Showing posts with label USA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label USA. Show all posts
Thursday, 8 May 2014
Wednesday, 30 April 2014
Tuesday, 29 April 2014
The Chester Concession. Admiral Colby Chester served for some time in Turkey in 1898 and got to know the Young Turks. And since then it has been: "Ankara says"..
The two person George Horton mainly refers to are the U.S. Rear US Navy Admiral William Colby Mitchell Chester (1844-1932) and his son Lieutenant Commander Arthur Tremaine Chester (1874- 1936).
Admiral Colby Chester served for some time in Turkey in 1898 and got to know a number of importnat people among the Young Turks. Ten years later in 1908 he came back to Constantinople with money from the New York Chamber of Commerce and managed to get a number of concessions for works, railways, harbours, minerals, and oil in Ottoman Turkey.
The war, but especially the German competition, disrupted his ambitious and rosy dreams. They were revived when the war ended and a new "partner" appeared. Henry Woodhouse (1884-1970), an Italian-born speculator and forger, helped him form between 1920-1922 an oil syndicate called : "the Ottoman American Development Company" (OADC).
Thanks to the Admiral the syndicate received rights to construct and operate a railroad in Anatolia and along the Black Sea and to exploit the oil fields of Mosul. During the turmoils of the Turkish defeat and the civil war that started in Turkey the syndicate suddenly was promised mountains of gold also by the new ruler of Anatolia - Mustafa Kemal.
At that time Kemal was using the bolshevik arms, gold and advisors but it didn't hinder him to allure also the American big capital to be used in his game for power. Woodhouse who owned 1/6 of the capital stock of the OADC became director of the Turco-American Corporation that had received options to build the future capital - the city of Ankara.
It is under these cicumstances that the "famous" Chester Concession originated. The concession was formally signed in April 1923 after the extermination of the Greeks. Gazi Mustafa Kemal allowed the Ottoman-American Development Company "to construct and operate 2,700 miles of railroad, to exploit all mines and minerals found in a 25-mile zone along the right of way of this road, which, according to estimates made upon various surveys, cover:
1) the famous Mosul and other oil fields, aggregating from 4,000,000,000 to 8,000,000,000 barrels potentially, or between one-sixth and one-tenth of the world's total oil resources.
2) Copper deposits comprising over 400,000,000 tons of rich ore.
3) About 500 gold, platinum, silver, manganese, iron, tin, zinc, salt, coal and other mines and deposits."
In exchange for that generous gifts the OADC and all its personnel and stock-holders were supposed to spread good news about Kemalist Turkey and courageously counter anti-Turkish (mainly Greek and Armenian) "propaganda".
Admiral Chester fought now with a pen for his Turkish promised land. Among other things he wrote an article which was widely popularized by the New York Times in September 1922 accusing the Armenians to be the principle cause of the ‘trouble' in the Ottoman Empire. The Turks never had done what their notoriously malicious enemies accused them of having done.
His son Lieutenant Commander Arthur Tremaine Chester did his best too to promote the newly discovered "Turco-American friendship". In 1923 he published "A spirited defense of the Turks against charge of atrocities," in the same "The New York Times." Many other interested persons followed with their defenses of Turkey's virtue and integrity.
But all of that was love's labours lost. The Chester Concession turned out to be one of the biggest hoaxes in history. For Gazi Mustafa it was a purely political weapon. He managed to sow discord and suspicions between the greedy Western Powers by playing off the US against Britain and mainly France.
Thus he was free from any pressures and troubles from the West. He exterminated the Greeks, denied the charges of genocide and got in exchnage the international recognition of his regime at Lausanne in January 1923. His agenda was quite different from what greed and ignorance of the Turkish realities made the Americans believe it would be.
Later in the same year (1923!) Gazi Mustafa through the Grand Assembly simply cancelled the whole concession. The reason was allegedly "owing to failure of the concessionaires to fulfill in the allotted time (!) certain conditions of the grant".
If I may dare draw any conclusions from the above, I'd say that the Americans seem to have learnt little if anything from the Chester hoax. The dupe is chronically forgetful, the swindler encouraged in his unsocial behaviour.
American Interests and Policies in the Middle East: 1900-1939 John A. DeNovo
"Starving Armenians": America and the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1930 and After, Merrill D. Peterson
Ataturk Calling To American People http://youtu.be/xlz-B85M08w
American Interests and Policies in the Middle East, 1900-1939. John A. DeNovo
Admiral Colby Chester served for some time in Turkey in 1898 and got to know a number of importnat people among the Young Turks. Ten years later in 1908 he came back to Constantinople with money from the New York Chamber of Commerce and managed to get a number of concessions for works, railways, harbours, minerals, and oil in Ottoman Turkey.
The war, but especially the German competition, disrupted his ambitious and rosy dreams. They were revived when the war ended and a new "partner" appeared. Henry Woodhouse (1884-1970), an Italian-born speculator and forger, helped him form between 1920-1922 an oil syndicate called : "the Ottoman American Development Company" (OADC).
Thanks to the Admiral the syndicate received rights to construct and operate a railroad in Anatolia and along the Black Sea and to exploit the oil fields of Mosul. During the turmoils of the Turkish defeat and the civil war that started in Turkey the syndicate suddenly was promised mountains of gold also by the new ruler of Anatolia - Mustafa Kemal.
At that time Kemal was using the bolshevik arms, gold and advisors but it didn't hinder him to allure also the American big capital to be used in his game for power. Woodhouse who owned 1/6 of the capital stock of the OADC became director of the Turco-American Corporation that had received options to build the future capital - the city of Ankara.
It is under these cicumstances that the "famous" Chester Concession originated. The concession was formally signed in April 1923 after the extermination of the Greeks. Gazi Mustafa Kemal allowed the Ottoman-American Development Company "to construct and operate 2,700 miles of railroad, to exploit all mines and minerals found in a 25-mile zone along the right of way of this road, which, according to estimates made upon various surveys, cover:
1) the famous Mosul and other oil fields, aggregating from 4,000,000,000 to 8,000,000,000 barrels potentially, or between one-sixth and one-tenth of the world's total oil resources.
2) Copper deposits comprising over 400,000,000 tons of rich ore.
3) About 500 gold, platinum, silver, manganese, iron, tin, zinc, salt, coal and other mines and deposits."
In exchange for that generous gifts the OADC and all its personnel and stock-holders were supposed to spread good news about Kemalist Turkey and courageously counter anti-Turkish (mainly Greek and Armenian) "propaganda".
Admiral Chester fought now with a pen for his Turkish promised land. Among other things he wrote an article which was widely popularized by the New York Times in September 1922 accusing the Armenians to be the principle cause of the ‘trouble' in the Ottoman Empire. The Turks never had done what their notoriously malicious enemies accused them of having done.
His son Lieutenant Commander Arthur Tremaine Chester did his best too to promote the newly discovered "Turco-American friendship". In 1923 he published "A spirited defense of the Turks against charge of atrocities," in the same "The New York Times." Many other interested persons followed with their defenses of Turkey's virtue and integrity.
But all of that was love's labours lost. The Chester Concession turned out to be one of the biggest hoaxes in history. For Gazi Mustafa it was a purely political weapon. He managed to sow discord and suspicions between the greedy Western Powers by playing off the US against Britain and mainly France.
Thus he was free from any pressures and troubles from the West. He exterminated the Greeks, denied the charges of genocide and got in exchnage the international recognition of his regime at Lausanne in January 1923. His agenda was quite different from what greed and ignorance of the Turkish realities made the Americans believe it would be.
Later in the same year (1923!) Gazi Mustafa through the Grand Assembly simply cancelled the whole concession. The reason was allegedly "owing to failure of the concessionaires to fulfill in the allotted time (!) certain conditions of the grant".
If I may dare draw any conclusions from the above, I'd say that the Americans seem to have learnt little if anything from the Chester hoax. The dupe is chronically forgetful, the swindler encouraged in his unsocial behaviour.
American Interests and Policies in the Middle East: 1900-1939 John A. DeNovo
"Starving Armenians": America and the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1930 and After, Merrill D. Peterson
Ataturk Calling To American People http://youtu.be/xlz-B85M08w
American Interests and Policies in the Middle East, 1900-1939. John A. DeNovo
Wednesday, 23 April 2014
May 20, 2012 - The day Veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, members of Afghans For Peace, led a peace march and threw medals at the NATO Summit in Chicago
From Chicago, site of the largest NATO summit in the organization's six-decade history. Veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, as well as members of Afghans For Peace, led a peace march of thousands of people. Iraq Veterans Against the War held a ceremony where nearly 50 veterans discarded their war medals by hurling them down the street in the direction of the NATO summit.
We hear the soldiers' voices as they return their medals one by one from the stage. "I am giving back my global war on terror service medal in solidarity with the people of Iraq and Afghanistan," said Jason Heard, a former combat medic who spent 10 years in the U.S. Army. "I am deeply sorry for the destruction that we have caused in these countries and around the globe." - DemocracyNow.org
Peoplesworld.org - Iraq and Afghanistan veterans return medals at NATO protest
Friday, 18 April 2014
Baroness Nicholson: “good friend” of some top officials in the Iranian government and against Iranian opposition - designated as terrorist by the US department as suspects of chain murders in Iran and on the UN-Geneva convention of protected persons - at the same time
The Baroness has for more than twelve years cooperated with Iranian authorities and received direct and indirect funding and support from the Iranian government for her efforts to supposedly provide humanitarian aide to refugees from Iraq who fled to Iran during the Iran-Iraq war.
However, it seems that the refugees mostly formed Iranian funded groups such as Hakim’s force, who took refuge in Iran and were trained and funded by Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps and the Iranian regime’s extra-territorial Qods Force, believed responsible for coordinating parts of the insurgency in Iraq.
As an MEP she actively lobbied for Iranian interests with European governments and political parties. The Baroness played an instrumental role in brokering the inclusion of the PMOI in the EU terror list as part of a bargain with Tehran.
Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne took her seat as a member of the House of Lords in the United Kingdom Parliament in 1997, Baroness Nicholson is a famed apologist of the Iranian regime, and a “good friend” of some top officials in the Iranian government.
In a debate in the House of Lords on 22 June 1999 she defended Iran’s leaders against charges of violating the human rights of women, a fact attested to by 51 UN condemnations of Iran’s human rights violations. She stated that: "The Iranian women who worry me most strongly both inside and outside Iran are members of the Mojahedin Khalq Organisation, the anti-government terrorist group. It consists of 10,000 women who train in camps inside Iraq.”
The Baroness did never criticised the Iranian government for its many abuses of human rights; nor for its support of terrorism throughout the Middle East and beyond; nor for its suppression of the Iranian people.
In a meeting in Brussels on 19 March 2002, held on the initiative of the regime and attended by then Tehran’s deputy foreign minister, Emma Nicholson said that she would ask the EU to declare the PMOI as a terrorist group.
Baroness Nicholson issued a press release on 3 February 2003, on the eve of the Gulf War and claimed to have passed evidence to Hans Blix that Iraqi WMD were being hidden in “MKO bases.”
Baroness Emma Nicholson was quoted in Tehran on 13 February 2003, on one of her numerous trips to Iran, as saying: “Here, our debates on Iraq have been attended by known members of the MKO recently… The MKO have thousands of members inside Iraq and thousands outside… These people are a threat to world security. This is Saddam's private, international terrorist army, working against us all… For the sake of our citizens' and for global safety I urge far greater security attention is paid to the MKO. War or no war, the criminals who make up the MKO kill and destroy the innocent.”
Baroness Nicholson in an interview with Radio Farda on 18 April 2003, openly and hatefully engaged in incitement for the wholesale killing of Mojahedin members and dissidents in Iraq on the eve of the Gulf War: “I welcome bombing the bases of MKO by coalition forces and I warn the world that this group should be destroyed, otherwise they’ll start their activities from another place in the world.”
Claims of WMD in Iraq later proved to be totally false, but Baroness Nicholson was adamant at the time that her “impeccable sources” had provided clear information on the find, part of a string of allegations, that set the stage for the bombing of neutral Iranian resistance bases in the course of the war, and led to the death of scores of innocent Iranian dissidents.
The U.S.-led occupation authority disarmed Badr Brigades following the overthrow of the Hussein regime.
Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt told a 27 January press conference in Baghdad (http://www.cpa-iraq.org) that intelligence indicates that between 3,000 and 5,000 anticoalition militants are currently operating in Iraq. Kimmitt added that 5 percent-10 percent of the militants are foreign fighters. "The vast majority of them we still believe are homegrown anticoalition elements, possibly former regime elements, possibly disenfranchised youth," he said. (Kathleen Ridolfo)
According to the report, a senior commander of the unit told a "Sunday Times" reporter that the unit employed members of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq's (SCIRI) armed wing, the Badr Brigades. He also said that armed Badr members had assisted the unit in "dangerous" missions. A number of prisoners were seen during a visit to the police intelligence headquarters in Al-Basrah, many of whom had reportedly been left handcuffed and blindfolded for four or five days.
An unnamed spokesman for Britain's 20th Armored Brigade told the newspaper that the force is officially known to the coalition as the "special operations department." "We know there are certain ways of the past that have to be unlearnt. If [the Police Intelligence unit] or anyone are keeping people blindfolded and handcuffed for an extended period then that is not acceptable," he said. He added that the British would not support the integration of any militias into the police force. (Kathleen Ridolfo)
Britain's Lord Brian Hutton released the findings of his investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of U.K. weapons expert Dr. David Kelly on 28 January, international media reported. Kelly committed suicide in July after he was named as the source for a BBC report claiming that the British government had "sexed up" an intelligence dossier on the threat from Iraq.
An article that appeared in the 25 January edition of Baghdad daily "Al-Mada" claims to have documentary evidence from Iraq's State Oil Marketing Organization (SOMO) that the regime of deposed President Saddam Hussein paid off Western and Arab countries through illicit oil sales and bribes in exchange for their support for the regime, or to help the regime obtain weapons and even extravagant materials unavailable to it under UN sanctions.
The article purports that several well-known officials, organizations, political parties, and companies benefited from the regime, including the Russian Orthodox Church and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation; Khalid Abd al-Nasir, son of the late Egyptian president; and U.K. Labour Party member George Galloway. It also includes the names of individuals and companies in Algeria, Austria, Bahrain, Belarus, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chad, China, Cyprus, Egypt, France, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Morocco, Myanmar, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine, Panama, Philippines, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Syria, Sudan, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, Ukraine, Vietnam, Yemen, and the former Yugoslavia.
Read full article
Rferl.org - A CASE OF GENOCIDE: THE DECIMATION OF THE MARSH ARABS. By Baroness Emma Nicholson
Interview with Baroness Emma Nicholson
Basra, 25 juin 2003 (IRIN) - The British NGO Assisting Marsh Arabs and Refugees (AMAR) was founded by former British MP and current MEP Baroness Emma Nicholson in 1991 to assist Iraqi Marsh Arabs following their forced evacuation from the marshes and the destruction of their habitat in southern Iraq by Saddam Hussein.
On a trip to the region shortly after the defeat of the Iraqi army in Kuwait Baroness Nicholson was moved to launch the NGO after witnessing at first hand the acute suffering of the Marsh Arabs and the southern Iraqi Shiites in general following their abortive uprising against Saddam.
irinnews.org - Interview with Baroness Emma Nicholson
British NGO Assisting Iraqi refugees in Iran
Baroness Nicholson whose charity, Assisting Marsh Arabs and Refugees, looks after Iraqi refugees in Iran, said the cuts would make it far harder for the refugees to return home.
The Marsh Arab money was earmarked for the purchase of heavy earth-moving equipment to help to reshape the marshlands in southern Iraq, which were drained on the orders of Saddam Hussein, after the failed 1991 uprising against him.
Read more
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3249947.stm
Baroness Nicholson Assisting Marsh Arabs and Iraqi Refugees in 1991
The early months of 1991 were a horribly dark time for millions of Iraqis, including families in the vast deserts and wetlands of the south. The southern region was already in turmoil as Iraqi forces retreated from their invasion of Kuwait. And in April, the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein—who was facing the humiliation of defeat in "The Mother of all Battles"—was confronted with another problem: a Shi'ite rebellion.
Saddam's response against his own people was predictably brutal. In the provinces of Basrah, Maysan and Dhi-Qar, he ordered ground forces and helicopter gunships to crush the revolt; unspeakable violence was used against terrified men, women and children. Mass executions were commonplace; homes were torched; livestock slaughtered. In the spring of 1991 southern Iraq—a region which has seen so much conflict across the millennia—had once again become a hellish cauldron of blood and brutality.
Saddam's genocidal campaign meant thousands of refugees were on the move—heading east where the vast Iraqi marshes lay between them and the Iranian border. Family after family crowded into overloaded boats with just the clothes on their backs and a few possessions; thousands disappearing into a watery world of islands, lagoons and near-impenetrable reed-beds whose towering shoots were taller than any man.
The Islamic Republic has a long history of opening its borders to refugees, and by the blistering summer of 1991, around one hundred thousand desperate refugees were living in makeshift encampments in Iran's Khuzestan province and elsewhere along the porous border with Iraq. Many refugees were malnourished, sick from disease and injured from attacks by Saddam's forces.
"Aid agencies sounded the alarm over a growing human crisis, and when word reached me at the House of Commons in London, where I was then an MP, I travelled to Iran to investigate."
"When I got to the town of Dezful in Khuzestan province, I was shocked beyond belief. The Iranians had opened up a camp which was originally built during the Iran/Iraq war. It was full of thousands of Iraqi refugees who had been pouring over the border to find safety. They had had limbs blown off and were suffering from the effects of chemical weapons on their skins which had caused massive blistering."
In the beginning, AMAR operated out of a local office in Ahvaz, the capital of Iran's Khuzestan province—a city which had prospered from the wealth from nearby oil fields, but which had suffered badly during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s.
"It soon became clear our operation would also need an office in the Iranian capital Tehran. Soon our Tehran office was busy hiring physicians and other health care professionals as well as teachers and other staff. This office also took care of storage and distribution of supplies."
http://www.amarfoundation.org/heritage/genesis.php
Baroness Nicholson was elected a Conservative Member of Parliament for Torridge and West Devon, in 1987, and was vice-chairman between 1983 and 1987. She defected to the Liberal Democrats in 1995. She was made a life peer as Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne, of Winterbourne, in the Royal County of Berkshire in 1997.
Lady Nicholson became a member of the European Parliament in 1999 joining the Committee on Foreign Affairs which she was Vice President of from 2004 to 2007. She was President of the Delegation for Relations with Iraq and President of the Committee on Women's Rights of the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly.
Lady Nicholson was also a member of the subcommittee on Human Rights, the Delegation for relations with Iran and the Delegation for relations with the Mashreq Countries. She was Rapporteur for Kashmir, and in 2007 her controversial report on Kashmir was passed by the European Parliament .
In 2006 Lady Nicholson was Chief Observer of the European Union Election Observation Mission to Yemen. She was a member of European Union Election Observation Missions to Palestine (2005), Azerbaijan (2005), Lebanon (2005), Afghanistan (2005), Armenia (2007) and Pakistan (2008). In January and December 2005 she was a member of the United Nations Election Observation Missions to Iraq.
In 2009 Lady Nicholson returned to London and resumed her political work at the House of Lords. In February 2010 she founded the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Business Development in Iraq and the Regions and currently serves as its Chair. She is also a member of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Human Trafficking and speaks regularly on health care and education in the Middle East and Eastern Europe and business development in Iraq and its wider neighbourhood.
Iran provided shelter to Iraqi Shi'ites oppressed by Saddam.
The Iraqi premier lived in Iran for 10 years after Saddam banned all Shi'ite parties, including the Da'wa Party.
Iran gave safe haven to thousands of Iraqis during Saddam's bloody purges in southern and northern Iraq. Many Iraqis still live in Iran. The cultural and religious affinities between the two nations are very significant and can never be underestimated," the English-language Tehran Times, close to the Foreign Affairs Ministry, commented.
Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Kamal Kharazi visited Baghdad, without achieving concrete results on most pending issues, such as the exchange of prisoners of war and the signing of a formal peace treaty replacing the present ceasefire decided by the United Nations Security Council in 1989.
Iran claimed that Iraq holds some 3,000 Iranian soldiers, while Baghdad says it holds none but a handful who were involved in a regional uprising against Saddam Hussein.
Tehran has repeatedly denied Baghdad's charges that it still holds 29,000 Iraqi prisoners. Iraq says another 60,000 are missing. Iran, meanwhile, claims that Iraq still holds some 3,000 Iranian soldiers, while Baghdad says it holds none but a handful who were involved in a regional uprising against Saddam Hussein.
"Iran has in the past years unilaterally released Iraqi POWs to show its goodwill and now it is Iraq's turn to do the same," Najafi was quoted by the Islamic Republic News Agency as saying
August 14th, 2000. "We demonstrated our goodwill through the unilateral release of all Iraqi prisoners. Now it is Iraq's turn to do the same," he said, claiming that Iraq still held 3,000 Iranians.
August 13, 2000, Iran Says It Holds No More Iraqi POWs
Iran has freed all Iraqi pows
Official: No Iraqi Explanation Yet on Fate of 3,000 Iranian PoWs
IRAQ/IRAN - Tehran and Baghdad on verge of closing POWs' file
Iraqi POWs say they too are victims of Hussein - WAR IN THE GULF
The Dark and Secret Dungeons of Iraq. Horror Stories of Female Prisoners
Up to 3,000 Iraqis believed to be gagged, bound, hooded and beaten at US camps
Red Cross registers more than 3,000 Iraqi POWs
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GG19Ak01.html
The world’s largest open-air prison of the Islamic republic regime
Iran, SAVAK, and the CIA: Financial Support, training and prisons big as cities
A Big Prison: Iran, Part 1
Iran Prison Survivors Part 1-5
http://www.kanoon-zendanian.org
Crimes in prisons of Iran
#Gaza
Investing in Kurdistan, case studies Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne, Executive Chairman
Baroness Nicholson's Speech to Investment Forum - Kurdistan, Kuwait, Norwegian Institute of International Affair
Political Chain Murders of Iran
After completing his higher education, he worked at the Iranian Interests Section in the Pakistan Embassy in Washington, D.C. for one year and at Iran's mission to the United Nations for another year.
At that time he was recruited by Iranian intelligence and after his return to Iran he went directly to the Ministry of Intelligence.
When Mohammad Mohammadi Reyshahri was serving as the Minister of Intelligence, Saeed Hajjarian, the Director General of the Intelligence Ministry voiced opposition to the appointment of Saeed Emami to key posts at the ministry because of his family records. But in 1989, Ali Fallahian replaced Reyshahri as Minister of Intelligence and appointed Saeed Emami as his deputy for security affairs immediately after assuming his post.
He remained unknown to the public until the fall of 1998, when it was declared that Dariush Forouhar and his wife Parvaneh Eskandari Forouhar, leaders of Mellat Iran, an Iranian opposition party, were found dead at their house in southern Tehran. Several weeks later, the Ministry of Intelligence officially declared that their deaths were murders and that rogue members of the intelligence ministry were responsible and had acted without the approval of the then-minister, Ghorban Ali Dorri-Najafabadi.
According to the general military prosecuter, Emami was the primary leading figure in these political killings. In spring 1998, military prosecuter Niazi declared that Emami had committed suicide in prison using a brand of strong hair removal powder containing arsenic. The bizarre account of Emami’s death in prison while under round-the-clock supervision convinced no one and it was widely assumed that he was murdered in order to prevent the leak of sensitive information about MOIS operations, which would have compromised the entire leadership of the Islamic Republic.
In late 1999, the press revealed that Emami was directly responsible for the “Serial Murders” in the 1980s and 1990s including: Saidi Sirjani's mysterious death, the Mykonos restaurant assassination scandal, an unsuccessful attempt to drive the bus of 21 Iranian journalists off a precipice on their way to Armenia, the unexpected death of Ahmad Khomeini (Khomeini's son), the murders of Mohammad Jaafar Pooyandeh, Mohammad Mokhtari, Peerooz Davani, and Majid Sharif.
Later on, a videotape of his speech at the University of Hamadan was published in which Emami enthusiastically promotes his Islamist perspective on social issues.
Later, during the amendment of the Press Law by the 5th Majlis, Emami was called the designer of the draft law by Salam newspaper, for which Salam was banned by the Tehran prosecuter and this finally resulted in the 1999 student demonstrations in Tehran.
In his revelations, Jamshid Tafrishi, a former MOIS defector, who defected after ten years wrote:
“…I met Saeed Emami (a.k.a Shamshiri), the number two man in the Intelligence Ministry for eight years, who was behind the murder of at least 100 dissidents in Iran. The latest of these serial killings was exposed in November 1998, when Dariush Forouhar and his wife Parvaneh were brutally murdered in their home in Tehran. Emami was also responsible for the assassination of dozens of dissidents abroad."
"I also met Mostafa Kazemi (a.k.a Sanjari, Emami's deputy), Amir Hossein Taqavi (responsible for counter-PMOI operations in the Intelligence Ministry) and Hossein Shariatmadari (a Revolutionary Guards brigadier and Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s representative at the government-owned Kayhan newspaper). My contact with the Ministry was a man by the name of Reza who was an assistant to Saeed Emami. It was revealed later that his name was Morteza Qobbeh. He was Emami's deputy and had the task of recruiting those who had left the Mojahedin Organization.”
Makhmalbaf and Saeed Emami
The Iran Hostage Crisis: A CIA Covert Op
Mansoor’s meticulous documents, shared exclusively with this magazine, shows a much more sinister plot, the plot to take the hostages in the first place. “For 15 years the truth about the nature and origins of the Iranian hostage crisis has been buried in a mountain of misinformation,” Mansoor states.
“Endless expert analysis has served only to deepen the fog that still surrounds this issue. We have been led to believe that the ‘crisis’ was a spontaneous act that just sprang out of the ‘chaos’ of the ‘Islamic Revolution’. Nothing could be further from the truth!”
“To really understand the hostage crisis and ‘who done it’, one has to look not only with a microscope, but also a wide angle lens to have a panoramic view of this well scripted ‘drama’,” Mansoor states. “That ‘drama’ was the result of large historical patterns, models, and motives. Once its true nature is understood, it will be clear how Iran/Contra happened.
“The private Alliance was the logical result of the intricate Iranian political reality of the mid-70s, and a complex network of powerful U.S.-Iranian ‘business’ relationships,” Mansoor states. “I first met Khomeini in 1963 during the failed coup attempt against the Shah.
Since that time I have been intimately involved with Iranian politics. I knew in 1979 that the whole, phoney ‘Islamic Revolution’ was ‘mission implausible’.” Mansoor was frank. “There is simply no way that those guys with the beards and turbans could have pulled off such a brilliantly planned operation without very sophisticated help.”
Mansoor has spent 10 years researching the issue.
“I have collected enough data to yield a very clear picture. Mr. Bush’s lieutenants removed the Shah, brought Khomeini back to Iran, and guided his rise to power, sticking it to President Carter, the American people (52 in particular), and the Iranian people.”
Read full article
The Real Iran Hostage Crisis: A CIA Covert Op
An Interview With Fara Mansoor Part 1 of 11
“Endless expert analysis has served only to deepen the fog that still surrounds this issue. We have been led to believe that the ‘crisis’ was a spontaneous act that just sprang out of the ‘chaos’ of the ‘Islamic Revolution’. Nothing could be further from the truth!”
“To really understand the hostage crisis and ‘who done it’, one has to look not only with a microscope, but also a wide angle lens to have a panoramic view of this well scripted ‘drama’,” Mansoor states. “That ‘drama’ was the result of large historical patterns, models, and motives. Once its true nature is understood, it will be clear how Iran/Contra happened.
“The private Alliance was the logical result of the intricate Iranian political reality of the mid-70s, and a complex network of powerful U.S.-Iranian ‘business’ relationships,” Mansoor states. “I first met Khomeini in 1963 during the failed coup attempt against the Shah.
Since that time I have been intimately involved with Iranian politics. I knew in 1979 that the whole, phoney ‘Islamic Revolution’ was ‘mission implausible’.” Mansoor was frank. “There is simply no way that those guys with the beards and turbans could have pulled off such a brilliantly planned operation without very sophisticated help.”
Mansoor has spent 10 years researching the issue.
“I have collected enough data to yield a very clear picture. Mr. Bush’s lieutenants removed the Shah, brought Khomeini back to Iran, and guided his rise to power, sticking it to President Carter, the American people (52 in particular), and the Iranian people.”
Read full article
The Real Iran Hostage Crisis: A CIA Covert Op
An Interview With Fara Mansoor Part 1 of 11
Defense Secretary Nominee Robert Gates Tied to Iran-Contra Scandal and the Secret Arming of Saddam Hussein
Robert Gates at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Democracynow.org, President Bush nominated former CIA director Robert Gates to replace Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. Gates briefly appeared with President Bush and Rumsfeld at the White House and spoke with reporters.
JUAN GONZALEZ: President Bush spoke highly of Robert Gates.
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH:
Bob is one of our nation’s most accomplished public servants. He joined the CIA in 1966 and has nearly 27 years of National Security experience, serving six presidents of both political parties. He spent nearly nine years serving on the National Security Council staff. And at the CIA, he rose from an entry-level employee to become the director of the Central Intelligence. And his experience has prepared him well for this new assignment.
JUAN GONZALEZ:
But questions are already being raised about Gates’s role at the CIA in connection to the Iran-Contra scandal and the secret arming of Saddam Hussein. In 1987, President Reagan nominated Gates to become CIA director, but the nomination had to be withdrawn because of stiff opposition in the Senate. Four years later, President George Herbert Walker Bush re-nominated Gates to be CIA chief, and this time he was confirmed.
Read full article
Robert Gates Tied to Iran-Contra Scandal and the Arming of Saddam Hussein
"The Return of Robert Gates"..as he visits Baghdad.. and his legacy
UN Protected persons and on the US terrorist list at the same time..
Crimes against Humanity: Massacre in Camp Ashraf
Massacre in Camp Ashraf - Iraq on April 8, 2011
Breaking international law in Iraq massacre
Attack On Ashraf Camp Resident in Iraq
Sept 1 Ashraf Massacre
Filme Jadid Az Vahshigarie Dar Ashraf
09.02.2013. Missile Attack at Iranian dissident Camp Liberty in Iraq
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyqxbDnVgWg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2AiAT-G038
Crimes against Humanity: Massacre in Camp Ashraf
Massacre in Camp Ashraf - Iraq on April 8, 2011
Breaking international law in Iraq massacre
Attack On Ashraf Camp Resident in Iraq
Sept 1 Ashraf Massacre
Filme Jadid Az Vahshigarie Dar Ashraf
09.02.2013. Missile Attack at Iranian dissident Camp Liberty in Iraq
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyqxbDnVgWg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2AiAT-G038
IRAN-RESIST.ORG - Britian, The USA, Kissinger, Bilderberg, the Brzezinski doctrine and the so called "Green Belt" agenda.
IRAN-RESIST.ORG – September 22, 2009. The President of the Mullahs is awaited in New York in view of his speech on peace and respect between nations at the General Assembly of the United Nations. Washington was hoping that Ahmadinejad would profit from this opportunity and resume direct talks with them, but Tehran refused. In riposte the U.S. pulled out its usual menaces : A possible Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities and the threat of further sanctions. Washington however to a further step towards appeasement made the incredible vow of “shooting down any Israeli aircraft using Iraqi airspace to attack Iran.”
This promise came from Zbigniew Brzezinski, a super Czar of the American diplomacy, and personal advisor to Obama, a man extremely well listened in Iran. This announcement has nothing to do with Israel but with Brzezinski’s doctrine on Central Asia followed for the past 33 years by all the American Presidents.
We have been listening to the same American music for the past six years. The U.S. does not wish to overthrow the Mullahs, but to scare them into accepting an entente that would open the door to Central Asia via Iran to them. This region highly interests the U.S. for it has a vital role on Chinese and Russian economies.
Central Asia is an enclave without any access to any major sea or ocean. In order to deliver their precious resources to the West, Central Asian countries need to transit through neighbouring countries: Russia, China, Iran and Afghanistan.
In this group of nations, Afghanistan is a lame duck, for it is itself an enclave but mostly prone to incessant civil war. If it were a more stable country it could become a corridor to the Indian Ocean through American allied Pakistan. However, the high stakes around the control of Afghanistan leads Russia and China in supporting the Talibans (via the aid of the Mullahs) in order to deprive the U.S. from the control of the country.
Thus, China and Russia share the natural gas resources of Central Asia, China for its industrial needs and Russia by selling them with high margin to Europe. If the U.S. were to access Central Asia, they would not only slow down China’s economic development but also deprive Russia of an important source of revenue. Therefore, the only stable option left to Washington is an entente with Iran, the third corridor between Central Asia and the Indian Ocean through the Persian Gulf.
The complexity of the situation is not that the U.S. just wants a simple corridor, for it has the means to help the Iranian people to overthrow the Mullahs and in exchange get access to Iran for its trading purposes. Washington also wishes to have the Mullahs as regional allies. The heirs of Khomeini are venerated by Muslims around the globe for their anti-Zionist stands, and could encourage the Muslims of the Western Chinese region of Xian Jiang to move towards independence from China and deprive Beijing of a region rich in natural resources. Washington could give a fatal blow to its new economic rival China.
The hidden Iranian agenda. In exchange for an entente with the U.S. that would eliminate the Sino-Russian adversity, Tehran wants the abandon of sanctions and American demands of demilitarization of the Hezbollah. For the past three years the Hezbollah has been engaged in a military war with Israel. This conflict has greatly troubled the U.S. allied Arab nations, for they are being accused of complacency towards Israel by the Arab opinion. The Hezbollah is therefore an indispensable arm for the Mullahs allowing them to put pressure on the U.S. and its allies when needed. The Hezbollah is a warranty clause in their entente negotiations with Washington. Their survival depends upon it.
The Iranian demands are obviously incompatible with American interests. Washington therefore deploys its threats of sanctions and military strikes in order to push the Mullahs in lowering their pretentions. The threats do scare the Mullahs, for they are aware of their unpopularity with the Iranian people and know that a strike or harsh economic sanctions would irremediably lead to an uprising and their downfall.
It is exactly because this risk exists that Washington refuses to carry on its threats for the Mullahs would be an extremely valuable pawn if an entente was reached. Despite the fact that the Mullahs are aware of their interest for the American agenda, they do not know how long the U.S. patience would last, for the control of Central Asia is becoming urgent. Washington is using the Mullahs doubt in their intimidation strategy.
The architecture of credible threats.
In the Bush era, the threats were credible but fictive, in the form of either American or Israeli rumours, never denied. This strategy was stamped “the drumbeats of conflict” by the American Admiral Fallon before he resigned. The threats ended up being useless for Tehran used them as a pretext alongside the Western demand it suspend its nuclear enrichment program in order to snob any dialogue.
Obama has slightly changed his strategy by renouncing on any preliminary conditions to engage a dialogue with Tehran, the threats being left to Israeli lower hierarchal officials, and quickly denied by the American State Department to avoid giving excuses to Tehran to snob the dialogue. To put an end to the Bush Administration’s counterproductive aggressive attitude, the U.S. has changed their credible threat strategy radically.
In this new strategy after an Israeli threat, we got an official American denial of Israeli strikes, followed by a denial from an Israeli high official on the absence of certitude in this domain, and last an article in the Jerusalem Post citing an anonymous high ranked American official affirming that in case of a non concerted Israeli attack on Iran Washington would “shoot down Israeli aircrafts overflying Iraq.” The Post, an accomplice in the rumour, then makes the precision that the author of the above information “does not have a decisional position in the Obama administration.” However, we know the contrary for the author of this affirmation is non other but Zbigniew Brzezinski, the author of the principal strategic doctrine carried out in the Middle East by Washington for the past 33 years.
Brzezinski is the hidden chief of American diplomacy for he past 33 years, he also has a foot in the Obama administration through one of his closest lieutenants Robert Gates, who already served in the Bush administration. Without being officially a representative of the U.S. government, Brzezinski was used as an alternative to flatter the Mullahs and try to obtain a concession on the Hezbollah issue.
With this latest version of the credible rumour strategy we have reached a new limit of virtuosity but also of absurdity to reach an impossible entente with the Mullahs. It is not surprising to see Brzezinski hold a role in this comedy for he is after all its author.
The actual American policy regarding Iran is a failure, for it is a renewed version of Brzezinski’s old doctrine of the green belt that has also failed in the instrumentation of radical Islam with the objective of agitating the Muslim regions of Communist USSR and China and lead them to their demise. Brzezinski first initiated his doctrine in 1977 in Pakistan with an Islamic coup against the progressive Bhutto, followed in 78 in Iran and 79 in Afghanistan.
In Iran he proposed the idea of an Islamic revolution to topple the Shah, who’s preference for a secular system, his industrialization projects and his refusal to reconduct the petrol agreement with a multinational consortium composed of American, British and French oil companies in 1979.
But Brzezinski broke an established order in the region and his doctrine did not achieve the results hoped for. In Afghanistan the U.S. lost the control of the Taliban monster it had created. And in Iran, the Mullahs who were not initially destined to holding on power, kept it by sweeping aside the pro-American Islamo-Nationalist Iranians.
Despite the failures, Brzezinski has remained influential, for he was one of the first to predict in the 1970’s the extraordinary Chinese economic leap and to imagine a manner of preventing it. But today China has become an economic giant and Washington is still applying Brzezinski’s preventive doctrine imagining that the control of Central Asia would push China to attack Russia to take over Siberia’s resources : the two former Communist nations confronting each other for the pure pleasure of Washington.
Meanwhile, whilst the Brzezinski doctrine has remained unchanged despite a few modifications after repeated failures, the Russians who in the past because of an anti-Chinese jealousy had delayed the construction of a Siberia-China pipeline, signed the construction of one in 2008, making it operational in 2010. Time has come to throw away this defective doctrine that has proven ineffective in its Iranian objectives since 1979 and is outdated in its Sino-Russian chapter.
It will be an even greater feat than an entente with the Mullahs to abandon this doctrine, for Brzezinski has over the years weaved a large web of researchers and politicians, like Gates and Obama , who owe their careers to him, and fear that by admitting that the doctrine is faulty they would lose their advantages.
A change would not only be salutary for the region but also for the United States, for like all great empires, the American weak point is in the heart of its power. Meanwhile, we will witness other examples of the Obama administration’s absurdity with ephemeral but credible threats. A greater and greater absurdity as an entente with the Mullahs will become less and less probable by following the Brzezinski doctrine.
http://www.iran-resist.org
This promise came from Zbigniew Brzezinski, a super Czar of the American diplomacy, and personal advisor to Obama, a man extremely well listened in Iran. This announcement has nothing to do with Israel but with Brzezinski’s doctrine on Central Asia followed for the past 33 years by all the American Presidents.
We have been listening to the same American music for the past six years. The U.S. does not wish to overthrow the Mullahs, but to scare them into accepting an entente that would open the door to Central Asia via Iran to them. This region highly interests the U.S. for it has a vital role on Chinese and Russian economies.
Central Asia is an enclave without any access to any major sea or ocean. In order to deliver their precious resources to the West, Central Asian countries need to transit through neighbouring countries: Russia, China, Iran and Afghanistan.
In this group of nations, Afghanistan is a lame duck, for it is itself an enclave but mostly prone to incessant civil war. If it were a more stable country it could become a corridor to the Indian Ocean through American allied Pakistan. However, the high stakes around the control of Afghanistan leads Russia and China in supporting the Talibans (via the aid of the Mullahs) in order to deprive the U.S. from the control of the country.
Thus, China and Russia share the natural gas resources of Central Asia, China for its industrial needs and Russia by selling them with high margin to Europe. If the U.S. were to access Central Asia, they would not only slow down China’s economic development but also deprive Russia of an important source of revenue. Therefore, the only stable option left to Washington is an entente with Iran, the third corridor between Central Asia and the Indian Ocean through the Persian Gulf.
The complexity of the situation is not that the U.S. just wants a simple corridor, for it has the means to help the Iranian people to overthrow the Mullahs and in exchange get access to Iran for its trading purposes. Washington also wishes to have the Mullahs as regional allies. The heirs of Khomeini are venerated by Muslims around the globe for their anti-Zionist stands, and could encourage the Muslims of the Western Chinese region of Xian Jiang to move towards independence from China and deprive Beijing of a region rich in natural resources. Washington could give a fatal blow to its new economic rival China.
The hidden Iranian agenda. In exchange for an entente with the U.S. that would eliminate the Sino-Russian adversity, Tehran wants the abandon of sanctions and American demands of demilitarization of the Hezbollah. For the past three years the Hezbollah has been engaged in a military war with Israel. This conflict has greatly troubled the U.S. allied Arab nations, for they are being accused of complacency towards Israel by the Arab opinion. The Hezbollah is therefore an indispensable arm for the Mullahs allowing them to put pressure on the U.S. and its allies when needed. The Hezbollah is a warranty clause in their entente negotiations with Washington. Their survival depends upon it.
The Iranian demands are obviously incompatible with American interests. Washington therefore deploys its threats of sanctions and military strikes in order to push the Mullahs in lowering their pretentions. The threats do scare the Mullahs, for they are aware of their unpopularity with the Iranian people and know that a strike or harsh economic sanctions would irremediably lead to an uprising and their downfall.
It is exactly because this risk exists that Washington refuses to carry on its threats for the Mullahs would be an extremely valuable pawn if an entente was reached. Despite the fact that the Mullahs are aware of their interest for the American agenda, they do not know how long the U.S. patience would last, for the control of Central Asia is becoming urgent. Washington is using the Mullahs doubt in their intimidation strategy.
The architecture of credible threats.
In the Bush era, the threats were credible but fictive, in the form of either American or Israeli rumours, never denied. This strategy was stamped “the drumbeats of conflict” by the American Admiral Fallon before he resigned. The threats ended up being useless for Tehran used them as a pretext alongside the Western demand it suspend its nuclear enrichment program in order to snob any dialogue.
Obama has slightly changed his strategy by renouncing on any preliminary conditions to engage a dialogue with Tehran, the threats being left to Israeli lower hierarchal officials, and quickly denied by the American State Department to avoid giving excuses to Tehran to snob the dialogue. To put an end to the Bush Administration’s counterproductive aggressive attitude, the U.S. has changed their credible threat strategy radically.
In this new strategy after an Israeli threat, we got an official American denial of Israeli strikes, followed by a denial from an Israeli high official on the absence of certitude in this domain, and last an article in the Jerusalem Post citing an anonymous high ranked American official affirming that in case of a non concerted Israeli attack on Iran Washington would “shoot down Israeli aircrafts overflying Iraq.” The Post, an accomplice in the rumour, then makes the precision that the author of the above information “does not have a decisional position in the Obama administration.” However, we know the contrary for the author of this affirmation is non other but Zbigniew Brzezinski, the author of the principal strategic doctrine carried out in the Middle East by Washington for the past 33 years.
Brzezinski is the hidden chief of American diplomacy for he past 33 years, he also has a foot in the Obama administration through one of his closest lieutenants Robert Gates, who already served in the Bush administration. Without being officially a representative of the U.S. government, Brzezinski was used as an alternative to flatter the Mullahs and try to obtain a concession on the Hezbollah issue.
With this latest version of the credible rumour strategy we have reached a new limit of virtuosity but also of absurdity to reach an impossible entente with the Mullahs. It is not surprising to see Brzezinski hold a role in this comedy for he is after all its author.
The actual American policy regarding Iran is a failure, for it is a renewed version of Brzezinski’s old doctrine of the green belt that has also failed in the instrumentation of radical Islam with the objective of agitating the Muslim regions of Communist USSR and China and lead them to their demise. Brzezinski first initiated his doctrine in 1977 in Pakistan with an Islamic coup against the progressive Bhutto, followed in 78 in Iran and 79 in Afghanistan.
In Iran he proposed the idea of an Islamic revolution to topple the Shah, who’s preference for a secular system, his industrialization projects and his refusal to reconduct the petrol agreement with a multinational consortium composed of American, British and French oil companies in 1979.
But Brzezinski broke an established order in the region and his doctrine did not achieve the results hoped for. In Afghanistan the U.S. lost the control of the Taliban monster it had created. And in Iran, the Mullahs who were not initially destined to holding on power, kept it by sweeping aside the pro-American Islamo-Nationalist Iranians.
Despite the failures, Brzezinski has remained influential, for he was one of the first to predict in the 1970’s the extraordinary Chinese economic leap and to imagine a manner of preventing it. But today China has become an economic giant and Washington is still applying Brzezinski’s preventive doctrine imagining that the control of Central Asia would push China to attack Russia to take over Siberia’s resources : the two former Communist nations confronting each other for the pure pleasure of Washington.
Meanwhile, whilst the Brzezinski doctrine has remained unchanged despite a few modifications after repeated failures, the Russians who in the past because of an anti-Chinese jealousy had delayed the construction of a Siberia-China pipeline, signed the construction of one in 2008, making it operational in 2010. Time has come to throw away this defective doctrine that has proven ineffective in its Iranian objectives since 1979 and is outdated in its Sino-Russian chapter.
It will be an even greater feat than an entente with the Mullahs to abandon this doctrine, for Brzezinski has over the years weaved a large web of researchers and politicians, like Gates and Obama , who owe their careers to him, and fear that by admitting that the doctrine is faulty they would lose their advantages.
A change would not only be salutary for the region but also for the United States, for like all great empires, the American weak point is in the heart of its power. Meanwhile, we will witness other examples of the Obama administration’s absurdity with ephemeral but credible threats. A greater and greater absurdity as an entente with the Mullahs will become less and less probable by following the Brzezinski doctrine.
http://www.iran-resist.org
Thursday, 17 April 2014
Wednesday, 16 April 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)