green revolution (Iran; 'the fix')

never trust any statistic ...

 .. that you didn't forge yourself ...

   .. "They'd have to say that, wouldn't they?"

     .. yet another c-theory - this time hardly joking at all


Q: How did the Mousavi rampagers get the idea the election was 'fixed' anyway?

A: They tried to put the fix in themselves, but were outfoxed and (possibly) counter-fixed.


  1. reap what you sow, perhaps ...

     .. a "yes" to fiddled election...

       .. with a bit of a 'sting' in the tail ...

         .. wouldn't it be nice, if nobody told us lies?


    June 15, 2009
    The Iranian Elections
    Sure They Stole It... Up Front and Honestly
      «For now, the Iranian establishment has spoken unambiguously for the continuation of the Ahmadinejad presidency. So, welcome to four more years of back and forth on 'to bomb or not to bomb', four more years of sanctions, talk of more severe sanctions, and reports of covert ops and infiltrations, four more years of seeing Ahmadinejad palling around with Chavez, waxing philosophical about Bolivarian Socialism and imprisoning socialists at home; four more years of empty promises for the poor, whose socio-economic infrastructure is eroded further and deeper daily as they are handed sacks of potatoes to avert starvation. And, painfully, four more years of absolute and utter lies, spread by the Israelis, the neoconservatives and their liberal colleagues regarding Iran's 'threat' 

    I wonder how Iran would go, if it was just left in peace?

  2. I've come to much the same conclusion myself about this highly suspicious push by the western mass media to destabilise Iran - see:




  3. Ghorbanifar/Mousavi:

    G'day Syd,

    followed your 'dots' link, found Ghorbanifar - like getting an electric shock. If his relationship to Mousavi is current, then there's not much doubt left in my mind: a 'color coup' may well have been 'on;' hopefully no longer.

    Ghorbanifar ... «By his own account he was a refugee from the revolutionary government of Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini, which confiscated his businesses in Iran, yet he later became a trusted friend and kitchen adviser to Mir Hussein Mousavi, Prime Minister in the Khomeini government.»

    One of four mentions in my 2008 archive:

    «In December of 2001, Ledeen and two Pentagon Iran experts met an Iranian named Manucher Ghorbanifar in Rome. Ghorbanifar sketched out his plan to overthrow the Iranian regime on a cocktail napkin. The plan involved, as the Senate report puts it, "simultaneous disruption of traffic at key intersections leading to Tehran," which would "create anxiety, work stoppages and other disruptive measures." Ghorbanifar asked for $5 million in seed money to get started.»

    Then, from rawstory (via abovetopsecret), Thursday April 20, 2006:

    «The Department of Defense and Vice President Dick Cheney have retained the services of Iran-Contra arms dealer and discredited intelligence asset Manucher Ghorbanifar as their “man on the ground,” in order to report on any interaction and attempts at negotiations between Iranian officials and US ambassador to Iraq, Zelmay Khalilzad, current and former intelligence officials say.»


    Trail gone cold - as one might expect, if Mousavi really is 'color-coded;' "where there's smoke" etc. - on the one hand, one can't say anything without evidence, on the other, an absence of evidence is no evidence of absence. I've said elsewhere that the AusBC's slavering tends to indicate USraeli involvement, and we 'truth-seekers' tend to suspect coincidence.

    Here's something 'just in:'

    Middle East
    Jun 16, 2009
    M K Bhadrakumar Rafsanjani's gambit backfires
    By M K Bhadrakumar

    «Khamenei's message to Rafsanjani is blunt: accept defeat gracefully and stay away from further mischief. Friday's election ensures that the house of Supreme Leader Khamenei will remain by far the focal point of power. It is the headquarters of the country's presidency, Iran's armed forces, especially the IRGC. It is the fountainhead of the three branches of government and the nodal point of foreign, security and economic policies.»
    [cross posted]

  4. Thanks - a very interesting article in the Asia Times. Iran - like any sophisticated country of its size - has complicated politics. The one-dimensional show put on by the MSM is a travesty.

    You may find this story interesting also:
    Proof: Israeli Effort to Destabilize Iran Via Twitter at:

  5. Thanks for the Twitter link; interesting.

    Bhadrakumar and atimes in general are good value, especially C K Liu (economics.)

    Bhadrakumar mentions 'an active cadre of student activists numbering some 3 million.' Also, that they're coming from 'for profit' Unis; a disaster waiting to happen, and a 'natural' rent-a-crowd.

    Other sources also put Mousavi on the fat-cats' cause.

    None of this means that the vote wasn't fiddled, although it was also pointed out that Mousavi was a v.late entrant.

    More serious reading/thinking required; too late for much of that tonight.

  6. But, some more info:

    Preparing the Battlefield
    The Bush Administration steps up its secret moves against Iran.
    by Seymour M. Hersh
    July 7, 2008

    «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 covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations. They also include gathering intelligence about Iran’s suspected nuclear-weapons program.

    Clandestine operations against Iran are not new. United States Special Operations Forces have been conducting cross-border operations from southern Iraq, with Presidential authorization, since last year. These have included seizing members of Al Quds, the commando arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and taking them to Iraq for interrogation, and the pursuit of "high-value targets" in the President’s war on terror, who may be captured or killed. But the scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which involve the Central Intelligence Agency and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), have now been significantly expanded, according to the current and former officials. Many of these activities are not specified in the new Finding, and some congressional leaders have had serious questions about their nature.»


    It's a big article...

  7. Thank you, Syd Walker, for that link to info on the JPost connected tweeting (cyber)terrorists.

    There's little doubt that agents provocateur operate in Tehran, their efforts aided by this agitprop coming out of IL and elsewhere.

  8. IDH, to pick up the trail on Iran-Contra arms dealer and discredited intelligence asset Manucher Ghorbanifar look into the activities of Fereidoun Mahdavi (aka "Ali").

  9. Then look into the activities of Wayne Curtis "Curt" Weldon, former vice-chair of the Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee, prominent neocon, and crook.

  10. here and now, boys! ...

     .. (from Huxley's "Island") ...

       .. what we need is leaked proof ...

         .. of destabilising USraeli subversion


    G'day Syd & orana gelar,

    of course it's unlikely - after all, IF it's filthy USraeli subversion THEN it's covert.

    We can easily imagine a conflict between the "Heaven later ..." and the "iPod now!" crowds, and the lying propagandists well know that "democracy," "change" and "freedom" virtually 'sell' themselves.

    But we also know, that the results as demonstrated in the US, UK, Aus & Israel are strictly *NOT* as advertised.

    Take the examples of Obama and Rudd; Bush and Howard simply had to go - but the replacements have hardly deviated from their predecessors' paths. "Helping working families" and "Change we can believe in" were simply hollow slogans, exactly as "Making the world safe for democracy" was, coined by Bernays&Co for Wilson in WW1. (Some change, down through the years, eh?)

    Further, we also know that interfering in some 3rd-party, otherwise sovereign nation is not 'just' mean-spirited - when the intention is to 'economically colonise,' to give a most charitable description - as opposed to the true reality: *WE'RE GUNNA RIP 'EM OFF!* - that interfering in some 3rd-party sovereign nation is not just tantamount to war - it actually *is* war.

    Sooo (looping), what we need are REAL leakers[1] and LOUD whistle-blowers.


    PS I don't have any realistic hopes of anything but yet another win for the 'dark side.' But what a sad state of affairs; is this truly the 'best' that our Anglo/Judaic civilisation is capable of?


    PPS Thanks for the tips, orana gelar.



    [1] leaker
    figurative (of secret information) become known: worrying stories leaked out.
    [with OBJ.] intentionally disclose (secret information): a report was leaked to the press | [as ADJ.] (leaked) a leaked government document.[Oxford Pop-up]

  11. Q: Where did all the *green* go to?

    Iran poll result will stand, Tehran crowds gather
    Posted June 17, 2009 00:45:00

    Look carefully at the photie; saw it last night on the teeve, too - a so-called post-election 'opposition' rally.
    hundreds of thousands of Mr Mousavi's supporters

    [blogger doesn't let one post pictures in comments - or colour font]

    The AusBC story concludes with:
      «A spokesman for the Guardian Council, which groups clerics and Islamic law experts as a constitutional watchdog, said that it was "ready to recount the disputed ballot boxes claimed by some candidates, in the presence of their representatives".
    "It is possible that there may be some changes in the tally after the recount," spokesman Abbasali Kadkhodai said.
    "Based on the law, the demand of those candidates for the cancellation of the vote, this cannot be considered."»

    Once more, Q: Where did all the *green* go to?

  12. Trying, mainly in vain, to find 'before' photies; here are two:

    Mousavi fan

    many Mousavi fans

  13. the kiss of death ...

     .. credibility? ...

       .. whose credibility? ...

         .. Fran Kelly vs. Robert Fisk (losers!)


    Two of the latest from AusBC:

    1. Iran curbs media as protests continue
    By Ben Knight, Kim Landers and wires
    Posted June 17, 2009 05:27:00
      «Supporters of both the defeated presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad held peaceful rallies in Tehran overnight.
    "It's clearly an Islamic protest against specificallly
    [sic] the personality, the manner, the language of Ahmadinejad," [Fisk] said.
    "They absolutely despise him but they do not hate or dislike the Islamic republic that they live in."»

    Me: There's also some bumpf from Obaba, about him not meddling.

    BUT (and it's a truly massive but); IF what's going on is materially encouraged by the CIA (Haw! As if it isn't!) - THEN it's the good old "Do what I say, not what I do" US hypocrisy.

    Nothing to see here; MOVE ON!!

    2. Extraordinary scenes: Robert Fisk in Iran
    Posted June 17, 2009 11:23:00
      «My suspicion is that [Ahmadinejad] might have actually won the election but more like 52 or 53 per cent. It's possible that Mousavi got closer to 38 per cent.» 

    Now, contrast Fisk's "They absolutely despise him" with his "that [Ahmadinejad] might have actually won the election but more like 52 or 53 per cent."

     .. credibility? ...

       .. whose credibility? ...

    Comment: I lived o/s for a while; after I got back I was truly amazed (i.e. genuinely gobsmacked) to find how dreadfully biased RN/b'fast was, then under the führership of one Peter Thompson. (Biased not for we the sheople, Oh no!) After Thompson they had a 'moderate' moderator for a while, then switched to the current one-eyed monster. Boo! Hiss! Evidence based, as I am (or evidence lacking, on principle); IF she's against something (Ahmadinejad, say) THEN I find myself at least 99.9% of the time for it, and vice versa.

    Not just BTW, inspect Fisk's estimates again: «Ahmadinejad ... actually won ... like 52 or 53%».

    Q: Tell me again why there're demos?

  14. and the next 'vote' is for ...

     .. 'electoral irregularities' ...

       .. along similar 'green' lines ...

         .. to an earlier one: Juan Cole's


    Middle East
    Jun 16, 2009
    The meaning of the Tehran spring
    By Pepe Escobar
      «This has nothing to do with the US-supported color-coded revolutions in Eurasia. This is about Iran. An election was stolen in the United States in 2000 and Americans didn't do a thing about it. Iranians are willing to die to have their votes counted. There is now an opening for a true Iranian people-power movement not specifically to the benefit of Mousavi, but with Mousavi as the catalyst in a wider struggle for real democratic legitimacy. The die is cast; now it's people power against "divine assessment".» 

    Escobar, also like Cole, lists 'electoral impossibilities.' Ooops!

    Something pretty 'big' strikes me; Escobar's: "nothing to do with the US-supported color-coded revolutions." To which I say "Hmmm." (I heard of at least 400mio reasons to doubt this.)

    Common now, to Cole, Bhadrakumar & Escobar is Rafsanjani vs. Khamenei, both 'clerics,' i.e. erring ideologues, with Rafsanjani in the 'filthy capitalist' corner, and Khamenei in the 'power-obsessed religious revolutionary' corner; with 'seconds' the mild(ish) Mousavi (recall his mate: (the lying?) Ghorbanifar, linked to the (liar?) Ledeen et al. - both/all vowing 'regime-change') vs. the rabid Ahmadinejad (Dr.Phil. son of a blacksmith, charms peasants (aka sheople) and says that the Holocaust is no excuse to murder Palestinians in order to steal Palestinian land.)

    Escobar opines that it's 'people-power' vs. "divine assessment" (aka guns?)

    Comment: Keeping in mind, that the presidential position is one of very little if any power, the *real power* could have been relatively indifferent to whoever 'won' - BUT (the *buts* just snowball!) IF the Mousavi 'green gambit' actually was a covert attempted subversion, courtesy of the CIA/Mossad (say), THEN *all* patriotic Iranians would, by rights, violently object. Lucky, perhaps, that *someone* set out to take effective steps to avoid the worst possible and most outrageous insult of anyone's lifetime? (I mean primarily the voters, backstopped perhaps, by the counters...) The sheople should be out dancing in the streets, rejoicing!

    As far as 'democracy' goes, in Iran or more specifically anywhere in the so-called 'West,' I'm reminded of a dog chasing after cars:

    Q: What does the dog intend, if it ever caught one?

  15. how utterly disgusting ...

     .. the next 'cab off the rank' ...

       .. (detested Ameri-speak - spit!) ...

         .. puts it down to internecine Muslim strife


    Middle East
    Jun 16, 2009
    Hedgehogs and flamingos in Tehran
    By Spengler
      «By assigning 64% of the popular vote to incumbent President Mahmud Ahmadinejad in last weekend's elections, Iran's reigning mullahs, if there was indeed rigging, made a statement - but to whom?
    Were the Taliban to succeed in crushing Pakistan's Shi'ites, Iran's credibility as a Shi'ite power would fade, along with its ability to project influence in the region.
    That makes an Israeli strike against its alleged nuclear weapons facilities all the more likely - not because Tehran has shown greater militancy, but because it has committed the one sin that never is pardoned in the Middle East - vulnerability.»

    Spengler also seems to make the (heroic!) assumption, that it *wasn't* an attempted color-subversion.

    As one can see from my 'snips,' Spengler:

    1. Allows that 'vote optimisation' (aka 'frizieren,' i.e. modifying in a possibly unconventional way) - may have taken place.

    2. He discusses some 'arcane' Shi'ite vs. Sunni strife.

    3. Most chillingly, perhaps, he seems to endorse 'All options!' - i.e. a strike by USrael at Iran.

    You are of course free to make your own assessment (everyone has one - err, an opinion); but one thing - thanks, but "No, thanks!" to Howard (Results 1 - 50 of about 1,660 for Howard disunity is death); disunity certainly seems like death - if indeed this arcane Shi'ite vs. Sunni strife lies at the basis of *any* Arab/Muslim behaviour.

    But (yet another one); that'd only be the US learning from the UK: divide and rule out in the colonies; that'd certainly go a looong way to explaining the otherwise almost completely senseless terrorist bombings of mainly innocent civilians: CIA/Mossad black ops; designed for maximum 'Shi'ite/Sunni' split effect - as well as being 'fun' for sicko USraeli psychopaths.


    PS If it *was* fiddled, why in such an apparently non-transparent way? That could be the biggest self-insult of the whole charade, whether colored or non-.

  16. Very good reporting. I heard Fisk on the radio too - was rather amazed at his bias. I find Robert Fisk less and less credible as time goes by. Likewise Escobar and Cole.

    Incidentally, her's another in the 'busted wide-open for spreading slack disinformation' series:


  17. and now, something *entirely* different ...

     .. from a 'parallel source' (thnx) ...

       .. back to square-one? ...

         .. well, let's see now


    I was thinking 7-in-a-row meant time for a rest - but no; just as there's no rest for the wicked, I'm out of such 'luck' too. (Fortunately, Syd (g'day!) broke my monopoly up anyway; thanks for the new link.)


    Sooo, two new 'slants:'

    Ahmadinejad Won. Get Over It
    By Flynt Leverett, New America Foundation
     with Hillary Mann Leverett
    Politico | June 15, 2009
      «They ignore the fact that Ahmadinejad’s 62.6 percent of the vote in this year’s election is essentially the same as the 61.69 percent he received in the final count of the 2005 presidential election, when he trounced former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The "Iran experts’" shock at Friday’s results is entirely self-generated, based on their preferred assumptions and wishful thinking.
    The Islamic Republic is a system with multiple power centers; within that system, there is a strong and enduring consensus about core issues of national security and foreign policy, including Iran’s nuclear program and relations with the United States. Any of the four candidates in Friday’s election would have continued the nuclear program as Iran’s president; none would agree to its suspension.»

    The Iranian People Speak
    By Patrick C. Doherty, New America Foundation
     with Ken Ballen, Terror Free Tomorrow
    Washington Post | June 15, 2009
      «Allegations of fraud and electoral manipulation will serve to further isolate Iran and are likely to increase its belligerence and intransigence against the outside world. Before other countries, including the United States, jump to the conclusion that the Iranian presidential elections were fraudulent, with the grave consequences such charges could bring, they should consider all independent information. The fact may simply be that the reelection of President Ahmadinejad is what the Iranian people wanted.» 

    (There's only one v.slight 'niggle;' both reports share the same pre-election poll info.)


    Looks like it's back to 'color subversion;' and rabid, corrupt and venal MSM - including the AusBC - Boo! Hiss!


    (Now, who's got my $400mio?)

  18. Not quite moving on just yet ...

    Ghorbanifar met with Lawrence Franklin in late 2001.

    In 2002 and 2003, Franklin worked at the Office of Special Plans (created by Donald Rumsfeld).

    His boss, Douglas Feith, authorised Franklin's further meetings with Iran-Contra figures.

    In 2005, Franklin was charged with unauthorised disclosure US held classified information on Iran to Israel.

  19. After the mammoth effort yesterday, I have to do some 'other things' today, i.e. going 'out of office' for a short while.

    G'day orana gelar, rawstory has Ghorbanifar being put on Cheney's payroll in 2006.

    But: We don't know how much of GWBush's stuff has been carried over by BO (although we can assume: *lots*!)

    However and more immediate, with the AusBC's 'man' being kicked out of Iran, we need 'insider' info, preferably accurate. This morning, the b-bag was 'recycling' US talking-heads (detested Ameri-speak, spit!); we can't expect to get any sense out of them.

  20. I heard Raphael Epstein on AusBC 774 this morning hinting that Ben Knight (Aunty's man being *kicked out* of Iran) wasn't so much *kicked out* as ran away of his own volition. Note that Knight is usually based in Israel which is where Gillard, Costello and others all head to today or tomorrow.

  21. Also note this report from Ben Knight in November 2008 which is introduced by Elizabeth Jackson thus:

    "For three weeks Israel has been stopping foreign journalists from entering the Gaza Strip, while humanitarian agencies say the humanitarian situation is deteriorating."

    Israeli regimes lock out foreign journalists and it's mentioned in a by-the-by kind of way with a pointing toward "Arabs" doing that too. Israel's censorship is minimised as no big deal.

    The Iranian regime reduces reporters access and it's the news focus for days, possibly weeks to come. It's made into a big deal ... and there's no pointing out that Israel did the same.

    It's a huge hypocrisy.

  22. 'Bad Aunty;' Mk ∞

      a 'not published' comment:


    Do yourselves a favour, and Google:

    "The poll results, the only real information we have at this time"

    Let's see now; we, the sheople, get a government which supports the US (& Israel) - Lib or Lab.

    We, the great unwashed, are compulsory members of "The Mushroom Club."

    We are free to say whatever we want - but *nobody* listens; we are bought off in the manner of the primitive indigenes of old, with silly info-tainment TV, really "cheep cheep" cheap imported junk - and basically otherwise ignored. Our wages and conditions are continually under attack - on the 'down side;' whatever 'family jools' we've got left are to be flogged off for a miserable pittance. (NSW to keep AAA, QLD to try to regain. And what of electricity bills? Haw! UP-side!)

    And the students of Iran, 3 million of 'em (one might say "the cream of the crop") plus other sundry rent-a-green-crowds all wish to vote their way to join us - in our freedoms? Encouraged by the $US400mio subversion fund, no doubt.

    Message to green-Iran: look at what happened to the east Europeans & Russians, as the US carpetbaggers flowed over the torn-down iron-curtain.

  23. Green, of course, is the 'perfect' color.

    (Note: Throughout, I have used the detested US-speak spelling: color. Obviously, to emphasize the *filthy* origin of the concept.)

    Green is the *colour*, on the one hand of envy, on the other of 'save the planet.'

    If we ever dare to complain, about the already filthy-rich getting ever-more obscenely richer - and note carefully, for them to get ever-richer, we the sheople are condemned to get even less - i.e. ever poorer until, presumably, we starve to death - or otherwise get too weak to work - but in any case have no dough left for anything but a mean (i.e. cat-food type) subsistence - if we complain about being driven into the poorhouse - then we are summarily guilty of the politics of envy.

    Leaving that aside, if we try to 'save the planet' in even some tiny way, all the time heedful of the precautionary principle (if not the squillions of scientists - and finally the US White House) - then we are condemned as 'greenie dreamers.'

    And so the neoCon criminals running the US have yet another laugh at our expense; the US (covertly, $400mio at least) sponsored Iran green revolution - whereby the Iranian sheople 'democratically' volunteer - now violently demand - to join us in our form of serfdom.

  24. Back on track, a different view:

    Iran Faces Greater Risks Than It Knows
    By Paul Craig Roberts
    June 17, 2009
      «More evidence of orchestration is provided by the protesters’ chant, "death to the dictator, death to Ahmadinejad." Every Iranian knows that the president of Iran is a public figure with limited powers. His main role is to take the heat from the governing grand Ayatollah. No Iranian, and no informed westerner, could possibly believe that Ahmadinejad is a dictator. Even Ahmadinejad’s superior, Khamenei, is not a dictator as he is appointed by a government body that can remove him.
    The demonstrations, like those in 1953, are intended to discredit the Iranian government and to establish for Western opinion that the government is a repressive regime that does not have the support of the Iranian people. This manipulation of opinion sets up Iran as another Iraq ruled by a dictator who must be overthrown by sanctions or an invasion.»
    As usual, one should read it all.

  25. If there is any good that comes from this[1] it is that audiences in the West might have registered that should Israel bomb Iran it will likely cause the death of many of those marching.

    Perhaps those audiences reserve a little more compassion for people like them, i.e. the more affluent. They might be motivated to make some noise against any aggressive move against Iran by Israel and/or the U.S. [2]


    [1] Where 'this' is an unintended consequence of USRael's North Tehrani *green* stimulus program.

    [2] For me it's enough to know any family would die should Israelis attack, whether it's a family struggling in rural Iran or one living the outside Islamic/inside Western lifestyle of many a North Tehrani.

  26. filthy (deceiving!) lies ...

     .. not 'just' via but *by* ...

       .. the corrupt & venal MSM ...

         .. including public broadcasters - listening, Aunty?


    The 'lie of the week,' perhaps - and only 'domestically,' is the one alleged by Turnbull against Rudd; Turnbull alleges that Rudd may have 'mislead parliament' by denying that some toady in the PM's department may have laid on some advantage for some QLD used-car dealer, vis-à-vis some subsidy scheme. Wow! To 'top' this, Turnbull says it could be a reason to disqualify Rudd from being PM.

    Turnbull is in the same 'class' as Fraser; they even both sound and look alike - the whining tones, and especially the curled-upper-lip sneers.

    Now, if Turnbull can 'do' Rudd on this, who will 'do' Howard, and his trumped-up illegal invasion of Iraq casus belli? The lies that led to Iraq, now brutally occupied, cost perhaps over one million basically innocent Iraqi lives.

    Knock it off, Turnbull, get something useful to do.


    There are lies and there are lies[1], the only reason for deploying any is - to deceive. There's a good reason for including this post in this thread, namely:

    June 18, 2009
    Lapdog Journalists
    The Iranian Elections and the Faith-Based Media
      «I have documented at length in my previous two books the ways in which the American press distorts the reality on the ground in Iran. Whether it is the question of Iran’s "nuclear weapons," the British-Iranian "hostage" crisis, Iranian "aggression" in Iraq, or the recent election, America’s journalists show themselves to be lapdogs of the state, not independent actors. We should keep this in mind whenever we read stories about Iran in the "paper of record" and its cohorts.» 

    As usual, my selection can only be roughly indicative; one should (must?) read the lot.


    But I'm not interested in details (now, today, this instant) - I'm more interested in the principle. I've documented over the years the various lies we've been 'presented' with, and some of the worst of these - certainly on the *immorality* scale, are those coming to us, not 'just' via but *by* - publicly financed broadcasters.

    In this respect, since this is an Iran thread, we have the (filthy!) snide remarks on 'map-wiping,' 'denial,' 'nukular ambitions' and now 'election fiddling.'

    If evidence of any of these things existed, they'd trot it out - quick-time.

    But there isn't. They just repeat unfounded smears. And worse, once a liar, never thereafter trustworthy. Oh, the sheople hear and assimilate the lies alright - otherwise the AusBC wouldn't broadcast the misleading stuff that they do. I admit (with some shame - but my shame is because I trusted them) - I admit that the AusBC hoodwinked me - looong ago, by intimating that Israel was the brave little fighter, repulsing *bad, ugly* Arabs - say. Well, as we now know, it's been Israel all along as 'the baddie,' murdering ever more Palestinians to steal ever more Palestinian land, 61+ years long and no end in sight. This is *massive* injustice, done on an industrial scale, and the only way they 'get away with it,' (i.e. avoid deserved prosecution - and the hanging of the so-called 'leadership' that should result) is by lying; and the AusBC obviously helps the I/J/Z-plex out.

    Q: Why didn't/doesn't the AusBC tell us the brutal truth on this matter? (And all the other wicked crimes, mostly from the US & Israel murdering for spoil?)


    Democracy needs accurate info; the AusBC has failed us, continues to fail us.



    [1] lie2 —n. 1 intentionally false statement (tell a lie). 2 something that deceives. —v. (lies, lied, lying) 1 tell a lie or lies. 2 (of a thing) be deceptive. [POD]

  27. two more items for now (2nd follows; 4095 limit):

    Jun 18, 2009
    Khamenei rides a storm in a tea cup
    By M K Bhadrakumar
      «Western capitals must make a difficult choice: how long to pin hopes on the eruption of a "color" revolution in Tehran? The burden falls almost entirely on Europe, since Washington has different priorities.
    The United States cannot afford to be spotted in the barricades on the frontline of any attempt to prise open the Iranian regime at this delicate point in Middle Eastern politics. Tehran will not forgive for another quarter century at least any such American folly, and the Barack Obama administration has no intentions of committing hara-kiri, either.
    All in all, therefore, Western capitals will take note that the hope that a color revolution might overturn Ahmadinejad's victory or in a best-case scenario lead to the toppling of the Iranian regime is far-fetched and almost fanciful. The extent of the street protests has come down in Tehran, although uncertainties remain. The hope that there would be a countrywide popular uprising seems also to be far-fetched.»

    Comment: MK says that the US is not in it.

    But then my Q: What of the $US400mio?

    This, perhaps?
      «The Obama administration faces difficult choices. The stir in Tehran is fast becoming a "Twitter revolution". No such thing has ever happened there, despite the best efforts of former US vice president Dick Cheney and his covert team for well over four years for triggering "regime change".» 
    [atimes/Bhadrakumar, ibid.]

    Comment: Could the CIA possibly keep their hands in their pockets? What of Mossad? Of course, effectively Mossad = CIA, Israel = US. (Oh! 'Only' and 'of course' IMHO.)

    It might be well to recall that MK was a diplomat.

  28. A somewhat different view:

    Iran: Election clashes mount as West escalates pressure
    by Bill Van Auken
    June 16, 2009
    World Socialist Web Site
      «"The only demographic groups in which our survey found Mousavi leading or competitive with Ahmadinejad were university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians," they wrote.

    They also noted that, while the media had cast younger Iranians using the Internet as the heart of the anticipated "reform" surge - NBC News called the protests an "Internet uprising" - the poll showed that "only a third of Iranians even have access to the Internet."
    It is this class divide that is largely ignored by the Western media. Mousavi’s so-called reforms were pitched largely to a relatively privileged and narrow social base. The reforms themselves consisted essentially of a toning down of the rhetoric employed by Ahmadinejad in order to smooth the way to improved relations with Washington, an easing of US-backed sanctions and the opening up of the country to foreign capital. At the same time, they were identified with "free market" capitalism and opposition to the social assistance programs for the working class and rural poor. Such austerity measures hardly served as a pole of attraction for these layers, which constitute the majority of the Iranian population.
    For his part, Ahmadinejad utilized these programs - combined with populist demagogy and appeals to religious piety - to maintain a popular base for the regime.
    [Mousavi] Considered a "hardliner" during this period, he has been cast as a reformist and a modernizer in an appeal to the Iranian middle classes. Behind his campaign, however, are right-wing elements within the clerical hierarchy and, most importantly, former Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, reportedly the richest man in Iran.
    This pressure has no more to do with democratic rights in Iran than the arms and support provided to the Shah did 30 years ago. The aim of the US and the rest of the Western powers is to fully subjugate Iran in order to further their strategic interests in the region and fully exploit its massive energy resources.»
    [(DL,Brian)globalresearch/Van Auken]

    Bon reading!

  29. one more (peace, brothers!) ...

     .. a possible way forward


    Middle East
    Jun 17, 2009
    Ahmadinejad tries to douse the flames
    By Kaveh L Afrasiabi
      «Even though he belittled the brewing crisis over the disputed presidential votes, the next day's mass rally organized by challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi, and the related street clashes - all indications suggest Ahmadinejad is caught in an escalating drama with dangerous consequences for the entire nation.

    Will Iran's seasoned leaders and political rivals somehow manage to strike a deal to avert a full-blown crisis?


    With the crisis over elections results chipping away at the legitimacy and power of the Ahmadinejad government, the re-elected president may be able to keep hold of his position once the Khamenei-sponsored probe is over. Yet, inevitably, he faces a new balance of power that will dictate a new strategy and new game of political survival.

    There must be an understanding that even the losers in an election have a stake in the government, and that unless their grievances are addressed, it is a sure bet that things will get a lot worse in the days and weeks ahead.»

  30. Is the Pope a catholic?

    Of course it's a 'color revolution.'

    1. The US is obsessed with ME oil, full-stop: "The greatest (strategic/material) prize." They just can't keep their fingers off; they're worse than the UK who wanted Iraq for their oil-powered navy in the early 1900s; the US is fanatically, psychotically & criminally obsessed.

    2. Most commentary is concentrating on 'shadow-play' democracy, what's really underway is chaos-creation; 1st the chaos, then the carpetbagger rip-offs - guaranteed to be massive.

    3. Look at Syd's citation; the CIA coup methodology - the old Langley one, two, three.

    4. Look at Pepe's 7 point 'democracy plan' of the green revolutionaries (how realistic?)

    5. Look at Hersh's reports on $US400mio. The US wants value for its $s.

    6. And not just a BTW, while all this is going on, the 'big oil' contracts in Iraq are 'going down,' i.e. being made in the shadows of our Iran preoccupation.

    Don't talk to me about random events, coincidences, all this 'move on - nothing to see here' talk.

    The US, with 5% of the world's population, and 25% of the world's consumption, are the hideous pigs of the planet - by a looong stretch. Worse that that, the Pentagon is the world's biggest single user of oil; without oil the US air force would not - could not fly, and the US without their obscene 'air-superiority' - the one we see daily pink-misting Afghanis, Iraqis (1.3+mio dead) and now Pakistanis - without their murdering air force they'd be like Israel without US subsidies & weaponry both, i.e. finito.

  31. I asked above, "Where did all the *green* go to?" I wrote that because I'd seen, on AusBC TV, a video of supposed pro-Mousavi rally - but without all the green we'd been presented with in earlier pro-Mousavi material. I searched for, and found, the picture I cited.

    One *big* problem with the AusBC, as I've noted elsewhere, is that they broadcast stuff with little, or poorly accessible - or often absolutely no - paper (transcript), or any accessible record.

    Both Syd and Damian have more and better coverage of "Where did all the *green* go to?" (Damian points us to the BBC who "claimed that pictures of a massive pro-Ahmadinejad rally were of a pro-Mousavi rally") Blow me down and what d'ya know, but the picture in use is the same as Syd's; his was sourced from the LAT.

    C-word, anyone?

  32. Four sides to the Iran election; some good, some *really* bad. You can read 'em (I have) and then decide which is which:

    Middle East
    Jun 30, 2009
    Requiem for a revolution
    By Pepe Escobar
      «Yes, the ultras are paranoid. They know they're virtually encircled by the US military machine. They know about the George W Bush administration's US$400 million deployed for regime change. They have exploited their fears to the fullest - blaming Western foreign powers and foreign media for everything.» 

    Middle East
    Jun 30, 2009
    Obama creates a deadly power vacuum
    By Spengler
      «My Latin American friends who still mourn the victims of Pinochet's "night and fog" state terror will not like to hear this, but the several thousand people killed or tortured by the military government were collateral damage in the Cold War. Like Iran, Chile became the battleground of a Soviet-American proxy war. The same is true in Nicaragua.» 

    Middle East
    Jun 30, 2009
    A classic revolutionary dilemma
    By Dilip Hiro
      «Khamenei has won the immediate battle, but the conflict between hardliners and reformists is far from over. Taking a long-term view, Khamenei and his hardline cohorts face a superhuman task of countering an inexorably rising trend. Quite simply, the demographic make-up of Iran favors their reformist adversaries.» 

    Middle East
    Jul 1, 2009
    Obama faces a Persian rebuff
    By M K Bhadrakumar
      «However, Persian stories have long endings. The Iranian regime shows every sign of closing ranks and pulling its act together in the face of what it assessed to be an existential threat to the Vilayat-e faqih (rule of the clergy) system. Even if the US and Britain want to walk away from their nasty spat with Tehran, which would be an eminently sensible and logical thing to do, the latter may not allow them to do that.»