Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Lindsey Graham Blames Iran For 9/11 Attacks

LobeLog

Over the past week, Republican opposition to the Iran deal has devolved considerably. Senate Republicans spent the week in chaos, raising uncertainty about whether their measure of disapproval would even reach a key procedural vote (Senators agreed to a cloture vote at 3:45pm today), holding a rally with notorious Islamophobe and birther Frank Gaffney and, in a bizarre lack of self-awareness, trotting out former Vice President Dick Cheney for a speech opposing the deal at the American Enterprise Institute, the same institution where neoconservatives met for their “black coffee briefings” to plan how to win the “war of Ideas” after 9/11 and the de-Baathification of Iraq.

Much media attention from that event focused on Patrick Clawson, research director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, attempting to violently grab a demonstrator’s banner. The banner read “Cheney Wrong On Iraq Wrong on Iran,” a reference to Cheney’s certainty about the existence of Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction and the former VP’s reemergence as a prominent opponent of diplomacy with Iran.

That apparent obliviousness to the past, particularly by those who advocated for the invasion of Iraq over a decade ago, was in the spotlight again today. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) took to the floor of the Senate to decry the nuclear deal with Iran as a betrayal of Israel, “damning the Middle East to holy hell” and explaining why the Ayatollah isn’t celebrating by “dancing in the street”: “He just doesn’t believe in dancing.”

Graham is a high-profile hawk and, along with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), one of the Republican party’s most outspoken and influential foreign policy voices. So what he said next is truly surprising: Graham appeared to blame the 9/11 attacks on Iran:

I have no idea why you believe the Ayatollah doesn’t mean what he says, given they way he’s behaved. If they will shoot their own children down in the streets to keep power, what do you think they’ll do to ours? And the only reason three thousand people died on 9/11 is they couldn’t get the weapons to kill three million of us and they’re on course to do it now.

The 9/11 Report looked at the possibility of Iranian involvement and concluded that while some of the hijackers transited through Iran:

We have found no evidence that Iran or Hezbollah was aware of the planning for what later became the 9/11 attack. At the time of their travel through Iran, the al Qaeda operatives themselves were probably not aware of the specific details of their future operation.

If Lindsey Graham has some new evidence, he should probably share it with the public. On the other hand, taking the most hawkish anti-Iran positions, even at the expense of the truth, might be a political ploy. Graham’s presidential campaign is a total flop (he’s currently polling around 0 percent). He reportedly speaks frequently with Republican megadonor Sheldon Adelson and, in April, after a glass of wine, claimed he was a favorite of pro-Israel donors. The desperate bid to link Iran to 9/11 may be just the type of thing a donor like Adelson—who wants to drop nuclear bombs on Iran—might respond to by infusing the Senator’s campaign with some cash.

Graham may have to make increasingly outlandish statements if he hopes to garner any media attention, resuscitate his dying presidential campaign and maintain his access to anti-Iran deal GOP donors. With no accountability for the lies that led to the Iraq war, the strategy looks unlikely to have a downside.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Zalmay Khalilzad is Donald Trump’s special representative to the Afghan peace process, having previously served as ambassador to Afghanistan and Iraq under George W. Bush.


Robert Joseph played a key role in manipulating U.S. intelligence to support the invasion of Iraq and today is a lobbyist for the MEK.


Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks, and one of the prime vacillators among Republicans between objecting to and supporting Donald Trump.


Elliott Abrams, the Trump administration’s special envoy to Venezuela, is a neoconservative with a long record of hawkish positions and actions, including lying to Congress about the Iran-Contra affair.


Mike Pompeo, Donald Trump second secretary of state, has driven a hawkish foreign policy in Iran and Latin America.


Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) is known for his hawkish views on foreign policy and close ties to prominent neoconservatives.


Nikki Haley, Donald Trump’s first U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and is widely considered to be a future presidential candidate.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

François Nicoullaud, the former French ambassador to Iran, discusses the ups and downs of Iran-France relations and the new US sanctions.


Effective alliances require that powerful states shoulder a far larger share of the alliance maintenance costs than other states, a premise that Donald Trump rejects.


The new imbroglio over the INF treaty does not mean a revival of the old Cold War practice of nuclear deterrence. However, it does reveal the inability of the West and Russia to find a way to deal with the latter’s inevitable return to the ranks of major powers, a need that was obvious even at the time the USSR collapsed.


As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump appeared to recognize the obvious problem of the revolving door. But as the appointment of Patrick Shanahan, who spent 30 years at Boeing, as the Trump administration’s acting secretary of defense reveals, little has changed. America is indeed great again, if you happen to be one of those lucky enough to be moving back and forth between plum jobs in the Pentagon and the weapons industry.


Domestic troubles, declining popularity, and a decidedly hawkish anti-Iran foreign policy team may combine to make the perfect storm that pushes Donald Trump to pull the United States into a new war in the Middle East.


The same calculus that brought Iran and world powers to make a deal and has led remaining JCPOA signatories to preserve it without the U.S. still holds: the alternatives to this agreement – a race between sanctions and centrifuges that could culminate in Iran obtaining the bomb or being bombed – would be much worse.


With Bolton and Pompeo by his side and Mattis departed, Trump may well go with his gut and attack Iran militarily. He’ll be encouraged in this delusion by Israel and Saudi Arabia. He’ll of course be looking for some way to distract the media and the American public. And he won’t care about the consequences.


RightWeb
share