From the FB page of:
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PRO-MURDER OP-EDS
IRANIAN PEACE NEGOTIATORS must be told to agree with Trump or be killed, a Washington Post op-ed demanded this week.
“Iran's leaders must be made to understand that their lives literally depend on reaching a negotiated settlement to Trump's liking,” the paper said. “If they refuse to do so, they will be killed.”
Agree with Trump or die? This is not what normal humans think of as a peace negotiation, but no one can expect rationality from the western elite these days.
.
OTHER MEDIA'S THE SAME
The New York Times is the same. Bret Stephens, whose writing is often found on the front page of that paper, has been slavering for murderous attacks on Iranians instead of diplomacy: "The Case for Bombing Iran" is a typical headline.
In fact, it is clear that the argument that murder is fine because Iranians (or Chinese or Russians) are somehow uniquely bad has moved from far-right websites to the liberal mainstream media.
“You can find pro-war op-eds in the New York Times and The Atlantic, and Van Jones told CNN that Iran is not a ‘normal country’…” said Nathan J Robinson in Current Affairs.
.
AL-JAZEERA TOO
Even Al-Jazeera, which some people mistake for a news source giving the “other side of the story” (it is actually funded by Qatar, a US military partner) recently ran an op-ed praising the illegal US murders of the members of the Iranian government.
That country’s administration "has been decapitated at multiple levels" and the killing of Ali Khamenei "eliminated the apex of the pyramid," it printed approvingly in a 16 March 2026 op-ed by Muhanad Seloom, a former employee of the US State Dept.
.
USUALLY A WAR
“American journalists have a long, ignoble history of being willing conduits for pro-war propaganda,” said Ted Galen Carpenter in an article published by the CATO Institute in March 2022.
“Usually, that behavior is in service to a military crusade that Washington has launched or wants to initiate.”
All this echoes the truth that Julian Assange has said repeatedly: “Every war has been the result of media lies.”
.
AT ISSUE IS THE RULE OF LAW
The problem is that the leaders of the western world, the US and Israel, have spent decades telling us that the rule of law legitimizes the west’s hegemony over the planet.
But that has become nothing more than a bad joke. You either have the rule of law or you don’t – and the west clearly does not.
.
A PLAIN VIOLATION
As Nathan J Robinson said: “Let’s be clear: Iran did not attack the United States. Iran was not planning an attack on the United States. Iran does not even possess missiles that can reach the United States. It was a plain violation of international law, then, for the U.S. to bomb Iran, a sovereign country.”
But but but maybe the Iranians were hoping to emulate their trigger-happy neighbors Israel, and quietly build nuclear bombs, I hear critics say.
In legal terms, that’s missing the point. “It makes no difference what level they had been enriching uranium at,” Robinson points out. “It doesn’t even make a difference if they were trying to build a nuclear bomb. You can’t attack a country that hasn’t attacked you.”
That's actually important.
***
Vicious Venomous Vipers of a murderous nature slithered together a la Wanks and Shailoks
