Category Archives: Propaganda

The long history of lies about iran

by Muhammad Sahimi

If the lies about Iraq taught us anything, it is that we must pay attention to the massive campaign of lies about Iran

There was a flood of articles and analyses on the tenth anniversary of invasion of Iraqon March 19, most of which focused on the lies, exaggerations, and half-truths that the War Party told the American people and the world in the run up to the war. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq have died as a result of the lies. Tens of thousands of people have also died as a result of the NATO aggression against Libya, as well as the war in Syria that is backed by the United States and its allies in that region, namely, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey, with the carnage still continuing with no end in sight.
 
If the lies about Iraq have taught us anything, it is that we must pay due attention to the massive campaign of disinformation and lies that has been waged against Iran for over three decades, in order to “justify” a war with that nation. The campaign began with the hostage crisis after the U.S. Embassy in Tehran was overrun by Islamic leftist students on November 4, 1979, and is still continuing. There are still disinformation and one-sided stories about the hostage crisis, the latest of which is the film Argo. The biggest lie about Iran, which has been perpetuated since at least 1984, is that Iran is only a few months or a year or two away from a nuclear bomb, which has not materialized after nearly 30 years.
 
The campaign is separate from the secret war that has been waged on Iran for at least a decade, consisting of assassination of Iran’s top nuclear scientists, killing of many innocent people by terrorist groups, such as the Jundallah, and waging a cyberspace war against Iran’s nuclear facilities that even a recent NATO study recognized as being tantamount to the use of force and illegal. The campaign of lies about Iran is much deeper and broader than the Iraq campaign, far better organized, and much better funded, with the funding provided by not just the American administrations – such as $400 million provided by the GW Bush administration for destabilizing the Iranian regime – but also the Israel lobby and the War Party. The campaign also includes demonization of Iran by Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who haslikened Iran to the Nazi regime, our era to 1938, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Adolf Hitler, an outrageous claim that has been criticized even in certain pro-Israel circles.
 
Stephen Walt has already listed top ten media failures about Iran. Here is a list of some of the most outrageous lies about Iran, but the list is by no means complete.
 
1981: One of the most brazen lies is that the U.S. does not interfere in Iran’s internal affairs. From the CIA coup of 1953 that overthrew the democratically-elected government of Prime Minister Dr. Mohammad Mosaddegh and installing and supporting the dictatorship of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi for 25 years, to the aforementioned Bush budget for destabilizing Iran, the U.S. has always tried to interfere in Iran. On January 19, 1981, Iran and the U.S. signed the Algiers Accord to end the hostage crisis. In the Accord the U.S. promised that “it is and from now on will be the policy of the United States not to intervene, directly or indirectly, politically or militarily, in Iran’s internal affairs,” and that it will remove all of its sanctions against Iran. Not delivering on legally-binding promises is by itself a terrible lie.
 
1984: Jane’s Defense Weekly reported that West German intelligence believed that Iran could have a nuclear bomb within two years. Twenty-nine years later, that bomb has not been produced.
 
1988: An Iranian passenger airliner carrying 290 people was shot down over the Persian Gulf by the cruiser USS Vicennes, killing all the passengers and crew, including 56 children. To cover up the crime, the U.S. lied twice. It claimed that its cruiser was in the international waters, and that the airliners had been mistaken with a jet fighter. The International Civil Aviation Organization put the cruiser in Iran’s territorial waters, and Admiral William J. Crowe, then Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, also admitted later that the cruiser was in Iran’s territorial water. Newsweekmagazine accused the U.S. of a “sea of lies” about mistaking a passenger airliner with a fighter jet.
 
1996: The Khobar towers in Saudi Arabia were bombed, killing 19 U.S. servicemen. For years the U.S. accused Iran of sponsoring the terrorist attack. But, in his book,The Secret History of Al-QaedaAbdel Bari Atwan, editor-in-chief of the London-based Al Quds Al Arabi, detailed the involvement of Al-Qaeda in the attack. The 9/11 Commission reported that Osama Bin Laden was seen being congratulated on the day of the bombing. William Perry, who was Defense Secretary at that time, said in 2007 that he believes al-Qaeda, rather than Iran, was behind the attack, and Saudi Arabia’s interior minister Prince Nayef absolved Iran of any role in the attack.
 
1998: In its indictment of Bin Laden, the U.S. declared that Al-Qaeda, “forged alliances . . . with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group [the Lebanese] Hezbollah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies.” The allegation of a working relation between Iran and Al-Qaedawas repeated by Steven Emerson and the infamous Islamophobe Daniel Pipes in May 2001.
 
2001: There were allegations that Iran played a role in the September 11 terrorist attacks. But, the fact is that the Sunni/Salafi Al-Qaeda hates the Shiite Iran, and aside from rabid anti-Iran figures, such as Kenneth Timmerman and Pipes, no one believes that Iran had any role in the terrorist attacks. Then Iranian President Mohammad Khatami was one of the first heads of state to send a message of condolences to the American people. Even George W. Bush and his then Acting CIA Director John McLaughlin said that, “There was no direct connection between Iran and the attacks of September 11,” and Western intelligence agencies believe that there is zero chance of Iran helping Al-Qaeda to stage the terrorist attacks. In fact, in 2003 Iran offered to exchange members of Bin Laden family, who had fled to Iran after the U.S. attacked that nation in the fall of 2001, with the leadership of the Mojahedin-e Khalgh (MEK), an Iranian dissident cult who were in Iraq at that time, but the U.S. rejected the offer because the Pentagon wanted to train and use the MEK as a pressure group against Iran.
 
2002: In January Israel seized a cargo ship, Karine A, and alleged that it was carrying weapons for the Palestinian Authority with Iran’s help, an allegation that was supported by Colin Powell, then Secretary of State. In addition to the fact that Israel changed its history several times, there were also many holes in the official statements and allegations. After sometime, the allegations faded away and were never mentioned again.
 
2002: George Bush made the moronic declaration about the “axis of evil,” making Iran a charter member of the axis, of which Iran’s archenemy Saddam Hussein and his regime were also member. The absurdity and sheer magnitude of the lie about an alliance between Iran and Hussein’s regime was mind boggling. It was meant to demonize Iran and Iranians.
 
2005: Shortly after Ahmadinejad was elected Iran’s President in June, it was allegedthat he had taken part in the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979. Nothing could be farther from the truth. As I discussed elsewhere, Ahmadinejad had in fact been opposed to the takeover.
 
2005: In October it was claimed by the War Party and the Israel lobby, and aided by the U.S. mainstream media, that Ahmadinejad has threatened to “wipe Israel off the map.” This was used by the Party and Lobby to push for military attacks on Iran. But, it was shown by many (see here and here, for example) that it was simply a mistranslation of what he had really said. In 2011 even Dan Meridor, Israel’s minister of intelligence and atomic energy, acknowledged that Ahmadinejad never uttered those infamous words. But, the lie is still repeated.
 
2006: In May the National Post of Canada published an article by Amir Taheri, an exiled Iranian “journalist” who is close to the necons, claiming that the Iranian parliament approved a law that “envisages separate dress codes for religious minorities, Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, who will have to adopt distinct color schemes to make them identifiable in public,” hence likening it to the special dress code for Jews in the Nazi regime. The National Post even stated that Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, had said the report to be “absolutely true,” and that Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean of the Center had also confirmed it (though Hier denied it later on). It turned out that the story was a pure fabrication by Taheri, who has a long track record of reporting fictions as facts. Even the National Post retracted the story and apologized for publishing it.
 
2006: The Rupert Murdoch-owned Sunday Times of London alleged that Iran had tried to secretly import uranium from Congo, similar to George W. Bush’s infamoussixteen words, “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa,” which turned out to be a lie. The report turned out to be a fabrication.
 
2006: Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), the then chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, issued a report in August that claimed, “Iran has conducted a clandestine uranium enrichment program for nearly two decades in violation of its IAEA safeguards agreement, and despite its claim to the contrary, Iran is seeking nuclear weapons,” an outrageous lie that prompted the IAEA to send a letter to Hoekstra, rebuking the report, calling it dishonest.
 
2006: The Daily Telegraph claimed that Iran had tried to get uranium from Somalia’s Islamic forces, another sheer fabrication.
 
2007: In his infamous diatribes, “The Case for Bombing Iran,” Norman Podhoretz, the Godfather of the Israel lobby, claimed that when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini said at one time that, “I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world,” he had meant Israel. This was sheer lie; the Ayatollah had never uttered the words. It was another fabrication by Taheri.
 
2007: In the same article Podhoretz also claimed that in 2001 former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani had said, “A day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession … application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel, but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world.” This was another lie. I happened to be in Tehran, watching Rafsanjani on Iranian television when he uttered the alleged words. WhatRafsanjani said was, “There will never be a nuclear exchange between Israel and the Islamic world, because a day will come when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession….” In other words, Rafsanjani was saying that Israel is wise enough not to want a nuclear war with Muslims, although even this correct observation of his was roundly criticized by Iran’s reformists and democratic groups.
 
2007: In another attempt to use Hollywood for demonizing Iran, the film 300, pitting Persians (Iranians) versus the Greeks, was produced, which was criticized for its clear anti-Persian stance, and making parallels between the ancient war and the present standoff.
 
2007: Senators Jon Kyle and Joseph Lieberman tried to declare the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) of Iran a terrorist organization. Then Senator Chuck Hagel, the current Defense Secretary, voted against it, saying it is unusual – I say an absurd lie – to declare the regular armed forces of a country a terrorist organization.
 
2008: The Daily Telegraph claimed that there were “fresh signs” that Iran had renewed work on developing nuclear weapons, which was again a fabrication. Two days later, the paper alleged that the IAEA could not account for 50-60 tons of uranium, which was supposed to be in Isfahan, where “Iran enriches its uranium.” Not only was the claim false, prompting the IAEA to reject the allegations, it was also erroneous in that there is no uranium enrichment site in Isfahan.
 
2009: The Times of London published a document – later on proved to be forged – that supposedly revealed “a four-year plan [by Iran] to test a neutron initiator [for triggering a nuclear reaction in the bomb.” On the same day, the Times’ reporter Catherine Phillips quoted Mark Fitzpatrick of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, saying brazenly, “Is this the smoking gun? That’s the question people should be asking. It looks like the smoking gun. This is smoking uranium.”
 
2010: One of the lies about Iran, perpetuated by successive U.S. administrations, is that the United Nations Security Council and the “international community” – which in reality means the governments of the U.S., Britain, France, and Germany – are “united” against Iran. In reality, two permanent members of the Security Council, China and Russia, and a large number of two important international organizations, namely, the Non-Aligned Movement and the Conference of Islamic Countries do not support the unilateral sanctions against Iran by the U.S. and its allies, nor do they support the constant threats made against Iran. In 2010, when the U.S. began ratcheting up it sanctions, the lie was made more frequently than ever.
 
2011: Another anti-Iran film, Iranium, was produced by the same Islamophobe group that had produced the films “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West” and “The Third Jihad.” Iranium was replete with exaggerations and half-truths, if not outright lies, promoted military attacks on Iran, and was criticized.
 
2012: Too many false claims on Iran’s nuclear program were reported by George Jahn of the Associated Press, and others. Steven Erlanger, a New York Times reporter,was caught lying about Iran’s nuclear program.
 
2013: There have already been many hysteric warnings by Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) – also known as Institute for Scary Iranian Stories – and its President David Albright, including a recent one in the Wall Street Journal on stopping an “undetectable Iranian [nuclear] bomb,” a totally absurd notion that anyone with the knowledge that Iran’s uranium enrichment program is under full inspection and monitoring of the IAEA knows is untrue.
 
2013: Edward Jay Epstein wrote in the Wall Street Journal that Iran can buy nuclear bombs from North Korea “overnight,” another totally absurd notion. The Israelis have also not been silent. They now claim that Iran can make a nuclear bomb in 4-6 months, another dire “prediction.” This is at least “better” than the claim in theWashington Post in 2011 that Iran could produce the bomb in 62 days.
 
The above list is by no means complete, but it demonstrates clearly that the campaign of lies and exaggerations about Iran has been moving forward with full speed for over three decades. The campaign has nothing to do with the nature of the Iranian regime, which does violate the rights of it citizens, though that is an internal matter for the Iranians, but has everything to do with what General James Mattis, the U.S. Central Command commander said recently, namely, bringing Iran to its knees and removing it as a regional power that can resist the hegemonic will of the U.S. and Israel in the Middle East.
 
Muhammad Sahimi is Professor of Chemical Engineering & Materials Science and the NIOC Chair in Petroleum Engineering at the University of Southern California. In addition to his regular contributions to antiwar.com, he is also co-founder and editor of the website Iran News & Middle East Reports.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Ignoring western propaganda , who exactly is Bashar Al Assad ?

Syria: Democracy vs. Foreign Invasion. Who is Bashar Al Assad?

A Syrian’s Perspective: Bashar al-Assad’s Democratic Movement

by Arabi Souri

 

ASSADBashar al-Assad has recently been demonized by the mainstream and so-called alternative media who claim that he is a brutal dictator(?). Actually Bashar is a reformer who has done much to further the causes of democracy and freedom.

It is the opposition and their foreign supporters who represent the most repressive elements of the former ruling party in Syria. To fully understand this its is helpful to look at the historical context of the current crisis. The so-called “spontaneous popular uprising” started in Daraa on March 15th, 2011. The court house, police stations, governor’s house, and other public buildings were looted and torched by the “peaceful protestors” in the first week of the crisis. The people in Homs then began to protest in solidarity with Daraa, but this was uncharacteristic of peaceful Homs and many Syrians knew that it was a fake revolution.

About 110 unarmed police officers were murdered in Daraa and Homs, sparking anger against the “revolutionaries.” There was an incident in the city Baniyas where an Alawite truck driver was attacked by an armed mob, skinned, and paraded through the city. This disgusted almost all Syrians and since then not a single major city actually rebelled against the government. The foreign backed “revolutionaries” would attack a neighborhood, police station, or army base, from across the borders of Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, and Iraq. Then they would claim that the city was in rebellion.

But the Syrians, seeing the same lies in all the western and Arab news stations, and the exiled rotten officials adopting the ‘revolution’, mostly took an anti-revolution stance. That is why whenever the rebels would infest a town or city you would immediately hear of a massacre to punish the residents for not supporting them. Of course the mainstream media would claim that it was Assad forces punishing the town that dared to oppose him!

Assad took advantage of the revolution to introduce his packages of reforms, putting aside those in the old guards who opposed them. Many of the old guard then joined the opposition abroad.

The opposition demanded the removal of article 8 from the Syrian constitution making the Baath Party head of the government. Instead of just deleting it Bashar Assad had the constitution re-written buy a specialized committee of Syrian experts from all parties in Syria and with input from all Syrians.

A referendum was held and the new constitution was approved with almost 90% of a voter turnout of 60%. Assad then enacted a Media Law that would allow more freedom of expression and the establishment of new independent media outlets. Assad eased requirements on the formation of political parties, excluding sectarian based parties. We now have at least nine new political parties.

Municipal elections were held in December 2011. Many of those who won seats were assassinated or threatened throughout the country by the same revolutionaries who claimed to want democracy. Parliamentary elections were held in May 2012 with no eligibility restraints on the candidates. Many new members of parliament have also been assassinated by the FSA including the wife and three daughters of parliament elect trustee Abdulla Mishleb in the infamous Houla massacre.

 
 
Historical Context: Syria in the 1980s
 
MASSACRE

Recent events can be better understood in the context of Syrian history. Bashar al-Assad is the son of late president Hafez al-Assad. Hafez was described by western mainstream media as a tyrant and oppressor but he was not nearly as bad as any other leader in his time like Thatcher, Reagan, or any of the region’s rulers including Turkey’s military rule.

The current anti-Assad opposition often refer to the 1982 Hama ‘massacre’. They claim that Hafez besieged the city and then bombed it killing up to 40,000 civilians. I lived in Damascus at that time and you must understand the conditions in the country at the time to know what really happened.

1) The Muslim Brotherhood was engaged in a war of terror at that time, nothing less than what the Free Syrian Army (FSA) is doing now. The Muslim Brotherhood’s forces were called the ‘Fighting Vanguard’ (Arabic “Al Taleea Al Muqatleh”). Many of the present leaders of the FSA are the same men who led the Fighting Vanguard in the 80s; and they were as savage as their sons now. One of the Fighting Vanguard’s bombings included the Azbakiyeh Bombing in Damascus which took the lives of over 175 civilians and injured hundreds more, and there were many other terror attacks.

2) The entire Hama episode was led by Hafez al-Assad’s younger brother (Bashar al-Assad’s uncle) Rifaat Assad. Rifaat was heading the Saraya Difaa (later to become the Republican Guard). At that time the Syrian minister of defense was Mustapha Tlass, and the Syrian minister of foreign affairs was Abdul Halim Khaddam. All three of them: Riffaat al-Assad, Mustapha, and Abdul Khaddam are leading and financing the political opposition against Bashar from abroad right now.

In the current conflict Mustapha’s son Manaf Tlass was sent to negotiate a settlement with his cousins who were rebelling in Rastan. But instead of negotiating he gave them weapons from the Republican Guards caches and leaked secrets causing the deaths of many Republican Guard soldiers at the hands of the FSA.

Thirty years after the fighting in Hama a report by US intelligence was declassified revealing that the death toll didn’t even reach 2,000. That number included 400 Muslim Brotherhood Fighting Vanguard militants; many Syrian Army soldiers and officers; Baath Party and other state officials; and a number of civilians who were caught in the fire.

3) At the same time the Syrian Army was fighting the Israeli, US and French Armies in Lebanon.

4) Syria was under harder sanctions than it is now. Syria has been under increasingly severe western sanctions since 1956, 15 years before Hafez Assad took power.

 
assad5


Bashar al-Assad’s Damascus Spring: Syria in the 2000s

Late Hafez Assad followed a more complex policy regarding foes and foreign agents in his government than Bashar does. Hafez would keep his foes in their posts but under his watchful eyes. When Bashar was selected by the Syrian Parliament to succeed his father in 2000 he removed all of the treasonous foes and foreign agents that Hafez had maintained in office.

Bashar’s first reform was to ease some political restrictions, allowing politicians to move more freely. In June 2000 the Damascus Spring was started. It lasted until Autumn 2001 by which time most of the treasonous opposition’s foreign funding, and relations with the US Department of State and corporate think tanks had been exposed. The corrupt officials and their families were expelled from Syria and settled in foreign countries. They used their massive accumulations of wealth to mount political opposition to Bashar from abroad.

 
assad03


In 2003 the US was occupying Iraq. US Secretary of State Collin Powell visited Bashar and handed him a list of demands including: 1. Cutting all ties with the five main Palestinian factions in Syria, 2. Severing Syria’s relations with Iran in exchange for a promise of better relations with some Arab states.
3. Signing a peace treaty with Israel similar to one Syria had already refused.
4. Removing books from schools with any enmity towards Israel. 5. Allowing western banks and companies unhindered access to Syrian markets and resources along with other neo-liberal reforms.

Bashar refused these demands in the face of the nearly 200,000 coalition troops across the Syrian border in Iraq. Instead Bashar sought to hinder the occupation of Iraq and demanded that the occupying forces withdraw. Because of the proximity of Damascus to the western boarder with Lebanon Syria has the strategic need to secure this border. None the less in 2000 Bashar started withdrawing Syrian troops from Lebanon where they had battled Israeli forces. The troops were reduced from 35,000 in the year 2000 to 14,000 in early 2004.

In 2005 Lebanese Prime Minster Rafic Hariri was assassinated with the help of members of the Lebanese Future Movement party and likely the help of the US and France. This was a political blow to Assad within Lebanon, and he was also blamed for the assassination using media manipulation and prepared activists. Tens of thousands of Lebanese took to the streets to condemn the killing of Hariri including members of Syria’s closest allies Hizbullah and Amal. The media claimed that the crowds were against the Syrian Army presence in Lebanon. US and France tried to pressure Assad into reinforcing the Syrian Army in Lebanon to stabilize the country but Bashar withdrew all Syrian troops from Lebanon. This background gives the context accompanying president Assad’s reform attempts in Syria, where he had to face foreign powers from abroad and their agents from within. The current crisis is not a civil war or rebellion, but a foreign aggression against a sovereign nation.

 
Syria-is-a-Battle-for-Palestine0
 

1- “No word of truth from Erdogan”: Al- Assad

2- “Syria is a Battle for Palestine”

3- Arab League working for Whoms?

4- The Whys Enemies of Palestine are the enemies of Syria at the same time

 

Related posts:

 

 
About the author:
 
The author was born and lived in Damascus, Syria. He moved to Germany ten years ago and runs a company that organizes tourist groups to Syria. Before the conflict he went to Syria often to stay for days and months. He has been an outspoken defender of the Syrian government and has been targeted by the Free Syrian Army who destroyed his property and threatened his life, and so writes under the name Arabi Souri. This article was edited by Seth Rutledge
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

"Much of what was being reported on Syria was propaganda. Perhaps Israeli, perhaps rebel, perhaps Turkish, perhaps American. But obviously propaganda.

Via FLC

‘National funeral for former Syrian Defence Minister General Hassan Ali Turkmani, Defence Minister Daoud Rajha and Assef Shawkat,’
“The WSJ has a fascinating account of how President Obama’s efforts to extend our will without military intervention failed in Syria. Early in the article, it describes that, as the Administration was debating intervening directly last summer, senior officials “misjudged” the situation because rebels “appeared” to be getting close to killing Bashar al-Assad.

“… Just as pressure to intervene grew last summer, White House officials were buoyed by a series of attacks where rebels appeared to be getting close to killing Mr. Assad. Several senior officials now acknowledge the U.S. misjudged how long Mr. Assad could hold on….”
 

Many paragraphs later, the article elaborates on what caused this “misjudgment” about Assad’s resilience. It describes how in this period last summer, the Obama Administration was focused on post-Assad planning, rather than on getting rid of Assad, because the intelligence had “created a sense” that Assad would be ousted by the rebels acting alone.

The administration committee charged with Syria policy was kept on a tight leash by Mr. McDonough, then the deputy national security adviser and a close confidante to Mr. Obama, participants say. They said Mr. McDonough made clear that Mr. Obama wasn’t interested in proposals that could lead the U.S. down a slippery slope to military intervention; instead, he had the committee focus mostly on post-Assad planning. “It was clear to all participants that this was what the White House wanted, as opposed to really focusing on key questions of how do you get to the post-Assad period,” one participant said. Administration officials said one of the reasons the committee was told to focus on post-Assad planning was because intelligence at the time created “a sense” in the White House that Mr. Assad could be killed by rebels or his own people, eliminating the need for riskier measures to support the rebel campaign. 

“Appeared to be getting close” … “created a sense.” The article doesn’t say it explicitly, but either the intelligence the White House was getting about Syria was faulty, or the White House was reading into the intelligence what it wanted to hear (perhaps in their hopes that the “Obama Doctrine” would work better than Donald Rumsfeld’s fetish for a light footprint). That passage on how problematic intelligence led the Administration to assume Assad’s downfall is almost immediately followed by the airing of a dispute about whether or not the Administration was also focused on “strategic

… Likewise, high-level White House national security meetings on Syria focused on what participants called “strategic messaging,” how administration policy should be presented to the public, according to current and former officials who took part in the meetings. Another administration official disputed that account, saying there were multiple cabinet-level meetings “with extensive and rigorous analysis presented” and that he didn’t recall strategic messaging ever being a “central topic of discussion at senior levels.” [my emphasis] messaging.”


I find it telling that WSJ so closely follows a description of some kind of problem with intelligence with the (disputed) suggestion that even as the Administration was acting on faulty intelligence, it was focusing on its own “strategic messaging.”
Go skim Moon of Alabama’s archive from last July. It’s a very good read not only of the abundant open source evidence Assad might not be ousted so easily (and if he was, the problems that would create), but also of how much western propaganda was spinning what was going on in Syria.

That’s the thing: much of what was being reported — in public western reports, at least — was propaganda. Perhaps Israeli, perhaps rebel, perhaps Turkish, perhaps American. But obviously propaganda.

Now, the article presents a different chronology: the Administration got faulty intelligence (or misread what it got), and in response moved onto spinning what they were doing in Syria.

But I can’t help but wonder whether the Administration fell for its own propaganda about what it was doing in Syria?

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

WARNING: FINAL PSY-OPS VS SYRIA BEGINS

Posted on March 29, 2013 by

Out of time, out of legitimacy, and out of options, the West is attempting once again to prop up its faltering terrorist proxies with another psychological operation aimed at breaking the will of the Syrian people, despite the West’s multiplying tactical and political shortcomings. It began with a suspicious CBS News/AP report titled, “AP: “Master plan” underway to help Syria rebels take Damascus with U.S.-approved airlifts of heavy weapons,” which claims to divulge a “covert” plan by the West to flood Syria’s northern and southern borders with increased weapons and fighters for a “final” push to take the capital. The article would claim:

Mideast powers opposed to President Bashar Assad have dramatically stepped up weapons supplies to Syrian rebels in coordination with the U.S. in preparation for a push on the capital of Damascus, officials and Western military experts said Wednesday.
A carefully prepared covert operation is arming rebels, involving Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar, with the United States and other Western governments consulting, and all parties hold veto power over where the shipments are directed, according to a senior Arab official whose government is participating. His account was corroborated by a diplomat and two military experts.

One must question why the Western media would boldly declare to the world what is supposed to be a “covert” operation, if such an operation had any tactical chance of succeeding – unless of course, the announcement was designed to either cover for wide-scale Western special operations inside Syria, or to help achieve a psychological victory (or both) – to induce panic and terror across the Syrian population in tandem with recent, and increasingly barbaric terrorist attacks on Syria’s civilians.

One such attack included the recent mortar bombardment of Damascus University which left at least 15 dead. The New York Times seemed to take special pleasure in describing in great detail the disruptive effect the attack had on people attempting to live normal lives during the ongoing conflict in their article, “Syria’s War Invades a Campus That Acted as a Sanctuary.”
Now, echos of NATO’s spectacularly failed July 2012 “Operation Damascus Volcano” – where the Western media coordinated a propaganda blitzkrieg designed to portray Syria as on the verge of collapsing with Aleppo and Damascus’ fall “imminent,” are appearing once again in the headlines. Just a day after CBS/AP’s announcement of the so-called “covert Master Plan,” the Western media is reporting “rebel gains” including the alleged cutting off of Daara in Syria’s south – meant to foreshadow the once again “inevitable fall” of Damascus. AFP cited the discredited “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights” in their article, “Syria rebels seize town on key highway to south: NGO,” that:

“Rebels seized control of Dael after destroying the three army checkpoints at the entrances to the town,” the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. “The town is located on a main road linking Daraa to Damascus.”
The Britain-based watchdog said that a child was among 10 civilians killed in the fighting for the town over the past 24 hours.
At least 15 rebels and a media activist working with them were also killed, as were 12 loyalist troops, it added.
“Large swathes of Daraa (province) are now under rebel control. Their advance in the south is escalating,” Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman told AFP.

In actuality, the so-called “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights” is a single opposition propagandists, Rami Abdel Rahman, based in a comfortable countryside home in the UK, disingenuously masquerading as a human rights organization. When not feeding the biased-hungry Western media, Rami Abdel Rahman can be found scurrying in and out of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London to meet with Britain’s Foreign Secretary, William Hague.


Photo: From Reuters: “Rami Abdelrahman, head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, leaves the Foreign and Commonwealth Office after meeting Britain’s Foreign Secretary, William Hague, in central London November 21, 2011. REUTERS/Luke MacGregor”
Reuters had even admitted in their December 2011 article, “Coventry – an unlikely home to prominent Syria activist,” that “Rami Abdulrahman,” is openly part of the Syrian opposition who seeks the end of the Syrian government. Abdulrahman admits that he had left Syria over 10 years ago, has lived in Britain ever since, and will not return until “al-Assad goes.”

This facade is fully sanctioned by the Western media which despite acknowledging him as a biased, compromised source, consistently misrepresents him to their audience as a credible “human rights organization,” while almost exclusively deferring to him to lend credibility to their otherwise baseless narratives.

When entire articles hinge on Rami Abdel Rahman’s verified propaganda, perception management, not journalism, is dictating headlines and overarching narratives.

The Syrian people have resisted the collective efforts of the US, UK, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and their regional partners for 2 years, and have defeated at least two previous psychological operations aimed at toppling the government and destroying the country. The tides have shifted across public opinion, and evidence that the West has intentionally sought to arm and direct sectarian extremists against the Syrian nation since at least 2007, are reaching a crescendo.
While the West now openly admits it is working directly with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and NATO-member Turkey to supply thousands of tons of weapons to militants in Syria, it cannot explain how else Al Qaeda’s Al Nusra front has become the best armed and most well equipped front in the conflict – unless these thousands of tons of weaponry were sent directly to them, as was intended to begin with, according to Seymour Hersh’s 2007 article, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” which reported:

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

A window is closing, and the West is resorting to dangerous desperation. Syria and its allies, as well as concerned interests around the world, must be more vigilant and resilient than ever. The tell-tale signs of a psychological operation are there – but for a psychological operation to succeed, a nation’s people must not be prepared or aware that it is coming. By raising awareness of this most recent, insidious attempt at snatching a psychological victory from the jaws of a tactical defeat, we can help quicken the day when

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Syria: A photoshopped "revolution"

By http://worldmathaba.net/items/1674-syria-a-photoshopped-revolution

Pro-rebel photoshop propaganda
Pro-rebel photoshop propaganda

A Start-Up Figures Out Photoshop Abuses

Hany Farid, a professor at Dartmouth College, has built a career and a reputation as a leading researcher in digital image forensics. He has made software tools for a number of impressive projects in recent years. One was a pixel-sleuthing program to detect how much fashion photographs have been burnished with Adobe’s Photoshop editing program to remove wrinkles and flab, while plumping up lips and breasts. Another was software for the automated detection of child pornography on the Web to help law enforcement agencies.

Mr. Farid has worked with government agencies and companies, but these collaborations have typically been for individual projects. “Research is critical,” Mr. Farid said. “But unless you put your ideas into a product, the impact is limited.” Mr. Farid is hoping to broaden the reach of his work as co-founder and chief technology officer of a start-up company, Fourandsix Technologies, which is being announced on Tuesday. […] At a company whose key product has been transmuted into a verb – “to photoshop” – that means to doctor pictures, the technology to authenticate images was not a priority.

At a glance, Fourandsix seems to be in the Photoshop-busting business. Mr. Connor does not see it that way. Photoshop, he said, is “a great tool” – and one that is only misused at times. […] In law enforcement and photojournalism, Mr. Connor said, there is a clear need for the start-up’s product. “There is a business here,” he said. “But the open question is what size of a business is it?”
The initial product is for professionals, priced at $890 with an annual fee for updates to the database of digital signatures

Photoshop and the Syrian crisis

One of the most famous examples of photoshopping during the ongoing foreign-orchastrated Syrian crisis is the photo which appeared in Austria’s largest newspaper Kronen Zeitung on July 28 (first photo below) when readers were treated to the image on the left of bombed out Aleppo. The original photo on the right came from the European Pressphoto Agency and shows a Syrian family that was or wasn’t fleeing for the violence – but the Zionist media moguls apparently needed a more apocalyptic background to communicate their propaganda message against the Syrian government.
In numerous other cases photos of former war zones are used by the media as a propaganda tool in their anti-Assad campaign while photos of pro-government demonstrations in a Hollywood-esque way have been changed into photos of anti-government protestors.
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
Syria photoshop
More photoshop propaganda can be watched here. (Google+ page)
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Zionist Entity Disappointed by Sayyed Nasrallah Speech

In case you missed it:Sayyed Nasrallah Refutes Rumors, Stresses: “We Won’t Be Dragged into Sedition”

Tzvi Yekezkeli, Zionist expert in Arab affairs
נסראללה: אני לא חולה
Nasrallah: I’m not sick

Local Editor

The circulated rumor about the bad health conditions of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah didn’t meet the expectations inside the Zionist entity in using it as a kind of psychological warfare which they admitted for long Sayyed Nasrallah’s ability to use against them professionally.

As soon as Sayyed Nasrallah started his live televised speech on Wednesday, Zionist channels cut their programs to broadcast his eminence confident appearance, through which he indirectly proved his very good health.

“He (Sayyed Nasrallah) appears very good… this proves that all has been said about his health is untrue,” Tzvi Yehezkeli said, a Zionist expert in Arab affairs.

Zionist channel broadcasting Sayyed Nasrallah speech; Feb. 27, 2013

Zionist media stated that Sayyed Nasrallah has been able to turn the rumors – made by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar – into a media victory.

“He (Sayyed Nasrallah) has the ability to turn anything hostile to him into a real support,” Yaron, a Zionist correspondent said.

“Even though I am not a doctor, but I can say that Nasrallah is too far from being sick. He has turned the spreading rumors into a media victory. Why do you think this has been happened? It was because Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have been behind the rumors.

 He (Sayyed Nasrallah) has gotten out of this battle holding the upper arm,” Yehezkeli added.

חסן נסראללה, מנהיג החיזבאללה
כל מה ששמעתם אינו נכון

Hasan Nasrallah, Hezbollah leader:
“All what you have heard is untrue”

However, Zionist analysts believed that the most important point in favor of the occupation entity is that the Syrian opposition is confronting the “bitter enemy of Israel”, i.e. Hezbollah, portraying the ambushes it plans as the same which Hezbollah had made against the enemy entity.

Ahmad Ammar contributed to this report.

Source: Al Manar TV
01-03-2013 – 17:34 Last updated 01-03-2013 – 17:38

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Sayyed Hassan is in sound shape and will speak today, at 18:30 p.m. (local time), on Latest Developments

What’s the secret of the rumors and the campaign of fabrications and lies launched by some Lebanese  Pro-March 14 domestic media and its likeness uch as the “Arabiya” and others on Hezbollah for more than a week and on a daily basis?

Political sources monitoring the campaign calls for “caution and believes that the campaign come in the context of the campaign targeting the line of impedance, especially Hezbollah,” for several reasons including the fact that the balance of power seemed inclined in favor of the Syrian government therefore the Western and Zionist target is causing confusion in the Lebanese arena and to keep the objection Front in the case of confusion……..

Hizbullah Media Relations: Sayyed Nasrallah in Good Shape, Still in Lebanon

Local Editor

Hizbullah Media relations issued a statement firmly denying rumors saying Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah suffered a health setback and has departed to Iran for treatment. The following is the statement:

Hizbullah Media Relations resolutely refutes rumors concerning Hizbullah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. Hizbullah Media Relations assures these rumors are absolutely groundless; Sayyed Hassan is in sound shape and is still in Lebanon.

Source: Hizbullah Media Relations, translated by moqawama.org


Sayyed Nasrallah Speaks Today on Latest Developments
 
Local Editor
Sayyed Nasrallah

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah appears today to tackle latest political developments in Lebanon and the region.
The speech will be broadcast on al-Manar TV, at 18:30 p.m. (local time).

Source: Hezbollah Media Relations
27-02-2013 – 09:28 Last updated 27-02-2013 – 09:30

ما هي خلفية حملة شائعات إعلام 14 آذار ضد حزب الله وهل من أمر عمليات ؟ 
 
‏الأربعاء‏، 27‏ شباط‏، 2013


أوقات الشام

هلال السلمان
ما سر هذه الهجمة وحملة الاضاليل والفبركات والشائعات والاكاذيب التي “جردها” بعض الاعلام الداخلي المحسوب على فريق 14 آذار بوسائله المختلفة وشبيهه العربي من “عربية “وغيرها ، على حزب الله طوال أكثر من أسبوع وبشكل يومي ؟ ، فهل ما جرى يأتي ضمن حالة معتادة درج عليها هذا الاعلام منذ سنوات طويلة بأوامر من اسياده الخارجيين أم أن هناك أمر عمليات وأجندة خفية ما ، ومعدة حديثا لاستهداف حزب الله وتأتي هذه الحملة في سياقها ؟ ، ولماذا أخرجت هذه الابواق هذا الكم الهائل من الاكاذيب دفعة واحدة خلال أيام وما هو الهدف منها ؟ .
أسئلة عدة يطرحها المراقبون امام هذا الكم الهائل من الاكاذيب والشائعات في وجه حزب الله خلال فترة زمنية قصيرة .

بداية الحملة التي شنها هذا الاعلام وخصوصا إعلام حزبي “المستقبل”و”القوات” ومن يدور في فلكهما ، كانت مع أكاذيب ما يسمى ” الجيش السوري الحر ” عن تدخل حزب الله في معارك ريف حمص ومن ثم تهديده بقصف ما زعم أنه مواقع لحزب الله في منطقة الهرمل ، ولاحقا إعلانه عن قيامه بهذا القصف وسقوط إصابات جراءه ، وهو ما كذبته الوقائع رغم التضخيم الاعلامي لهذا القصف الافتراضي .بعد ذلك كانت أكذوبة تدهور الحالة الصحية للامين العام لحزب الله سماحة السيد حسن نصر الله ونقله الى أحد مستشفيات إيران للمعالجة ! ، ثم أتت مباشرة بعدها أكذوبة تعرض موكب نائب الامين العام لحزب الله سماحة الشيخ نعيم قاسم لهجوم خلال توجهه الى دمشق وإصابته بجروح ، وبين هذه وتلك ، كانت هذه الوسائل الاعلامية تنقل حادثة إنفجار عجلة شاحنة في منطقة الحازمية إلى كونها انفجار غامض وقع على اتوستراد السيد هادي نصر الله بالضاحية الجنوبية .
 


مصادر سياسية مراقبة تدعو الى “الحذر مما يقف خلف هذه الحملة الشرسة من الشائعات والاضاليل ضد حزب الله وخصوصا انها ليست منعزلة عن تطورات إقليمية ودولية مرتبطة بالوضع اللبناني ، وهي ترى أنها تأتي في سياق حملة تستهدف خط الممانعة وخصوصا حزب الله ” في هذه المرحلة لأسباب عدة بينها ميل كفة الوضع في سوريا لمصلحة النظام ولذلك يراد إحداث بلبلة وإرباك في الساحة اللبنانية ضمن مخطط غربي صهيوني لإبقاء جبهة الممانعة في حالة إرباك .
وفي هذا السياق تلاحظ المصادر ،
 أولا : أن هذه الحملة جاءت في اعقاب الحملة الصهيونية-الاميركية على حزب الله على خلفية إتهامه بتفجيرات بلغاريا والسعي لدى الاتحاد الاوروبي لادراج الحزب على لائحة الارهاب الاوروبية .
ثانيا : جاءت هذه الحملة وسط تصعيد صهيوني ميداني على الجبهة الشمالية عبر مناورات عسكرية ضخمة ونشر مزيد من بطاريات صواريخ الباتريوت وهو ما توج بتصريحات لقادة جيش العدو قبل يومين عن ان الجيش الصهيوني بات على جهوزية لمواجهة حزب الله ، والاستعداد مجددا لغزو لبنان لرد الاعتبار بعد الهزيمة الكبرى التي مني بها جيش العدو في حرب تموز عام الفين وستة .
ثالثا : تزامنت الحملة مع إفشال الغرب للجهود الروسية ببدء جولة حوار في موسكو بين النظام في سوريا وقوى المعارضة والاعلان عن إستئناف شحنات الاسلحة الى الارهابيين في سوريا بتمويل سعودي وقطري .
وهنا تعود المصادر لتتساءل هل أتت تعليمة جديدة لفريق 14 آذار من أسياده الاقليميين والدوليين لشن هذه الحملة من الاضاليل والشائعات
ضد حزب الله لإرباكه وإرباك ساحته ، عشية شيء ما يحضر للمنطقة وللساحة اللبنانية تحديدا ؟ .
اايام والاسابيع المقبلة تكشف خلفيات هذه الحملة وأهدافها .

يذكر أنه سيطل السيد حسن نصرلله اليوم الساعة 6:30 بتوقيت بيروت ليتحدث عن تطورات المنطقة
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Disinformation channels Fabrication; Using image to the martyrs of Hezbollah in Ruwais – 2008

من مسلسل كذب قنوات التضليل و جديدهم صورة لشهداء حزب الله في الرويس
 

دام برس – اياد الجاجة :
مازال مسلسل الكذب مستمرا لكن المشكلة الحقيقية هي أن من يدعون الحرية السلمية ومن يطلقون على أنفسهم التنسيقيات وبعد أن قمنا بكشف كل أعمال التزوير التي يقومون بها ما زالوا مستمرين بمسلسل سرقة الصور الكاذبة وفبركتها على أنها تحدث في سورية وفي جديدهم.
قامت ما تسمى صفحة “شبكة أخبار الجيش السوري الحر” بنشر هذه الصورة تحت عنوان مسرب – صورة 4 جنائز من مقاتلين حزب الله قتلوا على أيدي الجيش الحر في سوريا للإيحاء بوجود عناصر من حزب الله تقاتل في سوريا ومن شدة غبائهم بعد أن قاموا بقص الصورة حتى تظهر أربعة نعوش حسب ادعائهم نسوا النعشين الآخرين.
بعد البحث و التدقيق تبين أن الصورة هي لمراسم تشييع شهداء الوعد الصادق الثمانية المستعادين في عملية الرضوان الأخيرة للتبادل مع العدو وذلك من مجمع سيد الشهداء في الرويس في ضاحية بيروت الجنوبية، عام 2008
رابط الصورة الأصلي :
http://www.hajrnet.net/hajrvb/showthread.php?t=402945202&page=43

رابط ثاني:
http://somod.shiaweb.org/index.php?show=news&action=article&id=262

رابط الصورة من صفحة N.F.A – شبكة أخبار الجيش السوري الحر
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=462260133821852&set=a.452565511457981.94017.452561808125018&type=1&ref=nf

مصدر الصورة : فضحناكن مووووووووو

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Israel and the “Iranian Threat”

Latuff-IranTarget-Big[1]

Posted on January 12, 2013

Yesterday, Zionist prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu told a group of visiting US Senators that if relected his first priority would be to stop Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb by all means (Israel has between 240-400 nuclear bombs of its own). He thanked the group for their blind support for the Zionist entity. The Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) touted strong bipartisn support for the Zionist entity in the United States.

“As everyone in Israel knows, there are a lot of things we disagree on in America – but our agenda in this part of the world is same as your agenda,” said McConnell.

Netanyahu also raised his concerns about Obama’s nomination of former Senator Chuck Hagel as next Secretary of Defense. Hagel’s problem with Jews is not that he hates Jews or Israel – but because he refuses to take orders from Israel or the AIPAC. Bret Stephens in the Israel hasbara media outlet Wall Street Journal called Hagel antisemite because Hagel used the term “Jewish Lobby” in a conversation with Aaron David Miller, the former Middle East negotiator who doesn’t hide either his Jewishness or his support for the Zionist entity. Hagel, though, has been against US invasion of Iraq but believes that Bush was driven by the “oil Lobby” and not by the Israel-Firsters in his administration. Hagel is for military budget cuts and believe a war with Iran would be against the national interests of the United States.

Making a statement such as “the Israel lobby controls US foreign policy” is not antisemitic. These sentiments have been articulated by many Jews in the past and have credible evidence to support them, including admissions by the chief Israel lobby in America, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The former President of AIPAC, David Steiner, was actually caught on tape admitting as such. When AIPAC sends a letter demanding that Congressmen support a particular position, most immediately sign it. Almost every major US politician over the last 3 decades has attended the annual AIPAC conference on more than one occasion, and AIPAC’s own website even used to boast about how many pieces of legislation it was responsible for.

In US Congress, the anti-Iran crusade is headed by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman. She has Cuban Jewish family roots. British veteran journalist and author, Alan Hart, called her Zionist lobby’s First Lady in US Congress. She was co-star of a so-called “documentary” entitled “La amenaza iraní” (The Iranian Threat), in which she said, without blushing, that the US should attack Iran in order to “avert bomb explosions in various Latin American capitals”. The Israeli propaganda crap was aired by US-based Univision TV, a Spanish language network owned by Israeli-American Jewish billionaire Haim Saban. “I’m a one-issue guy and my issue is Israel,” Saban told his interviewer in 2004. Haim Saban was born in Egypt. After the 1956 Suez War, his parents “moved to Tel Aviv where his family lived in a one-room apartment and shared a bathroom, with a hooker and a pimp,” quoted by the NYT, September 5, 2004.

In 2009, another ridiculous “documentary” released by Univision involved Venezuelan consul in Miami, Livia Acosta, in an absurd cyber-plot against the US allegedly promoted by “Iranian diplomats and Mexican computer hackers”. This was the pretext used for expelling her from the United States in a move that was widely seen as an American political revenge for Venezuela´s independent foreign policy.

The 120-nation-strong Non-Aligned Movement NAM) have been calling for a nuclear weapon-free zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East for years. Washington still formally agrees, but insists that Israel be exempted—and has given no hint of allowing such provisions to apply to itself. “The time is not yet ripe for creating the zone,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated at the NPT conference in 2010, while Washington insisted that no proposal can be accepted that calls for Israel’s nuclear program to be placed under the auspices of the IAEA or that calls on signers of the NPT, specifically Washington, to release information about “Israeli nuclear facilities and activities, including information pertaining to previous nuclear transfers to Israel.”

Claude Salhani, editor of the Middle East Times has different theory of the “Iranian Threat”. He wrote recently: “The real danger emanating from Iran today comes not from its control of the world’s busiest oil routes (Straits of Hormuz), not from a potential capability to deploy nuclear weapons, not from its support of groups (Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hizballah) conducting acts of terrorism, but rather from Iran’s interests in the internet (cyber threat)”. And you thought Netanyahu displaying Iran’s nuclear cartoon at the UN General Assembly, September 2012, is the only idiot!

Let me not forget the “Iranian Threat” coming from Iran’s Latin American allies. Last month, Obama signed a bill to control Iranian influence in Latin America. The Zionist lawmakers have been whining for years that Iran and Hizballah have missile bases in Cuba and Venezuela which they intend to use against the US and Israeli interests in the US.

In November 2010, American author and journalist Belen Fernandez in an article, titled Distorting Iranian-Latin American Relations, she wrote: ““Iranian ‘penetration’ in Latin America has in recent years become a pet issue of Israeli Foreign Ministry officials and American neoconservative pundits, many of whom take offense at the perceived failure of the US government to adequately appreciate the security threat posed by, for example, the inauguration of a weekly flight from Caracas to Tehran with a stop in Damascus“.

Some Israel-Firsters have even claimed Iran or other pro-Iranian forces of “establishing mosques or Islamic centers throughout the region” in order to advance violent jihad “on our doorstep”.

“Latin American countries, especially those that follow an independent foreign policy, trust Iran because they know that the Iranians cannot be pressured into betraying an agreement that disturbs the US or its allies. This is a main reason of Iran´s rising popularity in Latin America despite the propaganda of Zionist-owned media outlets and the US political and diplomatic actions,” wrote Yusuf Fernandez, a journalist and secretary Muslim Federation of Spain.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

The USA , Saudi Arabia and "democracy"

The US – alongside Saudi Arabia – fights for freedom and democracy in the Middle East

 

The most significant problem in political discourse is not that people embrace destructive beliefs after issues are rationally debated. It’s that the potency of propaganda, by design, often precludes such debates from taking place. Consider how often one hears the claim that the US is committed to spreading democracy and opposing tyranny in the Middle East in light of this fact from a New York Review of Books article by Hugh Eakin reviewing three new books on Saudi Arabia (via As’ad AbuKhalil):

“The US does more trade – overwhelmingly in oil and weapons – with Saudi Arabia than any other country in the Middle East, including Israel, and depends on close Saudi cooperation in its counterterrorism efforts in Yemen.”

Indeed, President Obama has repeatedly touted what he calls “the strong partnership between the United States and Saudi Arabia” and “the importance of our bilateral relationship” and often vows “to continue cooperating closely on a range of issues”.

In other words, the single most repressive regime in that region is also America’s closest ally. Eakin also notes that while Saudi leaders have exploited the rhetoric of the Arab Spring to undermine leaders its dislikes (primarily in Syria and Iran), its only direct action was to send its troops into Bahrain “to stave off a popular revolt and prop up the Bahraini monarchy” and use “its influence in the Gulf Cooperation Council, the alliance of autocratic Persian Gulf states, to pull together support for the beleaguered royal houses of Morocco and Jordan.” About all of this Saudi bolstering of tyranny, Eakin says: “The White House has remained silent.”

Actually, that’s not quite accurate. The US has been there every step of the way with its close Saudi allies in strengthening these same tyrannies. As the Bahraini regime has systematically killed, tortured, and imprisoned its own citizens for the crime of demanding democracy, the Obama administration has repeatedly armed it and trumpeted the regime as “a vital US partner in defense initiatives” and “a Major Non-NATO Ally”. The US continues to be a close partner of the Yemeni dictator (“elected” as the only candidate allowed on the ballot). And it stands as steadfastly as ever behind the Gulf State monarchies of Jordan, Kuwait and Qatar as, to varying degrees, they repress democratic movements and imprison dissidents.

There is, of course, a long-standing debate about whether there’s anything wrong with the US supporting and allying itself with repressive regimes. A popular strain of foreign policy thought has long held that the US should be guided primarily by self-interest rather than human rights concerns: hence, since the US wants its Fifth Fleet to remain in Bahrain and believes (with good reason) that these dictators will serve US interests far better than if popular will in these countries prevails, it is right to prop up these autocrats.

That’s all well and good, but then there should be nobody willing to believe US political leaders when they claim that they are engaging in military action or otherwise interfering in other parts of the world in order to subvert despotism and spread democracy. When President Obama stands up and says – as he did when he addressed the nation in February 2011 about Libya – that “the United States will continue to stand up for freedom, stand up for justice, and stand up for the dignity of all people”, it should trigger nothing but a scornful fit of laughter, not credulous support (by the way, not that anyone much cares any more, but here’s what is happening after the Grand Success of the Libya Intervention: “Tribal and historical loyalties still run deep in Libya, which is struggling to maintain central government control in a country where armed militia wield real power and meaningful systems of law and justice are lacking after the crumbling of Gaddafi’s eccentric personal rule”).
The US is not committed to spreading democracy and freedom in the world. “Freedom” and “democracy” are concepts it exploits to undermine regimes that refuse to serve its interests. Indeed, there is virtually an inverse relationship between how democratic a country is in the Muslim world and how closely allied the US is to it.

Yes, all of this is obvious and not novel to point out. Still, it needs to be pointed out because of how often the US government succeeds in leading people to believe that these are its goals. It’s just extraordinary that so many people are willing to believe and advocate that the US ever acts in the world with the goal of undermining tyranny when “the US does more trade – overwhelmingly in oil and weapons – with Saudi Arabia than any other country in the Middle East”. That this blatant sham is so widely accepted is a testament to the potency of propaganda, bolstered by the willingness of people to embrace self-flattering claims.

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!