Filed under: Asia, Middle East | Tags: 1979 Iranian Revolution, Afghanistan, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Anglo-American, Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, Ayatollah Khomeini, Barak Obama, British Petroleum, Carter Administration, Central Asia, CIA, CIA coup, CIA Destablization Plan, Coup D'etat, Democracy, Egypt, Ex-Foreign Minister Yazidi, George Bush, Haiti, Hamas, Hezbollah, Hosni Mubarak, Iran Election 2009, Iran Guardian council, Iran Interior Minister, Iran June 12 Presidential Election, Iran Protests, Iran Ruling elite, Iran's Parliament, Iran's Prime Minister, Iranian, Iranian Street protests, Iranian workers, Jean-Bertrand Aristed, Jebhe Melli, Lebanon, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mir Hussein Mousavi, Mohammed Javed Mozafar, Mohammed Mossadegh, Monarchy, National Front of Iran, NATO, Palestine, Pashto Radio, Protests, Republicanism, Reza Shah Pahlavi, Sadeq Mahsouli, Seymour Hersh, Soviet Union, Stolen Election, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Tehran, Tehran University, Theocratic State, Theodore Roosevelt, US Media, Venezuela, Wall Street Journal, Washington, Washington Post, White House
* * * * *
18 June 2009
Source: Global Research
In the run-up to Iran’s June 12 presidential election, early indications suggested the media’s reaction if the wrong candidate won. On June 7, New York Times writer Robert Worth reported “a surge of energy (for) Mir Hussein Mousavi, a reformist who is the leading contender to defeat Mr. Ahmadinejad (and) a new unofficial poll (has him well ahead) with 54 percent of respondents saying they would vote for him compared with 39 percent for Mr. Ahmadinejad.” No mention of who conducted the poll, how it was done, what interests they represented, or if Mousavi winning might be the wrong result. More on that below.
Writing for the influential far right Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Fariborz Ghadar described the contest as “pit(ting) the hard-line Mahmoud Ahmadinejad against two relatively moderate and one conservative challenger.” In spite of one or more independent polls showing Ahmadinejad way ahead, he suggested that “the outcome (isn’t) Continue reading
Filed under: Middle East | Tags: 1967 Invasion, Arab Countries, Arab Intellecutals, Arab Monarchies, Arab Nationalism, Baghdad Pact, Bermuda Conference, Britain, China, Cold War, Colonialism, Denationalization, Egypt, European Colonization, France, Frantz Fanon, Gamal Abdul-Nasser, Gaza, Gaza Ghetto Uprising, gaza Strip, Gazans, Green Zone, Hamas, Hizbullah, Iran, Iranian Threat, Israel, Israel's Arab Allies, Israeli Intelligence, Isreali Massacre, Jordanian Army, Lebanon Invasion 1982, Mahmoud Abas, Moroccan dictatorship, Muslims, Nasser, Nasserism, Nazi, Nazi Genocide, Nazi-Occupied Europe, Neoliberal Arab Intellectuals, Oil Money, Omani Dictatorship, Oslo Agreement, Palestine, Palestinian Bantustans, Palestinian Liberation Organization, Palestinian People, PLO, Racism, Racist, Ramallah, Saudi Media Outlets, Settler-Colony, Soviet Union, Szmul Zygielbojm, the Bund, Third World Revolutionism, Tzipi Livni, US, US Aid, US Dictatorial Allies, Warsaw Ghetto, White Supremacy, Zionism, Zionist, Zionist Entity
4 January 2009
Source: Electronic Intifada
One is often baffled by the ironies of international relations and the alliances they foster. Take for example the Israeli colonial settlement that had declared war on the Palestinian people and several Arab countries since its inception while at the same time it built alliances with many Arab regimes and with Palestinian leaders.
While Hashemite-Zionist relations and Maronite Church-Zionist relations have always been known and documented, there has been less documentation of the services that Israel has provided and continues to provide to Arab regimes over the decades. It is now recognized that Israel’s 1967 invasion of Egypt aimed successfully to destroy Continue reading