Como dicen en mi rancho, when someone tells you the same lie for thirty years, eventually you start wondering if they think you're as pendejo as they are. But here we are in 2025, watching Benjamin Netanyahu pull out the same dusty playbook he's been using since 1992—claiming Iran is "just months away" from having nuclear weapons. ¿En serio? The same man who promised us Iraq had weapons of mass destruction is back with fresh fear-mongering, and somehow, the world keeps listening.
Living here in the borderlands of Sonora, we know something about manufactured crises. We've watched politicians weaponize fear about our communities for decades, turning human beings into existential threats to justify their power grabs. Netanyahu's nuclear scaremongering feels disturbingly familiar—a master class in how authoritarian leaders manufacture consent for violence through repetitive, breathless warnings about imminent doom.
A Timeline of Broken Promises and Moving Goalposts
Let's be clear about what we're dealing with here. Since 1992, Netanyahu has been promising that Iran would have nuclear weapons within "three to five years." According to Al Jazeera's comprehensive timeline, this isn't just political rhetoric—it's a systematic campaign of deception that has shaped U.S. foreign policy for over three decades.
The pattern is as predictable as a telenovela plot:
1992: As a member of Israel's Knesset, Netanyahu declared Iran would "become autonomous in its ability to develop and produce a nuclear bomb" within three to five years.
1995: In his book Fighting Terrorism, he repeated the same timeline, apparently forgetting his previous deadline had expired.
1996: Speaking to the U.S. Congress, Netanyahu warned that Iran's nuclear deadline was "extremely close," demanding urgent action.
2002: Switching targets, Netanyahu told Congress there was "no question" that Iraq was "advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons," claiming they operated "centrifuges the size of washing machines." We all know how that turned out.
2012: Back to Iran, Netanyahu stood before the United Nations with a literal cartoon bomb, claiming Iran would cross the nuclear threshold within a year. The Intercept revealed that Israeli intelligence at the time actually determined Iran was "not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons."
2025: During Israel's recent strikes on Iran, Netanyahu claimed Iran could "produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time. It could be a year. It could be within a few months."
Órale, Benjamin. If Iran has been "months away" from a bomb for thirty-three years, either they're the worst nuclear scientists in history, or you're full of it.
The Intelligence Community vs. the Fear Merchants
Here's where things get really interesting for those of us who care about truth over political theater. While Netanyahu has been beating his war drums, U.S. intelligence agencies have repeatedly contradicted his apocalyptic timelines.
CNN reported this week that U.S. intelligence assessments concluded Iran was not only not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon, but was "up to three years away from being able to produce and deliver one to a target of its choosing." That's a far cry from Netanyahu's "weeks away" rhetoric.
The 2024 U.S. Intelligence Assessment was even more explicit: "Iran is not currently undertaking the key nuclear weapons-development activities necessary to produce a testable nuclear device."
The report noted that Iran "uses its nuclear program to build negotiating leverage and respond to perceived international pressure"—a far more nuanced reality than Netanyahu's cartoon bomb presentations.
Even more damning, leaked Israeli intelligence cables from 2012 revealed that at the exact time Netanyahu was warning the UN about Iran's imminent nuclear capability, Israeli intelligence had determined that Iran was not actually working on weapons development.
¿Qué pedo? The man was contradicting his own spy agencies.
The Real Stakes: War, Sanctions, and Human Suffering
From our vantage point in the borderlands, where we understand how manufactured crises destroy real lives, Netanyahu's nuclear theater isn't just dishonest—it's deadly. His fear campaigns have contributed to decades of economic sanctions that have devastated ordinary Iranian people, creating the kind of humanitarian crisis that never makes headlines in American media.
The sanctions regime, justified in part by these nuclear warnings, has caused widespread medication shortages, economic collapse, and suffering for millions of Iranians who have nothing to do with their government's nuclear program.
Es la misma historia—the powerful wage their political games while the most vulnerable pay the price.
And let's be brutally honest about what happened in June 2025. Israel's "Operation Rising Lion" wasn't a defensive action against an imminent nuclear threat—it was a preemptive strike based on the same manufactured urgency Netanyahu has been peddling for three decades. The operation targeted nuclear facilities, assassinated scientists, and killed military commanders, all while claiming Iran was "weeks away" from a bomb.
The human cost?
Iranian media confirmed the deaths of senior military officials, and CNN reported that residential neighborhoods were hit across Tehran. These weren't precision strikes against an imminent nuclear threat—they were acts of war justified by thirty years of crying wolf.
The Border Perspective: Manufactured Crises and Real Consequences
Living on the U.S.-Mexico border, we've seen this playbook before. Politicians manufacture crises about "invasion" and "existential threats" to justify extraordinary measures that would never be acceptable under normal circumstances. The parallels are striking:
Repetitive, apocalyptic warnings: Just as border politicians claim our communities are being "invaded," Netanyahu claims Iran is perpetually "months away" from destroying Israel.
Moving goalposts: Border fear-mongers constantly shift their metrics—first it's drugs, then terrorism, then trafficking, then caravans. Netanyahu shifts from nuclear weapons to ballistic missiles to "weaponization activities."
Contradicting expert assessments: Border politicians ignore CBP data showing declining border crossings, just as Netanyahu ignores intelligence agencies' assessments of Iran's nuclear program.
Dehumanizing rhetoric: Both campaigns reduce complex geopolitical realities to simplistic good-versus-evil narratives that justify extraordinary violence.
The difference is scale. While border fear-mongering has led to family separation and militarization, Netanyahu's nuclear theater has contributed to economic warfare against 84 million Iranians and now actual bombing campaigns.
The Corporate Media's Role in Manufacturing Consent
Let's talk about the elephant in the room: how does someone get away with the same lie for thirty-three years? The answer lies in what Noam Chomsky calls the "propaganda model"—the corporate media's tendency to amplify official sources without rigorous scrutiny.
Every time Netanyahu raises his nuclear alarm, major outlets dutifully report his claims as if they're breaking news, rarely mentioning his decades-long pattern of false predictions.
The Times of Israel recently described Israel's strikes as responding to an "immediate operational necessity," treating Netanyahu's claims at face value despite his track record.
This isn't journalism—it's stenography.
¿Dónde están the follow-up questions?
Where are the headlines reading "Netanyahu Makes Same Nuclear Claim He's Been Making Since 1992"? Where's the context about his previous false predictions about Iraq's supposed weapons programs?
Corporate media's failure to provide this context isn't accidental. It serves the interests of arms manufacturers, oil companies, and politicians who benefit from regional instability. Real journalism would ask why we should believe Netanyahu's current claims, given his decades of false predictions.
The Intelligence Assessment That Changed Everything
Here's a detail that should terrify anyone concerned about truth in governance: The Foundation for Defense of Democracies reported that in August 2024, the U.S. intelligence community quietly removed a key finding from their annual assessment—the statement that "Iran is not currently undertaking the key nuclear weapons-development activities necessary to produce a testable nuclear device."
The timing is suspicious. This change came just months before Israel's strikes on Iran, suggesting that intelligence assessments were being adjusted to align with predetermined military actions rather than the other way around. ¿No que muy independent the intelligence community?
An ODNI spokesperson told the Wall Street Journal that "Iran doesn't have an active military nuclear program," while another stated that the "U.S. intelligence community is well-positioned to detect active work by Iran to build a nuclear weapon."
Translation: We're changing our assessment to create political cover for military action, but we still don't actually think Iran is building a bomb.
What This Means for Our Communities
From the borderlands, Netanyahu's nuclear theater looks like a distraction from the real crises facing our communities. While politicians manufacture foreign threats, we're dealing with:
Climate change: Rising temperatures and extreme weather patterns that threaten our agricultural communities and water security
Immigration enforcement: Militarization of our border that turns our home into a war zone
Economic inequality: Corporate policies that extract wealth from our communities while leaving us with environmental damage and low-wage jobs
Indigenous rights: Ongoing attacks on tribal sovereignty and sacred sites
The billions spent on military adventures in the Middle East could be redirected to address housing shortages, fund renewable energy infrastructure, or support community-led solutions to immigration. Instead, we get thirty years of the same nuclear scare tactics.
The Real Nuclear Threat: Climate and Corporate Power
While Netanyahu warns about Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions, the real nuclear threat comes from climate change and corporate power. The borderlands are experiencing record-breaking heat waves, prolonged droughts, and extreme weather events that render entire communities uninhabitable.
Fossil fuel companies—many of them beneficiaries of military contracts—continue to extract profits while our planet burns. The same corporate interests that profit from Middle East conflicts are destroying our climate and poisoning our communities with uranium mining, oil extraction, and chemical agriculture.
¿Dónde están the urgent congressional hearings about climate change? Where are the cartoon charts showing how many degrees of warming we're approaching? The real existential threat isn't a bomb that might exist in three years—it's the ecological collapse happening right now.
Looking Forward: Resistance and Truth-Telling
The good news is that people are waking up to these manufactured crises. The internet allows us to fact-check politicians in real-time, compare current claims to historical records, and organize resistance to manufactured consent.
Young people, in particular, are rejecting the foreign policy establishment's endless war mentality. They're asking hard questions about why we spend trillions on military adventures while infrastructure crumbles and communities suffer.
In the borderlands, we're building alternative models based on cooperation rather than conflict. Cross-border environmental groups are addressing climate change through collaborative efforts across national borders. Indigenous communities are protecting sacred sites and water resources through direct action and legal advocacy. Immigrant rights organizations are providing humanitarian aid and challenging militarization.
These movements offer hope because they're based on truth rather than manufactured fear. They address real problems with real solutions rather than creating new problems to justify political power.
The Path Forward: Accountability and Alternatives
Netanyahu's thirty-year campaign of nuclear fear-mongering must end, but that won't happen through electoral politics alone. It requires sustained pressure from civil society, investigative journalism that holds powerful people accountable, and alternative media that provides context missing from corporate outlets.
We need:
Media accountability: Journalists who challenge official sources rather than amplifying them uncritically
Congressional oversight: Investigations into how intelligence assessments are manipulated for political purposes
Diplomatic alternatives: Investment in conflict resolution rather than military escalation
Economic justice: Redirecting military spending toward community needs
Climate action: Addressing the real existential threat facing humanity
The borderlands teach us that security comes from cooperation, not domination. Nuestra seguridad comes from strong communities, environmental protection, and economic justice—not from bombing other countries based on manufactured threats.
Conclusion: No Más
Enough. Ya basta.
Thirty-three years of the same lie is thirty-three years too many. Netanyahu's nuclear theater has contributed to sanctions that have harmed millions of Iranians, military spending that could have addressed real crises, and now actual warfare based on manufactured urgency.
From the borderlands, where we have some experience with surviving manufactured crises, the solution isn't more fear—it's more truth. It's time to demand accountability from politicians who lie us into wars, media outlets that amplify those lies, and intelligence agencies that bend assessments to fit predetermined conclusions.
The real security threat isn't Iran's alleged nuclear program—it's the climate crisis, economic inequality, and democratic backsliding happening right here at home. Let's focus on those real problems with real solutions rather than chasing phantom threats manufactured by would-be strongmen.
¡La lucha sigue! The struggle continues, but it's a struggle for truth, justice, and a livable planet—not for more wars based on more lies.
Support independent media that tells truth to power. Subscribe to Three Sonorans Substack to stay informed about the real issues affecting our borderland communities and beyond.
What do you think? Drop a comment below:
How do you think corporate media could better hold politicians accountable for repeated false claims?
What parallels do you see between border fear-mongering and Middle East war rhetoric in your own community?
Share this post