted to say in aid of the American dream to "restructure" the Middle East. That was no ordinary romance he and Condi had going at Tim Horton's (Tim Horton's Fan); it was one of a number of sexy indoctrination sessions, this one beginning with a cute pretend argument over who would pay for the tea and coffee - that went on so long the cashier finally said it was on the house.  Neat trick. Tacky too.

Anyway, there isn't a doubt, I think, that this is one of the sweet nothings she whispered in his ear: "There isn't a doubt, I think, that Iran constitutes the single most important, single-country challenge to … U.S. interests in the Middle East and to the kind of Middle East that we want to see." (U.S. to sell high-tech weapons to Middle East allies (CBC)

Note, Condi didn't say Iran was dangerous or a lethal threat, only a "challenge" to US interests in the Middle East.  She probably doesn't want to be accused, when the chickens come home to roost as they did with the Iraq pretext, of having told an outright lie.

The US, along with Israel, has plans to completely dominate the resources of the Middle East by breaking it up into impotent little pieces, and to use it as its own power base against the rest of the world, but Iran, unlike Canada's government, simply doesn't relish being in thrall - nor do most Canadians relish the thought of more war.

Whoever fed the CBC its lines decided to toss in the word "threat" in the final paragraph of the article on US weapons sales where it wasn't likely to be missed by lazy readers who require an extra push toward the all-important hate-on for Iran. If they can keep up the rhetorical momentum, pretty soon you'll hear Canadians parroting, "Iran is killing our soldiers, you know."

Good again on the CBC for being extra helpful. This goes a long way toward justifying war and arms proliferation.  Here's hoping Harper promises them a fine handout in a brief burst of generosity at election time.

But it's a silly article, just the same.  Look at the first paragraph. The US is selling $20 billion worth of arms to Persian Gulf countries and expects nothing in return.  Nothing except $20 billion, eh?

yayacanada