PHOENIX - That the Clinton administration would sooner or later bow to Wall Street's God - the Almighty Dollar - and kiss and make up with Iran, 19 years of enmity between our countries notwithstanding, should come as no surprise to the TiM readers. Globalists, such as Bill Clinton, were put in position of power by Wall Street and Big Business because they believe in nothing; because no ideology or moral principle rules supreme; because nothing is sacred to them except their power to rule (also see this writer's WASHINGTON TIMES column, "The Nothing Philosophy," Dec. 29, 1996).

Nor should it be a surprise that the reason for such an eventual turn-about-face in the U.S. foreign policy is the Caspian Sea oil - the next most likely world conflagration point. Here is an excerpt from the Truth in Media's GLOBAL WATCH Bulletin 97/5-2, May 13, 1997:

"The Dow Jones Newswire reported from Teheran, Iran, on May 5, China and Russia were keen to co-operate on oil and gas exploration in this region, according to a senior Iranian government source, the Islamic Republic News Agency reported. It quoted Esmail Jalilian, a senior official with the state-owned National Iranian Oil Co., as saying that 'China and Russia are ready to contribute to oil and gas projects in Iran'."

So ostensibly to compete with Russia and China, some foreign policy analysts started advocating last year a change in the U.S. anti-Iran posture. Never mind that France, China and Russia are supplying to Iran missiles or nuclear technology which could threaten some western targets in years to come (just as we did to Iraq in the early 1980s). Never mind that the MULTINATIONAL oil companies fly as many flags as it takes to make a big buck, including China's or Russia's. And that they, not the U.S. taxpayers, will be the main benefactors of the Caspian Sea oil exploitation.

But through what countries will that oil get to the western tankers is a matter of great importance. The Dow Jones Newswire reported on May 6, 1997, for example, that the Azerbaijan President, Geidar Aliev, lifted the Turkish hopes for getting a role in the shipment of Caspian Sea oil to Western markets during his visit to Ankara.

Initial oil shipments, from Azerbaijan's rich offshore fields in the Caspian Sea, will come through Russia and Georgia. Turkey and Azerbaijan, having linguistic, religious and cultural ties, bolstered relations with a series of agreements on border security and trade Monday.

The Russian route goes through separatist Chechnya. The Georgian route runs through a part of the country that has experienced political turmoil. The Turkish route passes through the southeast, site of a 13-year-old war with Turkish Kurdish guerrillas.

 Meanwhile, there is Armenia, a predominantly Orthodox Christian country intersecting these competing world oil interests (see the map). The Armenians have the most to fear. For, they know what war and genocide are all about. They experienced it some 80 years ago (in 1915-1923) at the hand of the Turks, who then, as now, feared the Russians.

And then there is a possible "all Islamic" route - from Azerbaijan via Iran - an untouchable subject by the foreign policy rules of the last two decades. Yet Iran is the missing link on the "Green Interstate," a Bihac (western Bosnia)-to-Karachi Islamic ethnic highway which is an important element the NWO's three-pronged anti-Russian strategy (it rings Russia's soft southern underbelly - see this writer's WASHINGTON TIMES column, "Blood and Treasure for Private Interests," May 4, 1997).

Which is why the New World Order/Wall Street crowd has now found it necessary to start revising its Iran policy. The recent accession to power of the supposedly "moderate ayatollah" (an oxymoron in the world of Islamic fundamentalism), Mohammad Khatami, provided an excuse and the opportunity to advance this pro-Iran ball a bit further.

But sudden foreign policy shifts can backfire. After decades of anti-Iranian propaganda, the State Department can ill-afford to appear to be coddling up to Iranian ayatollahs (though that's exactly what it is doing). The "Ayatollah Klintonmeini" has been occupying the White House for the last five years (see this writer's WASHINGTON TIMES Sept. 15, 1996 column, "US Policy Shouldn't Side with Militant Islam"). But since Clinton doesn't wear a turban, many Americans, needing such simplistic images to form their opinions, don't necessarily see him as such.

So what to do? Get an NGO (non-governmental organization) to do the job instead. Just as Oliver North and his crowd did in the Iran-Contra affair. Or as Jimmy Carter, the NWO's "Rent-a-Trojan-Horse" did in North Korea, Haiti and Bosnia. Or as the "rent-a-general" NGO (MPRI) did in Croatia and Bosnia...

Enter one Christiana Amanpour, a CNN reporter of Iranian ancestry (which CNN carefully omits), whose passionate lies or distortions aired from the Muslim Sarajevo during the three-and-a-half year Bosnian war turned the Christian Serbs into NWO "PR" minced meat. Yet magically, a female reporter in a society which ostracizes women, Amanpour gets instant access to the newly appointed Iranian President Khatami, the supposedly "moderate ayatollah."

Hm...? Has CNN become a new branch of the State Department, supplementing its Voice of America and Worldnet propaganda services?

(By the way, one wonders how much did we [the disenfranchised U.S. taxpayers] have to shell out [directly or indirectly] to make Khatami into a "moderate ayatollah?" One hopes that it was a lot less than for Clinton, and suspects that it was a lot more than for Yeltsin or Jiang?).

An Odd Couple to Wed: Will It Be a Mullah or a Rabbi?

In the old days, kings and queens used to marry off their sons or daughters to political foes to gain diplomatic advantage. Nowadays, the media stars seem to be serving the same purpose.

Enter the front page story in the New York Times' Saturday, Jan. 10 edition. At a first glance, it is a love story. Boy meets girl; they fall in love; he proposes; she accepts... But how many love stories make the front page of the New York Times? Unless, of course, the lovers are jetsetters who get robbed or murdered. Or if they pray to different gods...

Enter possibly the "first foreign policy love story of our time." It's a story about the Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright's spokesperson, a 37-year old Jewish-American from New York, James Rubin, who "last month, on his knees on a beach in Tobago, asked her (CNN's Christiana Amanpour) to marry him," the New York Times reported in a flattering article which read like a National Inquirer soap. (But since many people don't know that flattery is 90% soap, and that soap is 90% lye, they tend to mistake soap for news.)

There was, for example, the "respectable" New York Times' allegation that Madam Secretary had "somewhat maternal" feelings for "Jamie," whom this Czech-born American of Jewish ancestry (in denial until January 1997) would occasionally invite to go to the movies. And with whom Albright "certainly spent more time together than with anybody else."

Hm... One doesn't envy Amanpour. With competition like Madeleine... or Ayatollah Khatami vying for her future husband's time and attention...

One important question the New York Times Jan. 10 soap failed to address is - who will bless the Rubin-Amanpour marriage when it is consummated next summer? Will it be a rabbi or a mullah? Or... an "NWO mule" wearing the robes of the Golden Calf?

Also, check out also the TiM GW Bulletins: "Klinton's Amerika: Israel's Tomahawk", "Christianity Under Siege... Revisited",  "New World Order's Control of Israel's Economy", "Caspian Sea Oil: The Matchmaker?", "We Have No Business Bombing Anyone Except in Self-Defense", "A Year of Awakening," "Like Bosnia, Like Lebanon"

Or Djurdjevic's WASHINGTON TIMES columns: "Christianity Under Siege: Toward a One World Religion" and "The Three Musketeers"