Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts

Thursday, November 12, 2020

CIA / MI6 Coup Playbook and the #DeepStateCoup

 

A US Public Television documentary "The Queen and the Coup" describes US CIA and UK MI6 involvement in the coup that helped install the Shah in Ira.


The playbook that both intelligence agencies used seemed similar to the ongoing Deep State coup against President Trump. First there was a concerted effort to publish smears against the target and his administration in the controlled media:












































Monday, November 9, 2020

a #RedGreenAxis wrt promoting #DeathToAmerica

 





















Saturday, January 13, 2018

#Time Magazine Slammed Ayatollah Khomeini

[Ayatullah Khomeini] approved the seizure and mistreatment of U.S. hostages by [Iranian] "students'





From Knauer, Kelly, editor. Great People of the 20th Century: by the editors of TIME. Time Books * Time Inc., 1996. article on Khomeini



































































I guess lefty TIME magazine was happy with the Iranian mullah for hating America and ousting our ally, the Shah, but was offended when the Ayatollah didn't form an alliance with the USSR.

Article is mixed but on balance negative.




















--------------------------------
Iron-fisted mystic Ayatullah Khomeini heralded a newly militant Islam

----------------------------------

The dour old man shuffled to the rooftop and waved apathetically to crowds that surrounded his modest home in the holy city of Qum.  The hooded eyes that glared balefully from beneath his black turban often turned upward, as if seeking inspiration from on high -- which, as a religious mystic, he indeed was.  To Iran's Shi'ite Muslims, Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini was an ascetic spiritual leader whose teachings were law.  To the West he was a fanatical foe whose judgments were harsh and whose reasoning was surreal.  Yet to millions of all faiths around the world, the Ayatullah was most significant as the prophet of a rejuvenated Islamic fundamentalism.  Just as Mao Zedong had proclaimed to the world on gaining power that China had "stood up," so too the Ayatullah was the herald of a new breed of extremist Muslims, militant in their determination to shape their own destiny.

Khameini was learned in the ways of Islamic law and Platonic philosophy, yet he would remain astonishingly ignorant of cultures other than his own.  Rarely had so improbable a leader shaken the world.  Only a few years before the Iranian revolution, Khomeini was an austere theologian almost totally unknown in the West.  For decades he had nursed an inflexible devotion to a few simple ideas and developed a finely tuned instinct for articulating the passions and rages of his people.  Khomeini was no politician in the Western sense, yet he possessed the most potent of political gifts: the ability to rouse millions to both blind adulation and blind fury.


Sign of God.  Khomeini's career traced the classic trajectory of 20th century rebels: from agitation to arrest, from arrest to exile, from exile to triumphant return.  His nemesis was the ruling family of Iran, personified in the figure of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, who ruled through the strong support of the U.S. In 1963 Iran was swept by riots stirred up by its powerful Islamic clergy.  The Shah suppressed the disturbances, in part by jailing one of the instigators, an ascetic theologian named Ruhollah Khomeini, who had recently attained the title of Ayatullah -- "sign of God," a popularly bestowed honorific.  Khomeini had drawn crowds to fiery sermons in which he denounced the Shah as a traitor to Islam.  In 1964 he was arrested and exiled, first to Turkey, then to Iraq, where he continued to preach against the idolatrous Shah and to promulgate his vision of Iran as an "Islamic republic."


By 1978 the Shah had alienated almost all elements of Iranian society.  Westernized intellectuals were infuriated by rampant corruption, workers by the selective prosperity that raised glittering apartments for the rich while the poor remained in mud hovels, the clergy by Westernized gambling casinos and bars/  Everyone hated the secret police, the SAVAK.  But the U.S. regarded the Shah as a valuable ally [against the USSR during the Cold War ] and funneled to him money and weapons.


Late in 1978, small anti-Shah demonstrations swelled into protest marches of hundreds of thousands in Tehran.  At the outset the revolt had no visible leaders.  But even in exile Khomeini was well known inside Iran for his unyielding insistence that the Shah must go.  When demonstrators began waving the Ayatullah's picture, the frightened Shah pressured Iraq to boot Khomeini out.  It was a fatal blunder; in October 1978 the Ayatullah settled outside Paris, where he gathered a circle of exiles and for the first time publicized his views through the Western press.




January 7, 1980




















1900 Born in Khomein, Iran
1963 Exiled for leading anti-Shah protests
1978 Moves to France
1979 Returns to lead Iran; approves taking U.S. hostages
1989 Dies in Qum


Return of the prophet.  Khomeini now became the active head of the revolution.  Cassettes of his anti-Shah sermons sold like pop records in bazaars.  When he called for strikes, his followers shut down banks, the postal service, the factories, the food stores and, most important, the oil wells, bringing the country close to paralysis.  The Shah imposed martial law, but to no avail.  In January 1979 the Shah and his Empress went off into exile, leaving behind a "regency council." But Khomeini announced that no one ruling in the Shah's name would be acceptable, and Iran was torn by the largest riots of the entire revolution.  Now his time was at hand, and the Ayatullah returned to Tehran to a tumultuous welcome: "The holy one has come!"  The vast, adoring throng stalled Khomein's motorcade so that he had to be lifted over the heads of his adulators by helicopter.  He withdrew to the holy city of Qum and appointed a government.  But it quickly became apparent that real power resided in the revolutionary komitehs that had sprung up all over the country and took orders only from the 15-man Revolutionary Council headed by Khomeini.

In power, Khomeini and his followers displayed a retaliatory streak, and revolutionary courts condemned enemies to the death or life imprisonment.  Troubled by ethnic minorities, Khomeini seized upon a successful student attack on the U.S. embassy in November 1979 as a way of directing popular attention away from the country's increasing internal problems.  When the U.N. and the world court condemned the seizure of the embassy, it was Iran against the world -- indeed, all Islam [at least the Shia vs Sunni branch] against the "infidels."  Glorying in his power over the West, a defiant Khomeini successfully held his 50 American hostages for 544 days, watching in delight as President Jimmy Carter's helicopter-rescue attempt fizzled in the desert. [8 servicemen were killed in Operation Eagle Claw - so lefty journalist flippantly characterizing the failure as "fizzled" seems tone death to veterans] When the hostages had finally lost their purpose, he released them -- bit not until the very day Carter yielded the presidency to Ronald Reagan.

Khomeini soon found new enemies, this time within the Islamic world; he became embroiled in a lengthy war with Iraq that was not settled until 1988.  Early in 1989, the Ayatullah again surfaced to surprise the West, denouncing Salman Rushdie's novel "The Satanic Verses" as blasphemous, and issuing a fatwah (death sentence) that drove Rushdie into an underground exile that continues in 1996, seven years after Khomeini's death in June 1989.

The Ayatullah's funeral was a bizarre spectacle.  As a frantic crowd of nearly 1 million mourners gathered around the open wooden coffin containing his remains, the corpse spilled to the ground, bare feet protruding from beneath a white shroud.  Revolutionary Guards had to beat back the adoring crowds to bury the body.  Yet even in death Khomeini managed to excoriate his enemies, raging in his will against "the atheist East" and "the infidel West."  Like the Ayatullah himself, the intense passions he ignited could not easily to put to rest.


REVOLT IN THE DESERT: Born the son of an Ayatullah, in 1952, became one of six grand Ayatullahs of Iran's Shi'ite Muslims
After [Ayatullah Khomeini's] return from exile in Paris









Saturday, April 26, 2014

Charlie Rose NPR voice vs Iranian nuke program apologist

Family Guy goofed on annoying faux soothing NPR voice:




and, not as surprisingly, Alex Jones, infowars guy, also goofed on NPR:




Charlie Rose, just being himself, seriously used his stupid NPR voice whilst listening to some Iranian mullah apologist try to justify the Holocaust denying nation acquisition of nuclear weapons on his 1/9/2014 show:





I have to compliment the Iranian dude, tho. He was able to simultaneously slag off Israel's right to exist without actually mentioning Israel by name, treating it like a Hogwarts student does "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" Lord Voldemort.

So even tho this tweet is probably a just joke:






notice how the Iranian Ambassador refuses to wear a necktie, presumably, because he disagrees with liberal imam from Islam Today and believes that neckties really are a tool of the evil Christian Great Satan Haberdashers:


Question
Some people say that it is unlawful for Muslim men to wear neckties, since they claim that the necktie has its origins in Christian religious traditions and that it symbolizes the cross. On the other hand, there are people who say that a Muslim man can even wear silk neckties - though silk is forbidden for men - because the tie is not actually worn directly on the body. What is the correct ruling on men's neckties?
Answered by
Sheikh Salman al-Oadah
I do not see anything wrong with Muslim men wearing neckties, because the necktie is no longer a distinguishing mode of dress for the unbelievers. It is now a part of the Muslims’ dress in many Muslim countries like Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Morocco...etc. Therefore, the purpose of forbidding it does not exist. Even if it is something that originated among non-Muslims, anything that becomes global ceases to belong to any specific civilization.

It is not permissible for men to wear a necktie made of silk. Silk is forbidden for men, whether worn direct on the body, around the neck, or over the head. All of these are different ways of wearing something.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) took a piece of silk in his right hand and a piece of gold in his left, held them aloft, and said: “These are forbidden for the men of my people and permitted for the women.” [Sunan Ibn Mâjah]
Patton got fired from his job in post WWII Germany after comparing Nazis to Democrats and Republicans:





but Charlie Rose still keeps his 10 million jobs after comparing the Iranian theocracy to Western democracies:

 
ICYMI, all the candidates in an Iranian "election" are per-screened by their theocratic mullahs, so Charlie Rose's analogy is just completely absurd.

And, finally, from Captain Obvious:


Thursday, January 9, 2014

Charlie Rose Islamo-Fascist Apologist

Charlie Rose on 1/8/14 show interviewed Iranian UN Ambassador and compared Iranian theocracy to US democracy:




Comparing US political parties to fascist factions got General George Patton reassigned:


Gen. George S. Patton tells reporters that he does not see the need for "this denazification thing" and compares the controversy over Nazism to a "Democratic and Republican election fight."


Patton had many gifts, but diplomacy was not one of them. After the war, while stationed in Germany, he criticized the process of denazification, or the removal of former Nazi party members from positions of political, administrative, and governmental power, probably out of naivete more than anything else. Nevertheless, his impolitic press statements questioning the policy resulted in Eisenhower's removing him as U.S. commander in Bavaria. He was transferred to the 15th Army Group.

Seems Charlie Rose is equally impolitic, as far as US national interests are concerned, in promoting moral equivalency between US secular democracy and Iran's theocracy. Would Charlie Rose like a US system where Pat Robertson vetoes candidates is US elections like the Shia mullahs in their Guardian Council do in Iran?


 




Sunday, June 7, 2009

What would happen if Iran nuked Israel?

A commenter on Debbie Schlussel's post about the word count of Obama's Cairo speech suggested creating a wordle, so here is one of said speech, fwiw:
I didn't infer the same conclusion that George Stephanopoulos did with Hillary Clinton's interview:Iranian Attack on Israel is Attack on U.S. Hillary said that if Iran nuked Israel, that "there would be retaliation". George tried to nail this jello-ish statement to the wall by prompting, "by the United States," to which Hillary would not explicitly concur. Hence, I inferred that the Obama administration was neither committing to a US conventional, let alone nuclear, response to Iran in such a scenario. I inferred that, at most, Obama might send a strongly worded memo to the UN to tut-tut such an occurrence & then probably write another speech equating the historic suffering of the Jews to the displacement of the Palestinians.



All of the commenters on ABC's board seemed solely concerned about a potential Israeli attack on Iran versus vice versa. From Jeff Olsen:

so we can also say an attack on Iran by Israel is an attack of US on Iran!?

Goerge kept asking if Iran attacks Israel then what, but is seem no one is allowed to ask if Israel attacks Iran then what.

George, for tha last so many years that you remember when did Iran attack any neigboring country?

please be fair.


Golly, Jeff, if you completely ignore all the "freedom fighter" or "manmade disasters" deployed in proxy wars trained & funded by Iran, then I guess you are technically correct, but that seems rather disingenuous. The US is attacked for having the CIA cooperate with Britain's MI6's 1953 overthrow of Iran's Soviet backed government. If the US is held accountable for the CIA's doings, I don't see why Iran should receive a pass for the nefarious goings on of their Persian analog.

UPDATE

NRO's take on Obama's Cairo speech:

President Obama’s Cairo speech was nothing short of an earthquake — a distortion of history, an insult to the Jewish people, and an abandonment of very real human-rights victims in the Arab and Muslim worlds[...]