SUPPORT DEMOCRACY: DON’T VOTE
Female Pilots in Iran Have Taken To The Sky
Iran is a much more open and modern society than many western people realize. I haven’t been there, but from watching some of the travel blogs of the many young westerners who have journeyed to this ancient land, it would seem Iranians are one of the most warm and generous peoples anywhere.
Iranians are often confused with Arabs – who are also Muslim – but who are also very different culture. Iranians are Persians, not Arabs. I have met a few Iranians when I lived in asia for 7 years. They were all just as warm and friendly as the people who appear on the travel blogs of westerners. As were the few arabs I met as well.
The idea that Iranians are warm, friendly, reasonable and highly educated people, who generously greet all visitors to their country, including Americans, is a big threat to the narrow narrative that is constantly portrayed by western medias. That narrative being, that Iranians are very serious, religously highly conservative and anti-American. Some of them might be like that, but then again, you can say that about many western nations as well, whose international behaviour on the international stage has been far worse.
Which nations have been launching constant wars around the world these past two decades? Iran’s highly conservative religious leaders – as different from westerners as they may be – haven’t attacked and destroyed other nations’ people and infrastructure.
So here we have two female pilots in Iran taking full control of a domestic commercial airliner flight, back in 2019 actually. If you recall, some of Iran’s neighbours, like Saudi Arabia are still arresting ladies who drive cars, even though, Saudi ladies were supposedly “given” this “right” a few years ago. In Iran, ladies do drive and more than 50% of university graduates there are women.
In reality, PR stunts by these brutal western friendly absolute Royal Arab dictatorships – such as the great western media campaign focussing on how Saudi Arabia is “opening up” and “modernizing” – are simply that. PR Stunts. Stunts to appease hapless western hollywood “human rights” types and the lap dog and incessantly unquestioning western mainstream media.
Thousands of westerners used to holiday in Iran each year in pre Covid days as Iran is a very beautiful country and contains one of the highest number of World Heritage Sites in the region. It seems all westerners are very warmly greeted by Iranians, which, given the blatant and ongoing interference by westerners in Iran’s internal affairs, going back many decades and continuing until today, is quite incredible don’t you think?
Would we in the west be so forgiving and welcoming of the Iranian people if their goverment had been caught deposing our democratically elected leaders, stealing our resources, had dropped chemical weapons on us and had generally bad mouthed and interfered in our affairs, time and again, over numerous decades?
It doesn’t seem likely.
Of course, it is highly unlikely that Iran, like most other nations would ever be caught doing these things, as most nations do not act in this extremely objectionable manner. And then when the USA and UK are caught acting highly objectionably like this, they make it all worse by their incessant lieing about their own actions, whilst proceeding to slander others to deflect attention away from themselves.
Anyway, one day I might journey to ancient Persia – modern Iran – to see it for myself. Thousands of westerners do that already. After all, there is no substitute for personal experiences. You might even meet some lovely female pilots there.
Is Iran’s Democracy So Different to Ours?
The Iranian people got to experience a strong and vibrant democracy from 1907 – 1953, before their country was plunged back into dictatorship by the 1953 coup instigated by the USA & UK. During these five decades of real democracy in Iran, the people enjoyed systems of government very similar to that we see today in countries like the UK, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
(See other posts here under the “Iran” tag about their electoral history.)
This full and free democracy is now no more, but much of Iran’s previously democratic procedures and institutions still survive today.
So. How different is the Iranian democratic system from ours then?
Iran’s current Constitution revolves around six main bodies,
- Supreme Leader
- Guardian Council
- Assembly of Experts
Although the connections between each of these are a bit complex, it all seems to boil down to one thing. The Supreme Leader has direct or indirect control over all of the other arms of government.
Although this might sound a bit dictatorial, this is actually quite a common form of government which is well accepted by the west.
Iran’s Supreme Leader enjoys similar powers and authorities to the leaders of such western friendly nations as Eygpt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Jordan. So we can’t fault Iran’s system of government, as the same system is used by many of the western world’s good friends and close allies without complaint.
And it can not be repeated too many times – it was the western world that took Iran’s true democracy away from their people and replaced it with a dictatorship in 1953.
Iranians are able to have a bigger say in their affairs than many of the people in the neighbouring Arab dictatorships. Positions from the President down, including the leaders and councils of every Iranian city are democratically elected. But the Supreme Leader is not.
Iran has a Guardian Council, much influenced by the Supreme Leader, which decides which people would make suitable candidates to run for President. The Council excluded most of the 600 people who sought the post in 2021.
There are positive aspects to political life in Iran. Women are allowed to run for President and many have sought office, but none have made it past the Council vetting process thus far. Women have occupied various cabinet level positions in several recent Iranian administrations.
There are currently 17 women in the Iranian parliament, out of a total of 290 elected representatives, approximately 6% of the total.
That might not sound alot, but by comparison, it took until the mid 1990’s, in the 102nd US Congress (1991-93) to reach this same percentage of female representation. It was only the 103rd US Congress, (1993-95) and all others since, that surpassed this percentage.
Female congressional representation by party in America highlights greater disparities. Even in the 116th US Congress (2019-21) there were just 13 female Representatives in the House from the Republican Party, a mere 3% of the total, although this represents a low point.
So it is not a perfect system in Iran, as we in the west would deem ourselves fit to judge it, but it is not at all as bad as it is sometimes made out. There are conflicts of interest certainly, but Iran is not alone in that regard either.
As Secretary of State for the pivotal American state of Florida, Katherine Harris was a central figure in the 2000 US presidential election result which saw a narrow and highly controversial victory for Republican George W Bush. The whole election result hinged upon whether Bush or Democrat opponent Al Gore won the state of Florida and its 27 electoral votes. Whoever won Florida would win the Whitehouse. The vote count was inconclusive.
As Secretary of State in Florida Katherine Harris is an impartial and apolitical official who would be required to formally certify the winner in her state based upon her state government role and responsibilities.
However secretary of state Harris is also a staunch Republican who took time out from her official Florida government duties to campaign for George W. Bush in New Hampshire, according to the Washington Post. New Hampshire is a long way distant from Florida, but the tiny northern state holds the first primary election of a presidential campaign and is therefore critical in getting a good start in the overall race.
Harris, the official apolitical certifier of Florida’s election result, was also serving as the co-chairwoman of George W Bush’s Florida campaign and was a delegate to the Republican national convention in Pennsylvania.
How is it possible that an American public official can serve as private campaign manager for one of the presidential candidates?
That type of conflict of interest would never be allowed or tolerated by people in my country New Zealand. It would be considered blatant corruption and a clear conflict of interest.
It is not just the Republican party in American that is tarnished with these types of scandal and corruption. Remember poor old Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders and his two primary election campaigns of 2016 and 2020?
New York Times Headline March, 2020:
“Democratic Leaders Willing to Risk Party Damage to Stop Bernie Sanders”
“Interviews with dozens of Democratic Party officials, including 93 superdelegates, found overwhelming opposition to handing Mr. Sanders the nomination if he fell short of a majority of delegates…..”
Superdelegates – making up almost 15% of the total delegate count – are highly influential senior party insiders who have total freedom to vote for any primary candidate of their choice, when the party convention officially votes for their candidate for President. This contrasts with normal elected state delegates (85% of total) who must vote for the candidate that voters in their state chose. Superdelegates therefore are highly influential in choosing the Democratic Party presidential nominee as their combined support for a second placed candidate, say Hillary Clinton, in a close race could give the nomination to that second place candidate, beating out the first placed candidate, who only held a small advantage, say Bernie Sanders.
This was a possible scenario facing the Democratic party in 2016 when outsider Bernie Sanders was running a strong and popular campaign against party insider and elite favourite Hillary Clinton. If Sanders had of won the primary election contest by only a small margin, superdelegates could have overturned the result by voting all together for Clinton, as they are free to vote for anyone they like. Party insiders like superdelegates would naturally support senior party insiders like Clinton.
As it turned out, the superdelegates en masse vote wasn’t necessary as there was enough help from the supposedly neutral Democratic party leadership for Clinton to win the primary vote anyway.
“Former Democratic National Committee chairwoman Donna Brazile acknowledged sending town hall questions and topics to Hillary Clinton’s campaign (before the event), calling it a ‘mistake I will forever regret.’ “
Bazile was sacked from her role as commentator for CNN as a result of this scandal.
Of course, Brazile wasn’t in the top job at the Democratic Party very long. She had only just replaced Debbie Wasserman Schultz as the party Chair.
Wasserman Schultz herself was forced to resign as party chair after a leak of internal Democratic party emails showed party officials actively favouring Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential primary and secretly plotting against Clinton’s rival, Bernie Sanders.
“Debbie Wasserman Schultz has made the right decision for the future of the Democratic party,” Bernie Sanders said in a statement. “The party leadership must always remain impartial in the presidential nominating process, something which did not occur in the 2016 race”.
So, can we really claim America’s democratic system is better than Iran’s? How much goes on in western democracies that we would never know about if it weren’t for Wikileaks?
One final thought.
Just think what it would have meant for the long suffering world if America had a type of Guardian Council like Iran has, that appraises candidates for President, based upon their suitability for office!
At least three of the last four American presidents – all of whom were, and clearly are, grossly unfit for any public office – would have been removed from the list of candidates.
What anguish, death and suffering might the world have been saved if the United States electoral system had of disqualified George W Bush, Donald J Trump and Joseph R Biden from running for President?
The fact that any of these people occupied the Whitehouse is a damning stain on a nation’s culture.
Who Are the “Other” Terrorists in Palestine?
It is a word, used alone or in phrases which the world has heard literally millions of times in recent years. I would wager that in 99.9% of those mainstream media mentions, words such as “Islamic” or an Islamic sounding name are mentioned a few seconds before or after the hook word, terrorism or terrorist.
It is quite a strong connection today. 9/11 made sure of that.
But do we ever hear of other, much older ethnic and religious connections to the phenomenon of terrorism? They certainly exist.
In the 1930s – 1950s, there were many Jewish terrorist organizations active in the Middle East, Britain, and Europe. Few people will have heard of them today. One such group was called “Irgun Zvai Leumi” (or simply Irgun) translating to, “The National Military Organization in the land of Israel.”
In the 1930s there was no entity called Israel, so that gives you a clue as to their agenda.
“WANTED” posters, such as those below, abounded across Palestine to find the perpetrators of hundreds of terrorist attacks carried out on innocent Palestinian people,
One of the most shocking Jewish terrorist attacks was the 1948 assassination of Count Folke Bernadotte.
Count Folke Bernadotte assassination in 1948. Note in the far-right column of the New York Times front page, in small print, “US Consul… ‘Terrorists presumably responsible’. “
The Swedish diplomat’s UN vehicle was ambushed at a check point and he, and two of his diplomatic staff also in the car, were shot dead in a hail of machine gun fire.
Count Bernadotte was operating in Palestine under the flag of the United Nations as a respected peace-maker. He was the nephew of the reigning Swedish King.
Count Bernadotte had found great success as a negotiator in World War 2, securing the release of over 31,000 Jews from Nazi concentration camps. His stature as a Royal, from “neutral” nation Sweden and his valiant efforts in saving so many Jewish people from the Nazi gas chambers, meant that he was trusted by both the Arabs and the few Jewish people of Palestine to secure a fair deal for everyone. And he was making progress.
But the very qualities and background which made him so trusted and respected made him very dangerous to Zionist extremists. What if he came up with a reasonable deal that the Palestinians accepted? The Jewish Zionists it seemed, never had any intention of making any “deal”.
When Bernadotte promoted a UN deal to share the land of Palestine 50:50 between the Palestinians and the Jews, that was impossible for the right-wing Jewish terrorist groups to accept. They had other ideas. These groups have always wanted nothing less than 100% of Palestine and so murdered Bernadotte – a great friend of the Jewish people – in broad daylight to prove their intent. They got their way.
(note: many Palestinians weren’t too happy about giving away half of their lands either, but the deal never had a chance of success due to the assassination.)
By the way, the Zionist movement to take Palestine from its Arab majority inhabitants began in the late 19th century, so the creation of Israel had nothing to do with sympathy for the Holocaust, an event which occurred half a century later.
Another of the tragic terrorist attacks in Palestine by Jewish groups occurred in the same year, 1948: The massacre at the Palestinian village of Deir Yassin
Between 120-250 Palestinian villagers were massacred by Jewish terrorists in the 3 days between April 9 and 11, at a village just out of Jerusalem.
The villagers resisted the attacks for the 3 days but were eventually all killed by the well-armed Jewish terrorists. No one came to help the Palestinian villagers.
Ongoing Jewish terrorist massacres on innocent Palestinian villagers had the desired effect. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled their homes in terror, lest they be the next victims of the well-armed and ruthless Zionist gangs and Zionists and settlers moved in. The occupation began.
These far-right Jewish terrorist groups operated not just across Palestine but they targeted the British and Europeans as well, lest anyone there show too much support for the Palestinians.
And in Europe the attacks continued,
Jewish Terror groups such as Irgun and the Stern gang are now known as “Zionists” and they have ruled Israel from 1948 to this day. They have hi-jacked Judaism itself and splintered it for their own extremist political purposes. Zionism has been utterly rejected by Strictly Orthodox Jews, many secular Jews, as well as the Palestinians, and increasing numbers of westerners.
But Zionists have extremely powerful friends and allies in the global media, in the world of weapons and technology, and in western politics. They can, and do, get away with murder. Genocide actually.
The names and faces on the old black and white “WANTED” Terrorist posters above might be familiar to you.
Both of these wanted Zionist terrorists – Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir – went on to become Prime Ministers of Israel, warmly welcomed into the halls of western power, and given undented support.
Menachem Begin, wanted terrorist in the 1940s, who became Israeli Prime Minister
And a wanted Terrorist.
Isn’t it a bit strange that “terrorist” is NEVER a term we see or hear now in conjunction with Zionists or Jewish people? Almost exclusively, “terrorists” as we come across them today is a word restricted to Muslims, or occasionally white people carrying out mass shootings in America. (The authorities there go to great lengths to avoid this designation as well).
But it really is irrefutable that the foundations of the state of Israel are the numerous acts of bloody Jewish terrorism that were carried out against Muslims and Europeans. That at least should be acknowledeged for there to be even a shred of justice and credibility in the affairs of the world.
I am not holding my breath.
The Third Time Iran was Invaded – & The MOST DEADLY Yet.
The oldest Iranians alive today would still remember voting for their country’s original “supreme leader” – their democratically elected Prime Minister – back in the 1950s. Iran’s democracy and the Iranian people’s right to elect their leader in free and fair democratic elections was taken away at gunpoint by the USA/UK coup in 1953, organized from behind the walls of the American embassy in Tehran.
Mohammed Mossadegh, the last freely elected Supreme Leader of Iran, was toppled from power in 1953 by the CIA / MI6. The loss of democracy in Iran is the subject of other posts here.
But even before the 1953 “invasion” (coup) Iran had been genuinely invaded militarily by the UK and Soviet Union just 12 years earlier, in 1941. Iran’s official neutrality in World War 2 wasn’t enough to protect its sovereignty.
So it was entirely predictable that just the year after the 1979 Iranian revolution, the UK and USA were planning yet another military invasion of Iran – the third assault on the nation in less than four decades. Iran’s sovereignty was going to be illegally infringed upon yet again, and this third time it was to be the most deadly so far.
In somewhat of a variation of the events of 1953, foreigners were once again not happy with the people of Iran taking control of their own affairs in the 1979 Revolution and it wasn’t long before Iran’s new leader had his first big test to deal with.
This time the invasion was from the Iran’s neighbour Iraq and its leader Saddam Hussein, when he launched his deadly and unprovoked invasion of Iran in 1980. It was a very formidable force assembled against Iran, and not just Iraqi forces.
Rich arab nations coughed up hundreds of thousands of troops and US$70 billion in cash. The UK supplied hundreds of tanks, the French supplied fighter jets armed with state of the art Exocet missiles, the Germans and Italians supplied vast quantities of chemical weapons to Iraq. “Vast” is not an exaggeration – at one point the EU factories could not keep up with demand such was the scale of the sales of their WMDs to Iraq.
(Why do you think that the West thought Saddam Hussein might still have secret stocks of WMDs in 2003? Because it was those same Western countries who had sold the WMDs to Iraq back in the 1980s to use against Iran. In 2003, the West was wrong once again – Saddam had gotten rid of his western WMD’s, but Iraq got invaded anyway – do you see a pattern?)
The American contribution to the all powerful array of western weaponary directed at Iran in 1980 were AWAK surveillance planes. These sophisticated planes provided the satellite, intelligence and logistical data needed in order to maximise and enhance the killing power of all of the other western weapons, including the chemical weapons.
Iraq’s unprovoked attack on Iran was a long and bloody affair. Iran really had a huge job on its hands to defend its sovereignty and borders. Borders in fact changed many times as the war ebbed and flowed over 8 long years, with each side, Iraq and Iran, gaining then loosing the advantage.
At one point, it looked like Iraq would defeat Iran. Guess who was watching it all and stepped in to support Iran? The United States. Yes, Washington was helping both sides kill each other at one point. I have never found a more sobering or shocking example of the true face of American foreign policy which often seems to revolve around just one thing. Killing.
Finally, like WW1, the very bloody 8 year long war (1980-88) ended pretty much where it started. Only that hundreds of thousands, maybe more than 1 million citizens and troops were now dead, including vast numbers of civilians, many poisoned by Western chemical weapons.
And this is where one of the most shameful episodes in the recent history of the western government and media begins. One sordid chapter in a long novel of false western pronouncements concerning Iran, amongst many other nations.
Media reports after the war, like this abridgement from the New York Times was typical.
The western media sentiment was something like….
“yes, we are sure chemical weapons were used in the 8 years war, but it’s too hard to tell exactly who used them and when…probably both Iraq and Iran used WMDs…..but, you know, it’s too hard to tell exactly, so we will just forget about it all and try to do better next time” or words to that effect.
“There was no clear culprit in poison gassing of the Kurds” in other words, said the New York Times headline, America’s most prestigious and important newspaper, in 1991, three years after the war ended.
In addition to the western media stating that it was too hard to tell who was using the chemical weapons, they also downplayed the intent of using WMDs in the first place by saying that WMD use was sort of accidental and whoever did it probably didn’t mean to target civilians – the civilians just got in the way sadly. The chemical weapons use on civilians was all just a big tragic mistake. You know, these things can happen I suppose in the fog of war…..Americans write all the suffering off and simply call this “co-lateral damage”.
ALL OF THIS NARRATIVE WAS COMPLETELY FALSE. ALL TOTAL LIES.
THE US GOVERNMENT, and probably its media, KNEW IT WAS BLATANTLY FALSE WHEN THEY PRINTED IT IN 1991.
Once again, it was years later before this truth emerged, too late for most people to notice or even care about.
The worst of Iraq’s chemical weapons attacks, on the village of Halabja in north eastern Iraq killed approximately 6800 people, mostly civilians.
Iran played no part in this chemical weapons attack – or any other in the 8 year long war – and the US government knew this definitively. But they instructed their state department officials to lie about it and blame Iran in public.
Here is the New York Times once again, in 2003, shedding a different light on this sordid affair and their false stories from twelve years earlier….
So there you are in black and white.
American government officials blatantly lieing to the public about Iran in their 8 year long struggle to fend off the mighty western led military alliance assembled against it.
Who remembers the New York Times article 12 years later clarifying Iran’s innocence in possessing or using chemical weapons in the war?
Some people today, who lived through this period still probably harbour some association of Iran with WMDs or Chemical Weapons – when there is none and never has been. This negative (and false) association of Iran with WMDs is still useful today as Washington tries to associate Iran with a nuclear weapons program in the minds of the general public. Another program it does not possess.
How is it possible to ever believe anything large governments or their media say?
I don’t anymore, for there has been too many times they have deceived us. MANY times. We just never find out about them until years later, when even fewer people care.
The blatant lies told in this case are far from unique sadly. Many have been about Iran and have been featured in previous posts, but there are plenty more about Iran and these will feature in future posts. In more recent years the lies were about Russia and President Trump. Also Venezeula and Bolivia. Palestine / Israel are perennial favourite sources for lies. Now it is China in the firing line. Xingjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan. Lies will never stop. They seem to be getting more brazen and more frequent. Only we can stop them. Stop engaging with the mainstream media – no matter their position on the “left-right” spectrum. No matter how old or “respected” they may be. It makes no difference which ones you read – it is all a scam. Offered from slightly different perspectives, but a scam none-the-less.
If you found this article disturbing or interesting please share it. The buck must stop somewhere. If ordinary people condone the lies and wars started in their name, then ordinary people are complicit in the killings. Are you ?
There’s NO WAR in Palestine
Is this a “war”?
There is NO war in Palestine.
14-year-old Palestinian boy Faris Odeh (right) is about to be shot dead by Israeli troops because he was throwing stones at an Israeli tank in November 2000.
After this incident 21 years ago, the shock and disgust from around the world soon dissipated (as it always does) and Israel went back to illegally demolishing Palestinian homes and building internationally condemned Jewish settlements in their place.
Israel has been doing this for four decades now and shows no signs of changing. By some measures, their activity is getting worse.
There is no “peace process”, “two state solution”, or “road map”. Those are simply the pre-programed talking points, repeated infinitely by the highly paid useful idiots in the UN and in western capitals, which satisfy the highly paid dangerous idiots who parade as a genuine international media. These parrotted talking points simply give Israel the time to carry on with their plans without being bothered too much.
The Israeli goal is surely obvious even to the most casual observer. They are eliminating all Palestinian Muslims from their own lands. This is Genocide. Or maybe it is Ethnic Cleansing. Or both? Where is the discussion about this? By the International media? By Washington and London? Or even by the supposed friends and allies of the Palestinian people in the region?
No one dares speak. They have seen what happens in the region when you are no longer useful to Washington.
There is no war in Palestine.
“War” is a deadly conflict between two broadly equivalent parties. Nations fight wars. Britain, Spain, Germany, The Netherlands, France, Russia etc and nations everywhere have been to war many times, often against each other’s armies. India and China have fought small wars as have Pakistan and India – all nuclear powers.
Israel and Palestinians are not fighting a “war”. It should not even be termed a “conflict”.
What is happening is that Israel, is shooting fish (the Palestinians) in a barrel. It’s a hobby for the IDF. The endless daily persecution of an almost defenseless and occupied population, decade after bloody decade. In broad daylight and with total impunity.
Israel possesses every advantage – burgeoning hi-tech weaponry, endless money (thanks to the USA), tight control of the global media narrative, powerful political support, diplomatic immunity (again thanks to the USA), cutting-edge IT resources, nuclear weapons.
In comparison, the Palestinians have practically nothing….home made rockets and old women and children throwing stones. But they do possess perhaps the most important assest of all.
The moral high ground.
Which is ever so slowly being acknowleged world wide, including now by myself, but the Palestinian people continue to pay a tragically high price.
I used to simply follow what I heard from the “respectable” media on global issues, including Palestine, until I actually found a few things out for myself. When I did my own research, I realized that I knew nothing at all about what happens in the world. I now realize that almost all global issues are either falsely or at least misleadingly reported in the international media, jst as CNN Director Charlie Chester admitted earlier this year. The history of Palestine I discovered is one of most falsely reported issues in my lifetime.
Article 4 of the Geneva Conventions, states that the Palestinian people – who, according to international law are living under an occupation – have the LEGAL RIGHT TO RESIST their occupying forces by any and all means – including the use of FORCE.
When Palestinians legitimately resist the occupation of their land, they are instantly demonized and called “militants” or “terrorists” in the media and by observers, as if they’re doing something wrong. It’s very helpful when one side has this sort of powerful influence over the narrative of things. No matter what your atrocity, you have protection from the media mob.
Refer to other posts at The Font which demonstrate this blatant narrative control by the supposedly “neutral” western media. The documentary about media propaganda wars by John Pilger, titled “The War You Don’t See” is highly recommended. It gives you an excellent idea of the power and history of using the western media for propaganda purposes, going all the way back to the roots of the modern propaganda industry during World War 1, and running all the way up to the present day.
In Palestine, which struggle will succeed – the one backed by money and power and influence or the one backed by morals? The result will say a lot about us as a species don’t you think?
By the way, is it just me, or does it look like major war crimes and the endless slaughter of Muslims by “respectable” people are quite acceptable, condoned and even encouraged, in some parts of the world, like, say, the whole of the Middle East, whereas in other parts of the world, like, say, Xinjiang, scant and often unreliable evidence of far lesser crimes against Muslims is enough to charge, convict and sentence the demonic perpetrators forever?
Iran and Its Real (Stolen) Democracy 1907 – 1953
Most older people know of the Iranian Revolution of 1979 which deposed the Royal Shah of Iran and installed Ayatollah Khomeini as Iran’s leader. Much was made of the resulting 444 day long hostage crisis, which saw Iranian students illegally enter the American embassy and take hostages. Iran was painted very negatively in the western media for decades afterwards, and even until today.
But few people know any more about this than what their totally biased and corrupted mainstream media told them during their one-sided coverage of those events, then and now. In fact, several crucial events are always ommitted from western media narratives about Iran’s dealings with the west, events which play a key role in understanding how most westerners view Iran today and how Iran views the West.
The first major “people’s power” revolution in the Middle East occurred not in any “Arab spring” of the early 21st century, or even in Iran in 1979. It occurred much earlier than that, between 1896 – 1907 but it was in Iran. It was called Iran’s “Constitutional Revolution”.
Persia, Iran’s traditional name, had one of the longest continously running Monarchies in the world, headed by The Shah. There were no religious governments in Iran back then although the majority of Iranians are muslim. The Iranian people are not as strongly religious as some of their neighbours and they have a very open and educated outlook.
Iran’s population had long suffered under the increasingly incompetant and corrupt rule of their Royal Shahs and the people had been fighting for a truly democratic society. By the late 1800s they were successful when Shah Mozaffar ad-Din Shah Qajar came to the throne in 1896. The Iranian people finally had a Shah sympathetic to their democratic goals. This Shah signed off on the new 1906 Constitutional which established an elected parliament and gave more power to the people to chose their fate.
A Constitutional Monarchy was created in Iran, like that in the UK, and a new post of elected Prime Minister was now effectively the ultimate authority of the people, replacing the Shah, who remained on the throne but only as a figurehead, in much the same way as Queen Elizabeth II is in the UK is today.
Iran flourished under these new freedoms. A free press blossomed, just and proper legal systems were established and new and independent courts were created.
There was real freedom, democracy and justice in Iran in the early 20th century – exactly the type of systems we are incessantly lectured about by the USA whenever they (often) hold themselves up as a shining example…
But even as a free, democratic and officially neutral nation during World War 2, (1939-1945) the Iranian democracy was still at risk from foreign empires. In 1941, 36 years after achieving its democracy, Iran was invaded by the unprovoked attacks of the British and Soviet governments. It was arbitrarily broken up by those foreign governments into a northern region for exclusive use by the Soviet Union and a southern region, for exclusive use by the UK. The needs and wants of the actual people who lived there, the Iranian people, were secondary to those of invading foreigners.
After World War 2 ended, and under the leadership of its democratic Prime Minister, Iran drove out its foreign occupiers and returned to its own Constitution and democratic way of life.
But by the 1950s, one issue still remained a thorn in the side of the Iranian government and its dealing with foreign powers. The country was still only receiving a tiny 6% share of the revenues from its oil wealth, the other 94% of the profits heading off to the UK, whose oil industry giants had developed Iran oil fields.
Similar countries in similar circumstances such as Saudi Arabia were receiving more than a 20% share of their oil revenues at this same time.
So by 1951, not unreasonably, Iran’s democratic government requested talks with Britain to discuss Iran receiving a greater share of the wealth generated from its own resources.
The UK refused to even discuss the matter, let alone negotiate, even as their major allies such as the USA urged them to do so. Mexico had nationalized its oil industry in 1938 and not paid any compensation. Venezeula was to nationalize some of its oil industry in 2007 and did pay an internationally recognized compensation sum. New Zealand nationalized the Bank of New Zealand in 1945 and the USA nationalized most of its Steel industry in 1952 as well as its railways in 1971.
So the concept of nationalization of your own assests is hardly unusual or uncommon around the world, in any era, or in any industry. One would have to ask, therefore, why Britain refused to even enter into talks concerning their extraction of Iran’s oil. Greed maybe? Arrogance?
Faced with implacible and ongoing British resistance to even discussing the issue, Iran’s Prime Minster, the hugely popular Mohummed Mossadegh, felt he had no other choice than to nationalize (take control of) his countries oil resources, which he did. He offered the UK the standard compensation package as was customary in such circumstances.
The Iranian people were elated. They had a strong, popular and competant leader who looked after the interests of common people. The future for Iran looked rosy !
But the elation didn’t last for long.
The UK refused to accept Iran’s decision and its legal right to nationalise its own resources. Instead, Britain asked the America’s CIA to return Iran to how it existed before the Consititutional Revolution of 1896, 57 years earlier. To return Iran to the days of being ruled by the authoritarian Shah and to throw out the 1906 Democratic Constitution.
Iran’s brief experience of democracy was finished.
And so it was. The CIA easily toppled Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohummed Mossadegh, and destroyed the hard won Democratic Constitution of 1906. The Majles, or Iranian Parliament was neutered and The Shah of Iran was once again, in 1953, dictator for life over the Iranian people thanks to the secret deeds of Washington and London.
All nations and their embassies around the world must follow diplomatic laws that respect the right of a nation to have its representatives work in a foreign country without undue danger or hazard to their safety. Embassy security therefore is the responsibilty of the host nation, but the embassy grounds themselves belong to the visiting nation.
The visiting nation can deny the host nation entry to the embassy, even though it is located on host nation soil. This is a huge advantage to the visiting nation. Embassy staff all have immunity from prosecution in the host nation for any crimes they might commit. Any law breaking by the visiting nation’s embassy staff will go unpunished by the host nation. These are huge potential advantages to any unscrupulous nation wishing to secretly carry out illegal activities from inside another nation.
The American embassy in Iran is owned and operated by Washington and no Iranian, not even law enforcement officers or government officials, can enter without US permission.
For this reason, aside from the diplomatic laws involved, much of the operation of the embassies around the world is run on mutual trust. If law breaking is going on inside an embassy, it will be difficult to detect as no one from the host nation can enter without permission from that embassy.
So, a nation’s embassy must not be used in a way which is incompatible with the functions of the mission or of diplomacy. An embassy in another country is for the sole purpose of conducting diplomacy – that is, the carrying out of communication and administrative functions only.
The mainstream media have stressed for decades the fact that the Iranian students forcefully entered the American embassy in Tehran in 1979 when the hostage crisis began. This act by the students was against diplomatic law.
What the media never elaborate on however are the reasons why these young Iranian students entered the American embassy without permission and took hostages. That part of the story is mostly unknown and will be covered more in a future post.
For now it is enough to understand that the greatest spreader of “freedom” in the world (their words, not mine) – the United States of America – was the nation that secretly destroyed Iran’s 1906 Constitution and the democracy that went with it.
In any dictionary around the world, under the entry “hypocrisy”, no words are necessary to explain the meaning.
A picture of the American Flag is sufficient.
Palestine and Xinjiang : One and the Same Thing
In the short comments above, acclaimed film maker and journalist John Pilger outlines why the issues underlying the slow, inexorable genocide of the Palestinian people and the issues underlying fabricated genocide in Xinjiang, China are one and the same thing.
They are both about a fading empire desparately trying to maintain their control over others.
The Palestinians have been sold out so many times by their regional cousins and by western powers and they have few resources to call on – mainly, the moral highground and the flimsical hope that a majority of westerners will one day understand the historical processes at work during the creation of Israel. And how and why Israel and the land it is made from, Palestine, are what they are.
When any reasonable person truly understands these process, I believe they will support the Palestinian people and their right to their own land. The global processes which have led to such great injustice in Palestine are the same processes that are playing out today in Xinjiang. However, in Palestine, the processes of western propaganda and their wars have been active for 70 years and the victim is weak and without much support.
The propaganda against China, and Xinjiang in particular is fairly new and the victim is becoming increasingly powerful.
It is not for nothing that China has gone, in a few short years since 2015 from this…
President Xi Jingping was treated to a full scale British state visit, complete with trips to the pub and selfies with his good mate UK PM David Cameron, as well as grand accomodation and state dinners with Queen Elizabeth. They were heady days back in 2015.
But those days are long gone and now we have these, pretty much all at the same time. Coincidence? Or is it because the west woke up the amazing opportunities that China can offer the world, if left alone?
These issues in China are not new, but they have certainly all been highly inflamed since 2015. Why is that ?
Because the United States in particular sees China’s new role in the world with fear and envy. President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) will transform the world for the better in my opinion. America now realizes this and they know that the bulk of the poorer countries in the world that have been bypassed for decade after decade by the major western powers will ask, “why didn’t you help us like China is today when you had the chance?”
The only answer to that is not flattering to the centuries of western led colonialism and domination that extracted the resources from its subject nations, but did little to improve the basic infrastructures of life to help the local people. China is doing that today with the BRI.
At any rate, America has done little to update its own infrastructure, instead choosing to give its money to financial elites and spending it on endess wars. So infrastructure building anywhere is not America’s strongpoint anymore.
John Pilger has also correctly stated that if you can fully understand the issue of Palestine, since the 19th century until today, and how Israel was created from it, then you will understand every issue around the globe. I used to be fooled by western propaganda until I started to do my own research and thinking. That is when I understood what Israel represents and how it came into being. And the role played by the UK and USA in creating a nation upon another people’s land.
And now I can see, as John Pilger said, how these same processes play out around the world every day.
It should be becoming increasingly obvious that the “leadership” of the USA, if it ever really existed, is coming to an end and not before time.
The only question is – will they go quietly or will they take much of the world down with them?
The Jews You’ve Never Heard of and Why They Support Palestine So Passionately
Tue, 25 May at 10:22 am
Strictly Orthodox Jews are those traditionally dressed people you see in big American cities such as New York or praying at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. They are passionate supporters of the Palestinian people, and always have been.
Yes, that’s right. Strictly observant Jews want the state of Israel peacefully dismantled and the land returned to the Palestinian people for they know the Palestinians are the righful owners of Palestine. They have openly protested for this cause since 1948 but few westerners know this.
What is the global mainstream media doing that so few westerners know this? Why do they hide this?
In 2021, 20,000 Orthodox Jews gathered in New York to protest against Israel.
Tens of thousands of Strictly Orthodox Jews protest in American cities against the state of Israel and in support of the Palestinians.
The Western media rarely covers these protests. They happen, but they don’t happen.
There are over 1 million strictly orthodox Jews in Israel.
In the scene above, taken in Israel in 2020, about 400,000 strictly orthodox Jews protest at the Zionist government’s new law removing their exemption from military service, in place since 1948. Most strictly orthodox Jews refuse to serve in the military due to their religious convictions of not killing people or stealing their land. That is what I call real faith in your beliefs.
Strictly Orthodox Jews make up a significant minority of the Jewish population and they want Israel peacefully dismantled and the land returned to the Palestinians. The two parties often protest together in public. Have you seen them together before?
Zionism is a secular political movement and is, therefore, the correct term for the secular rulers of Israel. Not all Jews are Zionists but Zionists mostly claim to be Jews.
It is sometimes easy to spot the difference. eg: Zionists often wear uniforms or are armed. Strictly Observing Jews wear traditional costume, such as in the picture above, and are non-violent.
The state of Israel has been created in such a way that there is no solution to the issues there and there never has been a solution.
Most people do not know this truth and they can not know it, for if people knew the truth, the issues would be settled overnight. So, decade after decade, the farce of a “peace process” or “the two state” solution continues to be parrotted by world leaders and their media, when, in the reality on the ground, the Palestinians lose more and more ground each year. Eventually, there must be nothing left at all if the trends continue.
A one-state solution – with equal rights for all – is impossible as the Zionist rulers would be in a minority against Palestinians, Arabs and Orthodox Jews (who all support Palestine). Israel would have to be a true democracy if it were one state, instead of the apartheid state it is, ruled by the minority Zionists against the majority.
Consideration has never been given to a two-state solution either. This notion has always been simply a diversion in order to create the time required to remove all the Palestinians from their homes in broad daylight.
Palestine really dissolved before it even started. It is a sham and a global shame that blights the western colonial powers, particularly Great Britian that created the sham and the United States, that allows it to continue.
Iran on a Path Back to Democracy?
The President of Iran, the entire Iranian Parliament, as well as the Leaders of every city, town and village across Iran, are chosen by democratic elections in this country of over 80 million people. There is much enthusiasm in Iran’s elections,
Supporters of Iranian political parties rally enthusiastically in 2017.
Note that many women’s hair is clearly visible, the scarves being merely token. The ladies are stylish and wear bright colours. People mix freely outdoors.
Political polling in Iran is conducted by both local and western polling agencies during their elections.
Iranian Presidential polling data from Washington based polling company “IPPO Group”.
Presidential debates are broadcast on live TV in Iran, just like we do in the Western elections. It’s all pretty normal isn’t it?
Turnout on election day in the 2017 Iranian Presidential election was over 70%, a very healthy result, although this did drop in 2020.
Turnout for Iran’s Parliamentary Elections is often even higher – it has reached a whopping 85% in the past, a turnout which puts every western nation to shame, but even the more normal turnout of 65 – 75% is still excellent by any standard.
The Iranian parliament was established in 1907, after the 1905-07 Constitutional Revolution by the Iranian people.
(Yes, there was an Iranian revolution earlier in the 20th century than the one we know about, but it is little publicised in the western media and for good reasons – it is a shameful episode perpetrated upon Iran by the UK & USA, but that is a subject for another post.)
There are over 40 political parties active in Iran, split roughly 50:50 between “reformists” and “traditionalists.” The recent 2020 elections saw a traditionalist type candidate Ebrahim Raisi bought to power, replacing outgoing reformist President Hassan Rouhani, who had served the maximum 2 terms and was not eligible to run again.
Perhaps because of the hardship and suffering inflicted upon the Iranian people by American sanctions, and the refusal to lift those sanctions, even temporarily, to provide relief from Covid 19, a more traditionalist candidate was elected President. This might also have resulted from the candidates approved to run for President being more aligned to traditionalist causes.
After progressive President Rouhani had negotiated in good faith with the Americans and signed the 2015 JCPOA Nuclear agreement to enable sanctions relief along with Iran agreeing to international nuclear inspections, Iran was betrayed by the American government when the Trump administration unilaterally broke the agreement in 2018.
Promised sanctions relief was short lived and even more harsh sanctions were put in place after 2018.
Iranians used to enjoy a full participatory democracy until 1953, so it’s hardly surprising that large remnants of their genuine democracy and enthusiasm still exist. It’s hardly their fault that the democratic system they once enjoyed for nearly 50 years, was destroyed by the very same people who today, criticise Iran for not being democratic enough – the Western Nations, particularly America and Britain.
Yes, it is successive governments of the USA and UK who can go on camera in front of their people and criticise Iran when it was the exact same two nations that took away the very hard fought democracy from the Iranian people in 1953, then lied about doing so and then continued to critcise and persecute Iran right up until today.
The current Iranian administrative organization (post 1979) has aspects to it that westerners might not identify with nor understand. However, Iran comes from an ancient culture – Persian – and its people are educated and clever. (the outgoing President Rouhani went to university in the UK).
Modern Iran has had a turbulent history, much of the blame for which can be directly attributed to British and American meddling in their affairs.
But that is a long story that will be covered in future posts. It is enough here just to recognise that Iran can choose a colourful path back to full democracy if only outsiders would stop interfering. The Iranian people have won full democracy before and I am sure they can do it again if they choose to as a nation.
Iran’s Nuclear Program : There are No Weapons there either
Sorting Fact from Propaganda
“There is little doubt that even before the JCPOA deal’s existence, Iran was violating its terms.”2019 QUOTE FROM THE TRUMP WHITEHOUSE – WILL BIDEN’S ATTITUDE BE ANY BETTER ?
For many years, one of the most targeted nations for western propaganda has been the ancient nation of Iran, or Persia as it used to be known historically.
Yes, Iran hangs people, like other nations still use the death penalty and it has an authoritarian religious government. However that is no reason to regularly lie about it.
There are many deliberately misrepresented aspects of Iran circulated by the western media and some governments, so I thought it might help to put Iran’s so called “breach” of what was the international multi party and UN backed JCPOA Iran Nuclear agreement (now defunct) into proper perspective.
The media will never tell you the facts in their proper context.
By way of an intro, 31 countries currently employ nuclear power, France generating the bulk (75%) of its electricity from nuclear energy. So these 31 nations including France, Iran and many other western nations have a “nuclear program.” France in fact has a nuclear generation program AND a nuclear weapons program. Iran does not have both.
Many countries are turning to nuclear power generation in order to reduce their carbon emissions, as nuclear power does not emit carbon, thereby meeting the requirements to reduce their carbon emissions.
Iran has signed the International Nuclear Non Proliferation treaty (NPT) which allows for independent IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) inspections to inspect and verify a country’s nuclear activity.
(Note: Israel has never signed the NPT, and has never publically acknowledged its nuclear weapons program. Theirs is a weapons program, not an electricity generation program and is estimated to consist of over 400 nuclear missiles.)
So what is Iran doing with its Uranium nuclear power program then?
Uranium (symbol U) mineral ore is a naturally occuring mineral found in the ground and is mined and processed for a variety of purposes, from medical diagnoses, electricity generation and, unfortunately, in some cases, military weapons as well.
The natural ore found in the ground is a mixture of different forms of Uranium, mostly U238 (coloured BLUE below) with only a little U235 – the useful bit, (coloured RED).
Natural Uranium Ore is represented by the upper most pie chart below – it consists of mostly blue U238 and is relatively harmless, as it does not contain much U235.
By slightly refining the natural Uranium ore in what are called Centrifuges, nations are able to increase the amount of Red U235 to make the material useful for domestic purposes such as electricity generation. This is represented by the middle chart – this is what Iran and the other nations agreed it would be allowed to do.
Under the UN backed agreement Iran had negotiated with the western powers (USA, UK, France, EU plus China and Russia), Iran agreed to limit its refining of Uranium ore to a maximum of 3.7% Red U 235 in line with Iran’s use of low grade Uranium ore to generate electricity.
Iran’s limiting of its Uranium enrichment to 3.7% U235, meant that it was agreeing to use a less pure, less efficient grade Uranium in its nuclear power generation reactors than it otherwise could have used. But by agreeing to limit the purity to only 3.7%, Iran was ensuring it could never be accused of making a nuclear weapon as this grade is far too weak for that purpose. It would be like trying to sell some dusty mineral deposits containing a tiny amount of gold in a flash jewellers store.
This grade – 3.7% U 235 – is very, very far from the purity of Uranium required to make a nuclear weapon, which at 90+% U235 is a completely different material, as seen above in the bottom chart – where the chart is now mostly Red U 235. Alot of refining is necessary to make this pure grade and Iran agreed NOT to do this and has always said it does not want to ever do this.
The 6 party Iran Nuclear International agreement was made water tight, and backed by UN Resolution, because it was glibly assumed that if anyone tried to break the deal it would be Iran. As it has turned out it was not Iran but the United States that illegally withdrew from the agreement.
Iran has been complying with all aspects of the nuclear deal, as verified by ongoing IAEA inspections and reports, carried out inside Iran.
Since the USA withdrew from the JCPOA nuclear deal, the remaining western parties to the agreement, the EU, UK and France have done little to help Iran with sanctions relief for the Iranian people, relief that Iran was owed by JCPOA agreement, after it was acknowledged as having complied with all of its responsibilities.
But due to no fault of its own, Iran still finds itself the subject of slander and threats from western powers, having done its part to uphold the agreement.
So, Iran’s patience finally ran out – but by just a tiny bit.
Iran had given up alot and received nothing in return from its efforts.
Iran announced it was intending to enrich Uranium ore above the 3.7% limit from the now defunct nucllear agreement, to 4.5% U 235.
But putting this in perspective – which the media will never do – look again at the pie charts above.
Nuclear energy grade Uranium for electricity generation (the middle pie chart) can be up to 20% U235 in strength, though often only about 3-4%.
Iran’s then announced an increase of its enrichment of Uranium 235 from the agreed 3.7% to 4.5%.
From the coloured graphs, we can see that is an extremely small and insignificant increase and still very far from the upper limit of 20% U235 that can be legitimately and safely used in some nuclear power plants to generate electricity.
And even if Iran continued to increase its Uranium refining all the way to 20% U235, that is still FAR BELOW the 90+% U235 that’s required to make a nuclear bomb.
So, when you see the context and perspective of the matter we can see that Iran is proceeding very responsibly and still adhering to the spirit of the now defunct nuclear agreement.
But that doesn’t stop many senior USA government and media figures from spreading shameless lies and misrepresentations. Instead of keeping such discussions in context, these government people have gone before the cameras and journalists and routinely talk of “halting Iran’s nuclear weapons program”.
They know Iran does NOT have a nuclear weapons program – their agreed U235 refinement limits are far too weak to build a weapon. Iran has a nuclear electricity generation program. But still people like former National Security Advisor John Bolton continue to mislead the world by spreading such false statements and the media, as always, just parrot these false statements without checking anything.
Or maybe the media either don’t care that these statements are wrong ? Who knows.
Iran has acted very responsibly in this matter but the nation, like Venezeula, Cuba and others, is still suffering greatly under American sanctions. It is hoped that these severe sanctions will over time, cause sufficient stress and suffering to ordinary people that they will revolt, and in the resulting chaos, western powers can intervene and impliment governments more to their liking.
Check this out for more….
Mainstream Media Propaganda called Out by Citizen Journalists!
Here’s an excellent example of “citizen journalism” in action, in this case discussing the blatant bias of mainstream media such as the BBC and CNN, on issues such as Palestine.
The discussion centers around the performances of three prominent mainstream media figures,
1) Ms Emily Maitlis, above, host of the prestigious BBC Newsnight show, attempts to bring the interview narrative back to “Hamas aggression” when interviewing the Palestinian ambassador.
2) a CNN interviewer who instantly ends an interview after an excellent response in reply to the interviewer’s attempted narrative framing question against Hamas, and
3) Ned Price, a Biden spokesman on the Middle East who turns himself inside out trying not to say forbidden words, in response to fair and reasonable questioning.
If 20 minutes is too long to watch, just forward to the 15 mins mark to hear the funniest and most tragic section – the Whitehouse spokesman Price desperately trying NOT to speak words that he knows are forbidden to be spoken.
“Self defense often does authorize the use of force,” Whitehouse spokesman Price initially says in his official comments (when referring to Israel naturally…)
Ok Ned, so the obvious follow-up question therefore is, which is then asked by a reporter,
“Do the Palestinians have a right to self-defense?”
This is where Whitehouse spokesperson Price gets himself into all sorts of trouble. It is shocking to watch actually.
Even if he contradicts himself, even if he makes a fool of himself, even if everyone watching knows what the correct answer should be to this fair and reasonable question, Mr Price knows that he just CAN NOT publicly say anything positive about Hamas or the Palestinians, or grant them any rights or respect.
That is not following the very long established narrative.
On the other hand, many European countries have made any criticism of Israel a crime.
Is that because of guilt maybe? Fascism?
Why should the Palestinian people have to pay for the centuries-long persecution of the Jewish people by Europeans?
Eye Witness Accounts of Atrocities Are Often FAKE
One of the most famous fake testimonies was that of a tearful and emotional young Kuwaiti girl called Nayirah.
The “Nayirah testimony” was official testimony given before the United States Congressional Human Rights Caucus on October 10, 1990 by a 15-year-old girl who provided only her first name, Nayirah.
Her tear filled and highly emotional testimony described how she had witnessed the most heinous and barbaric torture of innocent Kuwaiti people by the Iraqi troops of Saddam Hussein, listing most prominently, the killing of innocent little babies lying in incubators in Kuwaiti hospitals.
Her story was corroborated by Amnesty International which published several independent reports about the baby killings.
Her testimony on these unspeakable horrors was widely publicized in the global media and it was cited publicly many times by United States Senators and Congresspeople and the US President George H. W. Bush in their rationale to invade Iraq in the 1991 “Gulf” War.
The chairman of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, Representative John Porter, (above) stated after the testimony,
“…. over the past 8 years of this committee we’ve heard many testimonials from human rights abuse witnesses, but in no circumstances have we ever heard anything of the level of brutality, of sadism that we’ve heard from the witnesses today.”
Western coalition forces did indeed subsequently invade Iraq, destroying much of its modern and well maintained infrastructure such as electricity generation facilities, hospitals, bridges and railways, fresh water reticulation systems and sewage systems.
Ostensibly, this destructive military response was to ensure that Iraq was never able to trouble its neighbours in such a way ever again.
However in 1992, after the destruction of much of Iraq had been completed, it was revealed that Nayirah’s heart felt testimony to the US Congress was in fact, TOTALLY FALSE.
Nayirah was actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States and her testimony was in fact, staged as part of the American based “Citizens for a Free Kuwait” campaign. ie: a pro-war campaign.
Amnesty International reacted by issuing a correction to their previous endorsement of the story, with executive director John Healey subsequently accusing the Bush administration of “opportunistic manipulation of the international human rights movement”.
Nayirah al-Sabah’s testimony has come to be regarded as a classic example of modern “atrocity propaganda” where emotional manipulation of general opinions of society towards the achievement of a greater goal is the sole objective. Frequently this type of emotional propaganda, has no basis in fact or truth.
Anything sounding familiar….?
Is the Suffering any Different?
They Were Just Kids
A Holocaust Survivor Speaks about Palestine
Dr Gabor Mate, a holocaust survivor as an infant, speaks to Russell Brand about the situation in Palestine.
This is incredibly moving and thought provoking.
Remember when listening that media wars, propaganda and “disinformation” (aka lies) are not a creation of the modern day.