The United States is faced with anti-war protesters who also condemn the assassinations of Iran’s high profile nuclear scientists.
An analyst believes that warmongering groups in Wall Street provoke wars in the Persian Gulf region in order to prevent the collapse of the US currency, the dollar.Webster Tarpley, author, journalist and lecturer joins Press TV to share his thoughts on the issue.
Following is an approximate transcript of the interview.
Press TV: Let us look at the demonstrations that were held on Saturday. On Saturday there were demonstrations throughout the United States and some other countries including Canada and basically talking about stopping the war in Iran, no war on Iran.
First of all does it make a difference to have these types of demonstrations when we look at back to the prelude of the last war on Iraq, the US war on Iraq?
We know there were a lot of anti war demonstrations being held, in trying to demand Washington not to go in to Iraq, but it did not change anything. Does it make a difference?
Tarpley: It might make a difference this time, because Bush-Cheney were relatively impervious to that kind of demonstration, even though they were not very large.
Obama needs left cover; he needs it like he needs air to breath and if he is getting an attack on his left flag from an anti war movement coming back after a long period when it did collapsed; that is a significant political problem for Obama.
I would not want to overestimate the effect, but I think it is important. We have to remember that in 2006 – 2007, there was essentially a movement, an anti-war movement that was also an impeach Bush-Cheney movement. There was also a 9/11 Truth movement and what Obama was able to do was to wreck all of those.
He essentially neutralized everything. So that when we had the attack on Libya this past summer, spring- summer; the resistance was basically nothing. In other words the protest movement was practically non-existent.
So anything that would get the anti-war movement back in the streets would be important.
We have to remember how this control is exercised. A lot of the anti-war groups are foundation-funded and the foundations were willing to fund them when it was Bush-Cheney, but now that it is Obama they are not because Obama comes from this world of the foundations, in particular I would say the sort of Soros Group foundation. So if this movement could be brought back, that would be a good thing.
Press TV: Ok, what about that Webster Tarpley, what our guest has said that he doesn’t think that really they can make a difference – those people who are out in the street and that with all the wars that the US has been in, basically the American people have gotten nothing from it.
Of course, some would argue that, that one percent though have gone even more wealthy. So, can they make a difference being on the streets?
Tarpley: Well, as one of other speakers suggested let’s take an international approach because it is not just whatever protest can be mounted in the US.
I have a point of difference. We need to distinguish the authentic anti-war movement from color revolutions or CIA-people-power cause that are being attempted to destabilize a government, say like Russia. The so-called white revolution in Moscow in my view is a CIA – NATO project to try to overthrow Putin and what would that mean?
Let us look at what we just had yesterday; we had a resolution brought into the UN Security Council that would have been the first giant step towards a war involving Syria, which would target Iran and the other forces that are allied with Iran and Syria around the Middle East.
If we did not have Putin, if we were back to Medvedev, Medvedev would have let that go through as he did the Libyan resolution. So I think we have to be a little bit more sophisticated and cagy in the international analysis, but I think it is perfectly possible.
The other thing is, this occupy did not start in Wall Street. It started in a place called Madison, Wisconsin and it started almost a year ago now with the reactionary governor of the state trying to bust all the unions.
The way you get real results is if you bring the organized labor forces; working class workers together with the anti war people, so you better have some hard hitting demands, you better have a Wall Street sales tax, student loan amnesty, a stop to all foreclosures and your anti war demands and you better not let some facilitator tie you up in a consensus straitjacket so that you do not get any demand.
Press TV: Are you saying that they can make a difference?
Tarpley: Sure they can, sure, and I think defeatism is you know, you can have the pessimism of the intelligence, but you better have the optimism of the will. Things are pretty bad, everybody knows that, but it’s time to get active, right? The old saying get active or get radioactive probably applies.
Press TV: Webster your final thoughts? Will they attack Iran or not in your perspective?
Tarpley: I think there is a real danger. I think that has to be taken very seriously. The US ruling elite is in a kind of collective war psychosis at this point . If you saw Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice essentially hissing and apoplectic with anger after the Russians and the Chinese vetoed that Syrian resolution yesterday, I think you can get a sense of the mental instability of these people.
One of the things that is driving them is the potential collapse of the US dollar and I think this maybe looks a little bit different than what was just said. There is a group in Wall Street that says, “ Start a war in the [Persian] Gulf; Close [Strait of] Hormuz or get Iran or somebody else to do it; make the tanker traffic impossible; get the price of oil up to five hundred or a thousand dollars a barrel because that is a way to save the Dollar.”
If the dollar is collapsing, you can generate a huge artificial demand with a war.
First of all does it make a difference to have these types of demonstrations when we look at back to the prelude of the last war on Iraq, the US war on Iraq?
We know there were a lot of anti war demonstrations being held, in trying to demand Washington not to go in to Iraq, but it did not change anything. Does it make a difference?
Tarpley: It might make a difference this time, because Bush-Cheney were relatively impervious to that kind of demonstration, even though they were not very large.
Obama needs left cover; he needs it like he needs air to breath and if he is getting an attack on his left flag from an anti war movement coming back after a long period when it did collapsed; that is a significant political problem for Obama.
I would not want to overestimate the effect, but I think it is important. We have to remember that in 2006 – 2007, there was essentially a movement, an anti-war movement that was also an impeach Bush-Cheney movement. There was also a 9/11 Truth movement and what Obama was able to do was to wreck all of those.
He essentially neutralized everything. So that when we had the attack on Libya this past summer, spring- summer; the resistance was basically nothing. In other words the protest movement was practically non-existent.
So anything that would get the anti-war movement back in the streets would be important.
We have to remember how this control is exercised. A lot of the anti-war groups are foundation-funded and the foundations were willing to fund them when it was Bush-Cheney, but now that it is Obama they are not because Obama comes from this world of the foundations, in particular I would say the sort of Soros Group foundation. So if this movement could be brought back, that would be a good thing.
Press TV: Ok, what about that Webster Tarpley, what our guest has said that he doesn’t think that really they can make a difference – those people who are out in the street and that with all the wars that the US has been in, basically the American people have gotten nothing from it.
Of course, some would argue that, that one percent though have gone even more wealthy. So, can they make a difference being on the streets?
Tarpley: Well, as one of other speakers suggested let’s take an international approach because it is not just whatever protest can be mounted in the US.
I have a point of difference. We need to distinguish the authentic anti-war movement from color revolutions or CIA-people-power cause that are being attempted to destabilize a government, say like Russia. The so-called white revolution in Moscow in my view is a CIA – NATO project to try to overthrow Putin and what would that mean?
Let us look at what we just had yesterday; we had a resolution brought into the UN Security Council that would have been the first giant step towards a war involving Syria, which would target Iran and the other forces that are allied with Iran and Syria around the Middle East.
If we did not have Putin, if we were back to Medvedev, Medvedev would have let that go through as he did the Libyan resolution. So I think we have to be a little bit more sophisticated and cagy in the international analysis, but I think it is perfectly possible.
The other thing is, this occupy did not start in Wall Street. It started in a place called Madison, Wisconsin and it started almost a year ago now with the reactionary governor of the state trying to bust all the unions.
The way you get real results is if you bring the organized labor forces; working class workers together with the anti war people, so you better have some hard hitting demands, you better have a Wall Street sales tax, student loan amnesty, a stop to all foreclosures and your anti war demands and you better not let some facilitator tie you up in a consensus straitjacket so that you do not get any demand.
Press TV: Are you saying that they can make a difference?
Tarpley: Sure they can, sure, and I think defeatism is you know, you can have the pessimism of the intelligence, but you better have the optimism of the will. Things are pretty bad, everybody knows that, but it’s time to get active, right? The old saying get active or get radioactive probably applies.
Press TV: Webster your final thoughts? Will they attack Iran or not in your perspective?
Tarpley: I think there is a real danger. I think that has to be taken very seriously. The US ruling elite is in a kind of collective war psychosis at this point . If you saw Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice essentially hissing and apoplectic with anger after the Russians and the Chinese vetoed that Syrian resolution yesterday, I think you can get a sense of the mental instability of these people.
One of the things that is driving them is the potential collapse of the US dollar and I think this maybe looks a little bit different than what was just said. There is a group in Wall Street that says, “ Start a war in the [Persian] Gulf; Close [Strait of] Hormuz or get Iran or somebody else to do it; make the tanker traffic impossible; get the price of oil up to five hundred or a thousand dollars a barrel because that is a way to save the Dollar.”
If the dollar is collapsing, you can generate a huge artificial demand with a war.
Help Us Transmit This Story
Add to Your Blogger Account
Put it On Facebook
Tweet this post
Print it from your printer
Email and a collection of other outlets
Try even more services
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment