What's scant is hard evidence that the weapons are provided by the Iranian government, rather than arms dealers or rogue Revolutionary Guard elements. "Iranian lethal support for select groups of Iraqi Shia militants clearly intensifies the conflict in Iraq," says the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq. But the most that can be said with certainty is that Tehran is failing to stop the traffic. The Iranians themselves admit they're not trying as hard as they could. "I can give you my word that we don't give IEDs to the Mahdi Army," says an Iranian intelligence official who asked not to be named because secrecy is his business. "But if you asked me if we could control our borders better if we wanted to, I would say: 'Yes, if we knew that the Americans would not use Iraq as a base to attack Iran'." - It is well known in the alternative, independent media that Iran gives weapons to Shiite Iraqis. It is also well known in the alternative, independent media that the United States government ALSO gives weapons to Shiite Iranians and possibly also to Sunnis, because the United States goverment goal in Iraq is to foment civil war, so that they can proceed with their 1992 plans to divide the country and pocket the oil spoils. - WPA
International Politics: February 2007 Archives
Have you ever had a friend hit you with the classic word trap, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Answer yes or answer no, and you incriminate yourself. This joke is based on the technique of using an implicit premise. While it may get a laugh, it is also used by politicians as more than a joke.
Political manipulation is most effectively accomplished when you control the framework in which others can argue and, ultimately, think. For example, if you want to get your viewpoint accepted without openly debating it, you make it an assumption, a premise for any other debates. Not only will you win the public over to your view, but you will effectively exclude the possibility of any serious opposition.
Suppose many years ago a government wanted to expand it's power to by having control over what people put in their bodies. There may have been real debate among the populace as to whether this is an appropriate function of law or government. Many may not have wanted such a "war" on drugs, which, after all, is just a war on people who ingest certain plants or chemicals.
