Soleimani More Dangerous Dead Than Alive

Soleimani More Dangerous in Death

Nicholas Johnson
The Gazette, January 12, 2020, p. D2

In the movie “Wag the Dog,” two weeks before a presidential election, the sitting president is accused of sexual misconduct with a young girl. Desperate for a way to suppress the story the president’s political consultant, Conrad Brean (Robert DeNiro), seeks the help of Hollywood producer Stanley Motss (Dustin Hoffman). “What do you think would hold it off?” he asks. The producer responds, “Nothing. Nothing. You’d have to have a war.” [Photo credit: still from film, used by Hollywood Reporter.]

How can a president get popular support for war? Hermann Göring understood it best: “It is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship … All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” [German General Hermann Göring, Nuremberg Trial, 1946; photo credit https://marinamaral.com/portfolio/hermann-goring-sits-in-the-dock-at-the-nuremberg-trial-1946/](fn 1)

As prior presidents predicted, our enemy, General Qassem Soleimani, has already become a far greater threat to America in death than he ever was in life. That threat will only increase over the months and years to come. [Photo credit: General Qasem Soleimani; Ali Khamenei, http://farsi.khamenei.ir/photo-album?id=29307#i, commons.wikimedia.org] (fn 2)

Nicholas Johnson
Iowa City





FOOTNOTES
1. Snopes confirms the accuracy of this quote, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/war-games/ .

2. "George W. Bush did not target him [General Soleimani] during the height of the Iraq War, when Iranian-supplied roadside bombs and Iran-backed militias were killing hundreds of American troops. By 2011, that toll had reached more than 600 and Barack Obama was the president; he too declined to hit the general. But at some point Trump, who came into office vowing to pull the United States out from Middle Eastern wars, decided to cross a line two war-president predecessors feared breaching. ...

Elissa Slotkin, a Democratic representative and former CIA analyst focused on Shia militias, said in a statement that she’d seen friends and colleagues killed or hurt by Iranian weapons under Soleimani’s guidance when she served in Iraq. She said she was involved in discussions during both the Bush and Obama administrations about how to respond to his violence. Neither opted for assassination.

'What always kept both Democratic and Republican presidents from targeting Soleimani himself was the simple question: Was the strike worth the likely retaliation, and the potential to pull us into protracted conflict?' she said. 'The two administrations I worked for both determined that the ultimate ends didn’t justify the means. The Trump Administration has made a different calculation.'" Kathy Gilsinan, "It Wasn’t the Law That Stopped Other Presidents From Killing Soleimani; The Iranian general helped get hundreds of Americans killed — through two administrations. Both declined to kill him," The Atlantic, January 4, 2020, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/01/why-kill-soleimani-now/604441/ .

[Photo credit: http://alwaght.com/en/News/169779/Iranians-Hold-Massive-Rallies-to-Condemn-US-Assassination-of-Gen-Soleimani,-Demand-Revenge, January 3, 2020]

Would this picture be more understandable if we reversed roles? First off, realize that Soleimani was not just a military general, he was a national hero and the second most powerful political figure in Iran. Then consider this scenario. During World War II Dwight D. Eisenhower was a five-star general in the Army and served as Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Europe. Following the war he served as Army Chief of Staff (1945–1948), as president of Columbia University (1948–1953) and as the first Supreme Commander of NATO (1951–1952). He was twice elected president of the United States in landslides, 1952 and 1956. Understand that I am not saying that the two men are moral equivalents. But imagine that another country's president, or head of state, had arranged for the successful assassination of Eisenhower in 1952. What would have been Americans' reaction? What would have been your reaction?

# # #

Tags: assassination, Hermann Göring, Iran, Iraq, Nuremberg, President Donald Trump, Qassem Soleimani, Soleimani, Wag the Dog

Censoring Billionaires

August 28, 2008, 10:20 a.m.

In American Media Even Billionaires Get Censored
I have enough Texan in me (Austin and Houston, 1952-59) that I get a real kick out of reminders of the folks I used to know, in this case some straight talking fellow like T. Boone Pickens ponying up the money to take on the oil industry and Bush Administration.

Unless you don't have a TV set, or never turn it on, surely you know about his proposal to, if not solve, at least address our energy crisis: massive investment in wind power to relieve power plants dependence on natural gas (and polluting, greenhouse gas emitting coal), and use our clean burning natural gas to power our cars and trucks, bridging the gap until we can come up with something better. ("This is one problem we can't drill our way out of.") The Pickens' Plan.

To critics who note he owns a lot of that natural gas he replies, simply, "Look, I've got $4 billion and I'm 85 years old. I don't think I need any more money" (or something like that).

Anyhow, Gregory Johnson of ResourcesForLife, brought to my attention this morning that NBC is now censoring Pickens. "Too Hot for NBC," The Daily Pickens.

It's not the first time they've done something like that. Back in the 1970s, I think it was, Mobil Oil had a creative public relations executive named Herb Schmertz who was permitted to run quarter-page ads on the New York Times editorial page, and did some creative advertising for the oil company. When NBC rejected one of his commercials, he came to the public interest environmental community and offered us something we could never otherwise have afforded: equal time on the network, at Mobil's expense, in which we could attack the company as viciously as we wanted. Mobil would pay double, and permit our attacks, so confident was Herb that he could convince the public and Congress that fish really do feel kind of cuddly about offshore drilling rigs. Well, NBC turned down that idea as well. (At least that's how my aging brain now remembers it.)

My point? That the result of the Supreme Court's view -- that with the First Amendment right to speak goes a First Amendment right to silence all others, including billionaires and Fortune 500 corporations -- along with the concentration of the mass media into fewer and fewer hands, is that the mainstream media have a choke hold on what the newspapers, magazines, cables, satellites and airwaves can bring into our homes.

Now, of course -- because censorship is a natural human tendency in all times, in all institutions, and under all forms of government -- this handful of media firms want to have the same control over the once wild-west-free Internet. But that's a story for another day.

For this morning, I just thought you might like to watch this 15-seconds from my currently favorite Texan, T. Boone:



Because you won't be seeing it on NBC.

# # #