Follow by Email

Saturday, April 26, 2014

New York Times Editorial, "Meaningful Progress With Iran": Want to Vomit?

Did you ever read an opinion piece and want to vomit?

In an editorial entitled "Meaningful Progress With Iran" (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/27/opinion/sunday/meaningful-progress-with-iran.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0), The New York Times concludes:

"For all this positive momentum, which includes a reciprocal easing of some Western sanctions, many of Iran’s policies remain indefensible, such as the detention of political prisoners, support for President Bashar al-Assad of Syria and support for Hezbollah. Mr. Zarif failed to address those issues in an article he wrote on Iranian foreign policy in Foreign Affairs magazine. But he firmly committed Iran to 'prudent moderation' and to fostering peace and security. A durable nuclear agreement is an important first step in fulfilling that promise."

Ah yes, "prudent moderation" from Iran, a country that hangs homosexuals, stones to death women accused of adultery, executes poets, and commits atrocities against Baha'is, Kurds, Christians and Sunni Muslims.

After Obama's trip to Japan failed to yield a trade agreement, talks between Palestinians and Israelis sponsored by Kerry crumbled, and Putin thumbed his nose at the US in the Ukraine, we are to believe that Obama's initiative to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons is a success?

Those Iranians, who have witnessed the meaning of Obama's "red line" involving the use of chemical weapons in Syria, are sure to honor any agreement that they might sign with this cream puff . . . not.

2 comments:

  1. It makes you want to take these folks by the throat and throttle them until they repeat, "Khomeini and the Iranian ruling class is a fascist nightmare....Khomeini and the Iranian ruling class is a fascist nightmare...."

    ReplyDelete
  2. No, it makes you want to take these folks and ... transplant into Iran.
    BTW, we should remember that the Times was praising the Soviet "paradise" in the early 1930s (yes, during the Holodomor) and probably was also praising the "ruling classes of Germany" (Stalin's language which replaced overnight the previous "The Nazi thugs" ) after the 1939 pact.
    Yes, they are traditional.
    Now, excuse me, I really want to vomit.

    ReplyDelete