Two weeks ago, MSM on Iran—-NUKES!!! Bomb them!

This week—REGIME CHANGE! Save them!

It really starts to look bogus, folks…

who cares what was “padded”, or rather lets check out exactly WHO has been doing the “padding” for so many years:

“the Telegraph (May 27, 2007) reported were “CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs.”

<blockquote>
Folktruther:
‘Ed, Jackpine it is certainly POSSIBLE that the Ahmadinejad side padded the votes, as it is also possible that the “Reformist” side did.  anything is possible, BUT THERE IS NO PLAUSABLE EVIDENCE FOR IT.’

The religious authorities have already admitted that the votes were padded in some localities.  They had to do this because one of the candidates pointed out that the total number of votes in some places exceeded the number of possible voters.

Raimondo’s statistical analysis of the figures was also pretty persuasive.

As I pointed out before, none of that means Ahmadinejad didn’t get a majority of the votes.  Remember that Nixon, heading into a landslide victory in 1972, still sent forth thugs.

Ed, Jackpine it is certainly POSSIBLE that the Ahmadinejad side padded the votes, as it is also possible that the “Reformist” side did.  anything is possible, BUT THERE IS NO PLAUSABLE EVIDENCE FOR IT.
American Zionists and the Zionist media have come out with the Big Lie of the “Stolen Election” as they routinely make them up to disguise Israeli ethnic cleansing.

You may not like Ahmadinejad and think, as I do, that the Iran religious regime is repressive. THAT IS IRRELEVANT TO WHO WON THE ELECTION. Iran traditionally has had honest vote counting historically according to foreign observers, and the results are similar to the 2005 election and the Rockafeller poll.  there is marginal cheating in ALL elections but to substitute this venality for a grand result is wishful thinking.  Which of course plays a huge role in religion and politics.

The Zionists and the media are completely cynical; that just make stuff up.  Their substitute for truth is credibility, what people will believe.  That is why I like Inherit’s truths; they are so absurd that no reasonable person can believe them.  And remember, Ed, I have first dibs as the Caliph when you set up your Caliphate.

Indeed, Ed. My best guess is that Mousavi’s victory declaration at the moment the polls closed forced the Khameini into announcing results to discredit the declaration. But posting such extreme numbers played right into Mousavi’s hands.

On the other hand, the numbers that have been claimed for Mousavi (i’ve seen 19M to Ahmadenijad’s 5M) look just as made up.

It will be sometime, if ever, before we know what really happened and by then most the people so damned interested now won’t care.

And it seems that Rafsanjani lost his behind-the-scenes battle for control of the mullahteriat…which was probably a driving force in all of this (and a factor that the media hasn’t really discussed in it’s fawning over “democracy” and “freedom” motif).

FT: It is perfectly possible that Ahmadinejad really did get a comfortable majority of the votes (as objective polling predicted that he would), but that his supporters also did some cheating on his behalf, inflating his margin of victory. I think this is what Anarcissie means in saying there is “no contradiction between Ahmadinejad getting the most votes and the election being rigged.”

Anarcissie, how is their no contradiction between Ahmadinejad getting the most votes and the election being rigged?  You waste som much of your time working that you don’t read all the alternative pieces.

As an alternative perspecitive on Justinado, I think in this case he is full of merd.  And not only in this case.

Folktruther, June 22 at 1:57 pm #

But although this ‘false truth’ operation was carried out by Am-Zionists, they are working under the CIA and other US government agencies that are controlled more geneally by the US ruling class.  It is the US dog waving the Zionist tail, occuring also in the right wing Christian loony wing of the Gops, just as the Zionist loonies are in the Dems.  Faith for the Christians, Hope for the Jews.  At least the deceit is symetrical.
*********************************************

Good ole FT has a great sense of humor—I appreciate that about him and think more and more if we sat down for a beer together we’d have a lot of laughs amidst the arguing.

He’s also as predictable as Old Faithful, and as consistently wrong as Clarence Thomas (See today’s USSC ruling on the VRA).

FT: I have only two words to answer your above post:

Chris Hedges.

Hi, Ed—you are just as wrong as FT, but without the grins…Here’s one: 

Iran Falls to US PSYOPS

By Paul Craig Roberts

“June 22, 2009 “Information Clearing House”—-President Obama called on the Iranian government to allow protesters to control the streets in Tehran. Would Obama or any US president allow protesters to control the streets in Washington, D.C.?

There was more objective evidence that George W. Bush stole his two elections than there is at this time of election theft in Iran. But there was no orchestrated media campaign to discredit the US government.

On May 16, 2007, the London Telegraph reported that Bush regime official 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.”

We are now witnessing in Tehran US “attempts to foment a popular revolution” in the guise of another CIA orchestrated “color revolution.” It is possible that splits among the mullahs themselves brought about by their rival ambitions will aid and abet what the Telegraph (May 27, 2007) reported were “CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs.” It is certainly a fact that the secularized youth of Tehran have played into the CIA’s hands.

The Mousavi protests have set up Iran either for a US puppet government or for a military strike. The mullahs are in a lose-lose situation. Even if the mullahs hold together and suppress the protests, the legitimacy of the Iranian government in the eyes of the outside world has been damaged. Obama’s diplomatic approach is over before it started. The neocons and Israel have won.

The US intervention and the orchestrated disinformation pumped out by the western media are so transparent that it is impossible to believe than any informed person or government is taken in. One cannot avoid the conclusion that the West wants the 1978 Iranian Revolution overthrown and intends to use deception or violence to achieve that goal.

It has become increasingly difficult to believe that facts and truth motivate the western news media. For the record, I would like to point out a few of the most obvious oversights, to use an euphemism, in the Iran reporting.

According to a wide variety of news sources (for example, London Telegraph, Yahoo News, The Globe and Mail, Asbarez.com, Politico), “Before the polling closed Mr. Mousavi declared himself ‘definitely the winner’ based on ‘all indications from all over Iran.’ He alleged widespread voting irregularities without giving specifics and hinted he was ready to challenge the final results.” Other news sources, which might not have been aware that the polls were kept open several hours beyond normal closing time in order to accommodate the turnout, reported that Mousavi made his victory claim the minute polls closed.

Mousavi’s premature claim of victory before polling was over or votes counted is clearly a preemptive move, the purpose of which is to discredit any other outcome. There is no other reason to make such a claim.

In Iran’s system, election fraud has no purpose, because a small select group of ruling mullahs select the candidates who are put on the ballot. If they don’t like an aspiring candidate, they simply don’t put him on the ballot.”

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22882.htm

to Ed Harges:

maybe, or maybe they are just being forced to play the game, somewhat.

The truth as to who is causing the problem in Iran is well-known.  It’s the Christians in the town down the road from me.  Most are Catholics but there are some baptists, too.
  Their plotting was overheard.  Troublmakers, all of them. Agents of those despicable renegades who are running the Masons.
  the pox on them and their nefarious doings.

I am not a Libertarian, either, but, I am starting to read some of their sites.

It cant be worse than Neo-Liberal hell. Many voted Dem because they were anti-war. Further disappointment occus when neo-libs make promises that they never intend to keep. We have the worst of both Libertarianism and Socialism—you know the saying, “Socialism for them Capitalism for us”. Well its true. I am just not a Catpitalist.

Gawd, even a piece by Lew Rockwell made some sense. I must be losing my mind!

The Second Vermont Republic is gaining momentum. IOts not just Texas.

I like the “Miami linked up with Latin America” idea…!! I had better get off of here…lol

re: By Anarcissie, June 22 at 7:05 pm :

Yeah, Justin Raimondo is one of the best out there.

Of course, Truthdig would never include antiwar.com on its blog roll, or link to any articles at antiwar.com — even though antiwar.com has a much better record of getting it right and getting it early when it comes to the truth about what the neocons are doing to America, and even though the libertarian-leaning antiwar.com is willing to admit the merits of articles at Truthdig, and frequently posts links to this and other left-leaning or liberal sites.

A lot of older leftists and liberals came of age in the protest movements of the 1960s and early 70s, at a time when support for Israel was still successfully promoted as a left-liberal cause. But to the younger generations of liberals - especially those not sentimentally attached to Israel because of their personal ethnic backgrounds - the idea that Israeli Jewish ethnic nationalism is something that deserves liberal support has become a laughably obvious fiction. The truth has an anti-Israel bias - and the older liberals who run sites like Truthdig simply can’t accept that. Hence, they never mention or link to Raimondo or to any of the other great antiwar writers at antiwar.com.

Raimondo in particular is really good at pulling together all the pieces of the puzzle on an issue, gracefully working in links to his sources for every important assertion, and skewering the pretensions of the neocons and neolibs with rapier wit and a fine sense of principled outrage.

Casualties in Iraq and Af-Pak:

http://icasualties.org/Iraq/index.aspx

Baghdad:Associated Press

BAGHDAD — Bombings and shootings killed at least 33 people in Baghdad and surrounding areas today, including a group of high school students on a bus headed for final exams, as violence intensified before a planned withdrawal next week of U.S. troops from urban areas.

C’mon people, wake up!

I thought Raimondo’s article was rather persuasive.  Of course there is no logical contradiction between Ahmadinejad getting the most votes, Ahmadiejad winning the poll, the election being rigged, and the CIA interfering with it.

I don’t know how much I would trust that poll, anyway.  “Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion, a nonprofit institute that researches attitudes toward extremism…. the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation” sure sound like neocon outfits and the report was printed in the neocon Washington Post.  Many neocons probably actually favor Ahmadinejad since his ignorance and fanaticism help justify their buddy Bibi.  In this case, they may be divided on strategy: portraying the Iranian people as rapt followers of a crazed demagogue justifies war, but so does portraying them as the helpless victims of a tyrannical regime who are only waiting, like the Iraqis, to throw rose petals at the feet of oncoming American marines.  One thing is certain: they don’t believe in truth, because they believe in power.  Truth is useful only when it serves propaganda.  The disagreement would be about which story to tell to gain the most advantage for their projects, not which story is true.

Whether the election was stolen or not, will be debated ad infinitum, as will out election of 2000.

The trust that the US govt puts in “the vote” is pretty much a western invention, which leads me to believe that there is CIA orchestration going on here. There always has been.

Either way, we are NOT in a position to preach free speech nor fair elections!

Oops: I meant to write:

...Ahmadinejad had a better than 2-to-1 advantage; that is greater [not less] than his official margin of victory in the election.

Link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/14/AR2009061401757_pf.html

Anarcissie writes:

“Nevertheless, I think it’s quite possible that many votes were stolen and the election rigged.  The fact that the U.S. ruling class doesn’t like somebody doesn’t automatically make them nice.”

It is very possible there was cheating by Ahmadinejad’s supporters — but is decidedly improbable that Mousavi would have won in any case. The cheating at most may have inflated Ahmadinejad’s margin of victory.

How do we know this? Because the only scientific pre-election public opinion survey - conducted by 2 American non-profit groups and funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation - showed that Ahmadinejad had a better than 2-to-1 advantage; that is less than his official margin of victory in the election:

...our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin—greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday’s election.

Ken Ballen is president of Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion, a nonprofit institute that researches attitudes toward extremism. Patrick Doherty is deputy director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation. The groups’ May 11-20 polling consisted of 1,001 interviews across Iran and had a 3.1 percentage point margin of error.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/articl e/2009/06/14/AR2009061401757_pf.html

Nevertheless, I think it’s quite possible that many votes were stolen and the election rigged.  The fact that the U.S. ruling class doesn’t like somebody doesn’t automatically make them nice.

What I like about Inherit is that he is not afraid to make absurd bizarro assertions and stick to them, like stink to a skunk.  You have to admire that. It gives us a handle on the more subtle deceits of Sepharad, etc. 

This “Iran Stolen Election” is one of the biggest Big Lies ever told by the US media, including the pseudo-progressive media, this kind of power bullshit a najor reason the American people are so deluded, deranged, distracted and depoliticized.

the narrative is largely carried by American Zionist neoliberals, like Inherit, who have the same respect for evidence and reason that he does.  Ed Harges made an implicit distinction between American zionists and those in Israel and elsewhere, and it occurs to me, that it is Am-Zionists that we are dealing with here.  An especially poisonous group, that provide a third of the Israeli settlers and much of the money by Jewish billionaires like Addelson and Saban. 

But although this ‘false truth’ operation was carried out by Am-Zionists, they are working under the CIA and other US government agencies that are controlled more geneally by the US ruling class.  It is the US dog waving the Zionist tail, occuring also in the right wing Christian loony wing of the Gops, just as the Zionist loonies are in the Dems.  Faith for the Christians, Hope for the Jews.  At least the deceit is symetrical.

re: By KDelphi, June 22 at 11:56 am :

Yeah, that is unbelievably disgusting. It’s a amazing how the neocons project their own wet dreams onto the protesters. “Iranians are in the streets! That must mean they want the Shah back! And they love Israel! And they think Israel should be allowed invade Lebanon whenever it wants, and keep the Shebaa farms and whatever else it decides to annex! And they believe the Palestinians deserve their misery! And they endorse Israel’s eternal regional monopoly on nuclear enrichment, even though the NPT, which Israel won’t even sign, guarantees all signatories the right to enrich uranium! And they wish oil to be traded eternally in US dollars, even if the US dollar hyperinflates into thin air and becomes undetectable to the naked eye!”

Latest “curve ball”: Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi,(son of Shah) who said today, in a press conference, that he was only “answering the call of his people” who, “like him” were calling for “bread instead of yellow cake, we are starving!”. (!!!) In his designer suit…http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1456297/posts

This is so hypocritical it is repulsive.

From “Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi’s visions for Iran
Mideast News “^ | Adel Darwish in London

Posted on Wednesday, August 03, 2005 3:53:32 PM by Khashayar

“He [Reza Pahlavi] says we need freedom. He says we’ll be like Europe,” as 17-year-old Afshin Sadeqi, one of the teenage multitudes in Teheran’s streets last November told Hugh Pope and Peter Waldman of The Wall Street Journal. The young student had never heard of Reza Pahlavi until last October, when he saw him speaking on videotape. “We didn’t know who he was,” Mr. Sadeqi says. “But as soon as we heard him, we felt it was our own words that we couldn’t say. He said them beautifully.”

The protesters’ taunts directed at Iran’s clerical leadership were astonishing, the WSJ report continues, particularly these: “We love you, America,” and “We love you, Reza Pahlavi.”

(cont’d quote)

“Four decades later, Iranians are again gathering in the streets, calling out the name of Prince Reza. Could the Iranians be waiting for a rebirth of Reza Pahlavi to start another white revolution, this time based on full democracy?”

I guess he meant “green”. Yeah, sure get the Shahs family back in, and you’ll get “full democracy”...

Shingo:

If the US had the same percentage of people demonstrating in Washington in 2004 to protest the stolen election in Ohio (and don’t forget Florida) then we would have had 15,000,000 people in the streets!

You think if 15 million Americans protested the 2004 election the government and Bush wouldn’t have been changing their tunes???  They would have been doing fancy footwork if 1 million were on the streets.  Did we have a “Moratorium” the way we did during Viet Nam?  No!

We have 5x the population if Iran and they had 3 million on the streets of Teheran!  C’mon—this is a strategic retreat on the part of the Islamic Republic of Iran, not a mark of how fair the election was.

Shingo, you are too smart not to consider the alternative solutions, even if you don’t like them.

Here’s an interesting view:

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/21/iran’s-green-revolution-made-in-america/

jackpine savage:
’... I hope i’m not the only one who finds it strange that the lefty bloggers and the neocon politicians are on the same side in this.’

You aren’t.  It is kind of odd, isn’t it?  The official authors here on Truthdig are very enthusiastic about Musavi, and it’s their audience who are very reasonably suspicious.  But most of the authors aren’t what I would call leftists—they’re liberals with a few leftish streaks here and there.  Their instinct is to go with the monarch, especially if he’s another liberal.

Also, Ahmadinejad seems pretty repulsive, a toxic cornball like Bush, so it’s easy to like the other side.

Ardee,

I have no idea what a Mousavi election would bring to Iran, but his associations suggest more adoption of neo-liberal free trade ideas. He seems to have the support of Rafsanjani, a very rich man with a good many business connections to the West.

I don’t know if that’s good for Iran or what the Iranian people really want. We should know well enough that being sold “change” doesn’t always add up to a whole helluva lot.

My only point (here and at S&R) is that what the Iranian people want is what the Iranian people want…and not for us to decide or support when it happens to coincide with what we want.

I hope i’m not the only one who finds it strange that the lefty bloggers and the neocon politicians are on the same side in this.

Just ask yourself: what bloody difference does all this concern produce? Whether an election is stolen or not in another country is actually moot. Why all this concern? Is this the latest sideshow attraction? Countries have bad governments all over the world, including our own. Just posting this comment is actually a minor, but nevertheless COMPLETE waste of time.
“Precious time is slipping away, you know you’re only king for a day. It does not matter to which god you pray, precious time is slipping away.”
VAN MORRISON

Are: By Shingo, June 22 at 7:29 am:

As I have already said, it looks like the supporters of Ahmadinejad did some cheating, but it also looks like Ahmadinejad won legitimately anywayl, as the scientific pre-election survey results showed that he would. Even in if you flip 3 million votes to Mousavi, or subtract them from Ahmadinejad’s total, or both, it doesn’t come anywhere near giving Mousavi the victory.

Another thing that seems glringly obvious:

Like you said Inherit The Wind, the Iranian government ADMITTED that in 50 cities the votes counted exceeded the votes cast and ADMITTED that 3 million votes may be in error. 

Now what kind to tirrany ADMITS to such erroneous results? Bush never admitted to any of the ahnky panky that took place in 2000 and 2004 and we’re supposed to be a democracy.

Inherit The Wind,

During the 2004 election, a number of towns in Ihio recorded votes that exceeded the population in Ohio.  175 thousand votes were thrown out illegally. 

As it turns out, every day it becomes less likely that the the election was stolen at all. 

First, it was claimed that that Ahmadinejad stole the election, because the outcome was declared too soon after the polls closed for all the votes to have been counted. Then it turns out that Mousavi also declared his victory several hours before the polls closed.

Later, it was stated that the margin was too large even though the polls leading up to the election showed Ahmadinejad by the same margin he won the previous election.

As Craig Roberts has written “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 release 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.”

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.”

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.”

The protests also have the hallmarks of the orchestrated revolutions seen from Georgia and Ukraine. It requires total blindness not to see this.

Mousavi is turning out to be a serious jerk too.

Necon poobah Michael “faster please” Ledeen has published a letter reportedly from the office of Mir Hossein Mousavi, in which the Iranian opposition leader criticizes President Barack Obama for saying Mousavi and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad are “two of a kind.”

The letter, addressed to Obama, takes the president to task for the remark, calling it “a grave and deep insult, not just to Mr. Mousavi but especially against the judgment of the Iranian people, against our moral conviction and intelligence, especially those of the young generation that comprises a population of 31 million.

“It is a specially grave insult for those who are now fighting for democracy and freedom, and an unwarranted gift and even praise for [Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei, whose security forces are now killing peaceful Iranians in the streets of every major city in the country.

“Your statement misled the people of the world.”

It looks like Mousavi has proven Obama’s point about him and Ahmadenijad being “two of a kind.” After all, both of them seem to have mastered the capacity to talk like lunatics.

Your fantasies continue.

Today, the government ADMITTED that in 50 cities the votes counted exceeded the votes cast and ADMITTED that 3 million votes may be in error.  Also, members of Mousavvi’s family are being arrested.

Every day it becomes clearer and clearer that the election was fixed and you gang in “The Contingent” come up with more and more bizarre and outlandish explanations as to why it ain’t so.

The facts come out and you don’t like because they don’t fit your pre-conceived world view, so…the conspiracy theories and crazy stuff.

FT: If, by saying I’m possessed by “The Devil” you mean I’m glued to THE FACTS like stink on a skunk, you are right.

What is interesting is it’s clear that as draconian as the regime of Khamenei is, the people are ONLY willing to accept it if their elections are fair—they are clearly tougher and more addicted to the RIGHT to pick their day-to-day rulers than we are.

I’ve long thought Al Gore didn’t do the nation a service by giving in, by NOT demanding a full recount in Florida.  Damn! The man WON the popular vote! He WAS the people’s choice. EVERY single President who lost the popular vote (and I mean neither had a majority OR plurality) went on to be a failure as President—and ONLY George W. Bush served a 2nd term (I can’t say “re-elected” since Diebold cast more votes for him in Ohio and other states than he got).

But each day the FACTS that come out show that “The Contingent” are wrong, “wronger” and soon will be “wrongest”.  The election was blatantly fixed and soon the police will fire wholesale and indiscriminately upon demonstrators.

IRAN WAR - SETTING THE STAGE

@ By Ed Harges, June 22 at 3:41 am #
I appear to be the useful idiot who reflexively found and posted it. It did occur to me, afterwards unfortunately, to wonder why neither you nor Folktruther saw fit to do the same ... So many shills, so many idiots and so much disinformation these days.

Having said which, Ackerman and Freedom House were in the news previously. Perhaps for the Georgia fiasco and McInsane’s Neocon adviser’s attempt to make his man look more presidential by starting World War 4. (Because there was WW3 - Video - John Stockwell -  “Third World War” - Forty years of Secret Wars of the C1A - 6 million killed.) -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3ioJGMCr-Y

The most interesting part was Weissman’s very cynical, and/or realist, points one to five, imo. Particularly point four.

> Fourth, the Iranian activists want to win. At least some in the America government might prefer to provoke a brutal defeat, a Tiananmen Square, to further isolate Iran and bring pressure within the Obama administration for a military response to the Iranian nuclear program.

Sounds like a good assessment of the Neocons’s morality. Or lack thereof.

re: By Inherit The Wind, June 22 at 12:02 am:

I guess the redundancy problem is the likeliest explanation. In Iran, to say that there has been meddling in their elections by both the US and Israel would sound as weird as saying that someone “was run over both by that car and by the person who was driving that car.”

PSmith: thanks for providing us access to what Truthout’s censors didn’t want us to see!

And guess what? If you do a Google search of the Truthout website for “Peter Ackerman,” you will find that Truthout itself posted and still publishes that Herald Tribune article by Peter Ackerman and Ramin Ahmadi entitled “Iran’s Future? Watch the Streets.”

Now, Truthout generally posts only articles that agree with its officially liberal POV. You won’t see TO posting opinion pieces by Newt Gingrich or John Bolton.

What does it tell us when we see that “liberal” Truthout posts opinion pieces by the billionaire ultra-Zionist who chairs “Freedom House, a hot-bed of neo-con support for American intervention just about everywhere”, but deletes a piece by Steve Weissman that exposes Ackerman?

Iran Non Violence - http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0906/S00224.htm

Contd

But the presence of American involvement adds several dynamics of its own, which Ackerman and Ahmadi failed to explain to their Iranian trainees.

First, the Americans decide where to put their efforts - and when to stop them. Washington does not fund or provide training and technology for non-violent revolutions against regimes it backs, as in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Israel or Colombia.

Second, the American meddling makes it easier for the Ayatollahs to build support within their own ranks and among a large majority of the population for whatever repressive measures they finally decide to take.

Third, the non-violent participants know nothing of other moves that the dark side of the American government might be making at the same time, whether staging acts of provocation, or supporting terrorist activities by breakaway groups such as the Baluchi Jundallah. Nor do the vast majority of participants know that American intelligence regularly uses training sessions of all kinds to recruit individual agents.

Fourth, the Iranian activists want to win. At least some in the America government might prefer to provoke a brutal defeat, a Tiananmen Square, to further isolate Iran and bring pressure within the Obama administration for a military response to the Iranian nuclear program.

Fifth, non-violent tactics and organizational discipline offer ways to win the support of soldiers and police officers, isolate would-be provocateurs, and avoid giving the government any easy excuse to bang heads and kill people. The same techniques also give the organizers ways to turn off the protest, as appears to have happened during the Orange Revolution in Ukraine.

One other dynamic has more lasting effects. During the Cold War, the CIA funded and manipulated a number of liberal and social democratic intellectuals, labor unions, civil society groups and publications. The CIA-run Congress for Cultural Freedom and its vast network were perhaps the best known. When journalists at Ramparts and elsewhere exposed the CIA’s hand, many of these individuals and groups became discredited for having allowed Cold Warriors and dirty tricksters to use them.

Washington’s promotion of non-violent resistance in other countries is already casting suspicion on a number of activists and thinkers who, wittingly or not, have allowed themselves to become pawns in open - and covert - programs to “promote democracy.” Non-violent activists everywhere need to draw a clear line against cooperating with governments of any stripe in this foreign meddling.

*************
A veteran of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts, Steve Weissman lived for many years in London, working as a magazine writer and television producer. He

Iran Non Violence - http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0906/S00224.htm

by Steve Weissman,
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Peter Ackerman and Ramin Ahmadi called the revolution on January 4, 2006, in an article in the International Herald Tribune with the prophetic title “Iran’s Future? Watch the Streets.”

“Against all odds, nonviolent tactics such as protests and strikes have gradually become common in Iran’s domestic political scene,” they wrote. “Student activists have frequently resorted to, and the violent response of the regime and repeated attacks of the paramilitaries have not succeeded in silencing them.”

Iran’s medical professionals, teachers, workers, bus drivers and women were also using non-violent tactics such as protests, industrial action, and hunger strikes in their fight for equal rights and civil liberties, the authors reported.

These “uncoordinated actions” had created “a grass-roots movement ... waiting to be roused,” urged Ackerman and Ahmadi. But, “its cadres so far lack a clear strategic vision and steady leadership.”

Where would the Iranians find this vision and leadership?

“Nongovernmental organizations around the world should expand their efforts to assist Iranian civil society, women’s groups, unions and journalists,” the authors wrote. But, they left out a salient fact. In a chilling mix of Mahatma Gandhi and James Bond, Ackerman and Ahmadi themselves were already working with the United States government to engineer regime change in Iran.

A Wall Street whiz kid who made his fortune in leveraged buy-outs, the billionaire Ackerman was - and is - chair of Freedom House, a hot-bed of neo-con support for American intervention just about everywhere. In this pursuit, he has promoted the use of non-violent civil disobedience in American-backed “color revolutions” from Serbia to the Ukraine, Georgia, and Venezuela, where it failed.

Ahmadi teaches medicine at Yale and co-founded the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center, using initial grants of $1.6 million in 2004 from the US Department of State, according to The New York Times. Washington reportedly continued its open-handed support in succeeding years, allowing the center to publicize the abuses of the Ayatollahs in English and Farsi.

Ahmadi and the center also ran regular workshops for Iranians on non-violent civil disobedience. These were in Dubai, across the straits from Iran. Some of the sessions operated under the name Iranian Center for Applied Nonviolence and included a session on popular revolts around the world, especially the “color revolutions.”

According to The Times, at least two members of the Serbian youth movement Otpor participated, as did the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict, which Peter Ackerman founded and chaired. The sessions taught the Iranian participants how to use Hushmail, an encrypted e-mail account, and Martus software to upload information about human rights abuses without leaving any trace on the originating computer.

“We were certain that we would have trouble once we went back to Tehran,” said one of the Iranians. “This was like a James Bond camp for revolutionaries.”

No one should question the value of non-violent civil disobedience for those who would bring down an unpopular government. Nor does the American training deny the very real grievances felt by the millions of Iranians who have taken to the streets - or by the lesser numbers of middle-class women who banged pots and pans as part of earlier CIA destabilization programs in Brazil and Chile. Even more important, no one should doubt the courage and commitment of anyone who would stand up against the Ayatollahs and their repressive state power.

Didnt anyone hear Netanyahu today? It was so obvious…yes, the truthout article is gone.

I wonder if anyone in the uS will protest our lack of free speech, such as erasing things from the internet. Things that are not twitter-related anyway.

Anyone know how many were killed in Af-Pak today??

Ws, they did delete the Weissman piece on truthout.  but you can get it in other places by googling ‘Weissman, Peter Ackerman, Iran’

Inherit, I believe you are possessed by The Evil One.  Just remember, someday you will have to stand before Trith’s White Throne of Judgement.  I will pray for you.

Gosh, you’re right, Ed, they deleted the Weissman article!  I wonder if the US plans more moves in Iran.  That’s the first time I’ve seen something like that, but, as I say, Obama is leading us to a police state.

Here is a good article on US-=Israeli co-opting of Mousavi: It is from June 4th.

Iranian presidential election: candidates debate strategic shift
By Sahand Avedis and Alex Lantier
4 June 2009

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jun2009/iran-j04.shtml

“As prime minister from 1981 to 1989, Mousavi oversaw social austerity measures imposed to finance the Iran-Iraq war. At the time, he was a proponent of normalizing relations with the US and recognizing Arab regimes. In the lead-up to the American Iran-Contra scandal in the late 1980s, as the US and Israel sold weapons to Iran, Mousavi organized arms purchases from Israel and oversaw the repression of opposition to the negotiations with US officials on weapons—including the execution of prominent Iranian politician Mehdi Hashemi, who had led a Tehran demonstration against these covert arms deals…”

Also, Jeremy Scahill:“Seeing some of these people online turning their profile pictures green “for Iran” makes me want to create a Facebook and Twitter application that turns profile pictures blood red, in solidarity with all of the Afghans and Iraqis and Pakistanis being killed by US wars today; wars that people in the US failed to stop and whose representatives continue to fund to the tune of $100s of billions.”—Jeremy Scahill

Now that would be a “revolution” for you—the US OUT of the Middle East!

I don’t know how anyone could say the western press would not be so deceitful.  My last post shows how they are lying.

How can you trust western countries like the USA and Britain when they say its fine for tiny Israel to be a major nuclear power (CIA estimate is 150 nuclear warheads).  That makes them one of the biggest nuclear powers in the world.  At the same time, the west says Iran can not have nuclear power for peaceful purposes.  Iran is a member of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty which states they are entitled to peaceful uses of nuclear power.  Iran says it does not want nuclear bombs - its research is for peaceful purposes only.

Israel is not a member of the treaty and the USA and Britain don’t say one word.  The lies and hypocrisy just go on and on.

I would have no problem believing what Ed Harges says.  The western media (TV, newspapers and magazines) is completely in favor of Israel and biased against the Muslims. 

Its a fact that for at least the past year Israel has been pushing the USA to attack Iran or help Israel to attack them.  There have been numerous news reports on this.

Omitting Israel’s actions against Iran would be consistent with their pro Israel / anti Musim reporting.

re: By Inherit The Wind, June 22 at 12:02 am:

Or maybe the Iranians didn’t bother explicitly to blame both Israel and the US because its redundant?

“But I find it hard to believe that the Iranians are not pointing the finger at Israel, given that Israel is the world’s loudest screamer for regime change in (and/or war against) Iran. Much more likely is that the US media are removing mention of Israel from Iran’s complaints of foreign meddling.

Why would they do that? To protect Israel, by preventing average Americans — who get all their news from the big TV networks — from connecting the dots, of course.”
*************************************

Wow! You’ve lost the last of your sanity.  You can’t see the obvious: Iranians aren’t blaming Israel because Israel isn’t involved.

Instead you concoct a bizarre impossible plot of ALL the news media agreeing to delete key info when they have shown us all sorts of other far more unpleasant news.

You’ve reached the tin-foil hat and space aliens stage.

I think the people behaving like children are westerners like the British and Americans.  The following article shows the BBC caught in an outright lie.  A pro- Ahmadinejad rally is labeled as being pro-Mir Hossein Mousavi.  The LA Times article is propaganda also.

Unfortunately nothing you read in our press can be believed.  Everything, but especially reporting on the middle east must always be questioned.  Until our press stops defending mass murderers like the Israelis and conditioning our citizens that its perfectly acceptable to bomb Iran into oblivion because they have a nuclear program for civilian purposes, nothing they write can be believed.

http://www.infowars.com/bbc-caught-in-mass-public-deception-with-iran-propaganda/

Wow. Folktruther, I have disturbing news. The Weissman piece about Peter Ackerman’s involvement in the Iran uprising has been removed from the Truthout website. A fluke? A temporary glitch? Well, luckily, before it was removed, I quoted a good chunk of it below in ‘By Ed Harges, June 21 at 8:27 pm’. The URL of the article was http://www.truthout.org/062109Y.

Folktruther writes:

“According to Ed Harges, the Iranian authorities blame the US and Britain for the demonstrations, so perhaps it was American Zionists that were primarily involved, not Israeli ones….”

No, that’s not quite what I’m saying, FT. I’m saying that our corporate TV news shows are reporting that Iran blames “the US and Britain”.

US TV news is leaving it at that — implying by omission that Israel is not named by Iranians as a culprit.

But I find it hard to believe that the Iranians are not pointing the finger at Israel, given that Israel is the world’s loudest screamer for regime change in (and/or war against) Iran. Much more likely is that the US media are removing mention of Israel from Iran’s complaints of foreign meddling.

Why would they do that? To protect Israel, by preventing average Americans — who get all their news from the big TV networks — from connecting the dots, of course.

re:By Folktruther, June 21 at 7:30 pm:

Thanks, FT, for alerting us to the excellent Weissman piece at Truthout. The article is especially good at showing how even something as seemingly inherently innocuous as civil disobedience training can be an instrument employed for nefarious ends. He zeroes in on the fact that behind this effort is the decidedly un-Ghandian billionaire Peter Ackerman, “chair of Freedom House, a hot-bed of neo-con support for American intervention just about everywhere” and that very much includes violent intervention.

He also further elucidates why this American involvement cannot be regarded as wholesome:

But the presence of American involvement adds several dynamics of its own, which Ackerman and Ahmadi failed to explain to their Iranian trainees.

  Fifth, non-violent tactics and organizational discipline offer ways to win the support of soldiers and police officers, isolate would-be provocateurs, and avoid giving the government any easy excuse to bang heads and kill people. The same techniques also give the organizers ways to turn off the protest, as appears to have happened during the Orange Revolution in Ukraine.

http://www.truthout.org/062109Y

Yes I’m inclined to agree with ITW.  Reagan wasn’t that big a fan of Israel (neither was Bush Snr for that matter), but he and Bush did [pull some strings with the Iranians to make Carter look bad.

steve Weissman, formerly an editor of Ramparts, has just posted a piece on truthout about the training of Iranians in civil disobedience accross the gulf at Dubai.  It was funded, in addition to US agency funds, by Peter Acherman, a billionaire Zionist neoliberal.  Acherman made hundreds of millions of dollars assisting Milken at his junk bond firm but did not go to prison with him.  He has a doctorate from Flecher at Tufts university, a big CIA involved organization.

Ackerman was involved in training civil disobedience in the color revolutions: Serbia, Georgia, Ukraine, Venzueala, etc.  He trains people, many of whom do not know of CIA involvement and are quite sincere, in disciplined civil disobedience, which, largely unknown to them, is coordinated by the CIA with terrorism, and other violence.  As well as US media, and fake leftists like Stephen Zunes, a self-discribed Zionist, who provides academic cover for these revolutions.

The Iranian election used standard tactics of these color revolutions, but the vote outcome was grossly in favor of Ahmadinejad, leading Moussavi and his supporters to demand the cancelation of an election that was in fact a landslide against them.  This led to the Big Lie in the American media that this was a “Stolen Election.”  According to Ed Harges, the Iranian authorities blame the US and Britain for the demonstrations, so perhaps it was American Zionists that were primarily involved, not Israeli ones.

As I suggested previously, the US may want a massacre of the demonstrators to discredit the regime, and Weissman states that as one of the possibilities.

So…if the US and Britain were out to disrupt the Iranian election, does that mean that someone else like Britain or China wanted us to have a twit for President in disrupted OUR election so that George W. Bush was “appointed” President in 2000?

And maybe the Islamic Counsel in Iran got together with the Israelis to help Ronald Reagan unseat Jimmy Carter.  After all, the Iranian Revolution made Carter out to be Satan—and the Isrealis in power under Began CERTAINLY didn’t like him for forcing the Camp David agreements down their throats.

So it’s an obvious conspiracy…don’t believe what you read in the mainstream media—it’s all cooked.  Clearly Mossad and the Islamic revolution were working together to unseat Carter.

It fits the facts and fits the motives.  Motive, Means, Opportunity—- and the result was Ronald Reagan, a man whose horrendousness as President was only exceeded by John Tyler, James Buchanan, possibly Andrew Johnson, and, of course, by George W. Bush.  Still, Reagan benefited both the Israelis and the Iranians.

But all that compelling logic doesn’t make it so.  Israel and Iran didn’t work together to get rid of Carter, though Iran DID work with Reagan to sink Carter—and Reagan and his team committed treason to win the Presidency.

nefesh,

“This is not about elections - it is a life and death struggle against an oppressive regime.”

As is the case with the Palestinians, but you support the suppression of that struggle in favor of the oppressive regime.

“Were we in a similar situation, we would - just as we accepted the help of France during our struggle for freedom from imperial Britain”

No we wouldn’t.  We would fircely reists any intervention no matter how egelitarian the intention.  we would take any such intervention as an affront to our sovereingty.

You suffer from the Krauthammer type transparently narcissistic projection, assuming that if Iranians are repelled by the authoritarian abuses of the their government, they must by the same token be secular, pro-American, anti-political Islam, anti-Islamic Republic, and clamoring for the United States to free them from their oppressors.

It doesn’t even occur to Islamphobes like you that although many of the protesters may be secular, many are devout Muslims; that although some may want to overthrow the Islamic Republic, most respect its basic legitimacy; that although most want to avoid confrontation and conflict with the West, few are overflowing with admiration for America or Israel; that although none want to instigate a regional nuclear holocaust, the vast majority support nuclear power as a matter of national pride.

Pull your heard out of your Islamphobic ass.

jackpine savage, June 21 at 12:33 pm #

One more thing…i’m not much for blog pimping, but if you want to read my thoughts on this you can go here:
.......................

So, Lex, nice comments if rather pessimistic. I find myself in agreement as the election results do not alter the fact that it is the mullahs who rule Iran. I do think Moussavi can be a force for liberalization within that nation however. The fact that he is risking his life to take a stand adds up to more, in my opinion, than a struggle between elitists.

On a more catty note; if Russ Whelan agrees with you you can be certain that the DLC does as well.

Why oh why would anyone in his right mind suspect that the uprising in Iran is at least partly the result of US-Israeli connivance to destabilize the Iranian government?

Well, Paul Craig Roberts has summarized some of the evidence for you. There’s quite a lot of it, actually, and that’s not even counting that Rockefeller Brothers Foundation-financed, scientific, pre-election survey that found a better than 2-to-1 advantage for Ahmadinejad.

Roberts writes [excerpt and link]:

...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 release 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….

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.”

http://counterpunch.org/roberts06192009.html

FT: I don’t know what’s going on, nor do i pretend to. But why wouldn’t he? (or people who are his “supporters”) It would all be covert, so what real risk is there for him except the US then trying to topple him sometime down the road (which they will anyway)?

But there is certainly an element (probably the largest) of elite power struggles going on inside Iran. Whatever it was when it started, it may well be something wholly different now.

Folktruther: a point of observation. On US TV news for the past 2 or 3 days, I keep hearing that the Iranian leadership is blaming “the US and Britain” for meddling in the election.

This formula, “blaming the US and Britain” is repeated unvaryingly in US reportage of the Iranian leadership’s complaints. Notice that there is no mention of Israel. Isn’t that odd?

Given the fact that Israel has been at the forefront in advocating regime change in Iran, isn’t it highly unlikely that the Iranian leadership is accusing only the US and Britain of meddling, and not blaming Israel with as much or more emphasis?

Have you noticed this omission? Is the US corporate Zionist media trying to minimize the connection between Israel’s agenda and what is happening in Iran?

You think, Jackpine, Moussaavi just signed up for the money?  Pretty dangerous move he’s trying.  You may be right but most political people are more interested in power than money.  Thanks for the info about the meeting with Americans.

KDelphi,

The color revolutions have not been about overthrowing a foreign power, and they’re not even necessarily about putting a particular person in power. (Though that’s a plus when it happens, eg. Georgia.)

Destabilization and delegitimization are enough…especially in a case like Iran.

FT:

Why indeed? But there have been reports that DoS representatives met with Mousavi campaign representatives in Dubai shortly before the election. VoA basically ran an election campaign for Mousavi, contrary to the standard procedure of telling people not to vote…a no vote being the same as “no confidence”.

If (and it’s only an if) it happened, Mousavi probably only signed up for the money and with the intent of ignoring his covert patrons after the fact. Congress gave the NED $400 million to spend in Iran; we don’t/won’t know how that money was spent.

The point is that the issue is absurdly complex and much of the needed information is not readily available…even discounting US involvement. Yet the media here has it as a nice black and white struggle of freedom vs. oppression. Interesting too that in this the mainstream of the left and right are in fine agreement. (That usually suggests to me that something rotten is afoot.)

nefesh

Your shtick seems to be: “if I do not want to answer questions, get cute”.
Try again to answer mine if you can.

One need only look at who is propogating the “revolution”.  The 24/7 MSM news is apparent.

There are no reports, per usual, about the Swat Valley, Pakistan, etc. It seems to me to be a neo-cons excuse to expand the war.

We are is NO position to be telling another countrty what to do right now. The difference between this and the “color revolutions” is that, the Iranians are not righting against a foreign power, and, we have to keep that in mind. There is also the religious component of “martyrdom”.

For once, Obama has set just about the right tone, in my opinion. If people want more involvement, where would you like to take the troops from Iraq or Af-Pak.

I wish the ‘Merkin people felt as strongly about defending their own rights…I wish “twitterers” would come out as strongly to oppose Obama’s continuous increase in military expansion, or people dying from a lack of health care, or a home.
Hurrican Katrina was enough to convince me that, yes, the ‘Merking peopel WILL sit by and watch their own countrymen die.

If you want a revolution, start here.

US-Israel appear to have made significant inroads politically and culturally in Iran, abetted by the religous oppression of the regime.  It is also unlkey that Mousaive and the billionaire Rafsanjani family would have signed up for the color revolution without some military backing as well.  Chaos is being fostered by the terrorist groups, the Kurd M.E.K in the north and Jundullah in the south, which has blown up Mosques killing and wounding hundreds of people.

But the US obviously expected the vote to be closer, the landslide making the Big Lie of a “Stolem Election” absurd.  This may be why Dennis Ross, the Zionist militaist,  was removed from being Obama’s chief negotiater with Iran.  The “Reformers” ridiculous demand to cancel a landslide election and put their own man in power can be simply brushed aside by the regime.  And the Irani students themselves, those that are not paid demonstraters, will begin to realize that have have been deceived.

So what is the point of demos now?  Reading between the lines of the Zionist columnist Thomas Fridman of the NYTImes, it appears that the US and Zionists are hoping for a bloodbath which will destroy the initial impression of the “Stolen Election,” and divert attention to genuine repression.  Otherwise the genuine Reformists will realize that they have been conned, which will put them on the side of the regime against US-Israel.  As of now, this whole episode has been another historical disaster for the US-Israel, that not even Zionist cynicism for truth can reclaim.

One more thing…i’m not much for blog pimping, but if you want to read my thoughts on this you can go here:

http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/06/20/the-revolution-will-not-be-twittered/

And, yes, that’s me writing under my real name.

No doubt that the violence and repression and the elite power struggle is now very real. But the question remains: how did it become real?

Don’t forget that Mousavi declared victory immediately, sourced anonymously. That’s “color revolution 101”, because after that anything the regime says/does looks illegitimate. Whatever the real results, the regime reacted ham-handedly and played right into the color revolution parameters.

Also keep in mind that Mr. Mousavi was chin deep in the Iran-Contra scandal. And now he’s a liberating hero of freedom and democracy…or so American media tells us.

Further, one can apparently set time and location for a twitter account so we cannot be sure that the initial tweets were even Iranian in origin. Moreover, twitter doesn’t accept Farsi inputs so whatever information came out of this was from a select minority directed pointedly at the US.

But the would be revolutionaries and freedom lovers of the West jumped right on it. The color revolution narrative has been set.

Fugghetaboutit——Khamenie is right——Ahmadinejad did win the election.  Maybe not by the margin reported, but the plurality indicated a win.  The people demonstrating are the intelligensia, the elite and their cohorts who probably long for the days of the Shah.  In spite of the televised crowds, they make up a small percentage of the population.  The vast majority are conservative Muslims who favor a theocratic regime.  Iran has a bent towards violent elections——currently the Mullahs have complete control and that won’t change anytime soon without some dramatic upheaval

johannes, June 21 at 11:17 am #

As a young men I have walked in and trough the Iranian country, nice people but hatefull against the USA, they see the USA as the creator of the regime of the Sjah, with his secret police and hurting an killing people.
.......................................

How then do you explain that, after the events of 9/11, there were candlelight marches throughout Tehran in support of the American people?

Perhaps you might have a case that now, after eight years of American military presence in the Middle East, the sympathies of the Iranian people for America has diminished, but I would proffer that it is the American govt that is the target and not the American people at all. More so because the anti Anadinajhad fervor here has shown a great criticism of Iran, a great upwelling of fear of an unproven nuclear weapons program and all the talk of Israeli ( a rebellious puppet of the USA or not) military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.

By nefesh, June 21 at 10:47 am #

Properly articulated comment. Still to what extent would it apply it if you were an Afghan subjected to daily bombings by US drone planes.

“Were we in a similar situation, we would - just as we accepted the help of France during our struggle for freedom from imperial Britain, and the way Americans volunteered by the thousands to help the Spanish in a losing effort against the fascism of Franco in 1936.”

  Iranians ARE NOT WE. And the US are not Iranians. Would you be so committed if the Palestenians rose up against the racist Israelis or the Chinese rebelled aginst their own communist government? On an individual basis you have the right to volunteer wherever you choose. Iranians have no right to butt in America’s business period.

By dihey, June 21 at 11:11 am #

Why do I have to suffer the superficial analysis of the events in Iran which completely ignore the civil class conflicts of Iranian society and analyze all current events in terms of “freedom” and “repression”?

Because that’s the price you must pay to tolerate points of view different from your own.

As a young men I have walked in and trough the Iranian country, nice people but hatefull against the USA, they see the USA as the creator of the regime of the Sjah, with his secret police and hurting an killing people.

The problem is they are as all other people they want peace happyness famelie work well as every where, but it are the politicaly powers from inside and outside who make the problems, and now is their a third dimensen the religion, well give it a try, I hope they are luky, and come out of it with not that many dead.

Why do I have to suffer the superficial analysis of the events in Iran which completely ignore the civil class conflicts of Iranian society and analyze all current events in terms of “freedom” and “repression”?
Who were the winners and who were the losers when the Shah was overthrown? Who in Iranian society are the potential winners and losers of the current revolution and how do these “classes” relate to the ones when the Shah was overthrown?
If we do not understand these forces we will continue to be surprised and baffled by what happens in Iran.

By omop, June 21 at 10:22 am #

would Americans welcome any “butting-in” by the Iranians, the Russians, the Chinese or Saudis in the Presidential elections?

This is not about elections - it is a life and death struggle against an oppressive regime. The fraudulent election was just the catalyst in a broad uprising -  real revolution. Were we in a similar situation, we would - just as we accepted the help of France during our struggle for freedom from imperial Britain, and the way Americans volunteered by the thousands to help the Spanish in a losing effort against the fascism of Franco in 1936.

If the american MSM had covered the illegitemate 2000 and 2004 elections in this nation as much as they have covered the recent Iranian election we might be a very different nation right now.

With that said, Iran appears to be a growing example of what power the people can weild when they are organized and truely ready for change. No, the progressive opposition probably did not win this election, but they came closer than anybody thought. And the best lesson learned here is that change can come about with the ballot and not the bomb.

Are the rest of us in the troubled US of A paying attention? Could we learn a thing or two from the Iranians?

Aside from the “philo” comments about “the battle for this group or that group”. Any thoughts or comments about:

    What role (if any) did the Voice of America broadcasts in Persian play prior to and after the elections in Iran?

    Are some of the comments coming out of Iran that “millions of US dollars” were distributed prior to and after the election In Iran believable?

    To what specific extent is the “health, welfare and security of all Americans” affected by “who ultimately wins the election in Iran”?

    And lastly if the roles were reversed would Americans welcome any “butting-in” by the Iranians, the Russians, the Chinese or Saudis in the Presidential elections?

    Greetings to all fathers on this day.

Are the Iranian Election Protests Another US Orchestrated ‘Color Revolution’?

By Paul Craig Roberts

June 20, 2009 “Information Clearing House”—“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.”

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article22875.htm

The revolution is on:

Resistance against the Basiji (the regime’s gestapo death-squads)  - they are losing their fear of their dictator’s private army of religious police - the Islamist thugs…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alTMUmCDgVE
==============

Protesters shouting “Death To Khameini” - they are losing their fear of their self-proclaimed “Supreme Leader” dictator…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOUiXtZTRJo&feature=player_embedded
==============

Police attack unarmed protesters (warning: graphic violence)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVCPByWEiSk&feature=player_embedded
==============

Streets are burning, protesters position cars as barricades to block intersections
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GzChTBsJgI&feature=player_embedded
==============

Fisk writes:

What we are now seeing is a regime which is far more worried than the Supreme Leader suggested when he threatened the opposition so baldly on Friday…...the Iranian regime, led by a Supreme Leader who is frightened and a president who speaks like a child, is now involved in the battle for control of the streets of Iran. It is a conflict which will need the kind of miracle in which Khamenei and Ahmadinejad both believe to avoid violence.

First Mr. Fish and now Fisk? I shouldn’t look a gift horse in the mouth, I suppose, but it is remarkable when even Fisk, for whom the verb “to fisk” (as in , “the article was fisked by just about everyone” - the picking apart of specious and in-bed-with-terror rationales) was coined, begin to express opinions even I can agree with.

I’ve been saying it for a while now - the “Supreme Leader” IS scared. The peoples’ fear of the regime is now transferring to the regime itself. This marks the beginning of the end of one of the world’s worst authoritarian power centers. The promise of at least a glimmer of hope on this stage is brighter than anything Obama created last year.

I think much of the problem in Iran is cultural rather than political. Technological innovation has much to do with this. The younger and those with technological savvy have become tired of the theocratic state imposing social censorship upon their lives. President Ahmadinejad is a hallucinatory figure; one who simultaneously claims the holocaust did not exist and that there are no gays in Iran. If the Islamic republic is betting on this strange figure, there very will be a likelihood of continuing trouble.

I align more with purplegirl on this than I do with the ideas expressed in this article

Is it not the very obvious hypocrisies of our two stolen Presidential elections, our policies of war and torture, our obvious giveaways to the wealthy at the expense of most important govt function thatmake a mockery out of any judgement of the actions of another nation?

We need , desperately , to look inward before we tell others what to do.

Do they think a Nation which ws subjected to Butterfly ballots, hanging chads, voter caging, redistricting, machine malfunctions/shortages, flyers stating voting day is Nov 5th,misrepresetation of candidates platform, religion or background is going to believe for One minute a totalitarian regime like that in Iran couldn’t pull off an election heist?
Beyond that do they think their own people will believe that the majority of Americans are listening to the same people who called them a nation of ‘Terrorists’, supporters of the Axis of Evil. We stopped buying the Repug portrayal of the iranian people long ago.Are the Repugs so delusional they think we would now swallow their claims to be supporters of the iranian protesters? The only reason these War dogs are pretending to have any concern (empathy?) for these protesters is that they smell the potential for war profiteering and Oil revenues.The are savagely drooling foam over the prospects of a civil war. Not for the possiblity of the iranian people liberating themselves from this tyranny- but so they can once again fire up the gin mill to claim intervention is necessary to do the ‘liberating ’ For them.The Iranian people were able to change their political leaders 30 yrs ago- I’m betting they can do it again without the ‘aid’ of the Corp Interlopers. these Repugs and their Corp overlords want it to appear as if the US and UK are spurring this on, acting as invisible forces- ‘divide and conquer’ is a lucrative tactic.This is a Win/win for the MIC- weapons profits and possibly more oil fields to pilfer. If nothing else the flow of oil will be curtailed from Iran, effecting pricing and forcing both China and Russia to seek oil from US or our ‘friends’ the Oil royals.
A word to the Wise in Iran, If our Neo Cons offer you a laural leaf- beware of what lies in the other hand behind their backs, just ask the Iraqi’s.

I don’t usually buy what Fisk is selling but here we see again and again how the “progressives” on the Left are splitting up over whether the Iran resistance to the Islamic regime is real or a manufactured artifact of the “Western Media” and a big plot to get…Iranian oil.

It’s getting hard to deny that the unrest and the violent suppression of it is very real.  Fisk and “Mr. Fish” have come down on the side of real.

“The Contingent” will soon attack and tell us that the Ayatollah is reacting properly and Ahmedinejad is really a capable sane guy who the West deliberately mis-quote…..and legitimately won the election in a landslide that he himself thought he was going to lose.