The Maxine Waters Investigation: What is Iran Doing in this Picture?

Maxine Waters

The timing of an investigation by the House Ethics Committee, which on August 2, 2010 formally brought a case against Congresswoman Maxine Waters, one of America’s most enduring liberal and fierce Anti War politicians, and the WikiLeaks of tens of thousands of Army documents related to the war in Afghanistan may be connected.

Speculation by bloggers, including John Young of, and an expose at The Intel Hub that the WikiLeaks is part of a disinformation operation, and that the documents themselves could even be fake, should put every left leaning American on Yellow alert.

Fox News wasted no time exploiting the WikiLeaks documents to further vilify Iran, pointing out that the documents indicate the U.S. belief that Iran is arming the Taliban insurgency. This adds another layer to Fox’s steady stream of propaganda that has flowed over the years advocating for an attack on the country, and stands as a reason why some believe the leak was staged. WikiLeaks documents — disinformation or not — are being used for anti-Iran propaganda, OpEdNews

Google trends confirm the news coverage has shifted from the BP Gulf Oil Spill to a debate over the non-Arab sovereign country of Iran. [1]

An investigation marginalizing the most virulent anti war democrat in congress at a time when the U.S. is openly considering a raid on Iranian’s (non-existent) nuclear weapons program, could be the most dangerous move towards nuclear war the world has seen since the 1962 Cuba Missile crisis.

Congresswoman Waters responded immediately to the baseless charges, “The record will clearly show that in advocating on behalf of minority banks, neither my office nor I benefited in any way, engaged in improper action or influenced anyone.”

The committee, which apparently is dragging it’s feet on the investigation of the alleged impropriety that took place 18 months ago, recently announced it could not determine a date for the hearing.

August 4, 2010, Congresswoman Water’s office called on the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to schedule an adjudicatory hearing and to release to the public all documents related to her.

“I feel strongly that further delay in the scheduling of the hearing violates the fundamental principles of due process, denies my constituents the opportunity to evaluate this case, and harms my ability to defend my integrity.

Therefore I am waiving my right to keep the Committee’s findings confidential so that the public to be fully informed about this matter and I am able to present my case, my constituents and all Americans will understand that I have not violated any House rules.”

The failure to release the allegations against Congresswoman Waters has resulted in a media circus of speculation based only on a report prepared by the controversial Office of Congressional Ethics.

You will recall Public opinion was deeply divided on Bush’s 1990 Gulf policy, and the decision to invade Iraq was made by the US Senate via a narrow five-vote margin.

An investigation of any kind (especially one that is over events that took place in 2008) of the most outspoken voice of reason in the U.S. House of Representatives on the issue of U.S. aggression in the Middle East should put all Americans on Red alert.

And if you want more proof of a concerted effort to paint Iran, a country with a non-existent nuclear weapons capability and an air force that belongs in museums read on. [2]

On August 3, 2010, the U.S. State Department rebuffed a call from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for direct talks with President Barack Obama. In the same week of the anniversary of the unnecessary bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Hillary Clinton proposes the ultimate hypocrisy by suggesting that Tehran pay more attention to the international concerns over its nuclear program. [3]

Just two days later, the U.S. State Department released their latest report on terrorism and claims that Iran remained the, “most active” state sponsor of terrorism, and its support for terrorist and militant groups throughout the Middle East and Central Asia had a “direct impact” on international efforts for peace and stability.

This report on terrorism should be questioned because in 2001 the senior director for Middle East affairs in the National Security Council is quoted as saying:

“The State Department and NSC officials met secretly with Iranian diplomats in October, 2001 to discuss “how to effectively unseat the Taliban and once the Taliban was gone, how to stand up an Afghan government.” [4]

Normally I don’t recommend those “take action”- campaigns: the ones that tell us, it’s not too late, click-here to importune our “elected”- representatives with emails and faxes.

However, a confrontation with Iran is different.

A World War III would be terminal, and therefore it is imperative we make our voices heard.

Contact Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton and demand she honor the commitment made by President Obama during the 2007 Democratic debate when he said that he would:

“As president, be willing to meet without preconditions with Iran’s leaders, and that the notion of not talking to one’s foes was ridiculous.” [5]

What’s worse than turmoil in the Middle East asked a blogger, “A radioactive turmoil in the Middle East.

E-mail President of the United States

Call President Obama (202) 456-1414

Fax the White House (202) 456-2461

E-mail The Secretary of State

Call Hillary Rodham Clinton (202) 647-6575 press 1 to leave a comment

Albert Einstein understood the perils of nuclear war and the extinction of life on earth, which has already started with the radioactive contamination resulting from depleted uranium. “ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”

Katherine Smith, PhD


[1] Recent developments have turned the Middle East into the center of international attention. Iran, as the Persian Gulf region’s only non-Arab nation, Israel, as the world’s sole Jewish state, and a host of fragile Arab countries, who are being immersed in the waves of the West’s economic turmoil, find their destiny intertwined, with each party trying to surmount the other. All this makes for an interesting, yet worrying, rivalry in the Middle East.

August 5, Google Alert – Nuclear

AP Exclusive: Iran defiant in nuclear documents

Nuclear powers remember Hiroshima, The Press Association

UK PM Makes Policy Slip, Says Iran Has Nuclear Weapon, Wall Street Journal

Senate Committee Delays Action on New START Treaty, Voice of America

Poll: Arab majority believes nuclear Iran helps Mideast, Jewish Telegraphic Agency

[2] Who’s Telling the Truth About Iran’s Nuclear Program? by Muhammad Sahimi

Since February 2003, Iran’s nuclear program has undergone what the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) itself admits to be the most intrusive inspection in its entire history. After thousands of hours of inspections by some of the most experienced IAEA experts, the Agency has verified time and again that (1) there is no evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran, and (2) all the declared nuclear materials have been accounted for; there has been no diversion of such materials to non-peaceful purposes. Iran has a clean bill of health, as far as its nuclear program is concerned.

July 7, 2008 04:24 AM H. Con. Res. 362 – through efforts, Iran seeks to establish regional hegemony, threatens longstanding friends of the United States in the Middle East, and endangers American national security interests.

Regional hegemony is not achieved with Iranian army that has been designed solely to defend Iran, and an air force that belongs in museums.

To summarize: it is clear that practically every paragraph in the Senate and House Resolutions have factual errors, lies, exaggerations, and half-truths. Iran can be criticized on many grounds, particularly in the area of respect for human rights. But, Iran is not a threat to the United States or to Israel. It is not anywhere close to having the capability for manufacturing nuclear weapons, even if it wanted to.

Therefore, the American public must recognize these Resolutions for what they really are: War Resolutions proposed and pushed by neoconservatives in both the Democrat and Republican parties, various pro-Israel lobbies, and their allies.

It is crucial that the American public act now, today, by calling their congressional representatives before these “declarations of war” against Iran are passed. If we do launch an unprovoked attack on Iran the results will most probably be horrific to all sides, if not to the entire world.

[3] U.S. dismisses Ahmadinejad’s call for direct talks with Obama

[4] President Ahmadinejad of Iran has denied the charges that his government supports Taliban insurgents.

Prior to Ahmadinejad’s coming to power, while the U.S. planned the invasion of Afghanistan, Iran helped organize the Northern Alliance against the Taliban. Though the U.S. has downplayed Iran’s role in the early days of the war, U.S.soldiers and officials have conceded that Iranian forces were present with the Afghan rebels in 2001. In his 2006 article, “How Neocons Sabotaged Iran’s Help on al-Qaeda” author Gareth Porter wrote:

“After the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. officials responsible for preparing for war in Afghanistan needed Iran’s help to unseat the Taliban and establish a stable government in Kabul. Iran had organized resistance by the Northern Alliance and had provided arms and funding at a time when the United States had been unwilling to do so.”

The article quotes Flynt Leverett– senior director for Middle East affairs in the National Security Council at the time– who said that State Department and NSC officials met secretly with Iranian diplomats in October, 2001 to discuss “how to effectively unseat the Taliban and once the Taliban was gone, how to stand up an Afghan government.”

The State Department’s policy planning staff wrote a paper in November 2001 recommending that the U.S. pursue more formal cooperation with Iran in fighting al-Qaeda. Yet collaboration with Iran in Afghanistan would have involved equal sharing of information about al-Qaeda between the two countries, and since the Bush administration had already decided to include Iran on its “axis of evil” hit-list by then, the U.S. turned its back on the idea.

As Neocons use the WikiLeaks story of Iranian efforts to hamper the U.S. occupation of its neighbor in order to push their agenda, no doubt they will overlook the fact that in 2007 the CIA received presidential approval to mount a covert operation to destabilize Iran’s government. It’s even less likely that they’ll mention that Iran’s democratically elected government was overthrown by the CIA and replaced by the heavy-handed Shah– a U.S. puppet– when it wanted to nationalize its oil fields back in 1953.

Such facts aren’t convenient for a U.S. government trying to seize the moral high ground while biding its time for the right moment to launch another unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation. WikiLeaks documents– disinformation or not– are being used for anti-Iran propaganda, OpEdNews

[5] Mr. Obama first made waves with his views on Iran policy in 2007, when he said during a Democratic debate that he would, as president, be willing to meet without preconditions with Iran’s leaders, and that the notion of not talking to one’s foes was “ridiculous.”

Since becoming president, Mr. Obama has pursued diplomacy, but his stance has become steadily more confrontational. Iran’s Nuclear Program, The New York Times

11 Comments on "The Maxine Waters Investigation: What is Iran Doing in this Picture?"

  1. Your Mom | Aug 9, 2010 at 8:13 am |

    Sure, let's “speculate” to divert attention from the massive fraud and misconduct that Maxine Waters is charged with. Since the Dems control the executive and legislative branches, we can't blame the Republicans … but we can attempt to muddy the waters (pun intended) by somehow trying to make Iran look like the good guys.

    Holy crap, Disinfo, you're really losing it…

  2. Simply with regard to the “expose” on Intel Hub, your citation of that nonsense is baffling. I might as well cite the ramblings of the all the homeless people in my neighborhood. Yeah, sure, their insanity is pretty much the most potent critique of society that I can find, but that doesn't mean that the words coming out of their mouths make any sense.

    To take just one example, the idea that Wikileaks is somehow shadowy because it outmaneuvered the CIA and NSA…this makes no sense. Wikileaks didn't outmaneuver anyone. They posted some documents that pretty much told us what we already know about this war. The documents provided details rather than general themes. Daniel Ellsberg gave docs to the NY Times and others. Someone gave docs to Wikileaks. That's it, not much difference if any.

    The CIA and NSA have proven themselves to be useless when it comes to anything other than promoting their paranoid, anti-people agenda. When someone exposes their idiocy, it doesn't mean they are shadowy, it just means they are trying to stand in the way of domination and control.

  3. Theodore (Ted) Sumrall | Aug 9, 2010 at 11:26 am |

    Iran has been involved with a lot of bad things since the revolution. The Reagan administration succesfully kept them pinned down with their “cheap oil” strategy and in concert with Saudi Arabia. This tactic also crippled the Soviet Union. The book “Victory” by Peter Schweitzer goes into much detail on this effort. I do not think that the situation with Iran is a Republican or Democrat tool of convenience. They are just bad guys pure and simple. They are so fanatic they would risk destruction of their entire country if they could deliver a knockout blow to the US or Israel. The leaders would of course be someplace safe before they did this because the US would retaliate. Even if the country were destroyed, the ballistic submarines would still be operational.

    • Hadrian999 | Aug 9, 2010 at 3:24 pm |

      good job telling half the story, before your heart swells too much with patriotic fervor maybe you should look at the things the US government did to Iran that precipitated the Islamic revolution, and then hired out iraq to do.

    • Haystack | Aug 9, 2010 at 6:33 pm |

      The book you cited deals with Reagan's policies. Have you considered that things might have changed in the last 30 years?

  4. The book you cited deals with Reagan’s policies. Have you considered that things might have changed in the last 30 years?

  5. Maxine Waters is an awesome Congresswoman, and the BS surrounding this non-scandal smells a lot to me like more ACORN blithering, which helped destroy one of the primary organizations that registers black voters who aren’t rolling in Cosby or Shaq type money, not to mention more than a few impoverished white folks too. (Basically people who vote against Republicans.) So a “scandal” was manufactured out of whole cloth, Faux Nooz goes into overdrive, the Democratic “leadership” of the party folds like a cheap suit, and the organization gets it’s Federal Funding cut (meanwhile Blackwater who it has PROVEN has committed war crimes, gets another contract from Leon Panetta at CIA). And later it’s proven that ACORN is “guilty” of exactly squat.

    Maxine’s done a lot for middle class and poor Americans over the years, and Republicans don’t like that when you’re both outspoken and effective — thus the bullshit charges.

    As for what Iran has, or doesn’t have at this point, it never ceases to amaze me why we aren’t sending in SWAT to arrest Darth Cheney, considering he was the douche who supplied Iran with nuclear centrifuge parts in the first place while he was CEO of Halliburton in the 1990’s, in violation of American sanctions.

    Why is nobody talking about locking his punk ass up?

  6. Not to mention Cheney’s outing a CIA NOC who was tasked with preventing nuclear proliferation. That little political tirade cost us a brassplate company that it took years to set up, and no doubt cost the lives of all the assets they had contact with. Cheney committed a straight-up hanging offense — treason. And he did it all because an honorable man told the truth about his crap war of choice — a war which ended up costing this country not just trillions out of the national treasury, but also over 4,400 American soldiers lives, millions of Iraqi lives, and making five times that many Iraqi’s homeless and wicked angry. Heckuva job, DICK!

    But the people getting “prosecuted” a people like Maxine who advocated for minority-owned local banks? Are you shitting me?

  7. Anonymous | Sep 24, 2011 at 4:05 am |

    i like your blog because you are perfect blog writer please tell me more about yourself in this linkmasonry productsBrick stone 

Comments are closed.