Neocon Public Radio

As Porter pointed out in the "Open Thread" comments below, NPR brings on a couple of neocons -Kenneth Adelman and Joshua Muravchik - and gives them lots of free airtime to offer their propaganda unchallenged and with support from from Scott Simon. The interview serves two main purposes - to shine a positive light on neoconservatism and to propagate anti-Iran misinformation.

Part I: The Glories of Neoconservatism

Simon describes neocons as "...often former liberals...who thought that liberals had accomodated communist totalitarianism at the cost of human rights..."

Adelman states, "....to save people in horrendous situations, which is to me the very essence and the very identity of the neoconservative movement."

Simon asks Muravchik, "What about the idea that stimulating democracy around the world was a good thing?" He then asks Adelman, "How do you see the idea of encouraging democracies around the world - is that idea still looking good?"

Simon simply accepts and asserts that neoconservatism is about human rights and the spread of democracy. There is no critique of Neoconservatism's main ideal - complete US military hegemony over the world to protect our "interests." And, of course, there is not one reference to the historical record of neoconservatism's brutal human rights program as practiced in Latin America.

Part II: The Iranian Nemesis

Simon asks Muravchik to respond to the following statement: "You explore the idea that Iraq might have been the wrong war, the wrong time, the wrong place...the United States has been left out of position to confront a threat in Iran."

Amazing isn't it, how a complete non-threat like Iran, is posited as a threat by Simon.

To which Muravchik responds, "Whatever you might have thought about how much connection there was between Sadaam Hussein and al-Qaeda, what was crystal clear was that THE BIGGEST STATE SUPPORTER OF TERRORISM IN THE WORLD WAS THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAN. (Simon can be heard grunting "ummhmm" in agreement).

Not only does Simon not challenge this utterly unsupported assertion, he offers his agreement!

Simon then turns to Adelman "Is the United States just out of position when it comes to credibility on Iran at this point?" Out of position? How about ethically and morally bankrupt.

Adelman claims that "a military solution is impossible in Iran because the main problem is nuclear weapons being developed there, and the nuclear weapons there are hidden buried and dispersed..."

Muravchik accurately corrects Adelman: "Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons," and then rolls on into his own bomb Iran bloodlust, "it has facilities and some of them may be hidden but we know where most of them are, and I believe we can cripple Iran's drive to get nuclear weapons through air strikes...."

Not only are the factual distortions unchallenged in this sorry excuse of an interview, but there isn't even a peep made about the immorality and illegality of an unprovoked air assault on a country that poses no significant threat to the United States.