Sohel Ajani
It all started in 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini returned from Paris to Tehran after the exile of US backed Reza Shah and declared Iran as Islamic Republic after the huge public referendum. The then puppet ruler of Iran, Reza Shah, was an open puppet of US and has allowed the US embassy to perform without any restrictions in the nation. After the exile of Shah, revolutionary youths of the country invaded the US embassy, also known as ‘Den of Spies‘.

The tense ties between the Islamic Republic and The US are still bitter and constantly kept world on toes. After the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the US & its allies are constantly trying to topple the Iranian regime through any means. Initially they exerted the physical pressure in the form of attach from Saddam Hussein Regime from Iraq. They support the evil regime of Saddam Hussein openly and provided it with sophisticated weapons to harm the newly formed independent republic.

Eight years war crumpled the Iranian economy where debts were on rise and falling value of currency. With all this, the economic sanction imposed by the US government played spoil sport for the already crunching economy. However, the nation resisted and shown its real strength behind its leader, Ayatollah Khomeini.

Soon after the end of 8 years Iran — Iraq war; in 1989 nation lost its founder strong man, Ayatollah Khomeini. This served as major setback to the Iranian nation and the west started believing that the end of regime is close. These calamities turned as blessings for the striving nation in the form of leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

Iranian Revolution 1979 Fall of a Shah 1 of 10 — BBC Documentary

[ Part 2 ] [ Part 3 ] [ Part 4 ] [ Part 5 ] [ Part 6 ] [ Part 7 ] [ Part 8 ] [ Part 9 ] [ Part 10 ]

From 1989 onwards, Iranian nation has not seen backwards under the guidance of leader Khamenei. Following reports shows the growth of Iranian nation:

Iran showing fastest scientific growth of any country: Canadian report

Iran ranks first in scientific growth

The stunned West is constantly trying to downgrade the development cycle of Islamic Republic through economic sanctions, media war, spreading Iranophobia, etc. However it seems the psychological warfare is giving no positive results to west.

In recent developments, Israel is constantly warning Iran about its peaceful nuclear activities which Tehran says are meant for generating electricity and treatment of cancer patients; however Israel and West claims that it’s intended towards generation of nuclear war heads.

The latest report from IAEA (Nuclear watchdog of UN) says that there is something fishy going on in Iran in regards to nuclear development. Iran slammed this report saying its influenced by west. However, following this report, west has imposed another round of sanctions followed by other European and Asian countries like Japan.

This is one side of the scenario, however the conditions on the side of Iran is very happening. The Arab uprisings in Middle East have toppled many of the western puppet regimes like Tunisia, Egypt & Libya. And some other puppet regimes are still trying to control the uprisings in their countries; such as Bahrain & Yemen. In such scenario, other Arab monarchies can’t go directly in favor of west inviting the public uproar.

With all this, the ongoing financial crisis in Europe is acting like a trend breaker in the Western policy. The “Occupy Movement” in the US, which is actually a people’s movement, is unexpected by anyone and is a major shock for the US administration. We have seen it in the recent media pictures & videos, how the police and state are trying to control the ongoing high profile people’s uprising in western countries.

This is not the end. The actual dent in US & European economy is very visible. The natural awareness spread through the tools which the west has developed has made people much aware about the actual crises at the core of Capitalist system. Today, everyone knows the intentions of US & UK behind the attack of Iraq & Libya. This has also hampered the position of west and turned the sentiments of common people away from them.

Israel, the western puppet in the region, is constantly raising the voice over attack on Iran with the help of US. However, after the capture of drone in eastern Iranian province, Israel has to change its stand. Now we can see this kind of news in media:

Israel says Iran attack not imminent

Not to miss, the capture of drone by Iranian military holds a major importance in this psychological warfare. Till today, US drone technology considered as very sophisticated & holds very important position in the military field. Iranians not only captured the drone unaffected but also proved their superiority by capturing the most sophisticated US weapon till now. Best thing in this operation was the use of electronic waves to make the drone land.

President Obama asked the Iranians to return the captured drone and that also without any apology; this has created uproar in the social media where the Iranian supporters utilized this opportunity to make fun of the US administration.

West also knows that the war with Iran is not a war with any arrogant regime or war with a dictator like Saddam or Gaddafi, however, it’s a war of Ideology. The US can kill people, invade country and install the puppet regime, however they can’t replace the powerful stronger with the weaker one.

The US & the West is trying its level best to shake the foundations of Islamic Republic by economic sanctions, psychological pressure of attack from Israel, installing missile shield in Turkey, by removing Iranian supporters like regime of Assad from Syria, attacking Hamas & Hezbollah, etc. However Iranians are replying by their simple actions.

They can change the puppet regime, however changing the concept and deep rooted ideology of martyrdom & sacrifice is not possible for west.

History of U.S. Intervention in Iran — 1953 Until Present

   Columnist – John Sammon
The 10-year anniversary of 9-11 will include memorializing and flag-waving on television networks under the motto “We Won’t Forget,” but will not include any mention of our attack on Iraq in a false attempt to link that country to 9-11.

We choose to forget that part.

No mention will be made of the approximate million Iraqis killed in a war started by George Bush and Dick Cheney, who lied us into a war by claiming that Iraq under Saddam Hussein was involved in 9-11. Bush later openly admitted they weren’t.

He has never faced justice for these deceptions.

Apparently, what Americans choose to remember in the 9-11 tragedy through the media is selective.

The fanatics who did 9-11, mostly Saudi Arabians, came from a country with which we have the friendliest of relations. Let’s say for argument’s sake these nuts attacked us and will do so in the future for no other reason than they don’t like us because we are primarily a Christian country.

That still doesn’t change the fact that we attacked Iraq because we didn’t like its leader, and killed a million people not to mention the lives of U.S. soldiers lost because we falsely tried to tie Iraq to 9-11. The perpetrators of this misdeed remain unpunished, even glorified.

The observances of 9-11 will also include no objective assessment of our role in the Middle East in past history, and how it has helped to de-stabilize the region and give impetus to extremists. Let me give some specific examples of the history Americans choose to forget, or are totally unaware of.

Let’s take Iran. The United State backed the former Shah of Iran, a brutal dictator who had secret police forces imprisoning and murdering Iranians. Backing by the U.S. fueled hatred of the U.S. in that country and gave unwitting help to extremists under the Ayatollah Khomeini, which led to the taking of American hostages at the embassy there and the current hostile, authoritarian regime.

Our behavior in the Middle East has been less than wise.

How about Egypt? We supported Hosni Mubarak, a ruthless dictator now facing court trial, virtually right up until the time he was overthrown by a popular people’s street movement.

What about Saddam? We supplied equipped and encouraged him guaranteeing him we wouldn’t let him lose a war with Iran. Former Bush Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld posed for a famous picture shaking Saddam’s hand in his palace.

We choose to forget that.

We gave at least voiced support to rebel units fighting the Russians in Afghanistan during the last of the Cold War who later became the Taliban.

We choose to forget that too.

The list goes on and on.

Bush and Cheney approved the torture of prisoners and threw out the rules of the Geneva Convention, instituted a gulag of camps in which prisoners had no recourse to an attorney, and instituted illegal wiretap spying on American citizens that violated The Bill of Rights under the guise of making us safer and which was ludicrously and perversely called “The Patriot Act.”

We’ll also forget that.

Rather than acting as a peace broker in the Middle East, which occasionally we have, for example, the attempted Camp David Peace Accords between Israel and Egypt, we have pretty much given Israel a blank check to do whatever it wanted. This included pushing Palestinians out of ancestral homelands and building settlements which has heightened tensions.

Our memorializing of 9-11 will not include an overall objective assessment of this history as a whole. The idea conveyed will be that the U.S., innocent of ever doing anything unwise, was picked on for no reason by evil people.

There is some truth to this. But that is a stilted viewpoint.

What terrorists did on 9-11 is evil. They are fanatics. The heroism of responders to the tragedy and the loss and sacrifice should be remembered and honored.

But to selectively choose to remember only what we want to or to “cherry pick” history so that a one-sided viewpoint (good guys versus evil fanatics) is presented does no one any good. History is not a vacuum, or wearing blinders, but a long catalog of events, often decisions errantly made.

Our history of involvement in the Middle East has not always been wise. That will not be discussed during the remembrances of 9-11. This website, Politicalarticles.net, allows me to say this. Other websites will not and would censor what you are reading here because they are afraid or angry with ideas with which they don’t agree.

There is nothing unpatriotic about the truth, or criticizing the government of this country for its past mistakes in a volatile region. It is not unpatriotic to disagree in a so-called “Free” country.

Reference: Contradictions and Hypocrisy Haunt U.S. Policy in the Middle East

The John Sammon Playlist

Visit John Sammon’s Youtube Channel

   By: Gwada Ogot
North Africa is in political turmoil. Ben Ali and Mubarak fell in swift purges while leaderships in Syria, Bahrain, Libya and Saudi Arabia equally face immense public pressure to quit. Besides Libya, it is virtual social networks and not armies that have enabled human agency for change. The internet, long viewed as a superficial platform customized for young people’s trivia, has startled status quo with its ruthless efficiency, says Gwada Ogot

These nations bear a common feature — hereditary leadership — and elections, whenever held, are seasonal pseudo democratic rituals to confirm elite whim.

Syria’s Beleaguered President, Assad succeeded his father Hafez al-Assad in 2000. Hafez had led the nation from 1963. Towards the end of his 32 year reign, Mubarak too anointed his son Gamel, as heir-apparent.

Despite Ben Ali’s corrupt 28 year reign, he still intended to run again in 2014. For him, avarice and a primitive sense of acquisitiveness’ by his family members- especially nephews, in laws and brothers hastened his down fall.

Libya’s Gaddafi’s is the world’s longest ruling non-monarchical leader at 42 years. Though Libya’s case is complex, it is as much about big business interests in addition to the personal frolics of Gaddafi and his sons, with one a designated heir apparent.

Saudi Arabia and Bahrain too are embedded under ruling monarchies- both relics of a crumbling practice. Within them, popular will has been harshly suppressed while selfish aggrandizements by the ruling elite continue with impunity.

Yet besides Libya, it is virtual social networks and not armies that have enabled human agency for change. The internet, long viewed as a superficial platform customized for young people’s trivia, has startled status quo with its ruthless efficiency.

As a creation of liberal America, its impact on conservative Muslim nations reveals shifts especially when viewed from the conventions of culture and religion. As a secular nation America was ready for Obama in 2008 but before the Tunisian revolution, thoughts of a similar occurrence in North Africa would have seemed unrealistic?

Within the North African nations, leadership structure is essentially traditional and demands high moral answerability drawn exclusively from Islam. In contrast, American secularism classifies around transparency, accountability and liberty which paints its ethics.

Yet in spite of these elemental variations, the internet has impacted profoundly on leaderships of either sphere.

The internet, viewed from security lenses has presented enormous challenges to state agencies long used to intervention through physical means. Consequently, surveillance by national and international intelligence networks has manifested.

Conventional arrest is no longer viable. The case of Wael Ghonim, a 30 year old Egyptian internet blogger amply demonstrates. Ghonim was arrested as the suspected mastermind of the revolution and quickly released after demonstrations by infuriated citizens. The arrest only spurred citizen’s motion.

In Tunisia, a street haberdasher’s desperate act of self immolation and a subsequent internet post of the recording ignited the revolt. And this poses a question, if suicide by an ordinary citizen can lead to the overthrow of a sitting government, what would be the likely outcome of a suspicious political death, let alone a confirmed murder?

Strategically, virtual mobilization has revolutionized information communication through a speedy, non physical and integrated mass audience. The transformation directly translates into instant access with less capital investment; less physical risk and greater opportunities inter alia.

Though money remains a critical factor, there is a palpable anger against corrupt money and its beneficiaries.

Where did it all begin?

Barrack Obama’s unique run to becoming America’s first black leader offers some vivid illustrations. Obama’s resource mobilization was based mainly on the internet and specifically for this reason, Obama’s overcame both race and religion, and his opponents crystallized as political dynasties- the Clinton dynasty then later, the McCain military dynasty propped by the Bush dynasty. He triumphed!

Are there any lessons for East Africa to learn from?

Egyptian Revolution 2011

   By: Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
   [ Enlarge ]
In two earlier articles published under the titles “The Collapse of the Mubarak Regime and the Re-birth of Egypt“, and “Egypt in Crisis, Self-governed Cairo, and the Emergence of Egypt’s Civil Society“, I expanded on the underlying reasons of the present socio-political upheaval in Egypt, and on the socio-political developments that took place in Cairo during the week 28 January — 3 February.

I added that it would be very simplistic to establish a divide of the type “civil, democratic society supporters vs. an autocratic regime”, and I specified that for many long decades the Western mass media diffused worldwide an altered image of the Egyptian reality, thus helping the local regime myths remain intact in Egypt, and the global public opinion stay in mysteries.

In the present article, I will offer a striking example of journalistic fallacy published in the New York Times, which contradicts the diagram they offered to their readers.

“Hundreds of thousands” were never in Tahrir square prior to Mubarak’s removal on 11 February 2011, because presently, the famous Down Town Cairo square simply cannot accommodate even 100000 (one hundred thousand) people.

As a matter of fact, in front of the Egyptian Museum and on the back side of the former Nile Hilton (that is under reconstruction) and the Arab League building, there are works at the grounds in the sizeable area that was in the past the Tahrir bus station. During the recent manifestations, not a single protester had access to the said construction area which remained out of reach for all; similarly, the small street which, alongside the aforementioned area, leads from the back entrance of the Arab League building to the main entrance of the Egyptian Museum was sealed off to protesters. Finally, the courtyard of the Mogama building remained inaccessible to the gathering people.

7. The area where the Tahrir square protesters gathered comprises of the following parts:

a. from the end of Qasr el Aini street to the central roundabout of Tahrir square (the space between the American University and the Mogama building),

b. the central roundabout of Tahrir square,

c. the Mogama building gardens (beyond the courtyard in front of the building),

d. the nearby underground garage gardens,

e. the street leading from the central roundabout of Tahrir square to the corniche and the Qasr el Nil bridge,

f. the street leading from the central roundabout of Tahrir square to the intersection with Champollion street (opposite to the Egyptian Museum gardens) and further on up to the intersection with Mahmud Bassiyuny street (opposite to the backside of the enclosure wall of the Egyptian Museum / see here: http://www.touregypt.net/map06.htm),

g. the area between the backside of the enclosure wall of the Egyptian Museum and the Ramsis Hilton Hotel (part of this area is under the 6th October bridge and other passageways),

h. small parts of nearby streets close to the above area, notably in Talaat Harb street, and Champollion street, and to lesser extent in Muhammad Mahmud street, Tahrir street, Al Bostan street, and Qasr el Nil street, and

i. the corniche from the Radio & Television building to the Hotel Intercontinental

As it can be easily understood, the above points a to i encompass an area that is far wider than Tahrir square stricto sensu; but the density of the people gathered to protest was scarce to very scarce in the above parts g, h, and i, whereas the density was also meagre in several spots in the above parts a, c, d, e, and f.

In fact, high density was noticed in the central roundabout of Tahrir square and toward the beginning of Tahrir street and Talaat Harb street, let’s say from in front of Hardee’s fast food restaurant and up to the Telephone Office, before the intersection with Al Bustan street (ahead of the nearby intersection with Qasr el Nil street and Champollion street. In the street leading from the central roundabout of Tahrir square to the corniche and the Qasr el Nil bridge, high density was attested only up to the metro station exits (on either parts of the street).

With high density meaning four (4) persons per m2, the aforementioned data makes clear that in the high density area there were ca. 32000 to 35000 people. In various degrees of lower density (in above points g and i, it was less than 1 person per m2), there were another 20000 to 30000 people in all the other parts of the aforementioned areas.

Comically enough, the disreputable and misleading New York Times offered their readers a diagram of the above described area that, even under terms of utmost density (four persons per m2), cannot accommodate more than 100000 people (part coloured in light brown as per the above link).

Safely enough, they did not offer any map scale (as it can be noticed in the earlier link), because all of their readers would protest against the New York Times’ filthy lie stated in the shameful text under the title “The Battle for Tahrir Square” (“Sunday, Feb. 6 – Defying government calls for a return to normalcy, more than 100000 turned out to protest in the square”).

This minor example typifies very well the incredible score of fallacies diffused by the orchestrated mass media of the global word order. On this subject, I will further expand in a forthcoming article.

   Columnist – John Sammon
Hosni Mubarak in Cairo receives a call from Obama.

Obama — Hosni

Mubarak — Yes

Obama — This is President Obama. I’ve been calling for an hour. Where were you?

Mubarak — In my bedroom. I can’t bear to watch.

Obama — Why aren’t you establishing control? Are you following events?

Mubarak — Oh yes. I’ve been watching FOX News.

Obama — That’s outrageous. From now on, watch CNN.

Mubarak — Okay.

Obama — You’ve got to do something. Tell the people what they want to hear.

Mubarak — I won’t quit my job and you can’t make me.

Obama — I didn’t say that. Just make promises. Talk about a better economy coming. That’s what I do.

Mubarak — My own son Gamal quit, then el-sharif quit his job. They were more corrupt than me. But the people want more. What else do they want from me? I’m an old man. Why are they tormenting me?

Obama — They want freedom and prosperity. You’ve always prevented it, but haven’t I been patient with you and let you stand in the way of those things? Didn’t I give you backing any way? Haven’t I stood by you? Didn’t I always give you everything? This is making us look bad, because I have to stick up for you because I give you millions. The people get it in their heads that the US backs ruthless dictators for no other reason than they’re friendly to us and that our talk about freedom and democracy doesn’t mean a tinker’s damn.

Mubarak — Sir. I have to insist. You have no right to talk to me like that.

Obama — You listen to me. I’m not just the president of the United States. I’m the president of the world, except for North Korea. I’m your boss. You’d be nothing without me. I made you what you are. I give you millions every year. And what do we get back in return? You didn’t attack Israel. Thanks a lot for nothing. It’s little payback.

Mubarak — Yes sir.

Obama — Look out a window.

Mubarak — Okay.

Obama — What do you see?

Mubarak — A lot of angry, unemployed people.

Obama — No! What else.

Mubarak — A tank.

Obama — That’s right. And what kind of tank?

Mubarak — American tank.

Obama — You’re catching on! That’s right. A tank. Made in the USA after shipping in the parts made by Chinese laborers from jobs we shipped over there. You get this straight. I’m your boss.

Mubarak — Yes.

Obama — I’m leader of the free world. All of it. We reward you just like we did with Saddam Hussein until we pulled the plug on him, and you could wind up the same way. We’ve always considered you a friendly dictator. Don’t push your luck. Who do you think you are, Cheops the Pharaoh? Why don’t you just ask the protestors to give up and go make mud bricks for your Sphinx?

Mubarak — I don’t think they would.

Obama — I’m being facetious.

Mubarak — Sir, I have to protest this tone because….

Obama — Forget it. You’re too far gone. We need a plan. Television. That’s it. Go on TV and tell the people something.

Mubarak — What?

Obama — How should I know? You’re their leader. Make it up. No, wait a minute. I’ve got it. Nixon. We can use Nixon. That speech he made at the end of Watergate. Tell them, to quit before my term of office is up goes against every moral fiber in my body. Then tell them you’re not a crook.

Mubarak — We don’t have term limits. Besides, I already tried those words. It didn’t work.

Obama — Yeah they’re catching on, that’s a problem. Is the army still behind you?

Mubarak — I think so, the tanks are outside.

Obama — Okay. That’s a start. You’ve got to come up with a plan. Get people distracted. Tell them things will get better and that they need to be patient.

Mubarak — You think it will work?

Obama — How do you think the Afghanistan and Iraq wars have been sold to our people?

Mubarak — Okay. I’ll try.

Obama — Hosni.

Mubarak — Yes?

Obama — Boys try, men do.

Mubarak — Sir, I’ll have to ask you not to adopt that tone.

Copyright 2011 Sammonsays.

————————————————————————————————————————————————

————————————————————————————————————————————————