Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., is a WND senior staff reporter. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers "The Obama Nation" and "Unfit for Command." Corsi's latest book is the forthcoming "What Went Wrong?: The Inside Story of the GOP Debacle of 2012 … And How It Can Be Avoided Next Time."More ↓Less ↑
On Jan. 13, 2005, the pro-mullah American-Iranian Council joined forces with George Soros’ Open Society Institute to host Javad Zarif, Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, to give a talk titled, “The View from Tehran.”
Soros did not waste any time after supporting with millions of his own money John Kerry’s losing 2004 presidential bid. Even before George Bush could be inaugurated the second time, Soros was rolling out the carpet for the mullah’s top man in New York. Soros invited Zarif to explain why Kerry was still right to insist that Iran deserves full economic and diplomatic recognition, as well as nuclear fuel, all the while trusting that they would keep their word and not make bombs.
The New York papers announcing the event commented that on Jan. 3, 2004, Iranian government spokesperson Abdollah Ramenzanzadeh told reporters that Tehran “had not yet decided on a third party” to mediate “negotiations” with the United States. What negotiations? Investigative reporter Kenneth Timmerman, writing in the New York Post commented:
There are no ongoing negotiations between the United States and Iran. However, whenever the regime has felt under pressure from a vigorous U.S. policy, it has dangled the prospect of such negotiations in an attempt to discredit and to weaken the American side.
– “Shilling for the Mullahs,” Jan. 11, 2005
(Kenneth Timmerman has consistently written important reports on the pro-mullah lobby in the United States and their efforts to recruit a long list of Democratic politicians, including John Kerry, to their side.)
Once again, the mullahs are being clever. The entire staged event gave the appearance of putting pressure on the Bush administration to go along with the EU-3 and the IAEA and accept Iran’s word that they would be good and would stop enriching uranium. Now President Bush would appear to be the unreasonable one if he did not assign some third party to mediate these non-existing negotiations.
Moreover, the American left would have even more ammunition to make the case that the president was on yet another pre-emptive warpath against a presumed Islamic enemy who really never had any intention of possessing any weapons of mass destruction that could possibly be a threat to anyone.
Let’s face facts: The only reason Soros likes the mullahs is because they are as anti-American as the American far-left itself has become.
The Iranian foreign ministry went further, suggesting that Secretary of State Colin Powell has determined that a “future Iraqi government dominated by the Shi’a and influenced by Iran will not be a threat to the United States or its interests,” and “that Washington and Tehran have reached an understanding on how Iraq needs to be stabilized.”
Once again the pro-mullah public-relations effort in the United States was hard at work, trying to pin on outgoing Colin Powell – known to be one of the administration’s more liberal foreign-policy officials generally in favor of negotiations – the presumptive conclusion that Iran could be constructive in Iraq. This was not something the Bush administration itself would readily concede – not when the reports coming from our military in Iraq were presenting evidence that the mullahs were funding terrorists to cross the border into Iraq to harass our troops and create as much instability as possible prior to the scheduled elections on Jan. 30, 2005.
Ken Timmerman is used to the mullahs’ shenanigans: “What Tehran wants is abundantly clear. Iran’s ruling clerics want to continue mucking around in Iraq and to complete their nuclear weapons development, without the United States intervening.”
The key story here was not that the mullahs and their cohorts in America were dissembling – that was old news. What this event signaled was that George Soros and the American far left were ready to spend millions more supporting America’s enemies, including radical Islamic extremists from a terror-supporting rogue state like Iran.
“Soros is once again showing his true colors,” Timmerman wrote. “He is anti-American, anti-freedom and pro-tyranny, for America and for America’s friends overseas.”
Hassan Nemazee, as we have seen earlier, one of John Kerry’s top fund-raisers in his 2004 presidential campaign, was a board member of the American-Iranian Council. Nemazee has funded a long list of Democratic Party candidates, including Bill and Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy and Joe Biden. At every event where Democratic candidates have been present, the AIC has been certain to press its agenda to get the mullahs back their economic and diplomatic recognition.
Aryo Pirouznia – the Iranian freedom fighter whom Nemazee sued for defamation when Aryo called him an agent of the mullahs – was extremely upset by this Soros sponsored get-together between the AIC and the Open Society Institute in New York.
It seems once again the very same individuals and groups of interest, who tried to sell the false idea of any possibility of reforming an ideologically rogue and tyrannical regime, have mobilized in order to influence the second Bush administration.
These are the very same circles that pushed for Mr. Kerry’s presidency and now they’re intending to avoid the formation of a strong U.S. policy, which might back the Iranian people morally and financially in their struggle to overthrow the illegitimate and shaky Iranian regime.
There was no doubt in Aryo’s mind that the mullahs needed America’s economic and diplomatic support to prop up their regime. What Aryo wanted was freedom in his country, something he knew in his heart could only be achieved if the mullahs were thrown out of power.
More than ever, the Bush administration should avoid engaging the Mullhacracy and must increase its political and economic pressures on the totality of the Islamic regime and its partners in order to favor the opposition groups in Iran pushing for a popular take-over of power.
Only an elected Iranian secular and democratic state, issued from a real and genuine referendum, can answer the aspirations of the Iranian people and fulfill the world’s legitimate concerns about freedom, fanaticism, Islamism, terror and the dangers of nuclear weapons.
Timmerman was equally strong in his conclusion: “Soros’ prescription for America’s future was bad for America. His prescription for the future of America’s relations with Iran is bad for the world. Strengthening Tehran’s mullahs means a nuclear-armed Iran.”