| « November 2009 » | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | |||||
Recently by Catchy
- So leave them to plunge in vain talk and play about, until they meet their Day which they are promised -
- "Oh what a tangled web..." (humayun.gauhar)
- Do We Really Care About Democracy? Iran Election;
- Verily, your Lord will judge between them, on the Day of Resurrection, concerning that wherein they used to differ.
- And when Our Clear Verses are recited to them, you will notice a denial on the faces of the disbelievers! They are nearly ready to attack with violence those who recite Our Verses to them.
- Say, "The Truth has come; now falsehood cannot succeed whatever it may do."
- The right concept of Hijab from Quran
- you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم) are indeed guiding (mankind) to the Straight Path
- Verily, those who put into trial the believing men and believing women..
- you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) cannot make the dead to hear, nor can you make the deaf to hear the call
- ...even though you hate it
- Pakistan's EXPORTS rises
- Pakistan ka Matlib kia - Jia Alis Nadia Alis
- Pakistan's fate will never change until..
- What Noam Chomsky and other American writers write about Obama's speech?
- Ghair soodi bankari
By Charting Stocks
June 20, 2009 -- After being victims of multiple false and propagandistic media campaigns one would think that we would be able to read between the lines when our mainstream media sources act in lockstep with one another in marketing the agenda du jour.
Have we already forgotten the “flowers and candy� which the gracious Iraqi people were going to greet us with? You know, as “Liberators.� The weapons of mass destruction? The fear campaign waged against us to surrender our national treasure to a few Wall Street firms? When the mainstream media moves together in uniform, repeating the same talking points, it’s time to get suspicious, not complacent.
As soon as Ahmadinejad was declared the victor in Iran’s election EACH of our mainstream media sources were ready to cry foul and dismiss the results as an “obvious� fraud (see links below). One might think that a functioning media would produce ONE inquisitive reporter that was brave enough to even entertain the idea that Ahmadinejad, the incumbent with extremely high support in the country’s rural and poor areas, actually won. Unfortunately, we don’t have reporters like that in our mainstream media (which is why their readership continues to plummet).
If you doubt that the Iranian election media bombardment was deliberate, ask yourself - Do you know who won last months Panamanian election ? Did you even know there was an election? It’s not your fault if you don’t. Actually, I don’t see how you could know without a functioning media.
Have you heard much about the democratic elections in Saudi Arabia lately? Of course not. They don’t have elections. Any media outrage for the people of Saudi Arabia? A country ruled by one of the most repressive regimes on the planet. But hey, they’re our allies. We don’t talk about them (and certainly won’t tweet it).
What about the 2006 (monitored) democratic election in Gaza in which the people resisted western threats and bribes and elected Hamas as their leader? We responded by punishing the people of Gaza and cutting aid to the region. Well, they committed a supreme crime. They voted the wrong way and must be punished for it. I’m waiting for a sympathetic #GazaElection hashtag on Twitter, though I won’t hold my breathe.
Have you heard ANYTHING from the mainstream media of the democratically elected governments that we REMOVED? The fact is that we don’t care about democratic elections.
Dr. Michael Parenti, is one of the nations leading political scholars. In his book “Against Empire,� Parenti tells us that “The United States has overthrown democratically elected governments in Guatemala, Guyana, The Dominican Republic, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Syria, Indonesia, Greece, Argentina, Bolivia, Haiti, and numerous other nations were overthrown by pro-capitalist militaries that were funded and aided by the US national security state.�
The #IranElection hype has nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with effecting US public opinion. Why are “Iranian’s� microblogging in English and on Twitter (which they do NOT use)? According to Mehdi Yahyanejad, manager of a Farsi-language news site based in Los Angeles, “Twitter’s impact inside Iran is zero..here, there is lots of buzz, but once you look . . . you see most of it are Americans tweeting among themselves.� The Alexa rankings confirm that Twitter’s penetration in Iran is nearly 0%.
The United States is the last country on earth that Iran wants attention from. They certainly don’t want us involved in their elections. We’ve already removed a democratically elected government in Iran during the 1953 coup d’etat of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddeq. I’d venture to guess that most of the people expressing sympathy for the “Iranian Students� on twitter would have a hard time finding Iran on a map. Those that could would quickly realize that on either side Iran’s borders lies 2 countries which we are very familiar with - Iraq and Afghanistan. Both of which are militarily occupied by our armies. Both ruled by our puppet governments.
Ask yourself - If Iran’s army invaded and occupied both Canada and Mexico, would we want their “Help�? Would we find popular Iranian websites and keep them informed of our nation’s vulnerabilities in their native Farsi?
The media campaign, however obvious it is to some of us, has probably been successful. I’ll bet that if you poll the American people today (and they probably will), you’d find that 40-50% would support military involvement in Iran to “Help� with their elections. I’d also assume that those 40-50% are the same people (more or less) who believed we invaded Iraq because of 9-11, another testament to the effectiveness of propaganda marketing.
The Instant “Analysis�:
Reuters Iran’s election result staggers analysts
Hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad defeated moderate challenger Mirhossein Mousavi by a surprisingly wide margin in Iran’s presidential election, official results showed on Saturday. Mousavi derided the tally as a “dangerous charade.’
Fox News: U.S. Monitoring Iran’s Election Results
U.S. officials are casting doubt over the results of Iran’s election, in which the government declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner Saturday…U.S. analysts find it “not credible [Notice the usual UN-NAMED "US Officials and Analysts]
MSNBC: Violence flares as Ahmadinejad wins Iran vote
Riot police battled with protesters Saturday as officials announced that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won a landslide election victory. His opponent denounced the results as ‘treason’….Ahmadinejad had the apparent backing of the ruling theocracy.
CNN: Ahmadinejad wins landslide in disputed election
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been declared the big winner in the country’s election, but his chief rival and supporters in the Tehran streets are crying foul.
NY Times: Ahmadinejad Is Declared Victor in Iran
The Iranian government declared an outright election victory for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Saturday morning, and riot police officers fought with supporters of the opposition candidate, Mir Hussein Moussavi, who insisted that the election had been stolen.
Time Magazine: Protests Greet Ahmadinejad Win in Iran: ‘It’s Not Possible!
Iran’s Interior Minister announced Saturday that incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won 63.29% of the vote in the nation’s closely watched presidential poll. The announcement, greeted with widespread skepticism by Iranian opposition supporters and by foreign analysts, has brought thousands of people onto the streets where they have encountered a strong police presence and the threat of violence.
add to my favorite ilogs
flag objectionable content
By Paul Craig Roberts
June 20, 2009 -- -A number of commentators have expressed their idealistic belief in the purity of Mousavi, Montazeri, and the westernized youth of Terhan. The CIA destabilization plan, announced two years ago (see below) has somehow not contaminated unfolding events.
The claim is made that Ahmadinejad stole the election, because the outcome was declared too soon after the polls closed for all the votes to have been counted. However, Mousavi declared his victory several hours before the polls closed. This is classic CIA destabilization designed to discredit a contrary outcome. It forces an early declaration of the vote. The longer the time interval between the preemptive declaration of victory and the announcement of the vote tally, the longer Mousavi has to create the impression that the authorities are using the time to fix the vote. It is amazing that people don’t see through this trick.
As for the grand ayatollah Montazeri’s charge that the election was stolen, he was the initial choice to succeed Khomeini, but lost out to the current Supreme Leader. He sees in the protests an opportunity to settle the score with Khamenei. Montazeri has the incentive to challenge the election whether or not he is being manipulated by the CIA, which has a successful history of manipulating disgruntled politicians.
There is a power struggle among the ayatollahs. Many are aligned against Ahmadinejad because he accuses them of corruption, thus playing to the Iranian countryside where Iranians believe the ayatollahs' lifestyles indicate an excess of power and money. In my opinion, Ahmadinejad's attack on the ayatollahs is opportunistic. However, it does make it odd for his American detractors to say he is a conservative reactionary lined up with the ayatollahs.
Commentators are "explaining" the Iran elections based on their own illusions, delusions, emotions, and vested interests. Whether or not the poll results predicting Ahmadinejad's win are sound, there is, so far, no evidence beyond surmise that the election was stolen. However, there are credible reports that the CIA has been working for two years to destabilize the Iranian government.
On May 23, 2007, Brian Ross and Richard Esposito reported on ABC News: “The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert “black� operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell ABC News.�
On May 27, 2007, the London Telegraph independently reported: “Mr. Bush has signed an official document endorsing CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs.�
A few days previously, the Telegraph reported on May 16, 2007, that Bush administration neocon warmonger John Bolton told the Telegraph that a US military attack on Iran would “be a ‘last option’ after economic sanctions and attempts to foment a popular revolution had failed.�
On June 29, 2008, Seymour Hersh reported in the New Yorker: “Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership.�
The protests in Tehran no doubt have many sincere participants. The protests also have the hallmarks of the CIA orchestrated protests in Georgia and Ukraine.
It requires total blindness not to see this.
Daniel McAdams has made some telling points. http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/027782.html For example, neoconservative Kenneth Timmerman wrote the day before the election that “there’s talk of a ‘green revolution’ in Tehran.� How would Timmerman know that unless it was an orchestrated plan? Why would there be a ‘green revolution’ prepared prior to the vote, especially if Mousavi and his supporters were as confident of victory as they claim? This looks like definite evidence that the US is involved in the election protests.
Timmerman goes on to write that “the National Endowment for Democracy has spent millions of dollars promoting ‘color’ revolutions . . . 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.� Timmerman’s own neocon Foundation for Democracy is “a private, non-profit organization established in 1995 with grants from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), to promote democracy and internationally-recognized standards of human rights in Iran.�
Catchy
- Interacts: 28
- iLogs: 230
- Gallery: 48
- Page views: 63279
- Last visitor: guest
- Member since: Jan 25 2005
- Last signin: Oct 20 2009
- Send a message
- Add as friend
- Add to ignore list
- Add to block list


