Prove What You Don't Have

by Paul Balles

 
Prove that you don’t have what I believe you have! That was an exact demand made on Saddam Hussein.
He scoffed. That brought “shock and awe”, and Saddam was hanged on the mother of all ropes.
Prove that you don’t have weapons of mass destruction (WMDs).
The neocons sold the logic of that empty demand and the American public bought it.
Prove that you don’t have what you don’t have! That demand not only hung Saddam, it slaughtered “1,455,590” Iraqis in the US war and occupation of Iraq.
How does anyone prove that he doesn’t have what he says he doesn’t have?
Saddam didn’t have WMDs. He said he didn’t, and the brilliant masters of untruth insisted that he prove it.
One amazing feature of this whole scenario is that so few people saw through the faux logic, and those who did were universally ignored.
“By way of deception thou shalt do war” is the Motto of Israel’s assassination and spy agency, Mossad, exposed by Victor Ostrovsky.
Now, fast forward. CBS Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer reports: “Rouhani (Iran’s new president) says that Iran does not want and is not pursuing a nuclear weapon. Does anybody take that at face value?”
There are four approaches one can reasonably take to Rouhani’s statement:
(1) It can be taken at face value, (2) It can be questioned, (3) It can be ignored, or (4) It can be rejected.
Those who insisted that Iraq prove that it didn’t have what it said it didn’t have simply rejected (4) Iraq’s denial, which cost a million and a half lives and trillions of dollars.
CBS Schieffer actually asked a question (2): “Does anybody take that at face value?”
It’s a bad question since the answer is in the question. It’s a rhetorical question looking only for a “no”.
It’s a stupid question that deserves a “yes”, which Schieffer would either ignore (3) or reject (4).
Being a TV anchor, Schieffer is unlikely to ignore it. Look for how he will reject (4) someone saying he will take Rouhani’s statement at face value.
Peter Hart writing in FAIR perfectly identifies what should be. He says, “Actually, the burden of proof should be the other way around: Politicians who claim that Iran has such a program should have to prove it.”
This can’t be emphasised enough. Several TV anchors and a number of op/ed columnists have claimed that Iran has nuclear weapons or is working on developing them.
This is where proof should be demanded. If you believe this myth, more than likely invented by Mossad or Israeli Americans, then it’s your responsibility to prove it.
A Fox news report held that “President Obama announced Tuesday that he’s directed Secretary of State John Kerry to pursue a new round of talks with Iran over its nuclear program.”
Notice the reference to Iran’s “nuclear program”. The headline, however, distorted even their own report: “Obama directs Kerry to pursue talks with Iran over nuclear weapons deal.”
Deceptively, Iran’s “nuclear program”(for nuclear power and medical use) has been converted, by Fox, to “talks…over a nuclear weapons deal.”
The revisionist tactic of referring to a legitimate nuclear program for peaceful purposes at home have been repeatedly labelled “nuclear weapons”.
If one can believe President Obama’s verbal gestures toward diplomacy with President Rouhani, the world might have a way to avoid more unnecessary slaughters.
It won’t be easy with the designation of Secretary Kerry as US appointee. His excessive Zionist compassion won’t allow him open-minded diplomacy unless Obama has the courage to resist the Israelis.