The best political comment I have ever seen was the man that threw his shoes at W in Iraq, in 2008. The MSM was unable to ignore that story, and none of their bias could undermine the basic truth we all witnessed.
This blog is dedicated to the People's Right to Know.
Dedicated to Terry Anderson
The story of Terry Anderson is central to understanding the dynamics of the Mid-East. He is Christian, an ex Marine who served in Viet Nam, and a professional journalist, and was the longest held hostage during Lebanon's attempt to drive US Military out during the lebanonese Civil War. Two weeks before his release I spoke publically with the wife of an important Lebanese Official. My blog, shoe08, affirms Terry Anderson's experience, and is an attempt to explore the search for truth.
Folks, why has Obama not condemned this action as a coup? Here is an interesting description of what went down in Honduras, clearly showing the US is behind this.
"President Obama has made a statement regarding his "concern" for the situation in Honduras and a call to all political leaders and parties to "respect democratic norms." However, this statement is NOT a clear condemnation of the coup d'etat that has taken place during the early morning hours on Sunday. Nor did Obama indicate, as other countries have done, that Washington would not recognize any other government in Honduras other than the elected government of Manual Zelaya.
Opposition forces in Honduras, led by a U.S.-funded NGO Grupo Paz y Democracia, have stated via CNN that a coup has not occurred, but rather a "transition" to democracy. Martha Diaz, the coordinator of the NGO, which receives USAID funding, has just declared minutes ago on CNN that "civil society" does not support President Zelaya nor his "illegal quest" to hold a nonbinding referendum on a potential future constitutional reform. She justified his kidnapping, beating and removal from power as a "democratic transition."
Again, this is eerily reminiscent of the coup d'etat in Venezuela in April 2002, when so-called "civil society," along with dissident military forces, kidnapped President Chávez and installed a "transition government." The groups involved also received funding from the U.S. government, primarily via the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and later from USAID as well." http://socialistworker.org/2009/06/29/coup-in-honduras
This video speaks for itself, but leaves out Negroponte, a terror torture mad Bush holdover, as well as a host of Iran Contra Honduras operators.
Is this the change we voted for, or is it more of the same?
I have not seen any mention of the issue of Iran's planned gas pipelines. The video above describes a gas pipeling from Iran to Pakistan and India, and China has invested heavily in the development of the port infrastructure so gas could also be shiped. There are pipelines planned, and Ahmadinejad, far from being a "hardliner," is an engineer who has shown the ability to get projects that have been stalled for years, finished. One pipeline, from Azerbijian south thru Iran, and another from Turkmenistan to China, may indeed have freeked out Cheneys Haliburton. Are they in Iran? What is their relationship to Rafisjani, the uber rich Iranian millionair? Would a regeim change be enough, or woud there be a coup, with the Shaw's son in power? Isn't that what the US planned for Afghanistan?
Who was behind the attacks on the Chinese who are constructing the gasline port in Pakistan? Could iy be Jundullah, or al Quada trained Chinese Uighurs?
Is Obama the Change We Can Believe In? Or is he Bush third term? Or is it Clinton third term? At anyrate, is this the change we voted for?
Dennis Ross Prepares For War On Iran
Jim Lobe suspects Dennis Ross is trying to maneuver Obama into attacking Iran:
"According to a variety of sources, Ross was the main drafter of Obama’s pander (except on the settlers) to AIPAC’s annual convention here in May and has since raised his hopes for a top post in an Obama administration, possibly even secretary of state. Frankly, I doubt that the latter prospect is realistic, but — and here’s the main point — I have it from several sources close to the campaign that he is more eager to gain control over the Iran portfolio (possibly special envoy) than to work on the problem that he knows best from his long experience, the Israel-Palestinian conflict. If he succeeds in his quest and if this report is any reflection of his views, then the U.S. could very well find itself at war with Iran within a remarkably short period of time."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Everybody needs to worry about Dennis Ross having the president’s ear, day to day in the Obama White House, promoting an attack on Iran. .............
It should be repeated again and again: the National Intelligence Estimate concerning the question of Iran’s nuclear program, representing the consensus of the 16 different U.S. intelligence agencies in 2007 concluded in “high confidence” that Iran does not even have an active nuclear weapons program. (The report appeared after nearly a year’s delay due to apparent obstruction by Dick Cheney’s office, the neocon headquarters). .............
Dennis Ross is an NIE-denier. With no real expertise on Iran or Persian linguistic competence, and no understanding of nuclear science---but lots of experience in U.S.-Israeli relations and settler advocacy garnering him the nickname “Israel’s lawyer”---Ross was principal author of an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal eight months after the NIE appeared.
Sensationalistically entitled “Everybody Needs to Worry about Iran,” it alluded blithely, offering no evidence, to the Iranian regime’s drive to become “a nuclear state” and announced a drive to “mobilize the power of a united American public in opposition.” Co-signators included Richard Holbrooke, currently Obama’s special envoy to “Af-Pak;” former CIA director and Project for a New American Century operative James R. Woolsey and Mark D. Wallace, a former UN ambassador who heads up with Woolsey and others something called “United Against a Nuclear Iran.” (All were major proponents of the Iraq War.)
This group, in other words, wants to mobilize and unite U.S. public opinion against the consensus of the intelligence community about the nature of empirical reality, substituting for it the need to worry about Iran. ..............
Ross’s change of jobs was announced in the midst of the street demonstrations following the contested election results in Iran last week. He will now literally move into the White House and provide day to day counsel to Obama on how to “deal” with a leadership he wants to topple. ..............
Gary Leupp is Professor of History at Tufts University, and Adjunct Professor of Religion. He is the author of Servants, Shophands and Laborers in in the Cities of Tokugawa Japan; Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan; and Interracial Intimacy in Japan: Western Men and Japanese Women, 1543-1900. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch's merciless chronicle of the wars on Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, Imperial Crusades.
He can be reached at: gleupp@granite.tufts.edu
"Who is Dennis Ross, what does he advocate, how was he positioned to become the adviser on Iran in the Obama Administration and what will he do to Iran if he gets the chance? Let me briefly review the case.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Who Is Dennis Ross?
"Dennis Ross is best known as the dishonest broker who led the so-called negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians during the Clinton Administration. He was “Israel’s lawyer,” to use Aaron David Miller’s apt description of the role that Ross’s “negotiating team” played in the Clinton era, particularly in 1999-2000. [2]" http://www.counterpunch.org/sasan02272009.html
How we got into Iraq after 9/11 "After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Ross supported the advocacy work of PNAC, a neoconservative-led letterhead group that advocated overthrowing Saddam Hussein in response to the attacks, even if he was not tied to the them. 31 Ross signed two PNAC open letters on the situation in post-war Iraq, both published in March 2003. The first of these, “Statement on Post-War Iraq,” was issued on March 19, 2003, the day before the United States began its invasion. The letter argued that Iraq should be seen as the first step in a larger reshaping of the region’s political landscape, contending that the invasion and rebuilding of Iraq could “contribute decisively to the democratization of the wider Middle East.” Other signatories included Max Boot, Eliot Cohen, Thomas Donnelly, Joshua Muravchik, and several other core neoconservatives. 32 "
Road Map To War With Iran
"Calling the report a “roadmap to war,” Jim Lobe of the Inter Press Service wrote, “In other words, if Tehran is not eventually prepared to permanently abandon its enrichment of uranium on its own soil—a position that is certain to be rejected by Iran ab initio—war becomes inevitable, and all intermediate steps, even including direct talks if the new president chooses to pursue them, will amount to going through the motions (presumably to gather international support for when push comes to shove).… What is a top Obama advisor [Dennis Ross] doing signing on to it?” 46"
Top Obama Adviser Signs on to Roadmap to War with Iran
If you haven’t seen it already, check out the op-ed by former Sens. Daniel Coats and Charles Robb in the Washington Post today, entitled “Stopping a Nuclear Tehran.” It is the summary of a report issued last month by an organization called The Bipartisan Policy Center (at whose website you can find the full report), and it amounts to a roadmap to war with Iran to which a senior Middle East adviser in the Obama campaign — namely, Dennis Ross — has apparently signed on.
[UPDATE: Make sure you also read in this connection today’s New York Times article by David Sanger, particularly the part about the purported e-mail from Obama that was routed through an unidentified “aide,” who I presume to be Ross. The coincidence of the appearance of this article with the Coats-Robb op-ed suggests an effort to box Obama into a pre-election position. The Iran part of the story by Sanger, who considers himself a foreign-policy player, as well as a reporter, tracks the report’s narrative quite nicely.]
The 9/11 commission found that those who planned the attack on the World Trade center, did so because of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, and the US's support of that agression.
I believe there will be no peace in the Mid East until just solution is reached. That would, and must include a meaningful resolution to the right of return, as well as removal of Israeli's from all settlements in Palestinean areas. Any two state solution must be just that, two sepearte, but EQUAL, states. Not one state, and one reservation.
In the case of a failure to achieve an equitable two state solution, a one state solution will be the final result, with an end to unequal treatment, an end to Jewish supremacy supported in the law, an end to aphartide, and ultimately, an end to Zionist Israel.
The fundamental problem causing instability in the Mid East is Nakba. It is not essentially different from the removal of the Jews in Germany. The silence of the Arab states is not unlike the silence of the European states.
Now, there will be those who will say that I am not allowed to say that because it is anti semitic. These are the same people who critize Iran, but not Saudi Arabis, of not allowing freedom of speech. The fact is Israel, and her supporters like the US, are opposed to Iran using it's free speach, and walked out of the UN meeting because of Ahmadinejad's comments. charging Israel with racism and human rights abuses.
Where is the outrage?
Israel has shot, killed, and imprisoned hundreds, if not thousands of palestinian children, little children, but folks are up in arms over a contested election in Iran. Chasing red herrings. What a convenient distraction from the real and fundamental problem.
Ahmadinejad's Disagreement with the US Embassy Hostage Crisis in Tehran
In this video BBC interviews Ibrahim Asgharzadeh, Students Leader about the hostage crisis. He explains that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, present president of Iran opposed the movement. Ahmadinejad was against this because he feared that Soviet Union and Marxist will become more powerful as an outcome.
در این ویدیو تلویزیون بیبیسی با ابراهیم اصغرزاده، طراح و سرگروه حرکت تسخیر سفارت امریکا در تهران مصاحبه میکند. او توضیح میدهد که محمود احمدینژاد مخالف این حرکت بوده چرا که این را عامل قوت گرفتن شوروی و گروههای مارکسیست در ایران میدانسته.
The Iran hostage crisis was a diplomatic crisis between Iran and the United States where 52 U.S. diplomats were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981, after a group of Islamist students took over the American embassy in support of the Iranian revolution.
تصرف سفارت آمریکا، که به نامهای بحران گروگانگیری در ایران یا تسخیر لانهی جاسوسی هم یاد میشود، به دوران ۴۴۴ روزهای از تخاصم میان دولت آمریکا و ایران گفته میشود که با حملهی تعدادی از دانشجویان پیرو خط امام و تصرف سفارت آمریکا در تهران و به گروگان گرفتن ۶۶ دیپلمات آمریکایی در ۱۳ آبان ۱۳۵۸ (برابر با ۴ نوامبر ۱۹۷۹) آغاز گردید، دو هفته یعد تمام 13 زن و سیاهپوست و چندی بعد یکی از افرادی که مریضی جدیای داشت آزاد شدند، و در ۳۰ دی ۱۳۵۹ (برابر با ۲۰ ژانویه ۱۹۸۱) با پذیرش قرارداد الجزایر از سوی دولتهای ایران و آمریکا با آزادی بقیه 52 گروگان پایان یافت.
The provincial visits and the concept of social and economic justice through the perfection of the Islamic State. Ending sectarian divisions, and working togethre in the service of One God. Hard work, cooperation, and sharing the power as well as the wealth. Why would Iranians vote for Ahmadinejad?
Right after Ahmadinejad took office in 2005, he started his regular provincial trips as he had promised earlier in his presidential campaign.
The aim of these trips was visiting the masses to diagnose and get to know their shortages and deprivations directly. People who have been deprived from their most basic needs thanks to the negligence of former administrations.
He started his trips from the poorest provinces and blew a new air of hope in the hearts of the forgotten people.
These trips have been considered an administrative revolution towards discovering the shortages of the poor and decision-making for rectifying them.
indeed....
Peace love and respect with all cultures and beliefs - that is the reason we are an Islamic Republic. to share our culture without invading any country, to show respect for others while being disrespected, to stand up for the oppressed and to make this world into a beautiful place for all that is good to co-exist
Here is a video, that looks like a campaign video, that shows Ahmadinejad's visits to the rural and ethnic areas of Iran. I am posting this for those who have expressed frustration at not knowing more about these rural areas.
After Hamas won the elections in Palestine, the Bush administration armed fatah, for the purpose of creating "civil war" or sectarian "divisions," among the Palestinians. Why would the US do that?
In a previous post, I reported that it had been reported in 2007, that Bush authorized $400 million for a black ops campaign against Iran. In the runup to the Iran election, American supported terror group, Jundull bombed a Mosque, band, and campaign headquartes, with the purpose of inciting ethnic and sectarian divisions in Iran, hoping to influence the outcome of the elections.
Although this is widely reported in Iran, the MSM, which is enthralled by the Israeli Narritive, fails to report news truthfully to the American people, substituting, instead, the propaganda from the black ops campaign. The result is Americans are grosly dis-informed, and have been robed of their right mind, as well as being robbed of their democratic rights.
The fallout from the Iran elections cannot be understood in a vacumn. The US has a long and ugly history of agression against Iran, while supporting Saudi Arabia. Why?
Also, recently, and reported in other posts on this blog, the US has been funding black ops, including propaganda, media, psy ops, etc, for the explicit purpose of inciting ethnic and sectarian divisions and violence.
Receently, the Obama administartion has stated their "soft power" approach. Is soft power, Velvet revolutions, black ops and psyc ops, behind the recent violence in the Mid East and Central Asia and So Asia? Are American people being brainwashed by the MSM enthralled with "The Israeli Narrative?" Is propaganda destroying the "free press?" Open minds want to know...
He may yet turn out to be the avatar of Iranian democracy, but three decades ago Mir-Hossein Mousavi was waging a terrorist war on the United States that included bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.
Lyons, sometimes called "the father" of the Navy SEALs' Red Cell counter-terror unit, also fingered Mousavi for the 1988 truck bombing of the U.S. Navy's Fleet Center in Naples, Italy, that killed five persons, including the first Navy woman to die in a terrorist attack.
Bob Baer agrees that Mousawi, who has been celebrated in the West for sparking street demonstrations against the Teheran regime since he lost the elections, was directing the overall 1980s terror campaign.But Baer, a former CIA Middle East field officer whose exploits were dramatized in the George Clooney movie "Syriana," places Mousavi even closer to the Beirut bombings."He dealt directly with Imad Mughniyah," who ran the Beirut terrorist campaign and was "the man largely held responsible for both attacks,"
Baer wrote in TIME over the weekend."When Mousavi was Prime Minister, he oversaw an office that ran operatives abroad, from Lebanon to Kuwait to Iraq," Baer continued.
While there is no doubt that the regime of Ahmadenijad is reprehensible and the feelings of many of the young protestors in Iran are genuine, you will forgive me for quesyioning the motives behind the monolithic media support for the overthrow of Iran’s government and the installation of Mir-Houssein “Butcher of Beirut” Mousavi.
"Mousavi government oversaw the mass execution of political opponents in 1988, and say he has been largely silent on human rights violations since. ... They also point to his support for Khomeini's fatwa against Salman Rushdie, the British author of The Satanic Verses." Source: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4921
This second bit is from Chapter 1 of Walsh Iran/Contra Report: (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_01.htm) "On or about November 25, 1985, Ledeen received a frantic phone call from Ghorbanifar, asking him to relay a message from [Mir-Hossein Mousavi] the prime minister of Iran to President Reagan regarding the shipment of the wrong type of HAWKs. Ledeen said the message essentially was "we've been holding up our part of the bargain, and here you people are now cheating us and tricking us and deceiving us and you had better correct this situation right away.''[...]"In early May, North and CIA annuitant George Cave met in London with Ghorbanifar and Nir, where the groundwork finally was laid for a meeting between McFarlane and high-level Iranian officials, as well as financial arrangements for the arms deal. Among the officials Ghorbanifar said would meet with an American delegation were the president and prime minister [Mousavi] of Iran and the speaker of the Iranian parliament," (emphasis added).
Is it possible that the usual excuse, of Weapons of Mass Destruction, is not the real reason that the US is Targeting Iran? After all, the US and UK have been interferring with Iran for more than half a century, now. perhaps the real reason is that Iran has created itself into a "Model Islamic State." Is it the fear that Muslims can create a just and democratic society, based, at least in part, on Sharia Law, that is seen as a threat.
Just when you thought the US had stopped interferring with Iran, and took heart at Obama's resolve to "talk" first, by extending an open hand, we find out that the covert policies of the Bush administration, see video above, has continued into the Omama presidency? A Mosque, and bank in So East Iran, were bombed just 2 weeks before the Iran elections, purportedly to incite sectarian and ethnic divisions, to affect the outcome of the election. This was one week after the poll, done by a group backed by McCain and Frist, showed that Ahmadinijad would win the Iran election by a vote of 2-1.
Today, Iran continues to be rocked by charges of voter fraud and rigged election. Now I wonder if those who opposed Obama's announced policy of extending an open hand, rather than a clenched fist, and agreeing to talk first, before blowing a country off the map, I wonder if folks who oppose Obama's policy, had anything to do with the "demonstrations" in Iran?
Is This the Culmination of Two Years of Destabilization Are the Iranian Protests Another US Orchestrated "Color Revolution?" By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Or is Obama continuing Bush's covert ops against Iran?
Who Put the ‘green’ in the Green Revolution? http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/027782.html “Some of that money appears to have made it into the hands of pro-Mousavi groups, who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that the National Endowment for Democracy funds.”
Yes, you say, but what does a blow-hard propagandist like Timmerman know about such things? Well, he should know! His very spooky Foundation for Democracy in Iran has its own snout deep in the trough of NED’s “open covert actions” against the Iranian government.
How does the “Foundation for Democracy in Iran” seek to “promote democracy” in Iran with our tax dollars? Foundation co-founder Joshua Muravchik gives us a hint in his subtly-titled LA Times piece, “Bomb Iran.”
Is Iran right? Have outside forces interferred in the Iran elections and incited the demonstrations in the aftermath of charges that the election was rigged?
State Department Backs 'Reformists' in Wild Iranian Election By: Kenneth R. Timmerman http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/Iran_election_Reformists/2009/06/11/224025.html
Why has the western MSM swarmed this story? Is there fair and unbiased news coverage?
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10616.shtml The Western media and Iran Matthew Cassel, The Electronic Intifada, 23 June 2009 "For years, Palestinians have organized weekly nonviolent demonstrations against Israel's wall in the West Bank. Each week protestors face the heavily-armed Israeli military and are beaten and shot at with rubber-coated steel bullets and tear-gas canisters, sometimes fatally. Yet, during his recent speech in Cairo to the Muslim world, Obama made no reference to these protests and instead called on Palestinians to "abandon violence" and adopt nonviolent means. Days after the speech a Palestinian was killed and a teenager wounded during the weekly protest, yet there has been no call by the US administration for Israel to "stop all violent and unjust actions" against the Palestinian people. And the media has followed and remained silent, even though covering the demonstrations would be as easy as a 30-minute drive from most Jerusalem-based news bureaus on any given Friday.
Why has the western MSM "forgotten" the recenttly and ongoing discussion of US covert ops in Iran in it's reporting of the Iran election? double standard?
Do we have a "free press" or is the press being used to propagandise American people?
Leader addresses nation in Friday prayers: Transcript http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610
