Protest in Iran
- Thread starter Corduroy
- Start date
The west is at war with Iran. Its covert, involves destabilization efforts, deception, funding opposition and terrorist organizations and acts of terrorism.
The effort costs the US hundreds of millions:
The Bush Administration’s operations in Iran : The New Yorker
Someone is killing Iranian nuclear scientists. You can tell our news has chosen sides when they describe a car bomb which kills civilians as "daring".
CBC News - World - Israel, West behind Tehran bombings: Iran
I see this as no different than bombing a Tel Aviv night club full of off duty Israeli soldiers. Both bombings should have been condemned by the MSM and our leaders as acts of terrorism.
The effort costs the US hundreds of millions:
The Bush Administration’s operations in Iran : The New Yorker
Someone is killing Iranian nuclear scientists. You can tell our news has chosen sides when they describe a car bomb which kills civilians as "daring".
I see this as no different than bombing a Tel Aviv night club full of off duty Israeli soldiers. Both bombings should have been condemned by the MSM and our leaders as acts of terrorism.
Are you asking me if I think it is intentional? I'm quite sure Iran is getting the same treatment Cuba got when she revolted against the US.
Here is a clip from one of the newest vids that I would peg as US propaganda from the very start right through to the very end. In this cpip at about the 1:25 mark there is footage of the revolt in 1979. What they fail to mention is no matter how bad things were after the 'revolution' the less important people were better off under what was a CIA sanctioned Dictator for the previous 25 odd years. Had that not been a brutal one there would have been no revolt let alone the hostage incident. In the full version the hostage incident is given as the whitewashed US version that the hostages only got released because Regan came to power. The US was paying Iran not to release them until that very day. (Iran/Contra scandal) That's two falsifications right there so why would that not get the whole film labeled 'pure propaganda'?
I'm hoping it has nothing to do with a Jewish media conspiracy.
No, I'm asking you why you think Iran has gotten more media coverage in the last 5 years than Libya, Bahrain and Yemen.
Our MSM media tends to follow the Israeli narrative exclusively.
Analysis of Coverage of Israel/Palestine in Media
If you go back to 2002/2003, the media played an active role in helping the Bush administration gain public support for an unprovoked attack against Iraq (war crime). The media continues to play this role regarding Iran.
Analysis of Coverage of Israel/Palestine in Media
If you go back to 2002/2003, the media played an active role in helping the Bush administration gain public support for an unprovoked attack against Iraq (war crime). The media continues to play this role regarding Iran.
The demonstrators in Tehran today are pro-Govt. They are demanding the execution of the leaders of the Green Revolution.
The Green Revolution's failure is pretty solid evidence that regimes which are prepared to kill their people will not fall until they run out of bullets.
The Green Revolution's failure is pretty solid evidence that regimes which are prepared to kill their people will not fall until they run out of bullets.
We lack the numbers and motivation to risk our lives. We aren't as desperate.
Israel and the US are less hostile toward Libya, Bahrain and Yemen... They overthrew Iraq by force already. Now they've moved on to Iran which has been the target of a simmering cold war since the Shah's overthrow in 1979.
Powerful people control the Western media message. They aren't shy about using their control to assist Israeli/US foreign policy. Canadian media is a little less compliant to these interests. The UK is more influenced by Europe. The message has changed by Turkey and Lebanon. Some news coverage from Israel is far more objective than Canada regarding Palestinians, Lebanon, Syria and Iran.
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988), by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky, is an analysis of the news media as business.
concept
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Herman%20/Manufac_Consent_Prop_Model.html
and conclusion
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Herman /Conclusions_ManufacConsent.html
The internet has diminished the ability of powerful people to control the message, what people know and as a result what people think, how they vote and which countries they'd like nuked. The majority of us are still manipulated sheeple. Anyone with internet access can read the foreign news and get an informed opinion, but most of us don't out of apathy, laziness... One day that will change.
Last edited:
Scenes from 1979. You wish buddy. That is modern footage and it burns you that it is.
Which is fact. The Iranians purposely withheld the release of the embassy hostages to further embarrass Jimmy Carter. As much as the left loves Jimmy today... the Iranians HATED him back in the late 70's.
This is why debating guys like you is so simple. The Iran/Contra Scandal was an Arms for Hostage Deal in the Mid-80's. The deal was to give Iran arms and in return Iran would negotiate the release of US Hostages being held in Lebanon by Hezbollah. Funds from the sales would be diverted to the Contras in Nicaraugua.
The Iran-Contra had NOTHING to do with the US Embassy Hostages in Iran.
Look it up if you don't believe me.
So now what should we call your post?
How about PURE PROPAGANDA and FABRICATIONS.
CHECK YOUR FACTS MHz
Last edited:
I'd describe it more like an exclusive club of wealthy powerful people who cooperate.
Do you think our news reports accurately and objectively regarding US and Israeli adversaries?
I don't believe it is just over power plants, more to do with hindering social and political advances that the 'west' find hurts the way they prefer to see things run. That was the agenda back in '53 and the ones that ran things back then did not lose the hand on the reign entirely. To see the difference you would have to have an alternative where the way things were progressing in '53 would have continued without any outside interference other than which country would supply the hardware for what used to be considered luxuries. If things seem to be in upheaval today that is because this is about 60 years for US involvement in an attempt to 'own them'. For the other three I haven't seen any material about the inner workings, that to any great degree. That applies to the Congo too so that doesn't mean they weren't hot beds of human rights abuses, areas when the US was the dominant force in who laid down what was acceptable and what was not. It's called 'doing it on the cheap' when it comes to getting raw materials and giving weapons to 1% of the population and 10 bags of money to split is the solution to maximizing profits for the Western Corporations.
No conspiracy. Just lots of Jews in the media and a media that isn't exactly vocal on the political actions of both USA and Israel. Why would a substancial ethnic influence in the media and enertainment need to conspire?
By who, and why do you dislike Jews so much, what have they done to injure your mind so?
(1:30 'similar to events in 1979 people again took to the streets .....' end quote) that is the comment I was referencing. These protests have the financial backing via the CIA, the instability tactics are directed by persons who are 'foreigners' or backed by 'foreigners'. They like to hide in the protests and start events that piss the Police off.
The Iranians hated the section of the US that had part in their support for an oppressive dictator.
I was going by this sort of article and it doesn't point to the mid-80's
(in part)
The Israeli Interest in Iran
... Israeli interests in non-Arab Iran became prominent as early as the 1 950s, when Mossad, Israel's foreign intelligence agency, cooperated with the CIA in establishing the Shah's secret police, SAVAK. A 1979 CIA report on Mossad notes that:
The main purpose of the Israeli relationship with Iran was the development of a pro-Israel and anti-Arab policy on the part of Iranian officials. Mossad has engaged in joint operations with SAVAK over the years since the late 1950s. Mossad aided SAVAK activities and supported the Kurds in Iraq. The Israelis also regularly transmitted to the Iranians intelligence reports on Egypt's activities in the Arab countries, trends and developments in Iraq, and Communist activities affecting Iran."
Cooperation between Israel and Iran touched many fields, including oil, trade, air transport, and various forms of technical assistance. But their most important mutual interest was in the military sphere.
Like the United States, Israel cemented its relationship with Iran by the exchange of arms for oil, which both sides kept alive through the worst of the OPEC oil embargo. The Iranian arms market was worth at least $500 million a year to Israel. The Shah bought everything from Gabriel anti-ship missiles to advanced communications equipment. In 1977, Israel arranged a $1 billion arms-for-oil deal around Operation Flower, a joint Israeli-Iranian project to build a nuclear-capable surface-to-surface missile. And like their American counterparts, certain Israelis also seem to have been part of the corrupt nexus through which top Iranian political and military leaders were enriched through arms sale commissions. "When the Israelis decide to change their policy," one top State Department official told a reporter in the mid- 1 970s, "the first place the Israeli jet touches down is Tehran. Moshe Dayan is in and out of there quite frequently."
No Israeli representative in Iran during the Shah's reign was more significant or influential than Ya'acov Nimrodi, Israel's military attaché. He reportedly helped organize and encourage the rebellion of Kurdish tribesmen against Iraq, the Shah's main political and military rival in the region. As the chief government agent for Israel's burgeoning arms industry, known as an all-purpose "fixer," Nimrodi was intimate with the Shah and his generals. "I was in partnership with the Shah," he told friends. (Among other coups, Nimrodi sold the Iranian army on the Uzi submachine gun.) And as the Mossad agent who could properly boast of having "built" SAVAK into an efficient if brutal intelligence service, he was no less intimate with the keepers of the Shah's secrets. With the arrival of the Khomeini regime, Nimrodi kept open his lines of communication as a private arms dealer who would become central to the Reagan arms-for-hostage talks.
Though Israel, along with the United States, suffered a grievous loss with the fall of the Shah, its leaders concluded that lasting geo-political interests would eventually triumph over religious ideology and produce an accommodation between Tel Aviv and Tehran. The onset of the Iran-Iraq war in 1980 gave Israeli leaders a special incentive to keep their door open to the Islamic rulers in Iran: the two non-Arab countries now shared a common Arab enemy. As Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon told the Washington Post in May 1982, justifying Israeli arms sales to Tehran, "Iraq is Israel's enemy and we hope that diplomatic relations between us and Iran will be renewed as in the past." Four months later he told a Paris press conference, "Israel has a vital interest in the continuing of the war in the Persian Gulf, and in Iran's victory." Such views were not Sharon's alone; Prime Ministers Itzhak Shamir (Likud) and Shimon Peres (Labor) shared them too.
Irangate: The Israel Connection excerpted from the book The Iran Contra Connection Secret Teams and Covert Operations in the Reagan Era
My bad, they have so many deceptions it is hard to keep the names straight, this is the proper name for that black operation.
October surprise conspiracy theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Been there done that, we should be on the same page as far as that issue goes. Is the reference ti 1979 also clear (same size and demeanor of the crowd rather than the footage was from back during that very revolution)
How about keeping me on my toes?
Only the name of the operation was wrong, the 444 days could have been ended under Carter's watch, the delay was theatrics for the home crowd. That part hasn't changed, nor does it change that Bush Sr. was the negotiator in that deal.
No conspiracy. Just lots of Jews in the media and a media that isn't exactly vocal on the political actions of both USA and Israel. Why would a substancial ethnic influence in the media and enertainment need to conspire?