In Civility Report 2023, Peace Worldwide Organization Founder Mehdi Alavi reviews all countries within the United Nations and provides human rights, democracy, peace, and civility scores for 193 countries. We urge you to read Civility Report 2023 today.


In Civility Report 2023, Peace Worldwide Organization Founder Mehdi Alavi reviews all countries within the United Nations and provides human rights, democracy, peace, and civility scores for 193 countries. We urge you to read Civility Report 2023 today.


Africa is the world's second largest and second most populous continent, after Asia. Africa covers 6% of the Earth's total surface area and 20.4% of the total land area. With 1.0 billion people, it accounts for about 14.72% of the world's human population.


Americas are lands in the Western hemisphere of the world. In English, the plural form of the Americas is often used to refer to the landmasses of North America and South America with their associated islands and regions.


Asia is the world's largest and most populous continent, located primarily in the eastern and northern hemispheres. With approximately 3.879 billion people, it hosts 60% of the world's current human population.


Europe is the world's second-smallest continent by surface area, covering about 10,180,000 square kilometres or 2% of the Earth's surface and about 6.8% of its land area. Yet the borders of Europe, can incorporate cultural and political elements.


The Middle East is a transcontinental region centered on Western Asia, Turkey, and Egypt.

How to Tell Between an Iranian “Proxy” and an Ally

Aitit,southern Lebanon/Lebanon:1/6/2017: flags of Hezbollah with the sun shine reflection During a military salute For the funeral © crop media /

Western media habitually label Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah as Iran’s proxies. One could just as reasonably consider European countries proxies of the US. Such a blind approach only serves to further erode the media’s credibility. A more accurate description for these groups would be “allies” or “partners” of Iran.

William Randolph Hearst, who built the United States' largest media conglomerate, famously declared, "You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war." Hearst pioneered yellow journalism, a style characterized by its extensive use of bold headlines and exaggerated narratives, often rooted in speculation and dubious information.

Sensationalism plagues the American media. The dramatization of news stories to attract a wider audience and generate revenue is a persistent trend. The media habitually deploy misleading information, propaganda and unverified rumors.

This penchant for sensationalized reporting has become so ingrained that even some formally independent media outlets can be drawn into this vortex. Fair Observer purports to champion balanced and truthful reporting. However, during the recent coverage of escalating tensions between the United States and Iran, this author noted with surprise the editorial oversight that allowed contributors to refer to Iran's allies and partners as proxies.

The terms “proxy,” “ally” and “partner” all describe relationships between actors on the international stage, but they are not synonyms. A proxy is an entity acting on behalf of another, often with a degree of subordination. In legal contexts, a proxy typically grants the designated individual general discretion throughout the matter at hand.

An ally, by contrast, is a party that provides assistance or support in a shared endeavor. Formalized agreements between states for wartime support are what alliances often become in the legal realm. In the context of Iran's Axis of Resistance, this can include non-state actors as well.

Finally, a partner refers to an entity associated with another for the joint execution of an activity that offers mutual benefit. In legal terms, a partnership is an agreement between two or more parties to engage in mutually advantageous projects.

Iran's Axis of Resistance comprises entities such as the Houthis, Hamas and Hezbollah. These groups should not be categorized as Iranian proxies, but rather as allies or partners. (While their alliances with Iran may lack formal agreements, their actions demonstrate a level of cooperation.) Most importantly, each group retains its own decision-making authority. The Houthis pursue independent governance in Yemen. Similarly, Hamas, a Sunni group, has a history of conflict against Iranian-backed forces in Syria to overthrow Syrian President Assad. Hezbollah receives financial and military aid from Iran, yet it maintains its independent decision-making capacity.

Iran firmly bases its policy on ethical grounds when it supports the restoration of Palestinian control over Palestine. Analogous to the shared democratic values purportedly uniting the US and the EU, Iran and its allies share a common goal: the cessation of Palestinian occupation and the facilitation of a coexistence of Palestinian Christians, Jews and Muslims without unequal Jewish power.

The era of colonialism has concluded. Should the Western coalition, led by the US, seek to dismantle Iran’s Axis of Resistance, they must stop colonizing Palestine, thereby letting Palestinians to govern their own territory. Failing this, the resistance will grow stronger and force the West to retreat in disgrace, as seen in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

The proxy narrative is a misconception in Middle Eastern politics

The ongoing conflict between Israel, backed by the US, and the Palestinians in Gaza has garnered global attention since the October 7 attacks by Hamas on Israel. While not directly implicated in the October 7 assault, Iran's allies or partners in Lebanon, Iraq, Palestine, Syria, Yemen and other nations have aligned themselves with Hamas in the aftermath of the incident. The adversarial stance of the United States and its media towards Iran often unjustly characterizes these entities as Iran’s proxies. That is just another lie to instill public anger against Iran. 

In a report spanning 20 pages, Michael Knights of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy asserted that Iran typically refrains from imposing its will on groups such as the Houthis, allowing them autonomy in their decision-making processes. Knights contends that the Houthis are neither direct proxies of Iran nor opportunistic wartime allies. They align with Iran based on shared ideological beliefs rather than coercion. Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, the leader of the Houthi movement, considers himself equal to Iran's supreme leader.

The Council on Foreign Relations’ study too found that mutual consent, not proxy servitude, forms the basis of Iran’s associations, which further debunks the notion of Iran’s dominance over its partners.

The persistence of Palestinian resistance

The Houthis, Zaidi Shia Arabs known for their robust determination and autonomous disposition, remained unsubdued by British dominion over Yemen for 129 years. The are combatants who resist oppression, something evident in their solidarity with the oppressed Palestinians in Gaza. Although, like Iranians, they are Shia Muslims, Iranians are predominantly Twelver Shias. The two sects diverged in the 7th century, and so are separated by more historical distance than Catholics are from Protestants or Orthodox Christians. 

Currently, the Houthis are attracting attention for their strategic blockade of the Bab al-Mandab strait in the Gulf of Aden, aimed at Israel and its allies, including the United States and the United Kingdom. Their actions are underpinned by a principled stance, conditioning the lifting of Israel's internationally condemned blockade of Gaza as a precondition for de-escalation.

Since 2007, Hamas has effectively governed Gaza following the 2006 parliamentary elections, catalyzed by US President George W. Bush's endorsement of Palestinian electoral processes To the US’ surprise, Hamas won the election in Gaza. Instead of endorsing it, the US opted to finance and endorse violence against Hamas, instigating internal conflict among Palestinians. Subsequently, Hamas consolidated control over Gaza in 2007.

Despite Israel's awareness of Hamas as a resistance movement aspiring to reclaim Palestine, it seized upon Hamas' ascension to perpetuate Palestinian disunity and thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state. Under Benjamin Netanyahu's leadership, Israel supported Hamas to prevent the realization of a Palestinian state. In return, Hamas purportedly endorsed a Palestinian state alongside the state of Israel, notwithstanding its status as a resistance entity.

Lacking progress on the two-state paradigm, hostilities naturally escalated between Hamas and Israel. Despite agreeing to a ceasefire and lifting the blockade in 2008, Israel broke the agreement, launching a ground invasion and aerial bombardment of Gaza, subsequently reinstating the blockade. Since then, Israel has invaded and bombed Gaza. The October 7 assaults represented Hamas' desperate bid for liberation from Israeli subjugation. Predictably, Israel's responses have been disproportionately forceful, seeming even genocidal to observers in many corners of the globe. However, US media persists in hiding the truth, perpetuating Israel's customary falsehoods and propaganda.

Iran’s allies share a common objective with Iran: the liberation of Palestine from prolonged oppression under Western colonization. This aggression has perpetuated regional instability, engendering numerous casualties and extensive devastation.

A wake-up call for transparency

Israel has committed atrocities that lay bare a disturbing reality: Media conglomerates are complicit in perpetuating a narrative that shields Israel from accountability, serving as an extension of US policy. Chief among these entities is The New York Times, which actively disseminates falsehoods and propaganda to obfuscate the crimes committed by both the United States and Israel.

We must recognize that the deep state influences the US government and its affiliated media conglomerates, making them untrustworthy as information sources. Therefore, individuals should cross-reference information from these sources with independent media outlets and alternative sources to verify their truthfulness.

Independent media like Fair Observer must vigilantly avoid falling into the deceptive narratives that mainstream conglomerates perpetuate. They must conduct rigorous independent research to maintain the accuracy and integrity of their reporting. Accountability is a moral imperative. And even if we do not hold ourselves accountable in this life, we all will be accountable before God.


The article was originally published by Fair Observer on April 23, 2024.


How to Know God in Religion

Cosmic Cliffs in the Carina Nebula. James Webb Space Telescope. Glittering Landscape of Star Birth. Elements of this image furnished by NASA. © GizemG /

The overwhelming majority of the world believes in God. Religion emerged through introspection and observing God’s bountiful creation. Prophets and teachers formed the world’s understanding of God, particularly in the three most popular religions: Christianity, Islam and Hinduism. It is prudent to discuss their commonalities and differences, and how their modern supporters represent their faiths.

Most people in the world adhere to a religion. Followers of the top three religions constitute 72.5% of the world's population. The populace is 31.6% Christian, 25.8% Muslim and 15.1% Hindu. They all have one thing in common: a belief in God.

In history, man has realized that there must be a God that transcended everything, although he cannot perceive this deity with his usual senses. As time passed, the spontaneous realization of God gradually evolved into institutions that we now refer to as religion. People sought religion to address their concerns about natural phenomena and the powers that control them. Therefore, it is not surprising that the essence of all major world religions remains the unity of mankind. It is founded on the belief in the one and only God, which is worshiped through the multitude of idols in Hinduism, the Trinity in Christianity and the oneness in Islam.

When these three major religions are cleared of all man-made innovations, they boil down to many of the same virtues. They promote honesty, trust, compassion, love, peace, cooperation and brotherhood. They prohibit dishonesty, betrayal, theft, rape and murder. They inspire us to help the poor and disadvantaged. The following is a brief discussion of God as he is presented in these religions.

God in Hinduism

Among the world’s major religions, Hinduism is believed to be the oldest, beginning between 2,300 and 1,500 BC. It is rooted in monotheism, the belief in a single omnipotent God. In about 2,000 BC, an early Vedic hymn titled, Origin of All Things, set the foundation for Hinduism by referring to God as the source of life:

There was neither aught nor naught, nor air, nor sky beyond.

What covered all? Where rested all? In watery gulf profound?

Nor death was then, nor deathlessness, nor change of night and day.

The One breathed calmly, self-sustained; nought else beyond it lay.

As time passed, the deity was called the Brahman — “supreme, lord, eternal, unborn, imperishable.” He put in motion “creation, preservation, and destruction.”

Over time, Hindu writers went overboard in creating deities to illustrate the Brahman. He is now represented by over 30 million gods, vying for superiority. This is head-scratching for many. However, the hymn leads wise believers to one conclusion: “God alone knew how the world came into being.”

Hinduism’s core values are based on the purpose of life and ethical virtues. It teaches that given how our universe is created, it is in our best interest to work together for the well-being of mankind and other species. The primary belief of Hinduism is of a universal God. It perceives a pure, wakeful, omnipresent intelligence that created and maintains the universe. It professes the mindset that a clever person should have: He knows that God is beyond the grasp of knowledge, he sees God in every being and he does not get fixated on his choices in achieving eternal life.

Hinduism has influenced and been influenced by other religions. In particular, the faith has influenced Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism and Zoroastrianism. It shares numerous concepts with the Abrahamic religions — Judaism, Christianity and Islam — including the soul (atman) and personal, loving devotion to a deity (bhakti).

The peaceful spirit of Hinduism must not be confused with the bigoted zeal of its followers in attacking minorities in India, especially Christians and Muslims. The country is considered extremely dangerous for women. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi has disgraced the faith by demonizing the minority Muslims and polarizing Hindus against them. In the 2002 Gujarat massacres, Modi allegedly instructed other officials not to intervene as Hindu mobs killed Muslims. As punishment for failing to stop the massacres, the United States banned Modi from entering the country for years.

God in Christianity

Around 2,000 years ago in the early 1st century AD, Jesus Christ was miraculously conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of his virgin mother, Mary. He was one of Abraham’s descendants. He rose among the Israelites and performed countless miracles.

According to biblical scholars, Jesus’s ministry began with his baptism by John the Baptist. He taught that besides worshiping the one God, people should treat others the way they want to be treated. His kind demeanor and peaceful approach provided a positive passivity permeated with intense love and charity toward others.

In his lifetime, Jesus attracted a few dedicated followers. But his message of compassion resonated in the hearts of millions long after him. His teachings became the doctrine of a new religion, dubbed Christianity.

Jesus called the Jews to return to God and observe the commandments laid out in the Torah, the Jewish holy law. In Jesus’s spoken language of Aramaic, God is called Alaha. This is cognate to the Arabic word ilah, the root of Allah (al-ilah, “the God”), the name Arabs and Muslims would go on to use when referring to God.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus said, “Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God.” He preached, “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.” Even as the Romans crucified him, he cried, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

The gospels were written years after Jesus. So, some contradictions and inaccuracies are not surprising. However, one thing is clear in all four gospels: Jesus preached the worship of only one God. On occasion, the scribe’s imagination scandalously stretched, equating Jesus or the Holy Spirit with God.

From his message, it is clear that Jesus worshiped the single God, Alaha. This defies the Trinity, an innovation that emerged years after he was gone. The idea of the Trinity, rooted in “threefold”, was first used by Tertullian (d. 200) in his small circle. 

In the 4th century, the First Council of Nicaea, discussed Christ's relationship with the Father and formalized the doctrine of Jesus being of the same substance as God. After that event, the Gospel of Matthew must have been tempered for the Trinity.

As for the Bible, Jesus’s teachings hang on two commandments: First, you must love God with all your heart, soul and mind. Second, you must love other people as you love yourself.

Jesus’s early followers considered themselves Jews by birth or conversion. They believed in the Jewish God and Jesus as the Savior, considering him the prophesized Jewish mashiach, or messiah. They insisted on following Jewish laws and rituals. They never thought of Jesus as the divine. They believed God would destroy their enemies and set the stage for the coming mashiach. He would gather all Jews and bring justice and peace, specifically to Egypt.

Jesus’s disciples lived alongside other Jewish sects, such as Essenes, Sadducees and Pharisees. Some of them were referred to as Ebionites and Nazarenes. Jesus’s early followers closely obeyed his teachings. These peaceful people lived by loving their neighbors, adversaries and persecutors. They never referred to themselves as Christians, as Jesus never gave a name to the faith or followers. However, they considered themselves those Jews who worshiped the one God and exercised love for one another.

Christ preached for people to love one another unconditionally. The aggressively vicious behaviors of Christendom must not be bemused with his teachings. In his book, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon wrote: “Jesus did not bring peace on the earth, but a sword; his patient and humble virtues should not be confounded with the intolerant zeal of princes and bishops, who have disgraced the name of his disciples.”

God in Islam

In 610 AD, in a forgotten land that interested neither Romans nor Persians, a middle-aged man undertook a task no man had ever achieved: to unite mankind. His only weapon was his passionate conviction in the oneness of God, and thus the oneness of humanity. Like Noah, he was patient, persistent and faithful to God. Like Abraham, he reasoned to explain his ideas in a simple language that his people could easily comprehend. Like Moses, he spoke only a few words, filled with wisdom and meaning. Like Jesus, he was humble, compassionate, forgiving and looked after the sick and orphaned. His eloquence pierced the hearts of his listeners.

In his early years of preaching, no one beyond his close family joined him for fear of retribution from the tribal chiefs. After preaching for 13 years in his hometown of Mecca in Saudi Arabia, few people followed him. That only made him more determined. His perseverance finally paid off when he left his home; his teachings changed the desolate Arabian peninsula and the world. This brilliant man was Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam.

Muhammad preached Islam, an Arabic word meaning, “submission to the will of God.” This was the continuation of God’s message to Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus. He spoke of the one God, Allah, Who commanded him:

Say: He, God is one.

God is He on whom all depend.

He begets not, nor is He begotten.

And none is like Him.

As for the oneness of God:

If there were, in the universe, other gods besides God, there would have been confusion!

1,400 years ago, Muhammad rejected superstitions and the tradition of following the paths of ancestors. He called people to think, reason and reflect.

At a time when women had little value, Muhammad addressed men and women equally. When men considered daughters shame and killed them, Muhammad preached rights and privileges for women and forbade the people from molesting and hurting them. When the economy ran on the toil of slaves, Muhammad encouraged people to set them free for goodwill and penitence. He championed equal opportunity and encouraged people to give to those less fortunate what they loved for themselves.

These days, we must all have a keen mind when absorbing information. We must not be fooled by the propaganda against Islam that the US has disseminated across the globe. It is perpetuated to distract from domestic issues, cover for atrocities and justify interventions in Muslim countries. The Western support of the Israeli genocide against Palestinians clearly demonstrates that the West has long abandoned its Christian values.

To take a page again from Edward Gibbon, we can say: “[Islam] is free from suspicion or ambiguity; and the Koran is a glorious testimony to the unity of God. The prophet of Mecca [Muhammad] rejected the worship of idols and men, of stars and planets, on the rational principle that whatever rises must set, that whatever is born must die, that whatever is corruptible must decay and perish.”


The article was originally published by Fair Observer on March 26, 2024.


What Do You Know About Mainstream Media?

Digital contents concept. Social networking service. Streaming video. NFT. Non-fungible token. Wide angle visual for banners or advertisements. © metamorworks /

We need free, honest and decoupled media from the government and corporate influences. The media must question the government on the matters that affect our safety, security and health. They must be curious, resourceful and truthful in reporting. They must investigate, check facts, expose cover-ups and show different perspectives. That only happens when we use good judgment and become selective in giving media attention

Freedom of the press, if it means anything at all,  means the freedom to criticize and oppose.

— George Orwell.

 There is a growing sentiment of distrust with the mainstream media. People are disturbed by the reporting of the Israel–Hamas war.

In communist countries, the press spoke on behalf of the government’s position, like the Soviet outlet Pravda. However, the Western mainstream media’s collaboration with their government in a supposedly free world is manipulated in such a way that the connection is not that clear, especially on global matters. On the US-backed Israel, the media follow the US, avoiding the urge for a permanent cease-fire. 

The depth of Western media’s level of corruption is clear in portraying the US-backed Israel the oppressor as a victim despite its indiscriminate and massive bombardments of Gaza. The narrative portrays Israel as the aggrieved victim and criticizes the West in a merely peripheral and artificial way. Brazenly, the media keep dramatizing the stories 24/7, enforcing Israel’s views with little or no attention to the Palestinian victims. This is a clear example of Western tribalism and the lack of a moral compass.

In a 2022 survey, Americans showed they were losing confidence in their major institutions. Their trust in newspapers had dropped to 16% and television news to 11%. Since then, Israeli bombings of Gaza since the beginning of the war on October 7, 2023, have made many Americans realize that their government and media support ethnic cleansing and genocide, to their dismay. In a Gallup poll published after October 7, it was found that only 7% of Americans trusted the media while 38% said they had “none at all.”

Chances are if the survey were conducted today, it would have shown even fewer Americans trust their media. Americans are becoming more aware that their government and media are biased and controlled by the rich and the deep state.

Fortunately, the government and media collusion has sometimes received national attention. In July, a federal judge blocked the US government from influencing social media after people complained about being censored by Facebook and Twitter. 

The US and the media use fear

As human beings, we each share in the joy, sadness and fear-triggered emotions leading us to our perceptions of reality. Unfortunately, fear tends to have the most prolific impact on our thoughts and actions. 

The fear perpetrated by the actions of terrorists and the corresponding government and media reactions, lead us to believe that peace will never be achieved. The government is determined to keep us under its control using fear and so are the media, to maximize profit.

If the media stopped at “Kool-Aid” or “L’Eggo My Eggo,” they probably would not even be worth mentioning, but they do not. The media do not just influence us in our nutrition, but our way of life, our politics, our health, our ideas of right and wrong, who is good or bad, what religion is right and which country we should go to war with. The media follow the government, using fear to increase readers and viewers. 

To illustrate the media’s power, consider the case of terrorism. We all tuned in day and night to get more details about the attacks, such as the World Trade Centers in New York, Orlando Night Club in Florida, Route 91 in Las Vegas or the Promenade des Anglais in Nice, France. Now, they have been following the US by calling the Hamas fighters terrorists to entice more fear within us. 

The media aim to achieve high ratings and more profit by highlighting the negative events that can provoke fear. We know the media information comes from the government and inciting fear appears to be the objective of both the government and the media. If this isn’t collusion, then what is it?

How media use fear

The media know we are accustomed to headlines. They design and disseminate slanted information to increase readership. Every dosage is well prepared for our absorption. Over the years, the media have mastered the art of inducing constant fear with a shock factor in their audience to direct our preferences. The higher the shock level, the higher the ratings and the more profit. 

Subconscious ideas of fear, segregation and conceit are constantly planted like seeds in our heads. Each official speech, newscast, commercial or film we see is watering the seeds to flourish. We all see or seek evidence to support our underlying beliefs

As if terrorism was not inciting enough fear, we faced the COVID-19 pandemic. The media had a ball with it, reporting it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, each one with its spin.  

Supposedly, COVID first started in Wuhan, China. Soon after that, the media were giving minute reports on the deaths due to it. When the virus hit Iran, the media cheered some neo-conservatives who felt so secure from the virus that they forecasted the virus was about to do the job of changing the Iranian regime that the 40-year sanctions could not do. The Trump Administration mercilessly increased sanctions, “unnecessarily prioritizing its own political agenda above Iranian lives.”

Foolishly, those neocons did not think that the virus recognized no boundary, it would gradually reach the US shores. Of course, it inevitably did, killing over one million.

Using the fear of the virus, the media hooked audiences pocketing large profits and the government served the rich, the deep state, in expanding its tentacles. Now, the media are focusing on Hamas to generate fear and optimize profit.

As for media control, see how the media attract us to absorb their information. We feel thirsty for information. We are glued to our television, radio, press releases, web browsers, social media and cell phones. Often, we have no other place to go to get unbiased information. On the internet, much of the information we gather from other sources is just the restatement of that in the media. 

The US and the media are on the wrong path

In the post-9/11 period, we have seen what the collusion of the government and the media has done to us. The collusion has planted deep fear in each of us. It has brought us unjust wars, large numbers of casualties and global humiliation. It has caused millions of innocent people to die. For years, it has been beating the drum for a war with Iran. Now, it has been supporting Israel in its genocide against the oppressed Palestinians. 

On October 7, Hamas carried out an attack against Israel. Once again, the media revealed their true nature. They portrayed the victim, Palestine, as the aggressor and the aggressor, Israel. as the victim. As usual, many older Americans fell for it. 

So far, Israel has killed over 30,000 Palestinians. The media ignore to say that Israel has occupied the Palestinian lands through ethnic cleansing and genocide for over 75 years. Israel has pushed millions of Palestinians into the open-air prison, the Gaza Strip. Israel has blockaded that small territory from the land and the sea. It has controlled Palestinian livelihood, regularly harassed them and periodically bombarded them, killing hundreds to keep them living in perpetual fear. 

Over the years, the media have failed to reveal that the US approach is not helping Israel. In fact, the US’s strategy contributes to the destruction of Israel in the long run. By supporting Israel with billions of US taxpayer dollars (while more Americans languish in poverty at home), the US is merely pouring more fuel on the fire. 

In the eyes of the world, the media have concealed the truth from Americans that the US has become a collaborator in Israel’s atrocities against the Palestinians. The case South Africa v. Israel, before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), has globally exposed the potential crime of genocide in Gaza, implicating Western powers, especially the US. That places a moral imperative on the US and its media to critically examine their positions and align with international standards.

I believe that the media could take a positive step in urging the US to become an honest broker, especially in the Middle East. Then, Palestinian issues can be resolved. In exchange for its billion-dollar aid, the US could demand Israel to publicly apologize to the Palestinians for the land/property stolen and atrocities committed against them and make reparations. 

On January 26, 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) took the first step although it followed the US line short of decreeing a permanent cease-fire. The ICJ ruled that Israel’s military actions in Gaza fell under the scope of the Genocide Convention; thus, the Palestinians must be protected as a national group. Now, can the US and its media put their biases aside and get on board?

What can be done about the US and the media?

Indeed, Americans need free, honest, curious and resourceful media that meet these conditions: First, independent from government, powerful people and corporations. Second, investigate, check facts, expose cover-ups and show different perspectives. Third, non-partisan challenges the government on matters affecting our safety, security and health. 

None will happen without the American people’s participation. They must use good judgment, demand transparency from their government and be selective in giving attention to the media. They must become more skeptical and open-minded in listening, reading and watching the news in its current form. Whenever there is a conflict, they must stand with the oppressed.

Today, Israel’s existence is indebted to the US, which financially supports the apartheid state and keeps misusing the US veto power to block any move against it in the UN Security Council. If the majority of Americans truly believe to be Christians, they must push for peace in Palestine by heeding advice from their Bible: “Depart from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it.”


The article was originally published by Fair Observer on March 12, 2024.

The Lies United States and Media Told About Iran

USA and Iran relationship. US America and Iran flags on chess kings on a chess board. 3d illustration © rawf8 /

The media amplifies US government narratives on Iran, hindering objective perspectives and potentially shaping public opinion towards conflict. That is harmful to the US’ long-term interests. Americans must rise to use good judgment, demand transparency from their government, and be selective in giving attention to the media.

The media's relationship with the US government significantly shapes public perceptions of international events, particularly regarding Iran. Concerns about the objectivity of information rise due to the media's tendency to amplify the government's narrative. This amplification is achieved through sophisticated content disseminated across various platforms, from television and radio to press releases, online platforms and mobile devices.

This content fosters an insatiable demand for information, yet the desire for unbiased perspectives often faces a significant obstacle. Much of the readily available alternative content online merely recycles the dominant narratives established by the mainstream media, highlighting the media's substantial influence on public discourse and the challenge of readily accessing diverse and objective viewpoints.

In relation to Iran, the media has consistently adhered to a particular narrative. It has neglected to critically examine US claims, choosing instead to echo US propaganda. This has resulted in Iran being depicted as a pariah state, ruled by a dictatorship and involved in supporting terrorism. These portrayals are often accepted without the necessary critical scrutiny.

Nonetheless, a discernible shift is occurring. A growing number of Americans are becoming aware of the interconnectedness of their government and media, recognizing the presence of biases and the influence of powerful entities, often linked to the so-called “deep state.” This newfound consciousness was evident in a recent interview in which Russian President Vladimir Putin, speaking with Tucker Carlson, described the US “deep state” as the American ‘elite’ with the power to overrule the US president and dictate the country’s policies.

Déjà Vu in the Middle East: is the US destined to repeat history?

The January 3 terrorist attacks in Kerman, Iran, targeting a gathering at the burial site of Qasem Soleimani, resulted in a significant loss of life (84 reported dead) and injuries (284). This tragedy raises the specter of another potential conflict in the Middle East, with concerns escalating about Iran's potential retaliation against Israel, given the Islamic State's claim of responsibility and the possibility of Israeli involvement.

As a staunch ally of Israel, the United States faces a delicate decision. Historically, US involvement in wars has often resulted in widespread casualties and destruction. Examining interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Vietnam reveals a pattern of initial engagement followed by gradual withdrawal due to unforeseen challenges, potentially eroding US global credibility.

Furthermore, concerns exist regarding the dissemination of misinformation by the US government and media. The echo chamber effect, where media narratives align with government pronouncements, is particularly concerning. Historical examples, such as the Vietnam War, highlight the devastating consequences of such deceit, costing over 3 million lives, including approximately 60,000 Americans. The media's complacency in events like the Cambodian Genocide and the Iraq War, where questioning of US actions often lagged behind public opposition, further underscores its role in facilitating government actions.

The post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan aimed to remove the Taliban, resulting in substantial casualties and destruction. However, the Taliban's return to power after a staggering financial and human cost exposes the futility of such interventions. Similarly, the Iraq War, based on false claims of weapons of mass destruction and connections with al-Qaeda, resulted in hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths and immense financial expenditure. The lack of accountability for those responsible, such as George W. Bush and his administration, remains a troubling aspect.

Iraq is not alone in bearing the brunt of US intervention. Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen have all witnessed the repercussions of US involvement in various conflicts. The instigation of regime changes and interventions in democratic governments, exemplified by the overthrowals of Mohammad Mosaddeq in Iran and Salvadore Allende in Chile, have proven to be costly and destabilizing endeavors.

The global cost of war, two decades after the US invasion of Afghanistan, has reached an estimated $8 trillion, with approximately one million lives lost. This contributes to heightened anxiety and poverty, particularly among Americans.

In the case of Israel, media support predates the nation's inception, marked by the Nakba and its associated violence. The media's historical alignment with the US and its recent support for Israeli actions, resulting in around 28,000 Palestinian casualties, raises ethical questions. The International Court of Justice (ICJ)'s examination of South Africa v. Israel has globally exposed the potential crime of genocide in Gaza, implicating Western powers, especially the US. The ICJ's preliminary ruling, acknowledging Israel's actions as potentially falling under the Genocide Convention, places a moral imperative on the US and its media to critically examine their positions and align with international standards.


A historical paradigm of misrepresentation

Since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, a recurring motif in US foreign policy has been the inclination towards conflict with Iran. This approach has been driven by a narrative, often amplified by media portrayals, depicting Iran as on the precipice of acquiring nuclear weapons, harboring terrorists and colluding with al-Qaeda. However, this narrative stands in stark contrast to demonstrable evidence: Iran has actively participated in combating terrorism, as evidenced by its crucial role in defeating ISIS in Iraq. Furthermore, while the US and media often label Iran as an authoritarian regime under the Mullahs, a closer examination reveals a system remarkably similar to the US itself and one that actively promotes regional democracy.

While historical timelines do diverge, with Iran's civilization boasting a legacy exceeding 2,500 years compared to the US's 250 years, their differences cannot justify misconstruing realities. Notably, the US has historically engaged in acts of aggression against numerous nations, with the oppression of Native Americans serving as a stark example. Further, the US, alongside Britain and Russia, has participated in suppressing Iranian aspirations for over a century, exemplified by the recently imposed draconian sanctions.

In stark contrast to US backing Arab authoritarian monarchies, Iran's foreign policy demonstrably favors alignment with the downtrodden. This principle, enshrined in Article 154 of its constitution, directly guides its active support for oppressed nations like Iraq and Syria in their fight against terrorism. While the US actively backs Israel, whose treatment of Palestinians remains a concern, Iran stands firmly in support of the oppressed Palestinian people. Notably, Iran recognizes Hamas as legitimate and raises concerns regarding Israel's disproportionate retaliatory measures, not only in response to the October 7 incident but also in previous instances.

On the critical issue of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), while significant global powers, led by the US, maintain stockpiles of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons, Iran adheres to a demonstrably higher moral ground. It explicitly prohibits the production of WMDs, citing their indiscriminate and unacceptable impact on human life. Iran's commitment to this ethical principle is further underlined by its restraint from utilizing chemical weapons in retaliation against Iraqi forces during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War, despite facing their deployment.

Media myopia: biases in the coverage of the Gaza conflict

The October 7 Hamas attack incited a response from U.S.-backed Israel, accused by the United Nations of apartheid policies. The subsequent conflict has resulted in significant casualties, predominantly among Palestinians. While the US and mainstream media have focused on the objective of neutralizing Hamas, concerns regarding civilian casualties and potential human rights violations have received less attention, potentially reflecting Western biases.

Furthermore, media narratives align with the US in attributing the Hamas attack to Iranian training, a claim Iran acknowledges but does not explicitly endorse as pre-planned. This framing could serve to strategically prepare the public for potential US involvement in a broader conflict with Iran. It potentially diverts attention away from concerns regarding Israeli actions in Gaza.

In support of Israel, media reports often cite a statement by an Iranian Revolutionary Guard official linking the October 7 attack to the assassination of Qasem Soleimani. This suggests a potential retaliatory motive, but the extent of Iranian involvement remains unclear.

A new approach to US-Iran relations

The current state of US-Iran relations is characterized by a pervasive climate of mistrust and hostility. This atmosphere, shaped by governmental pronouncements and media narratives, has instilled profound anxieties and insecurities within the American public. To ensure a more stable and equitable global order, a paradigm shift is required. This necessitates a concerted effort from both the US government and its media apparatus to engage in open and transparent communication with the American people.

Firstly, there is a pressing need for the US to abandon its reliance on demonizing narratives directed towards Iran. The persistent rhetoric of regime change has demonstrably yielded counterproductive outcomes, furthering tensions and fostering animosity. Instead, the US should consider pursuing a diplomatic approach based on mutual respect and understanding.

Some analysts argue that Iran is currently the most influential power in the Middle East. Recognizing Iran's regional influence presents an opportunity for the US to engage in strategic collaboration. A crucial step in this process involves acknowledging and apologizing for the 1953 coup, an event that undeniably shaped the trajectory of US-Iran relations.

A promising avenue for diplomatic progress lies in recognizing and endorsing Iran's stated opposition to Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). Collaborative efforts with other WMD-possessing nations, focusing on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, could prove highly beneficial.

Transitioning from belligerent postures to collaborative frameworks is essential for safeguarding US interests. Exploring possibilities for peaceful partnerships with other nations, potentially aligning with Iran on issues of global concern, offers a more sustainable path forward.

However, this transformation cannot be achieved solely by governmental actions. The active participation of the American public is crucial. This necessitates the cultivation of critical thinking skills, demands for transparency from governmental institutions and selective engagement with media sources. By doing so, American citizens can empower themselves to shape a narrative that prioritizes justice, collaboration and global well-being.


The article was originally published by Fair Observer on February 23, 2024.