Author Topic: Historische dagen in Iran  (Read 14914 times)

« on: 22/06/2009 om 22:54:27 »
Maandagmorgen briefing (Week 25)

Historische dagen in Iran. De “rode” Ahmadinejad (soort conservatief socialist) vs de “groene” Moesavi (soort neoliberaal), met een ongekende opstand tegen de mullah’s. De berichtgeving uit Iran is warrig en onbetrouwbaar. Feit is moeilijk van propaganda te onderscheiden. Teveel belangen, teveel factoren, teveel spelers. Wat wel duidelijk is, is de overweldigende belangstelling van de westerse media voor de ontwikkelingen in Iran (iets over Georgië gelezen de laatste tijd? Ow wacht, daar zit onze dictator). Public enemy no. 1 wordt extra in het zonnetje gezet, iedere staatsman/vrouw, politicus, commentator of analist (en Israël-Wilders) heeft een mening. Maar ondanks al die uren zendtijd en kilometers papier lijkt een ding over het hoofd te worden gezien. Waar is eigenlijk het bewijs voor verkiezingsfraude? Of het bewijs voor het tegenovergestelde? Zowel kamp Mahmou als kamp Moesavi riepen voor het sluiten van de stembus de overwinning uit. Cijfermateriaal is er wel maar conclusies trekken blijft moeilijk. Where is the proof?

Toegegeven, verkiezingsfraude is heel, heel goed mogelijk. De “gardisten” die goed hebben geboerd onder Mahmou zijn de laatsten die “verandering” willen. Frauderen lijkt op zich niet zo moeilijk. Duidelijk motief. Kamp Ahmadinejad heeft behoorlijk de schijn tegen.

Maar bij Moesavi klopt het ook niet helemaal. Snel de overwinning uitroepen en het “argument” hanteren dat “voor de verkiezingen” duidelijk was dat er gefraudeerd zou worden. Bovendien, alles wat zich op dit moment op de straten van Teheran afspeeld, draagt alle kenmerken van een “kleurenrevolutie”. Aanhangers met borden “Where is my vote?”, duidelijk gericht op de westerse media en niet de mullah’s, de twitter-actie die begon in Israël (zie Moldavië eerder dit jaar) en het openlijke feit dat Moesavi in feite voor de oud president (en westers gezinde millionair) Rafsanjani in de ring staat. En had de Amerikaanse regering onder George Bush niet miljoenen vrijgemaakt voor “destabilisatie” van Iran?

En wie schiet er eigenlijk op de protesterenden? Que bono? Is dit niet een van de trucs die in de briljante documentaire “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised” over de coup tegen Chavez werd vastgelegd?

Al zal het “bomb-bomb-Iran” kamp weinig in hun nopjes zijn met een democratiseringsgolf in Iran. Wat is Israël zonder “nieuwe Hitler” Ahmadinejad? Wat zijn de neocons met een minder star regime in Teheran, dat bereidt is (wat het ook onder Mahmou is) om aan de onderhandelingstafel te komen. Is “regime change” echt wat de Amerikanen en Israëlies willen? Een neoliberaal door de beruchte Iraanse politieke leemlaag schuiven? Dit alles spreekt 100% tegen “inmenging” van “buitenaf”. Hoe graag de mullah’s dit scenario ook willen voorhouden. Bovendien: de mossad geeft zelf toe dat een overwinning voor Moesavi (ondanks de mislukte Israëlische twitter-revolutie) “grote problemen” voor Israël betekent.

Het ziet er naar uit dat alle spelers op het bord een inschattingsfout hebben gemaakt. Moesavi, Mahmou, Ayyatholla Khamenei, Israël, overijverige Israëlische twitteraars, de Revolutionaire Garde. Het mullahdom is op de grenzen van het geduld van haar bevolking gestoten. Het volk wil domweg meer zeggenschap.

Donkerdoorn

http://zapruder.nl/portal/artikel/maandagmorgen_briefing_week_25/

« Reply #1 on: 24/06/2009 om 00:08:21 »
Iran, Iran, Iran

Wat is er nu werkelijk gebeurd tijdens de presidentsverkiezingen in Iran? We weten het niet en zullen het waarschijnlijk ook nooit te weten komen. De Iraanse “raad van hoeders“ geeft toe dat er in 50 gebieden gevallen van fraude is geconstateerd. Een feit dat werd opgepikt door het “Chatham House“ en ge-extrapoleerd(pdf!) naar “bewijs“ voor grootschalige fraude. Maar overtuigend is het verhaal niet. Zoals de reformistische presidentskandidaat Moesavi niets meer op tafel kan leggen als “beschuldigingen“ blijven de vermoedens van fraude dat ook: “slechts vermoedens“. Zoals de Midden Oosten correspondent voor “The Independent“ Robert Fisk aangeeft: “Ik weet het niet maar ik vermoedt dat Ahmadinejad gewonnen heeft. De cijfers zijn alleen geïnflateerd om Ahmadinejad’s overwinning er beter uit te laten zien.“ Iets wat de Raad van Hoeders ook opmerkt. Fraude ja, maar niet in dergelijke mate dat Moesavi de eigenlijke president is.

Blijven staan de opgeblazen westerse media-aandacht, inclusief hijgerige politici, de dubieuze Iraanse twitteraars, de “gelekte resultaten“ door “een ambtenaar die door een “auto-ongeluk“ om het leven zou zijn gekomen“(fake), ingevlogen Hezbollah-strijders vs protesterenden(fake), aanslagen op mausoleum, aanslagen op universiteiten, aanslagen op legerbarakken, neergeschoten omstanders(schokkend) en opgeblazen demonstrantenmassa’s. Mahmou blijft president. Iran de boogyman.

Donkerdoorn

http://zapruder.nl/portal/artikel/iran_iran_iran/

« Reply #2 on: 24/06/2009 om 16:48:07 »
Iran blijf een zelfstandige onafhankelijke staat en dat is een doorn in de ogen van het westen.
« Last Edit: 24/06/2009 om 16:50:39 by tikezdallah »

« Reply #3 on: 24/06/2009 om 17:01:08 »
Iran blijf een zelfstandige onafhankelijke staat en dat is een doorn in de ogen van het westen.

En je weet gelijk aan wiens kant die vieze poppenkastregering in Marokko staat >

http://www.amazigh.nl/awar/index.php?topic=12869.0

« Reply #4 on: 25/06/2009 om 13:46:50 »
I Een plan heeft Amerika/CIA al > ABC News uitzending van 05/24/2007

- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wg3r2YSM9g&eurl=http://www.nujij.nl/abc-news-het-plan-van-de-cia-om-iran-te.6001175.lynkx&feature=player_embedded



II Een werktuig heeft Amerika/CIA ook al > The National Endowment for Democracy (NED)

- http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/2501
- http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA/National%20EndowmentDemo.html
- http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4332.htm



III En bondgenoten in Iran heeft Amerika/CIA ook > People's Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI) en Iran Policy Committee (IPC)

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Mujahedin_of_Iran
- http://www.upi.com/Emerging_Threats/2009/01/26/EU-removes-PMOI-from-terrorist-list/UPI-44751232989491/
- http://www.nujij.nl/iraanse-leider-boos-op-eu-om-de-pmoi.4982110.lynkx
- http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Iran_Policy_Committee
- http://www.iranfocus.com/en/iran-world-press/iran-policy-group-outlines-new-approach-in-dealing-with-tehran-01475.html



Kijk en dan vindt ik het niet zo heel vreemd dat de Iraanse pers deze nieuwsberichten naar buiten brengt >

- http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=98931&sectionid=351020101
- http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=99003&sectionid=3510212

En dat terwijl de Westerse media bovenstaande Iraanse nieuwsbericht totaal negeren en in plaats daarvan de Westerse hersenen blijven voeden met dit soort (des-)informatie >

- http://www.nu.nl/algemeen/2029647/ahmadinejad-haalt-uit-naar-obama.html
- http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/25/iran.election/index.html
- http://www.nna-leb.gov.lb/indexeng.php



Mensen moeten weer leren rekenen!

Ik hoop dat je niet gaat zeggen dat het komt omdat ze tegen Amerika en Israel zijn.

Zie het als een optelsommetje 1+1=?




« Last Edit: 30/06/2009 om 00:27:00 by incognito »


« Reply #6 on: 29/06/2009 om 18:33:44 »
Tja het blijft moeilijk voor Amerika om in Iran haar meerdere te moeten erkennen en daarom vervalt het weer terug in haar vieze spelletjes > oppositiegroepen in Iran financieren om de Iranese nationale eenheid te verdelen en te verzwakken >



U.S. grants support to Iranian dissidents

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is moving forward with plans to fund groups that support Iranian dissidents, records and interviews show, continuing a program that became controversial when it was expanded by President Bush. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which reports to the secretary of state, has for the last year been soliciting applications for $20 million in grants to "promote democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in Iran," according to documents on the agency's website. The final deadline for grant applications is June 30.

MORE: USAID report on support to Iranian dissidents
U.S. efforts to support Iranian opposition groups have been criticized in recent years as veiled attempts to promote "regime change," said Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council, the largest Iranian-American advocacy group. The grants enable Iran's rulers to paint opponents as tools of the United States, he said.

Although the Obama administration has not sought to continue the Iran-specific grants in its 2010 budget, it wants a $15 million boost for the Near Eastern Regional Democracy Initiative, which has similar aims but does not specify the nations involved. Some of that money will be targeted at Iran, said David Carle, a spokesman for the appropriations subcommittee that oversees foreign affairs. "Part of it is to expand access to information and communications through the Internet for Iranians," Carle said in an e-mail. President Obama said this week the United States "is not at all interfering in Iran's affairs," rejecting charges of meddling that were renewed Thursday by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Asked how the democracy promotion initiatives square with the president's statement, White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said, "Let's be clear: The United States does not fund any movement, faction or political party in Iran. We support … universal principles of human rights, freedom of speech, and rule of law." State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said, "Respecting Iran's sovereignty does not mean our silence on issues of fundamental rights and freedoms, such as the right to peacefully protest." The Bush program "was a horrible idea," Parsi said. "It made human rights activists and non-governmental organizations targets." Not so, said David Denehy, the former Republican political consultant and State Department official who used to oversee the spending. "To say that we were the cause of repression in Iran is laughable … Our programs sent a message to the people of Iran that we supported their requests for personal freedom," he said.

The State Department and USAID decline to name Iran-related grant recipients for security reasons.
After Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced a major expansion of the program in 2006 — Congress eventually approved $66 million — the Iranian government arrested activists and closed down their organizations. Several Iranian dissidents, including former political prisoner Akbar Ganji, denounced the U.S. funding as counterproductive. Some in Congress are happy the program is continuing.

"As the Iranian regime cracks down on its people, I strongly believe that we should be prepared to extend our hand in help and support to any Iranian civil society group that reaches out for it," Sen. Joseph Lieberman, wrote in an e-mail to USA TODAY. Most of the money likely hasn't reached Iran but went instead to Washington-based groups, said Suzanne Maloney, an Iran expert who reviewed applications for the democracy program before leaving the State Department for the Brookings Institution. The United States lacks the insight to influence Iran's internal politics, she said. "We have such limited penetration of Iranian politics," she said. "We are so poorly positioned to add any value."

28-06-2009

Ken Dilanian

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-06-25-iran-money_N.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/pdf/usaid.pdf
« Last Edit: 01/07/2009 om 17:10:52 by incognito »

« Reply #7 on: 29/06/2009 om 18:39:24 »
US Likely Source of Interference in Iran's Election

A recent article called “Ahmadinejad Won, Get Over It” by Flynt and Hillary Leverett is not the only source with serious credentials offering reasonable, non-sensational explanations for events around Iran’s presidential election. Kaveh Afrasiabi, a scholar who once taught at Tehran University and is the author of several books, says many of the same things. Close analysis of the election results gives absolutely no objective basis for making charges of a rigged election. Mousavi’s expected win – expected, that is, by the Western press and by Mousavi himself - never had any basis in fact.

Afrasiabi also tells us that Ahmadinejad is extremely popular with the poor in Iran, a very large constituency, and he tells us further that Ahmadinejad spent a great deal of time traveling through the country during his first term listening to them. Ahmadinejad is himself a man of fairly humble origins with a good deal of genuine sympathy for the poor. Of course, the public in the West has been treated to a barrage of propaganda about Ahmadinejad, conditioned by countless disingenuous stories and editorials to regard him as the essence of evil, ready to stir up trouble at a moment’s notice. These perceptions, too, have no basis in fact.

Ahmadinejad is a highly educated man, ready and willing to communicate with leaders in the West, although given to poking fun at some of the shibboleths we hold to. His office as president is not a powerful one in an Iran where power is divided amongst several groups, just as it is in the United States. He has no war-making power.

Even his infamous statement about Israel – mistranslated consistently to make it sound terrible – was nothing more than the same kind of statement made by the CIA in its secret study predicting the peaceful end of today’s Israel in twenty years or the statement by Libya’s leader, Gaddafi, saying Israel would be drowned in a sea of Arabs. Unpleasant undoubtedly for some, the statement was neither criminal nor threatening when properly understood.

The post-election troubles in Iran definitely reflect the interference of security services from at least the United States and Britain. We have several serious pieces of evidence. First, Iran discovered and arrested just recently a group with sophisticated bomb equipment from Britain. They were caught red-handed, although our press has chosen to be pretty much silent on the matter. Of course, we all recall the arrest of a group of fifteen British sailors a couple of years ago, an event treated in our press as the snatching of innocents on the high seas when in fact they were on a secret mission in disputed waters claimed by Iran.

Robert Fisk recently wrote an excellent piece about photocopies of what purported to be a confidential official government report to the head of state, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, regarding the election results. It attributed a ridiculously small share of the vote to Ahmadinejad and was somehow being waved by Mousavi’s followers all over the streets. It seems clearly invented as a provocation, much in the fashion of the famous “yellow cake” document before America’s invasion of Iraq.

We know that Bush committed several hundred million dollars towards a program creating instability in Iran and that Obama has never renounced the operation. Iran, surrounded by threatening enemies and the daily recipient of dire threats from Israel and the United States, has absolutely no history of aggression: it has started no conflicts in its entire modern era, but naturally enough it becomes concerned about its security when threatened by nuclear-armed states.

Such threats from the United States are not regarded idly by anyone, coming as they do, from a nation occupying two nations of Western and Central Asia, a nation whose invasions have caused upwards of a million deaths and sent at least two million into exile as refugees.

It is a nation moreover that definitely threatened, behind the scenes, to use nuclear weapons against Afghanistan immediately after 9/11, helping end that threat being one of the main reasons for Britain’s joining the pointless invasion in the first place. In assessing the genuine threats in the world, please remember what we all too often forget: the United States is the only nation ever actually to use nuclear weapons, twice, on civilians. It also came close to using them again in the early 1950s hysteria over communism – twice, once against China and once in a pre-emptive strike at the Soviet Union - and again later considered using them in Vietnam.

As for the other regular source of threats against, Israel, it is a nation which has attacked every neighbor that it has at one time or another. In the last two years alone, it has killed more people in Lebanon and Gaza than the number who perished in 9/11. It is also a secret nuclear power, having broken every rule and international law to obtain and assist in proliferating nuclear weapons. Of course, there are many middle class people in Iran who would like a change of government. Such yearnings are no secret and exist everywhere in the world where liberal government is missing, including millions of Americans under years of George Bush and his motivating demon, Dick Cheney.

But saying that is not the same thing as saying that a majority of Iran’s people want a change in government or that the election was a fraud. And remember, too, Iran had a democratic government more than half a century ago, that of Mohammed Mosaddeq, but it was overthrown in 1953 and the bloody Shah installed in its place by the very same governments now meddling in Iran, the United States and Britain.

27 June 2009

John Chuckman > John Chuckman lives in Canada and is former chief economist for a large Canadian oil company.

http://atheonews.blogspot.com/2009/06/us-likely-source-of-interference-in.html

« Reply #8 on: 29/06/2009 om 18:46:07 »
Ahmadinejad won. Get over it

Without any evidence, many U.S. politicians and “Iran experts” have dismissed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection Friday, with 62.6 percent of the vote, as fraud.

They ignore the fact that Ahmadinejad’s 62.6 percent of the vote in this year’s election is essentially the same as the 61.69 percent he received in the final count of the 2005 presidential election, when he trounced former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The shock of the “Iran experts” over Friday’s results is entirely self-generated, based on their preferred assumptions and wishful thinking.

Although Iran’s elections are not free by Western standards, the Islamic Republic has a 30-year history of highly contested and competitive elections at the presidential, parliamentary and local levels. Manipulation has always been there, as it is in many other countries.

But upsets occur — as, most notably, with Mohammed Khatami’s surprise victory in the 1997 presidential election. Moreover, “blowouts” also occur — as in Khatami’s reelection in 2001, Ahmadinejad’s first victory in 2005 and, we would argue, this year.

Like much of the Western media, most American “Iran experts” overstated Mir Hossein Mousavi’s “surge” over the campaign’s final weeks. More important, they were oblivious — as in 2005 — to Ahmadinejad’s effectiveness as a populist politician and campaigner. American “Iran experts” missed how Ahmadinejad was perceived by most Iranians as having won the nationally televised debates with his three opponents — especially his debate with Mousavi.

Before the debates, both Mousavi and Ahmadinejad campaign aides indicated privately that they perceived a surge of support for Mousavi; after the debates, the same aides concluded that Ahmadinejad’s provocatively impressive performance and Mousavi’s desultory one had boosted the incumbent’s standing. Ahmadinejad’s charge that Mousavi was supported by Rafsanjani’s sons — widely perceived in Iranian society as corrupt figures — seemed to play well with voters.

Similarly, Ahmadinejad’s criticism that Mousavi’s reformist supporters, including Khatami, had been willing to suspend Iran’s uranium enrichment program and had won nothing from the West for doing so tapped into popular support for the program — and had the added advantage of being true.

More fundamentally, American “Iran experts” consistently underestimated Ahmadinejad’s base of support. Polling in Iran is notoriously difficult; most polls there are less than fully professional and, hence, produce results of questionable validity. But the one poll conducted before Friday’s election by a Western organization that was transparent about its methodology — a telephone poll carried out by the Washington-based Terror-Free Tomorrow from May 11 to 20 — found Ahmadinejad running 20 points ahead of Mousavi. This poll was conducted before the televised debates in which, as noted above, Ahmadinejad was perceived to have done well while Mousavi did poorly.

American “Iran experts” assumed that “disastrous” economic conditions in Iran would undermine Ahmadinejad’s reelection prospects. But the International Monetary Fund projects that Iran’s economy will actually grow modestly this year (when the economies of most Gulf Arab states are in recession). A significant number of Iranians — including the religiously pious, lower-income groups, civil servants and pensioners — appear to believe that Ahmadinejad’s policies have benefited them.

And, while many Iranians complain about inflation, the TFT poll found that most Iranian voters do not hold Ahmadinejad responsible. The “Iran experts” further argue that the high turnout on June 12 — 82 percent of the electorate — had to favor Mousavi. But this line of analysis reflects nothing more than assumptions.

Some “Iran experts” argue that Mousavi’s Azeri background and “Azeri accent” mean that he was guaranteed to win Iran’s Azeri-majority provinces; since Ahmadinejad did better than Mousavi in these areas, fraud is the only possible explanation.

But Ahmadinejad himself speaks Azeri quite fluently as a consequence of his eight years serving as a popular and successful official in two Azeri-majority provinces; during the campaign, he artfully quoted Azeri and Turkish poetry — in the original — in messages designed to appeal to Iran’s Azeri community. (And we should not forget that the supreme leader is Azeri.) The notion that Mousavi was somehow assured of victory in Azeri-majority provinces is simply not grounded in reality.

16 Juni 2009

Flynt Leverett & Hillary Mann Leverett

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23745.html
« Last Edit: 29/06/2009 om 18:49:55 by incognito »

« Reply #9 on: 01/07/2009 om 14:58:41 »
Maandagmorgen briefing (Week 26)

Is de “groene revolutie” in Iran geholpen door de VS en Israël? Ja, nee, ja. Misschien. Terwijl het protest in Iran zachtjes afkoelt en “oppositieleiders” de aandacht van “verkiezingsresultaat” naar “Neda” verschuiven, neemt de Amerikaanse president Obama een opmerkelijke stap: de Verenigde Staten gaan onder Obama, net als onder Bush, Iraanse dissidentengroepen ondersteunen. Wat eigenlijk neerkomt op een oorlogsverklaring. Obama heeft “er zin an”.  Meer oorlog in Afghanistan en Pakistan, wapens richting Somalië en hey waarom ook niet, we pakken meteen Mexico mee. Na het MSM-stuntje van afgelopen week al zin gekregen in oorlog met Iran?

Weinig nieuws uit Iran, behalve meer zin en onzin. Gekef en geblaf. Hypocriet gedoe.

Donkerdoorn

http://zapruder.nl/portal/artikel/maandagmorgen_briefing_week_26/

« Reply #10 on: 06/07/2009 om 03:19:10 »
Wie zegt dat Iran niet *blingbling* als Amerika kan zijn?



         
Iran seconds US in VIP automaking

Iran has showcased an SUV limousine luxury vehicle dubbed Emperatoor (Emperor), to become the second country to make VIP cars. The luxury vehicle manufactured by the Khodrosazan-e Jonoub Company was introduced in a ceremony on Sunday, IRIB reported. According to the managing director of the company Siavash Hojjat, 50 percent of the vehicle including the body, chassis and the luxuries are domestically built. However, the SUV runs on an eight-cylinder Toyota motor engine. The 8.5-meter luxury automobile comes with a 5.5-liter engine, uses a four-gear transmission system, and is also equipped with ABS brakes. Hojjat said that Iran is the second country to make such a vehicle next only to the United States, according to IRIB. The luxury car costs USD 150,000 but the price could be reduced to as low as USD 100,000 if it is totally manufactured in the country, the managing director said. The company is also planning to introduce a new type of limousine which sits in a low chassis in the near future.

6 July 2009

AR/SME/MMN

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=99892&sectionid=351020102
« Last Edit: 06/07/2009 om 15:02:01 by incognito »

« Reply #11 on: 06/07/2009 om 15:00:47 »
De laatste stuiptrekkingen van een politicus, die niet tegen zijn verlies kan >


Mousavi details accusations of fraud in Iran vote

Defeated Iranian presidential contender Mir-Hossein Mousavi has released a new report detailing what he calls 'irregularities' in the June 12 election. The report, prepared by the Committee for the Protection of Votes which is run by Mousavi's campaign office, accused the re-elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of abusing the national financial resources for his election campaign. It added that many Cabinet members, senior executive managers and governor generals carried out activities in line with Ahmadinejad's re-election campaign. The report alleged that the president had distributed cash among working class Iranians to win their votes, Ghalamnews released late Saturday.

Iran became the scene of opposition rallies after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared the winner of the 10th presidential election with nearly two-thirds of the vote. Defeated candidates Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi rejected the result as fraudulent and demanded a re-run. The Committee for the Protection of Votes, in its report, accused the Interior Ministry, tasked with organizing and holding elections, and the Guardian Council -- Iran's electoral watchdog -- of publicly endorsing the president before and during the campaign.

The report also charged that some commanders of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) had openly supported Ahmadinejad's candidacy and, along with the Basij, intervened in the voting process. It questioned an alleged move to prevent representatives of the candidates from attending the vote constituencies, saying, "According to regulations, this is a crime." The committee also asked why the Interior Ministry had printed 14 million more ballots than the total registered electorate of some 46 million. At least 20 people were killed and many others were injured when some protests turned violent. After the conclusion of a partial vote recount, the Guardian Council confirmed the result of the June 12 poll. President Ahmadinejad is scheduled to be sworn in before Parliament between July 26 and August 19.

5 July 2009

SF/MD

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=99873&sectionid=351020101
« Last Edit: 06/07/2009 om 15:05:26 by incognito »

« Reply #12 on: 13/07/2009 om 00:47:35 »
Je kan veel zeggen over rapper Marshall Bruce Mathers III aka Eminem aka Slim Shady, maar zijn "lyrics" liegen er niet om. Gezien de recentelijke onthullingen rondom Dickhead Cheney en de nasleep van 11 september is de Bin Laden-imitatie dan ook erg vermakelijk om te zien.   

♫...You waited this long now stop debating cuz I'm back
I'm on the rag and ovulating
I know that you got a job Ms. Cheney
But your husbands heart problem's complicating...♫


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QggN4XPEiRY


                                     



Mysterie rond geheim CIA-programma steeds groter

NEW YORK - De voormalige Amerikaanse vice-president Dick Cheney heeft er hoogstpersoonlijk voor gezorgd dat het Congres acht jaar lang onwetend is gehouden van een geheim antiterreurprogramma van de inlichtingendienst CIA. Dat meldt The New York Times zondag op basis van twee goed ingevoerde bronnen. Volgens hen heeft CIA-directeur Leon Panetta de inlichtingencommissies in het Amerikaanse parlement op 24 juni achter gesloten deuren geïnformeerd over de dienstorders van Cheney over het programma.

Ondergeschikten hadden Panetta een dag eerder op de hoogte gesteld van het bestaan van het antiterreurprogramma, dat na de terreuraanslagen van 11 september 2001 op New York en Washington werd opgezet. De CIA-topman heeft meteen een einde gemaakt aan het programma. Wat de CIA precies heeft gedaan, is onduidelijk. De wet eist van de Amerikaanse regering dat deze het parlement volledig en tijdig informeert over de activiteiten van de inlichtingendiensten. Dick Cheney was volgens de krant niet bereikbaar voor commentaar.

12 juli 2009

ANP

http://www.nu.nl/algemeen/2040232/mysterie-rond-geheim-cia-programma-steeds-groter.html



Democrats slam Cheney over CIA secrecy

Democratic lawmakers criticize former Vice President Dick Cheney for keeping a CIA counter-terrorism program secret from congressional leaders. At least two Democrat senators said they believed the former Bush administration's failure to inform Congress about the intelligence program had violated the law. Although Republican senators had a totally different view about Cheney, some GOP senators admitted that the White House should have informed Congress on the secret program.

Republican lawmakers criticized Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. for mulling over appointing a special prosecutor to investigate accusations according to which the CIA interrogators exceeded the rules laid out by the former Bush administration's Justice Department during use of abusive techniques while interrogating alleged terrorists.

Leon E. Panetta, CIA Director, halted the secret program shortly after learning about it, then immediately called special sessions with lawmakers to discuss the terminated initiative. So far there has been no detail on the nature and the objectives of the secret program. It was put in place in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, but never became fully operational.

12 Jul 2009

HSH/SME/MMN

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=100517&sectionid=3510203
« Last Edit: 13/07/2009 om 01:12:28 by incognito »

« Reply #13 on: 17/07/2009 om 22:24:52 »
Sommige Iraniërs kunnen gewoon echt niet tegen hun verlies... >



In Tehran, protests follow Friday prayers

After a top Iranian cleric and official has criticized the authorities for their handling of the country's disputed presidential election, defiant opposition supporters take to streets of Tehran. Clashes erupted outside the Tehran University campus on Friday after Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani led the weekly prayers there. Ayatollah Rafsanjani is a former president and an influential cleric who heads two powerful state institutions, the Expediency Council and the Assembly of Experts. Rafsanjani criticized the Guardian Council, the electoral watchdog, for failing to allay doubts about the outcome of the presidential election, which according to him, did not benefit anyone in Iran.

He also called for the release of those detained in the course of post-election events. Following the prayers, thousands of supporters of opposition leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi, who was defeated by the incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, demonstrated at various locations around the Tehran University campus. Riot police used tear gas to disperse the crowd, who spontaneously staged the demonstration in defiance of a ban on such gatherings. Mousavi has claimed that the June 12 vote was rigged, questioning the legitimacy of the incoming administration. President Ahmadinejad, however, has asked the opposition to abandon its pre-election mentality and look forward to the future of the country. During the Friday prayers, Ayatollah Rafsanjani said he hoped his remarks -- in which he offered suggestions for the authorities to end the post-election "crisis" -- would mark a new period for the Iranian nation to work toward "unity."

17 July 2009

MD/MMN

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=100935


« Reply #14 on: 20/07/2009 om 17:38:31 »
En plots neemt de machtsstrijd in Iran een andere wending... >





Mousavi, Karroubi assassination plots foiled

Iran's security services have foiled an attempt by terrorists to assassinate defeated presidential candidates Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, a report says. Jahan News quoted an unnamed source that five hit squads, had entered Iran as part of a concerted effort with the aim of assassinating the two opposition figures.

In the event, the report says, “with the vigilance of the intelligence and security bodies,” these plans were foiled when four of the hit-squads were arrested and one fled. According to the report, the would-be assassins were from the terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) and had entered the country from the southwestern province of Khuzestan, bordering Iraq and the Persian Gulf. They were reported to have received training at the MKO-run Camp Ashraf in Iraq.

The main intention of the operation was to attribute the assassination of Mousavi and Karroubi to the Iranian government, the report added. The report notes that in the run-up to the June 12 presidential election, “a number of anti-revolutionary groups had intended to carry out a similar plan by placing a bomb in the aircraft carrying [former President] Seyyed Mohammad Khatami, which was foiled by the flight security forces.”

Jahan News did not reveal the identities or genders of the terrorist detainees, or whether the assassination plan was foiled before or after the election. The MKO, a terrorist group on the proscribed lists in Iran, Iraq, USA and Canada, was housed, funded and armed by the former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in return for attacks against Iran.

19 July 2009

ZAP/MD

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=101114&sectionid=351020101