MICHAEL ENRIGHT, ARE YOU FOR REAL?
Sunday
morning I tuned into Michael Enright’s Sunday Edition radio show (Feb.
19) and was sorry.
I don’t know what to think about Michael these days.
Or CBC Radio. I understand that Stephen Harper considers CBC Radio
the enemy but I am increasingly perplexed as to why. As far as
international news reporting goes, it seems to me that the Canadian
media, including the CBC, is doing Harper’s job for him by keeping the
Canada public so tense with threats of imminent war that we will be
willing to accept more restrictions on our basic freedoms.
These threats
center on the so-called possibility of a US-Israeli invasion of Iran.
On
the program Michael utters the threatening words in a deeply
authoritarian voice: “How close is Iran to building a nuclear weapon?
What should be done? Should the US and Israel make a preemptive strike?”
Michael’s first two guests demure about a strike, but at least his
third guest, Hirsh Goodman from National Security Studies from Tel Aviv
University in Israel gives Michael the answer he seems to be hoping for.
The answer is yes. Mr. Goodman would think a preemptive strike would
be proper action if Iran continues with nuclear development.
The
other two guests, Barbara Slavin (Atlantic Council Think Tank) and Paul
Rogers (University of Bradford, England) weren’t so sure about what to
do. But what I find so troubling is this… there was a lengthy
discussion with these three scholars concerning Iran and a possible
invasion and not a single one of them, including Michael himself,
mentioned the magic word…China.
I couldn’t believe it!
It was as if
China didn’t exist. As if China hadn’t announced to the world that she
would protect Iran. As if China hadn’t announced to the world just
recently that she was preparing for war if need be (Commodity On Line
1/7/12) and that she was troubled by remarks coming from the White
House. Voila! An immediate change in Obama’s attitude.
“Okay,”
Obama and the bankers seem to say to China, “if you won’t let us invade
Iran without getting your kickers in a knot, will you please loan us
some more money? “Well,” China seems to say in response, “we would like
to see a negotiated settlement on the restrictive measures against
Iran”. “Okay, we’ll get to work on that,” Obama seems to have responded
and the bankers appear to have nodded in agreement. And China seems to
have accepted this kind of a compromise because suddenly China and the
US are big buddies. Really big buddies. And the talk coming from the
While House appears to be leaning toward a negotiated settlement with
Iran rather than an invasion. Just as Stephen Harper also appears to
have been “born again” on the Chinese front.
“We’re
not really looking for trouble over Iran,” Stephen Harper seems to have
explained to China. “We just have to get rid of some of this bitumen
we’re digging out of our tar sands, and as we are disfiguring and
poisoning the entire landscape, we need more investment in the tar sands
and we also have these other big plans for fracking shale gas that we
need investment for, and in return and with a little luck maybe we can
get the liquid gas over to your shores without explosions, how about
it?”
“Fracking right on”, the Chinese seem to have replied.
There
will be no invasion of Iran. China buys most of Iran’s oil. And while
China is not expansionist she will protect her own interests. Harper
and Obama and the banks all know this. However, the saber rattling by
the Western media keeps their citizens on edge. Nervous citizens will
allow erosion of civil rights that they wouldn’t entertain without the
stabbings of continuous war anxiety.
The CBC is certainly doing its
share of exaggerating or outright falsifying the dangers of an imminent
invasion of Iran.
And while I’m at it, I have another bone to pick with
Mr. Michael Enright’s reporting, this time about legalizing the sale of
body parts. For another time.
|
