Whereas the mainstream publications in Washington
and New York
are beginning to soften the fanatic look they have acquired while promoting the
Jewish causes, the Pittsburgh Tribune continues to move in the opposite direction.
It is as if the Tribune wants to be thought of as the
flagship of Jewish fanaticism and incitement – that which never misses an
opportunity to call for militarism and military violence. To wear this mantle,
the Tribune revived the old Jewish habit of creating a feature on its pages to
“watch” someone and badmouth them like the nagging whore that's never
satisfied. In fact, the tribune has been watching the U.N. and barking nags at
it like a bitch in heat that no dog wants to mount.
In addition to that, the Tribune comes up with a one-off
piece every once in a while, thus adds new objectionable displays to the
lamentable canvass it continues to paint about itself. The latest such work
came under the title: “The Iran
mess” and the subtitle: “Appeasement's aftermath,” an editorial that was
published on May 31, 2016 on its opinion page.
That piece is supposed to be about the Iran nuclear
agreement. The editors wrote it to say it was a bad deal from the start, and
that subsequent events prove it. In fact, they call today's Iran a
“widening morass,” explaining that it is due to President Obama appeasing the
Iranians who continue to commit aggression. The editors add that instead of the
adversary being transformed, “Iran
has escalated its hostilities toward the U.S. ”
That's the point at which you raise an eyebrow and scratch
your head because from all that you know, Iran has fastidiously kept its end
of the bargain, violating not the smallest of its provisions. So you go through
the article to see what evidence the editors are presenting to back their
claim.
The first thing you encounter is this: “Iran has launched ballistic missiles while Vice
President Joe Biden was visiting Israel .” So that's what it's about,
you say to yourself; it is about Israel ,
always Israel and no one but
Israel .
You stop scratching your head, you wipe your eyebrow with a finger, you shrug
both shoulders and you continue to read the rest of the piece.
You discover that the editors too continue to do what they
started doing. That is, they try to convince the readers that Iran is
violating the nuclear deal just because it conducts itself legitimately. Here
is an example: “The Revolutionary Guard continually challenges U.S. forces in
the Gulf.” Wow! you exclaim. Did they come into the Gulf of Mexico – America 's
backyard – and started challenging commercial shipping?
Oh no! No, no, no, no. What's meant here is the Persian Gulf ; the backyard of the Persian people.
Moreover, they are not challenging commercial shipping; they are challenging
the “U.S.
forces.” That's right; it's the American military that's in their backyard
menacing them, not the other way around. All they are doing is signal their
displeasure ... as would anyone sane.
So then, what's the worst thing that happened in the
standoff that's created between the two forces following America 's
provocations? Actually two major incidents happened, one of which was mentioned
by the Tribune's editors. It is this: “Iranians boarded a U.S. vessel and
videotaped the detained sailors.” Well, the vessel had strayed into their
territorial waters, and the Iranians detained it ... which is the normal thing
to do.
But if you think that's bad, contrast it with the Americans
shooting down an Iranian civilian airliner full of innocent passengers in Iran 's own
backyard, and you'll begin to realize that the American provocations are
deadlier and infinitely more serious than anything the Iranians have done.
When you digest all that; when you add to it the talks that
come out of New York and Washington ,
you begin to understand why someone in Iran
has noted “we have no enemies in the region except for America .” After
all, there is a not-so-subtle menace in this: “Iran will interpret U.S.
inaction as an invitation to stage further interventions … The next president
must [make clear] the days of U.S. appeasement are over”.