Just in case you missed it…

Back in March 2009, four months ago, the United States Director of National Intelligence Admiral Blair was questioned by the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Committee chairman Carl Levin asked about the Iranian nuclear weapons program. Here’s his question – and Blair’s reply:

Admiral Dennis Blair: not everyone called 'Blair' is a Zionist stooge

LEVIN: In 2007, the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran said that “the intelligence community judges with high confidence that in the fall of 2003 Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.” Is the position of the intelligence community the same as it was back in October of ‘07? Has that changed?

BLAIR: Mr. Chairman, the nuclear weapons program is one of the three components required for deliverable system, including the delivery system and the uranium. But as for the nuclear weapons program, the current position is the same, that Iran has stopped its nuclear weapons design and weaponization activities in 2003 and did not — has not started them again, at least as of mid-2007.

You can read informed commentary about this in a March 10th article by Ali Frick in Think Progress: see Dennis Blair: Iran Has Not Re-Started Its Nuclear Weapons Program. Or just watch the exchange on YouTube.

In the 19th century, Persia was courted by two pushy suitors:  Czarist Russia and Imperial Britain. It was one of the key arenas where the so-called ‘Great Game’ for control of central Asia was ‘played’ by these two giant imperial powers. Eventually two ‘Areas of Influence’ were established, with Russia dominant in the north of the country, Britain to the south.

After World War One and the Russian Revolution, Britain became the supreme foreign power in Iran. This continued until after World War Two, when the ascendant USA took over as Iran’s chief  ‘ally’. In the late 1970s a popular revolt toppled the Shah and Iran’s Islamic Revolution ushered in the current era.

Dr Younes Parsa Benab: a left-wing historical perspective on Iran

For most of the 20th century, a secular left-wing was a significant force in Iranian politics. It was was not monolithic and had pro-Soviet and independent elements, like the left in most counties. It was recurrently suppressed by authoritarian Iranian regimes, acting with the support of Britain and America. After the Islamic Revolution, repression of the secular left did not come to an end.

Iran has been the plaything of domineering external interests for generations – and the determination of Iran’s current leadership to chart an independent course is not hard to understand. Those in the west with secular and ‘progressive’ aspirations for the Iranian people might do well to reflect on how those influences came to decline in the first place. The centuries-old western imperial remedy – yet more external manipulation – is no way to help this generation of Iranians.

Mike Wallace and the Subversion of Democracy

Part 3 of 3: Celebrating Dominance

This is the final segment of a three part series concerning the veteran CBS interviewer Mike Wallace – and issues of freedom, democracy, subversion and manipulation. In Part One, a young Mr Wallace intervewed Aldous Huxley, a man who gave more informed consideration to the likely future directions of authoritarianism that most in his generation. Wallace asks Huxley a very curious question about freedom.

Iranian President Ahmenidijad portrayed as an 'Islamo-fascist'

In the Part 2 – Concealing the Conspiracy – we saw Wallace interview the Shah of Iran in the 1970s – and provide commentary on Iranian affairs at the time. Acting through agents such as Wallace, Zionists in the west pushed to destablize the Shah and usher in Iran’s Islamic Revolution.

Along with the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1982, this had a number of flow-on effects. It split Eygpt from Iran; led to war between Iraq and Iran; set the ‘Iranian hostage crisis’ trap, depriving Jimmy Carter of a second term as President; laid the foundations for the Iran-contra affair; led to a savage new round of repression of the left within Iran.

"And the winner is..." (Zionism?)

The resulting mayhem and bloodshed eventually killed millions in different parts of the middle east, especially Iraq and Iran. The key beneficary was the State of Israel.

Mike Wallace and the Subversion of Democracy

Part 2 of 3: Concealing the Conspiracy

At the height of his career as lead reporter on CBS 60 Minutes, Mike Wallace interviewed Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran, in 1974 – and again in 1976.

At the time, the Shah’s hold on power within Iran seemed impregnable.

Note how Mike Wallace appears incredulous when the Shah ‘candidly’ discusses the enormous influence of the American Zionist Lobby. Even so, the Shah presses his point with some skill.

While it’s often an interviewer’s role to play ‘devil’s advocate’, Wallace was surely disingenuous in his reaction. He would certainly have known about the power of the Jewish/Zionist Lobby within the US mass media. After all, Wallace was part of it himself.

Born Myron Leon Woleck in 1918 of Jewish parentage, Mr Wallace rose to prominence within a Jewish-owned television network. Along with the the other major US TV networks, CBS  had a strong pro-Zionist bias throught his entire career.

The Shah: surprisingly candid...

Wallace may well have surprised by the Shah’s quite open criticism of the power of The Jewish/Zionist Lobby. It was rarely discussed in public within the USA at the time – and remains something of a taboo subject to this day, although in recent years the taboo has been weakening.

American support for the Shah evaporated soon after the 1976 interview. When Jimmy Carter came to power in 1977, Iran became a key target of the new President’s pro-human rights overseas policies.

By the 1930s, it seemed the long political career of Winston Churchill was all but over.

He was a man out of time – an old imperial War Horse in an era when the patience of the British people for war-mongering was wearing thin. While Winston fulminated against Indian independence and beat the old imperial drum for more military spending, the world seemed to be moving on.

Winston Churchill: catspaw for Zionist interests?

The Great War of 1914-18 had bled the British people dry. Gandhi’s non-violent campaign for Indian independence was earning widespread respect. The peace movement was on the ascendant, having won support from some of the country’s finest intellects such as Aldous Huxley. Many hoped the age of British militarism was drawing to a close – and a slow, dignified decolonisation process lay ahead. In that scenario, Britain would remain a prosperous, productive and uniquely well-connected society – but a nation at peace.

Yet by May 1940, Britain was again at war and Churchill was Prime Minister. Rejecting German peace overtures, he immediately committed the British Empire to a ‘no holds barred’ fight-to-the-death: total war with the Axis powers. Eventually, after forging alliances with the USA and Soviet Union, Churchill led an exhausted, bankrupt nation to ‘victory’ five years later.

Winston Churchill suffered decisive electoral defeat in the 1945 post-war general election, then returned to power in 1951 for an undistinguished finale as Prime Minister.

For several years now, the USA has been spending $75 million per year in “pro-democracy aid to Iranian dissidents”. That’s what’s on the books. One can only guess at the real figure, because so much of the ‘intelligence’ budget of this bloated, bankrupt, parasitized imperial beast is impossible to scrutinize.

These days the United States of America (USA) might be better decribed as the PEI: the Parasitized Empire of Interference.

'US Spider' by Palestinian cartoonist Majed Badra; is the spider carrying a tick?

It would be most out of character if the PEI and MSM (Money-Serving Media) are on the side of the angels this time. Zionist agent Dennis Ross has just moved into the White House to advise Obama on ‘Iran policy’. Not a good sign…

In all the network TV cacophony about Iran in recent weeks, I’ve never once heard use of the elected Iranian President’s academic honorific. It’s a small point perhaps – but did you know that Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has a doctorate? Did you know that before becoming Mayor of Tehran in 2003, this man of humble origins gained a degree in civil engineering, followed by a doctorate in civil engineering and traffic transportation planning?

If you live in the USA, you probably do know that Ron Paul is Doctor Ron Paul. If you live in Australia, I bet you’ve heard of Dr Carmen Lawrence. The title of ‘doctor’ is still sufficiently uncommon among leading politicians to be worth noting… usually. But there’s nothing usual about the psy-op directed against Iran. You may have to wait until hell freezes over before any of the MSM tell you anything meaningful about Ahmadinejad’s pre-Presidential background.

The western mass media’s coverage of Iran just gets worse and worse.

Don’t the Hollywood clowns even know how to lie anymore?

The L.A Times, June 16th 2009: Why is the President waving at 'anti-Government protestors'?

Hat-tip to Whatreallyhappened Com

UPDATE: June 22nd

The BBC gets some feisty responses from viewers to its explanation about using a similar photo – see What really happened on the BBC Editors Blog.

I especially liked this comment (links and emphasis added):

malleestump wrote:

Very gracious of the BBC no doubt, thank God for the internet and sites like ‘whatreallyhappened.com‘ being a site I peruse daily.

Now people, have a look at Mike Rudin’s story and the comments (esp from abour 3,000 on)in the editor’s blog called “Caught up in a conspiracy” and see how the BBC is refusing to update The Rudin ‘Conspiracy File‘ programs on 9/11.

For example, the BBC will not report on the recent paper of 4th April 2009 by Niels Harrit and 8 other scientists on the confirmation of ther finding of nano-thermitic residue in the twin towers dust. Why not BBC? the Danes have put Niels Harrit on TV to explain the findings of the militarised explosives.Why should the Danes be more informed than the British in relation to the mass murders on 9/11?

Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald: a rare gem

Glenn Greenwald, an American journalist who deserves serious respect for cutting edge reporting, has a thoughtful piece in Salon.com with the self-explanatory title: The “Bomb Iran” contingent’s newfound concern for The Iranian People.

Glenn’s article begins:

I’m going to leave the debate about whether Iran’s election was “stolen” and the domestic implications within Iran to people who actually know what they’re talking about (which is a very small subset of the class purporting to possess such knowledge).

He’s right of course. What the hell do any of us know about what’s really going on in Iran – a country which, in my case at any rate, is half a world away?

Even so, the humble blogger can serve a useful purpose, it seems to me – if only to point out what’s missing (or almost missing) in the mainstream media narrative.

Over the last day, protests have continued in Iran. There have been sizeable demonstrations – for and against President Ahmadinejad. Fortunately, there appears to have been no repeat of the violence on Sunday evening that cost several lives.

While protestors, it appears, remain free to protest, western correspondents been confined to the luxury hotels where they spend most of their time anyway. Naturally, this is widely-reported as an outrage by the war-pimps of Fox News, CNN, the BCC and Australia’s own conformist media.

In the last week, two significant elections were held in the middle east. In both cases, high voter turnout was reported

Education Minister Bahiya al-Hariri and Prime Minister Siniora celebrate victory in the Lebanese election

The Lebanon went to the polls just over a week ago to elect a new Parliament. Interest centered on whether a Hizbollah-backed alliance (known as the 8th March Coalition) would win more seats than the ruling, more pro-western coalition of parties known as the 14th March Coalition. In the event, it failed to make the headway anticipated by some western observers.

The losing side immediately accepted the results of the election and pledged support for the next government. The western mainstream media, needless to say, gloated. It was smiles all round on the BBC, CNN and FOX.

Last Friday came the Presidential election in Iran. In this case, there was considerable anticipation within the western mass media that the current President might be defeated by a candidate perceived as more liberal and pro-western.

In this case, the west’s favoured candidate lost – rather decisively. Immediately the call went out protesting the election result. At the time of writing, it’s reported that the USA has yet to recognize the result; as usual, the Australian Government is following America’s ‘lead’. Vice President Biden is, however, quoted as saying that the USA will still negotiate with the Iranian Government. That’s patronizing, when you think about it – but it could be worse.

Kourosh Mozouni is a name to watch.

Kourosh Mozouni, Presidential nominee: a politician with policies!

The 12 year old Iranian boy recently nominated as a candidate in the Iranian Presidential election.

According to HollywoodCelebGossips.com: “Kourosh Mozouni’s bid for presidency was rejected by Iran’s Interior Ministry, because according to Iran’s law, any presidential candidate must be a politician or a cleric who is 18 years old or above and a Shi’ite Muslim.”

It’s unfair. This same reliable source informs us that “boy Mozouni… reportedly was the only one to to submit a written work plan as to his policies should he be elected”

This confirms my long-held view that democratic systems are inherently biased against policy wonks. Flim-flam rules! Spin is all. The dumbing-down of politics applies even in countries, such as Iran, that haven’t been over-run by Zionist mass media.

Batman and Robin do Gaza

It’s a shame, because Master Mozouni’s policies are certainly worth debating. His solution to the Israel problem, for example, shows more orginality than the last three generations of European and American politicians. Anyhow, with Batman in Washington’s White House these days, Iran would do well to counter with a Boy Wonder.

How curious that the Mullahs shafted Mozouni’s candidacy. Has the Shiite clargy been infiltrated by feminists?

Other than Hawaiians, Femocrats stand to lose most if Iran’s political Wunderkind ever achieves Supreme Power via the ballot box. His policies on family life, if enforced, would deprive the western mass media of most of its air-headed eye candy.