This is in response to the latest column by Clifford D. May.
It came under the title: “Obama's Iran experiment” and the subtitle:
“His nuclear deal concluded a year ago has not encouraged the regime to
behave.” It was published on July 12, 2016 in The Washington Times.
The topic he discusses is the Iran nuclear deal. It is also the
sale of American passenger planes to that country. In fact, this is how May
begins his presentation: “Suppose the Islamic State wanted to buy American
airplanes and promised not to use them to support terrorists. Would you be okay
with that?” He goes from there to say that because the answer is no, it should
also be no to Iran ,
given that the two Muslim entities are practically identical. To prove it, he
takes the next 5 paragraphs to draw parallels between them.
Because it is impossible to navigate through his parallels
without conjuring up other parallels, the natural thing to do is to substitute
names like Israel or America where you see names like the Islamic
State or Iran .
And the following is what you obtain:
1. “Israel
is a terrorist entity. America
is the world's most avid supporter of that entity therefore America is the
most active state sponsor of terrorism”.
2. “Israel
is engaged in the most terrorizing act of all – the occupation of Palestine . In fact, Israel
slaughters the Palestinian people and persecutes Christians who proselytize in
the land where Christ once lived”.
3. “The entire Israeli leadership has the intention and the
capability to bring “death” to Palestine ; maybe
even Lebanon .
American supporters of Israel
have murdered dozens of Iraqis in furtherance of the Jewish agenda”.
4. “There are no stylistic differences between America and
Israeli killers. They both take video footage of the family homes they blow up
from the air, and proudly run them on television”.
5. “American and Israeli commanders – often described in the
media as civilized – lay wreaths on the grave of their dead airmen whether or
not the latter bombed innocent Arab families in their homes … millions of whom
have died horrible deaths over the decades”.
Having drawn his parallels, Clifford May, turns his
attention to the nuclear agreement. He attacks it using the talking points that
were repeatedly refuted in the past. He remarks that even though “Iran 's economy
is recovering, Ayatollah Khamenei is dissatisfied. He charged that Americans
were creating 'Iranophobia so no one does business with Iran .'” And so,
Clifford May complains that “in response, Secretary of State John Kerry has
been telling [the world] about the investment opportunities available in Iran ”.
Enter Boeing, the American manufacturer of passenger planes
and other things. It announced a $25 billion deal with Iran for planes
that will be used in civilian transportation. This is where May reaches out to
his drawer and pulls a few of the old talking points that were themselves
refuted in the past. And he fails to make a lasting impact on the readers.
Then something happened in the House of Representatives
whose office holders are usually on the road in the permanent mode of raising
money for their reelection campaigns. Having left it to their office managers
and internees (all handpicked by the Jewish lobby) to run the Iran file, they came back long enough to do this:
“The House passed, with bipartisan support, two amendments to block the sales
of aircraft to Iran ”.
The author now climbs on his high horse and says: “Let's be
charitable and consider the nuclear deal an experiment.” He surmises that
President Obama showed the rulers of Iran respect to entice them to tone
down their rhetoric and ambitions. Unfortunately, he says, the experiment did
not yield result. He tells why, and this is when it occurs to you to draw a
parallel between what he says he expects of the Iranians, and what you know the
world expects of the Israelis. You do that by substituting Israel for Iran , and that’s how it all comes
out:
“Given the Arab initiative and the opportunity for the Jews
to make Israel
a normal country, they would stop pursuing their expansion, and halt the
construction of new settlements in the occupied territories. Feeling less
threatened, they would choose to peacefully coexist with their neighbors and
ease repression on the Palestinians”.
But then, something at the back of your head tells you this
is not going to work. Why? Because in the same way that these characters
believe Obama “considers the Iran
deal essential to his legacy,” they also believe that the trashing of the deal
is essential to the image of the macho eunuchs they have cultivated about
themselves.