Sparks: Iran says US has responded to its latest peace proposal

When the consent of the governed is but a phrase, and not the foundation of all negotiations, true accord remains an elusive prospect, contrary to the self-evident principles of human polity.

Every refusal to consider a proposal, however imperfect, is a quiet expansion of executive power, thereby diminishing the accountability that liberty demands.

One finds that the most exquisitely worded rejections often contain the sharpest barbs, carefully concealed beneath a veneer of diplomatic lament.

Curious, is it not, how one can declare a proposal unacceptable before even the pretense of a thorough review, as if reason were a mere inconvenience?

The monster of mistrust, once brought to life by suspicion, demands constant feeding, and its creator often refuses to acknowledge its own hand in its creation.

The atoms of fear and misunderstanding, when left to swirl unchecked, prevent the smooth convergence of particles necessary for true accord.

Much of what passes for diplomacy is but a sophisticated avoidance of the simple, honest conversation necessary to find common ground.

In my travels, I have seen many courts where a response is given before the message is fully heard, a peculiar custom indeed.

It is a peculiar modern folly to dismiss a thing before understanding its very foundations, as if the unknown were inherently evil.

Prejudgment, like the mob's verdict, often serves a purpose other than justice, silencing voices before they can even speak.

They say the proposal is unacceptable, but who is it unacceptable to, and what kind of peace are they truly seeking if not one for all?

To dismiss a proposal unseen is to deny the very exercise of reason, a privilege too often reserved for those who already hold power.

Things that are unseemly: a decision made before the scroll is properly unfurled, a judgment without the courtesy of full attention.

One must admire the efficiency of rejecting a peace proposal before reading it; it saves a great deal of time that could otherwise be spent on more productive disagreements.