Home / The Iran-Contempt Affair

The Iran-Contempt Affair

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Just as this article conjures The Iran-Contra Affair (1983-1988), something is equally rotten in Persia-Pakistan.

A new war drama has been advertised. It could be released as early as this summer. It could be the most costly war (I mean film) ever made. It is billed as a blockbuster. It is complete with a cast of billions. Headliners Hollywood would envy: Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Rice. They will all be playing themselves. Everyone is invited to the premiere.

The setting is Iran, a country that was once known as Persia. It shares borders with Pakistan and Afghanistan as well as other places rife with conflict. According to the CNN special recently aired with Christian Amanpour, “The Murder of Daniel Pearl,” his murder led up the steps of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), the Pakistani version of  the CIA. From her special it became clear that the real problem with insurgents, their funding, and comfort was coming directly from the real antagonist in this drama: the Pakistani ISI, stamped with a USA imprimatur. But these are our friends, allies, and co-producers in the war on terror. 

The Runaway Train?

While Iran's president Ahmadinjad did not use the words "runaway train" his description of Iran's nuclear program has been characterized by this uniquely American saying. What started as a simple two-page fax has ended up a farce. It was put together, according to The ITT List, by Iranian Ambassador Sadeq Kharrazi and Tim Guldimann, who acted as consultant (he speaks Farsi). It was actually an offer wherein U.S. officials could talk face-to-face with Iranian officials about the very thing that now seems to be wagging the dog — Iran's nuclear program.

The plan was presented in 2003; however, the actual document that went with this offer had been a well-kept secret. Where was it now? The recent Congressional hearings heard the Secretary of State say that she was "out of the loop."  I say that it is we who have been kept out of the loop.

A June 18, 2006 article in The Washington Post, clarifies that “[w]hile the Iranian approach has been previously reported, the actual document making the offer has surfaced only in recent weeks.” But was Rice out of the loop, or thinking out loud? No one believes that Rice was not privy to this script. It was perfect for her. Condoleezza Rice, the U.S. Secretary of State, said in reference to Ahmadinejad's comment, "They [Iran] don't need a reverse gear. They need a stop button."  More famous last words — to Ms. Rice I would say don’t push that button.


No one ever intentionally plays the part of the fool or the scoundrel, which Moliere satirized. If so, they will ever be the butt of jokes and ridicule. But according to Ms. Rice’s stern denials, this is precisely the type of role that Rice seems more than willing to accept! Can anyone believe her when she said, at the Congressional hearings earlier this month that she was “not in the loop?” There were a number of important issues brought up in this fax that Iran was willing to discuss. Here’s a condensed version from a Washington Post article:

  1. Full cooperation on nuclear safeguards,
  2. "Decisive action" against terrorists, coordination in Iraq, ending "material support"   for Palestinian militias
  3. Accepting a two-state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
  4. Negotiations, development of road maps on disarmament, countering terrorism and economic cooperation.

At those Congressional hearings, Rice said  “I would have remembered” if Iran had put recognition of Israel on the table. After repeated warnings about Iran and nuclear weapons, are its productions a rumor? 

Once again, unsubstantiated evidence creeps in like fog. Are plans in play that would give Iran nuclear weapons? What scenes have been deleted? Have pages have been torn from the two-page fax? Why is it that the American public is once again screening a play that was really conducted (read Oz-like) behind curtains that have come down?

Rove v. Rice? 

Thus within the past two weeks the world has been given a preview of the upcoming  “Iran War” the movie, written by Sadeq Kharrazi and Tim Guldimann and produced by Karl Rove. However, the director Dick Cheney nixed it at the last minute. The perfect leading lady for the part everybody knows would have been Condoleezza Rice. But she says that she was not given the script to read. Where was it filed — in Chapter 13?

For authenticity it was widely reported by her agents and detractors. Democracy Now! “The War and Peace report” reported Condi Rice repeating that she was not given this information four years ago. This is the smoking gun. Will this become a Rove versus Rice conspiracy? Was Rove trying to keep the part from Rice? So that she could not follow-up on this information diplomatically? Could this become Iran-gate? Could she have won a Nobel Peace Prize? Or should the people order an impeachment surprise? 

Keep Your Eye on the Bouncing Bomb

Are we the coalition of the unwilling to broker a peace? I ask what else should we expect from such producers:  More wars, more rumors of war, more shutouts to real diplomacy, served up with a one-act lie? What makes this more than a knotty problem is the potential for immediate bombings to begin

The denials are out there: denials that Rice did not receive a copy of the proposal, denials that Israel was on the table. 

Is it common sense that someone in Rice’s position, close confidante and inner sanctum-dweller, would be unaware of the proposal from Iran? In his interview with Democracy Now! Mr. Parsi says that he is not buying it. He was adamant that there are real reasons why they [Rice et al] are denying it. Others saw this proposal — why not Rice?

That said, why did Rice not see this proposal from Iran? More lies, more cover-ups, more spam-bombings in store? Instead of keeping our eyes on the roadmap to peace — we Americans were enthralled. Anna Nicole death reports kept us awake at night. We were busy watching a perky starlet fall. A bomb of a story was dropped — no doubt. And Iran now thinks it has to “act up” before the leading men will call.

Powered by

About Heloise

  • jaz

    solid read, thanks for putting this up here…and for all the links


  • Thanks jaz,

    I put a lot of time into this research and writing. Hope I get some luv on it.


  • Ruvy in Jerusalem


    Not a bad shot at this issue.

    One of the things I was warned about nearly a year ago about Iran was that they would do their best to put the oily ink of an octopus around their intentions.

  • methuselah

    The very definition of ‘actor’ is “paid professional liar”, they make money by sincerely and convincingly speaking the words of others. So it is with the actors named Rice, Rove, Bush, Cheney, etc., and their band of bit players.

  • moonraven

    Personally, I am tired of Rice always denying that she has seen controversial items–beginning with the memos of the summer of 2001.

    If she really is as out of the look as she claims, she must resign and claim that she was only put in there to be a token Aunt Jemima.

    She looks good in the apron and headscarf, I guess….

  • moonraven

    Soory: LOOP, not look.

  • moon,

    Funny comment. I guess it echoes my words in Never again. She was shuffling and buck toothing her way to the Secty of State office. It is too bad that she has made a sham of this office.

    To Colin Powell’s credit he got out with his creditability intact.

    Yes, I think the metaphor is appropo. They are paid professional liars.

    Are all politicians? In this age of imperalism, probably.

    Are we witnessing the fall of America due to our imperalism, which JFK and RFK unfortunately had a hand in advancing, I think so.


  • moonraven

    Heloise, Uncle Tom Powell has no credibility with me.

    That silly bit he did at the UN with the two ice cream trucks ripped it forever.

  • Okay moon what about the ice cream trucks? I missed that one.


  • moonraven

    When he claimed they were mobile bio-weapon labs. And insisted that they proved that Iraq had WMDs.

  • Nancy

    I agree, MR: there are just too many things Mrs. Bush – I mean, Ms. Rice has conveniently NOT seen. She’s a through – & – through liar just like her masters. Bosses. Husbands. Whatever. Bush & Cheney.

  • Ah yes, how could I forget the moving, mobile, mini weapons of mass destruction a la ice cream trucks!

    Too funny. But sadly we are paying for that damn ice cream. I eat ice cream q day by the way.


  • moonraven

    I hope Uncle Tom is too ashamed to eat any.