The discussion that follows has nothing to do with the
Catholic Church or the scandals that have plagued it of late. The image of a
confessor or someone demanding that others “fess up” to their sins is the
analogy being pursued here. What made this presentation necessary is an article
that was written by David Albright and Bruno Tertrais which came under the
title: “Making Iran Come Clean About Its Nukes” and the subtitle: “What is the
point of striking an agreement with Iran if Tehran will be able to hide its
weapons work?” It was published in the Wall Street Journal on May 15, 2014.
The two authors discuss an announcement made by Iran's
Atomic Energy Organization in which the latter said it will compile a document
listing all of the country's nuclear work. Instead of waiting for that document
to be tabled before blabber-mouthing it, Albright and Tertrais engage in a long
discussion that is useless at its core then say the following to end their
presentation: “If the West fails to demand that Iran verifiably fess up to the
military dimensions of its nuclear program, the odds are that Ayatollah
Khamenei would be able to build the bomb without fear of discovery.”
Now, this is the same David Albright who participated in the
witch hunt for the fictitious Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq after the
demolition of a country that did not have such weapons, and made repeated
statements to this effect. But despite the fact that other non-American experts
in the field, equal in stature to David Albright, who analyzed the situation
and came to the conclusion that Iraq was telling the truth – Albright said
nothing of the sort before the demolition of the country, then participated in
the witch hunt for the weapons with the zeal of a true believer in their
existence.
When his team found no Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq,
and he was interviewed to explain this colossal American crime against
humanity, Albright put the blame on the Iraqis themselves. He said, in effect,
that he did not believe the Iraqis when they said they did not have such
weapons because the Iraqis were snooped on by the Americans while talking among
themselves, but knowing that the Iraqis lie to each other, the Americans – he
included – came to the conclusion that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction ...
a logic that is Jewish through and through and through.
This man, therefore, is the father confessor of the analogy
– the man who seeks to commit a mistake equal to the previous by insisting that
Iran “fess up” which means “confess” to him its sins before he will do what he
did previously which is to declare that he does not believe the Iranians
because they are known to lie to each other. He will then allow America to
proceed with the demolition of Iran the way that a sick priest comes out the
confessional booth to go rape an innocent child.
You can already see Albright and Tertrais plant the seeds of
future rapes in what they are asking for at this time. This is what they say in
the article: “It is critical to know whether the Islamic Republic had a
nuclear-weapons program in the past, how far the work on warheads advanced and
whether it continues.” Having this under his belt – if they manage to get it in
the form that they want – Albright can then do what he did with Iraq, and say
that because the Iranians lie, the West must not believe a word they say,
therefore America must be green-lighted to commence the demolition of Iran.
If you want more convincing evidence that this is the
outcome Albright and his co-author seek before they even get to see the
document, consider this passage: “The announcement in April by Iran's Atomic
Energy Organization about a 'comprehensive document' may well be part of the
stalling strategy. They go on: “Iran has claimed all along it has never had
nuclear-weapons aspirations … but these denials are not credible.”
They are already casting doubt on the veracity of the
Iranian statements, and there is only one reason for this: to repeat the
disastrous history that turned America from a beloved superpower to a hated war
criminal.