Did We Pull the Plug on the Shah?

Did We Pull the Plug on the Shah?

by DC Dave

Benjamin_Disraeli_by_Cornelius_Jabez_Hughes,_1878 Sidonia quote

Benjamin Disraeli, describing the sage Jewish financier Sidonia in his classic novel, Coningsby.

“Surely, your majesty, you’re not telling me that the Jewish lobby in the United States pulls the strings of the presidency.”

Shah_of_iran

Shah of Iran

Thus begins an extraordinary 1976 interview by the Jewish Mike Wallace of CBS of the Shah of Iran. It’s really quite amusing to hear the tone of fake incredulity in Wallace’s voice as the Shah makes observations about Jewish power in the United States that most people these days would accept as fairly commonplace, though seldom spoken so openly. Powerful Jewish interests controlling the media and banks and pressuring politicians? Heaven forfend!

Now consider that this was America’s “great ally” in the Middle East, a man widely regarded as our puppet, whom we installed in power after orchestrating, along with the British, the overthrow of the elected president Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953. It certainly looks like he was straying pretty far off the reservation here.

Listening to the Shah’s words in retrospect, we can’t help but think of what happened to CNN anchor Rick Sanchez when he made a much more cautious statement about Jewish media power in an unguarded moment, before a far smaller audience. He was gone in a heartbeat, as if to prove the truth of what he had to say. Could the Shah’s words to Wallace have sealed his fate in a similar way?

But the Rick Sanchez newsreader types of this world are a dime a dozen and easily replaceable, I hear you say. The Shah was the

Mosaddegh in imperial court in 1955 Tehran

Mosaddegh in imperial court in 1955 Tehran

bastion against the menace of Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East. Look at what replaced him.

Exactly! Look at what has replaced Muammar Qaddafi in Libya and Saddam Hussein in Iraq and would no-doubt replace Bashar al-Assad in Syria should we have our way and he were to be brought down. The very fact that the United States has been instrumental in bringing down two strongmen who had been our allies when it suited us, as we were more consistently with the Shah, is another powerful reason for taking a more serious look at what really happened in the fall of the Shah of Iran.

That more serious look, to my mind, virtually begins and ends with a trenchant essay entitled “The British and U.S. Governments Installed Khomeini into Power in 1979,” posted on a web site called The Excavator on November 3, 2011 by Saman Mohammadi. Everyone who desires a better understanding of what is going on in the Middle East currently, and is likely to happen in the future, should read that essay. The article begins:

divideandconquer

The thesis that the British and U.S. governments drove out the Shah and replaced him with Khomeini destroys the clash of civilizations myth that has dominated the global conversation between Islam and the West for over a generation.

For years I thought this thesis was too “out there,” and a baseless conspiracy theory. I did not want to believe that there was any truth to this. It changes my entire view of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the relationship between Iran and the West, and the history of our times.

The implications of the thesis are too frightening to think about. The level of the treason and betrayal that is taking place against the people of every nation is beyond most people’s imagination.

image961_ayatolla_conneryBut I always try to keep an open mind because anything is plausible in this crazy world. So, last month I finally decided to actually look at the evidence that is available on the Internet about this thesis and dig deeper into history.

The first clue that caught my eye was the Shah’s own words. “If you lift up Khomeini’s beard,” he said, “you will find Made In England written under his chin.”

More clues come from more of the Shah’s words in the article, from an interview with David Frost when the Shah was in exile in Panama:

Do you think that Mr. Khomeini, an uneducated person . . . could have planned all this, masterminded all this, set up all the organizations. I know that one man alone could not have done it. This I know.

I know that tremendous amount of money was spend [sic]. This also I know.

I know that top experts in propaganda were used to show us like tyrants and monsters, and the other side as democratic, liberal revolutionaries who wanted to save the country.

I know how mean the BBC, British Broadcasting Corporation, had been towards us. This I know. Because we have all the files. If you monitor the broadcast towards our country you would see that it was full of venom. So it seemed that it was really a very well orchestrated conspiracy.

Going right to the heart of what actually transpired, the article gives us this quote from historian F. William Engdahl:

81JMUc5jjiL

In November 1978, President Carter named the Bilderberg group’s George Ball, another member of the Trilateral Commission, to head a special White House Iran task force under the National Security Council’s [Zbigniew] Brzezinski. Ball recommended that Washington drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the fundamentalistic Islamic opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. Robert Bowie from the CIA was one of the lead “case officers” in the new CIA-led coup against the man their covert actions had placed into power 25 years earlier.

Their scheme was based on a detailed study of the phenomenon of Islamic fundamentalism, as presented by British Islamic expert, Dr. Bernard Lewis, then on assignment at Princeton University in the United States. Lewis’s scheme, which was unveiled at the May 1979 Bilderberg meeting in Austria, endorsed the radical Muslim Brotherhood movement behind Khomeini, in order to promote balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. Lewis argued that the West should encourage autonomous groups such as the Kurds, Armenians, Lebanese Maronites, Ethiopian Copts, Azerbaijani Turks, and so forth. The chaos would spread in what he termed an “Arc of Crisis,” which would spill over into Muslim regions of the Soviet Union.

The coup against the Shah was run by British and American intelligence, with the bombastic American, Brzezinski, taking public “credit” for getting rid of the “corrupt” Shah, while the British characteristically remained safely in the background.

usrael

Speaking of “safely in the background,” one can’t help but notice what a boon to Israel all this balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East would certainly be. This policy of fracturing and destabilizing Israel’s biggest potential enemies bears a striking resemblance to “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” prepared by a neocon study group led by Richard Perle for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996. It is also in complete harmony with Oded Yinon’s “A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties.”

That securing Israel’s realm should be the foremost concern of noted Orientalist Bernard Lewis should be no surprise. In the following quote, M. Shahid Alam, contrasts a newer school of Oriental studies with that led by Lewis:

M-Shahid-AlamThey make an effort to locate Islamic societies in their historical context, arguing that Islamic responses to Western challenges have been diverse and evolving over time, and they do not derive from an innate hostility to the West or some unchanging Islamic mindset. The second camp, now led mostly by Jews, has reverted to Orientalism’s original mission of subordinating knowledge to Western power, now filtered through the prism of Zionist interests. This Zionist Orientalism has assiduously sought to paint Islam and Islamic societies as innately hostile to the West, modernism, democracy, tolerance, scientific advance, and women’s rights.

This Zionist camp has been led for more than fifty years by Bernard Lewis, who has enjoyed an intimate relationship with power that would be the envy of the most distinguished Orientalists of an earlier generation. He has been strongly supported by a contingent of able lieutenants, whose ranks have included the likes of Elie Kedourie, David Pryce-Jones, Raphael Patai, Daniel Pipes, and Martin Kramer. There are many foot soldiers, too, who have provided distinguished service to this new Orientalism. And no compendium of these foot soldiers would be complete without the names of Thomas Friedman, Martin Peretz, Norman Podhoretz, Charles Krauthammer, William Kristol, and Judith Miller.

Alam, whose essay is entitled “Scholarship or Sophistry: Bernard Lewis and the New Orientalism,” notes the irony of the fact that before the rise of Zionism, it was Jewish scholars who were more likely to give a more balanced view of Muslim and Middle Eastern societies.

eretz_israel_by_3d4d-d67paci

Yet the vigor of this early anti-Orientalism of Jewish scholars would not last; it would not survive the logic of the Zionist movement as it sought to create a Jewish state in Palestine. Such a state could only emerge as a child of Western imperialist powers, and it could only come into existence by displacing the greater part of the Palestinian population, by incorporating them into an apartheid state, or through some combination of the two. In addition, once created, Israel could only survive as a military, expansionist, and hegemonic state, constantly at war with its neighbors.

“They Hate Us for Our Freedom”

Claire Fontaine artwork

Claire Fontaine artwork

If the view of Muslim societies as hopelessly backward and riven with sectarian violence did not fit the facts, it was not the view but the facts that had to be changed. Iran under the Shah was not good for that worldview, which meant that he was not good for “the realm.” Returning to the Excavator article, here is a summary of why he had to go:

  1. Nuclear Power. The Shah was modernizing Iran in a significant way, and this had to be stopped. The Bilderberg and Club of Rome elite are notoriously anti-growth, and anti-economic development because keeping nations poor is the best way to control them. The British policy towards her colonies in Africa was based on under-development, keeping the people poor, and putting a tiny elite in power. This policy was also used against Iran.
  1. Oil Production. The Shah’s decision to increase Iranian oil production angered U.S. oil companies and others who wanted to maintain artificial scarcity in the international oil market in order to keep prices high and make more profits. Specifically, the Shah said that a couple of years before the Revolution he “heard from two different sources connected with the oil companies that the regime within Iran will change. . . If just in imagination, we believed that there was a plan that there must be less oil offered to the world market in order to make the price of oil go up, one country should have been the one chosen for this sacrifice.” (This quote is from an article called “Shah Retains Claim to Iranian Throne” that appeared in ‘The Fort Scott Tribute’ on January 18, 1980).
  1. Opium Profits. The Shah took serious measures to stop the flow of opium into Iran, which greatly damaged British interests. The Rothschilds and London’s financial empire depend on the world opium trade to retain their power and influence.
  1. Economic Threat of a Modern and Independent Iran to Interests of British-U.S. Elite. The Shah was building up Iran into a modern state by enriching the country and strengthening the middle class. He was not a perfect ruler, but he was not the tyrant that the West made him out to be. The Shah’s original sin was siding with the U.S. and British against Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953. He should have known that if you make a deal with the devil and then spit in his face you will be treated accordingly. But, this is not about one man or one nation. Nations around the world are treated like colonies by international banks and multinational corporations, including America. America and Iran have lived under puppet leaders for most of the 20th century. When a true leader acts in the interest of his country and his people the elite secret societies get rid of him. They either kill the patriotic leader, like John F. Kennedy in 1963, or they instigate a revolution against him, like the Shah in 1979.
  1. Create A Clash of Civilizations. The destruction of the modern world economy, the nation state, and the current world order are three stated objectives of the Anglo-American power elite. They have created an artificial conflict between Islam and the West to achieve all three objectives.

2 world events

09263760180010700This global conflict came into being as a result of two world events. The first event was the 1979 Iranian Islamic Revolution which was the product of the MI6, CIA, Bilderberg Group, Club of Rome and other secret global organizations. The second event was the September 11 terrorist attacks that was orchestrated by the Mossad and the Anglo-American shadow government.

Iran was set up in 1979 as the representative of Islamic Civilization, and ever since then its extremist clerical oligarchy has used the language of Islam to pose as the leader of a resistance bloc to Western powers. Influential Iranian clerics are most likely in the fold of the same Western powers that turned Khomeini into “Time’s Person of the Year,” in 1979.

He might not have been as important a leader, but the killing of James Forrestal could also be offered as an important assassination in the context of U.S. policies in the Middle East. One might also question the closing assertion that the current leadership of Iran is as much in the hip pocket of the Western secret governments as the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini appears to have been. The example of the Shah, himself, shows the difficulty of keeping puppets in line after they have been put in place. If they are responsive to the needs and wishes of their own people they need to use less repression to remain in power.

Even the mainstream media admit that the Israelis were instrumental in the creation of Hamas, they say as a counterweight to the PLO, but perhaps also in furtherance of their “clash of civilizations” strategy. It is difficult to believe that Hamas remains in Israel’s fold, but one at least must wonder who has been behind those pinprick rocket attacks from Gaza, twice providing a pretext for Israel to rain wanton death and destruction upon the region.

It has also been argued that the dissolution of the Soviet Union was an inside job involving the Western banks and secret agencies, khomeinibut the man hand-picked, according to this thesis, by Western stooge Boris Yeltsin to preside over the further looting of Russia, Vladimir Putin, has apparently turned out to be too much of a Russian patriot, which explains the vitriol that is heaped upon him by the Western media and governments.

Whatever one might speculate about Iran’s current leadership, the evidence appears quite strong that Khomeini, himself, was not what he appeared to be. Drawing from various sources, with links provided, an anonymous poster on AANGIRFAN argues that Khomeini was not even Persian, that he was actually the son of a British Middle East adventurer and British Petroleum named William Richard Williamson and that his mother was a Punjabi from India. Whether it is photo-shopped or not, the depiction on the site of the Grand Ayatollah without a turban and beard and wearing a necktie is certainly enough to give one food for thought. We also find there many similar arguments to those at The Excavator for Khomeini having been a creature of the Western intelligence agencies.

Continuing the “Clash of Civilizations”

isis_beheading_2

The ever more cartoonish character of the supposed opposition faced by the Western military behemoth in the Middle East further encourages us to go back and look critically at what happened in the overthrow of the Shah. As black-hearted villains, the wanton beheaders known most commonly as ISIS are everything that the Western secret agencies, their military-industrial complex, and the Western imperial creation of Israel might wish for. As Sunni Muslims opposed by the governments of both Iraq and Iran and Israel’s next-door enemy, Hezbollah, they might muddle the clear civilization-clash lines a bit, but such fine distinctions are probably lost on most Americans. The important thing is that Muslims are the enemy.

This latest Muslim enemy, one must admit, is absolutely the strangest one yet. Armies are expensive, what with the need to feed, clothe, train, and transport them and to keep them supplied with functioning weapons and ammunition. Where is ISIS getting the wherewithal to wage modern warfare?

James Corbett has done what seems to me to be the most thoughtful inquiry into that question on the Internet with his Corbett Report entitled “Who Is Really Behind ISIS?” He might have left the “Really” out of his title, because it suggests that we are being told one thing when the reality is something else. The really odd thing about ISIS is that the propagandists don’t even seem to feel the need to put out a story about who’s backing them. Who would want to back the very incarnation of evil, anyway?

Who_Is_REALLY_Behind_ISIS__186797

In the absence even of a cover story, Corbett in his researches comes down to a list of the six likeliest candidates for ISIS creators and backers. They are Israel, NATO, Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. Corbett came to that conclusion in late September 2014. Now, at the end of May 2015, we have a newly declassified Pentagon document concluding that “the West, Turkey, and the Gulf States” are behind the creation of ISIS, which accords quite closely with Corbett’s findings. Certainly the case is at least as strong that the U.S., Britain, and Israel were behind the fall of the Shah of Iran.

David Martin

June 3, 2015

Addendum

I have received this very thoughtful response from one of the people on my mailing list. He clearly knows a lot more about the web site in question than I do. If, as now seems likely to me, the article referenced is disinformation, it almost reinforces the central point of my article. If the spooks find it necessary to muddy the water in this way, it suggests that there must be something to the charge that Western intelligence was behind the replacement of the Shah with Khomeini. Think of all the garbage theories they’ve put out with respect to the JFK assassination and 9/11 to put the public off the scent:

Regarding the article “Did we pull the plug on the Shah” I believe there could be a lot behind the contention that western interests covertly supported the overthrow of the Shah. The writers quoted in the article impressed. There was one exception. This was the part that purported to provide biographical information on Ayatollah Khomeini.

If he were really the son of an Englishman this information would be widely known in Iran. Middle Eastern societies place a greater importance on familial relationships. If he were the son of a non-Muslim and a westerner this fact would have to be acknowledged for it would be to his disadvantage within the Shia religious hierarchy. To try to keep such information secret would be foolish and detrimental.

The two juxtaposed photos of him where one has him in western garb appear to be based on the same original where photo-shopping has produced a new version. It looks as though the original has been rotated a few degrees and then either brightened or darkened. Then new features are built in around the core of the face. I presume the one on the left is the original but maybe not!

So the alleged side-by-side photos of Khomeini in Shia religious and western garb are very highly suspicious. The notion that he secretly was not of Iranian parentage is most dubious.

Perhaps the aim of this fairly obviously questionable story about Khomeini is to discredit the idea that his overthrow of the Shah had western backing. Who knows?

An “anonymous poster” on AANGIRFAN is not what could be called a trustworthy source. This website has a history of putting questionable material under the noses of readers. On July 30, 2005 it carried a story from Arctic Beacon where the Bin Laden brothers in 1987 told two NASA research scientists about US government plans to cause 9/11. [1]

Arctic Beacon is a website which accuses “The Jesuits” of enormous malfeasance in world affairs. Draw your own conclusions.

On July 31, 2005 AANGIRFAN had a story about a Kay Giggs, a woman who claimed to be the wife of a senior US military officer. She heard all the details from him ‘usually while he was drinking before going into one of his drunken stupors’. There were stories of strange goings on, strange rituals and secret societies. In connection with 9/11 she manages to mention a host of guilty parties including, believe it or not, one “Basil Cardinal Hume”. It was all so very confused and incoherent. [2]

On Dec 22, 2010 AANGIRFAN tackled the question as to whether Julian Assange was gay. [3]

On the other hand the story for Dec 06, 2010 provokes thought. It deals with Wikileaks and the question as to whether it may actually be a construct of the intelligence world. It is a coherent piece. [4]

On Feb 09, 2011 the website referred to an article by Michael Collins Piper posted on American Free Press which dealt with how instability and turmoil in the Arab world played into the hands of Zionism. The AANGIRFAN piece went on to attack long time critic of Zionism Ralph Schoenman and suggest he was a “disinformation agent” and a “deep cover CIA agent”. The article also referred to the 1969 moon landing as a hoax. [5]

It is furthermore important to mention that there is no person or organisation identified in its profile as being responsible for the site. So, here is a mystery.

One must note there is a disclaimer at the top of the site to the effect that views expressed on the site are not necessarily endorsed by whoever runs it.

There is some very thought provoking and valuable material posted on AANGIRFAN. However, there is also some classic disinformation placed before the public. The professionally run disinformation operation contains a mix of truth and untruth. The truth is there to provide a carrier signal for the broadcast of the untruths. Disinformation on the web works by salting valid information with untruth so that actual reality becomes discredited in the mind of the viewer or so that the viewer becomes confused or else disillusioned with the search for verifiable fact.

It is hard for a current events/history website to be always 100 percent accurate in what it presents. However, the quality of the material on AANGIRFAN is very uneven. Profundity is set side by side with nonsense. We can not be assured the website has been set up deliberately as a disinformation source. However, nonetheless, this is a valid presumption. Even if it were not deliberately set up as a disinformation ploy it inevitably functions as such because of the mix of material it contains and the effect this will have of readers/viewers.

Even if we understand a website as a disinformation source this does not necessarily mean we avoid it at all costs. Instead we may decide to use it but with due care and discretion. For example AANGIRFAN contains many wonderful and thought provoking and well-presented articles. If we were to avoid accessing the site altogether, we might miss some of these treats. If an individual has a deep knowledge of the subjects that interest him or her then they can develop skills for recognizing disinformation. With these skills misleading articles and video presentations can be mentally cast aside and relieved of their power to cause harm.

We may discover a worthwhile article at a disinformation site and trace it to where it was originally placed online. If we want to reference it in an article of our own then we can reference the site where the article was originally put online. This will avoid the negative connotations of referencing a web resource tainted by an association with disinformation.

[1]       http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/30199.htm

http://aangirfan.blogspot.ie/2005_07_01_archive.html

[2]      http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/29982.htm

http://aangirfan.blogspot.ie/2005_07_01_archive.html

[3]      http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2010/12/assange-is-gay.html

[4]      http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2010/12/assanges-wikileaks-is-fake.html

[5]       http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2011/02/piper-schoenman-truth-lies-on-egypt.html

 

David Martin

June 29, 2015

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Multiple links will automatically relegate your comment to the spam section, so keep that in mind as you post.

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

12 thoughts on “Did We Pull the Plug on the Shah?

  1. the synagogue of satan cult compound is not ‘Israel’

    Israel is a “people” a company of nations that have never been the “Jews”

    Jesus requires that “we” know the Truth, and the “Jewish” so-called
    Religion is anti-Jesus…anti-Truth….anti-Justice

    excellent work on some background info in the 20th century,
    the Money Changers & Pariahsees working their business from
    England & France & Germany….”Europe” during the last 200 years
    have managed to inveigle the braindeadgoy “White People” to
    mass murder over 300 million NON JEWS in just the last century

    FOR FILTHY LUCRE

    There is a reference to Forrestal in the book
    TERROR OUT OF ZION by J. Bowyer Bell on page 248 & page 272
    in relation to the Zionist Terrorist Cult Compound in Palestine
    calling itself “Israel”…the “Zionist Terrorists” are/were mostly
    the Gog & Magog “Proselytes”…the “eastern european” Ashkenazim
    so-called “Jews”….who HATE Jesus.

    another deep background read on the historical perfidy of the
    Money Changers & Pariahsees is a book by Sholem Ash titled

    THE NAZARENE…

    http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=33463

    of course the book THE CURSE OF CANAAN by Mullins provides a
    rather succinct panoramic perspective of the 6,000 year
    history of the Evil Miscreants who use the FOG BANK
    [Israel/Jew] … as cover for their {anti-“we”}

    http://thosewhocansee.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/why-re-colonization-future-orientation.html

    Satanic “Business”….more than 90% of so-called
    “Jews” don’t really have to be …”Jews”, just imagine if James Corbett
    could address that Truth…!

    http://www.cjournal.info/2015/06/05/the-good-bad-and-uncertain-about-recognizing-palestine/

    and as a final recommended reading on the “Jewish” influence in
    America during the 20th century is a must read by Alan Stang

    IT’S VERY SIMPLE…the true story of the civil rights movement

    wonder what Sean Connery would say…
    as a Man who would be King

    Like

  2. I agree, to some degree with your premise and conclusion of USA/UK corporate and intelligence national security elements “pulling the plug” on the Shah. It appears that he outlived his usefulness like Batista or any other US “friend”. I was relieved to see references to a “fall back” position regarding the Shah’s long-term “replacement” and how it was arranged. Let’s not forget the plans involving the attempts to create a “green belt” (a sort of Iron-Curtain in reverse) around the SE perimeter of The (then) USSR of and by Islamic States, and very religious anti – Atheistic governments who hated the USSR actually more than the USA. Millions of people of Islamic Religious beliefs live in SW Russia/USSR.
    To give a good understanding of this: Imagine the rise in Mexico, or on maybe Brazil or Bolivia, of a radical Catholic or Christian Government pointing out the repression and treatment of all persons of hispanic descent in CA, MN, AZ and TX, and calling on them, to know, they now have a “friend” who will help them against the decadent oppressors of “THE NORTH” (aka “El Norte”)! Tell me that would not send the “hee-bee-gee-bee’s” up and down the spins of the US power structure???!!! Now, that’s how the Kremlin felt in Nov. of 1979 !
    And that is the key to understanding how we even got to “where” we are to day with ISIS and its deep and burrowing links to the US and UK corp / intelligence/national security sectors. Also, lets not forget also these “same guys” decided to “pull the plug” on Carter as well. Not as bloody as “pulling the plug ” 0n 11/22/63…but just as effective and necessary.
    Regards,
    David T. Krall

    Like

  3. per my above post. It should read as “SW Russia/USSR” and further, NM (New Mexico) not MN…
    Sorry. Thank you! Great Article !!!
    Thanks!
    Regards,
    David T. Krall

    Like

  4. I have received this perceptive comment in a private email:

    Listen to Barbara Honegger describe the Reagan administration’s rationale behind the 1980 October Surprise

    From the time of the Dulles Brothers in the early 1950s, the intelligence community and state department’s greatest fear in the Middle East were movements leading to Arab socialism and independent, non-aligned Arab nationalism. Mosaddegh in Iran and Nasser in Egypt personified this threat. To fight against these movements support was given to the Muslim Brotherhood and other entities to foster an “Arc of Islam” stretching across the planet from North Africa to Indonesia. These anti-Communist Islamic regimes were generally traditionalist authoritarian monarchies such as in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Libya, etc. used as Cold War proxies and, most notably, as buffer zones on the border of the Soviet Union.

    Zbigniew Brzezinski’s anti-Soviet Afghanistan policy in the Carter administration was followed up by Reagan and William Casey. It was all part of the “Arc of Islam” strategy conceived decades earlier and aggressively followed through by Brzezinski.

    Two seminal books which focused upon this background concept are Robert Dreyfuss, Devil’s Game: How the United States Help Unleash Fundamentalist Islam (published in 2005), and Hélène Carrère d’Encausse, L’Empire éclaté (Decline of an Empire: The Soviet Socialist Republics in Revolt) (published in 1978) which predicted the dissolution of the Soviet Union by fomenting revolt. in the Muslim areas of the USSR. bordering Afghanistan.

    Both books totally blew me away, discussing things no one was even remotely talking about regarding the back story of unfolding of world events in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil's_Game

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-imperial-anatomy-of-al-qaeda-the-cia-s-drug-running-terrorists-and-the-arc-of-crisis/20907

    Like

    • to dcdave !
      from: david t. krall
      Great post and great data…I am familiar with what you have posted and stated…
      THEY pound their chest and boast to save America, but secretly, alliances are made with
      monsters (& some of the “insiders” are monsters themselves!) to spread their power and influence…there is absolutely no difference between the rampant epidemic and growth and recruitment of organized crime, in a “plausible deniability” mechanism, its utilization and viability as a”covert” arm of US military and intelligence usage, “recruited” and sustained to fight a war in Europe and Asia and the present and recent “deep” alliances and actual recruitment of radical Islamic militants to do the same kind of dirty work today in Iraq and Syria…Operation Underworld is the perfect template, blueprint and historical “overlay” in understanding the “how and why” of ISIS.
      ISIS is a part of a very long chain and history of thugs, criminals and gangs right before, during and after WW2 and throughout the cold-war, .e.g “OUR” jihad against Castro, e.g. Operation Mongoose and its “sister act” JM/Wave…being used as a front “strike force” to start wars and agendas…proxy armies, militias and cadres to forment terror, murder and fear, just like in Europe (e.g. Operation Ohio, Operation Gladdio & the P-2), SE Asia (Operation Phoenix, The Khmer Serei, etc, & e.g. bloody purge/annihilation and overthrow in Indonesia in 1965, US bombing genocide in SE Asia from 1965 to 1972)
      and in Latin America (e.g.Operation Mongoose, JW/Wave, Operation Condor, purge & bloody overthrow of Chile in 1973, among others). ISIS is just the latest is this pageant of proxy armies under a veil of “plausible deniability” if not total deniability and covert secrecy. and Yes, Carter was indeed stabbed in the back just like JFK…a different mode or manner, but that was based on the then-current circumstances, domestically and internationally. These “things” are indeed thought out, no doubt!!!
      Regards,
      david t. krall

      Like

  5. I wouldn’t be so utterly convinced of the reality of “nuclear weapons” of mass destruction and their ultimate fear-mongering, never mind that countries like Iran, India or Pakistan (lol), in the economic mess that they’re in, could even remotely achieve such advanced technological innovations:

    If they faked the entire space-program,

    And continue to shamelessly lie about it to this day

    They still have plenty of destructive weapons but not these “doomsday” weapons.

    Wilson Bryan Key, colleague of Marshall McLuhan and author of “The Age of Manipulation” (must read book if you want to understand how subliminal programming works) claims that the word SEX in large letters was very lightly airbrushed across Khomeini’s forehead. There was also a small inset photo of Jimmy Carter on the same cover and on his forehead the word SEX in small letters was very lightly embedded. Subliminally this communicated the notion that Khomeini’s “SEX” was much bigger than Carter’s, which does what? Creates the e-motion (energy for motion, energy in motion) of fear, of course

    You can’t really see it in that photo, but that’s the cover.

    Here’s is a similar analysis of the Gadaffi Time cover from 1986:

    The Age of Manipulation – The Con in Confidence, the Sin in Sincere – Wilson Bryan Key Ph.D. (close colleague of Marshall McLuhan):

    “Wyndham Lewis was the person who showed me that the man-made environment was a teaching-machine, a PROGRAMMED teaching-machine. Earlier, the Symbolists had discovered that the work of art is a programmed teaching-machine, it’s a mechanism for shaping sensibility. Well, Lewis simply extended this private art activity to the corporate activity of the whole society in making environments that basically were artifacts or works of art and acted as teaching-machines upon the whole population.” — Marshall McLuhan

    Wyndham Lewis was a close friend and associate of Ezra Pound

    “Also I’m interested in such analogies with modern poetry as that provided by the vacuum tube. The latter can tap a huge reservoir of electrical energy, picking it up as a very weak impulse. Then it can shape it and amplify it to major intensity. Technique of allusion as you use it (situational analogies) seems comparable to this type of circuit. Allusion not as ornament but as precise means of making available total energy of any previous situation or culture. Shaping and amplifying it for current use.” — Marshall McLuhan, Letter to Ezra Pound (12 June 1951)

    Islamic Iran is controlled opposition. Why? Because it is not economically successful and is politically very oppressive. Therefore it poses no real threat, no matter how much rhetoric you hear on enemy-propaganda outlets on your MSM. It will never be attacked or occupied, not because anybody’s scared of them at all, but because they are the best enemy 100 Billion dollars of US money can indirectly buy.

    US Has Given Over $100 BILLION To Companies Defying Its Policy On Iran

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/06/us-has-given-over-100-bil_n_488787.html

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/world/middleeast/07sanctions.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

    They will never be attacked or not until a suitable replacement Islamic bogie-man can be found.

    Even racist, Marxist Israel

    http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/israel.htm

    can pretend to be “civilized” compared to this list of backwards and barbaric sharia laws:

    Islamic Penal Code of Iran:

    http://mehr.org/Islamic_Penal_Code_of_Iran.pdf

    Iranian lashed 74 (7+4=11) times for ‘insult’ to Ahmadinejad

    http://www.rferl.org/content/iranian_activist_lashed_for_insulting_president/24354115.html

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/09/iranian-lashed-insult-ahmadinejad

    My analysis of the Iranian situation and why the Shah was removed (Synergetic67):

    http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?s=ab8195e7144bd0f279a423e785ce422c&t=229638&highlight=kamran&page=3

    One of the Shah’s generals’ facebook page. This was put up by his family and friends in his memory. He was executed by the Khomeini government.

    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Timsar-Nader-Jahanbani/69755650986

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nader_Jahanbani

    The Shah’s father, Reza Shah, by the way, was pro-Hitler and over 50% of Iran’s foreign trade in the 1930s and early 1940’s was with Germany. He was the one that changed the name of the country from Persia to Iran, which means “Land of the Aryans.”

    The National Socialist Germans of Hitler’s era led a whole campaign of trying to convince Iranians that they were Aryans and to be proud of their ancient Aryan heritage.

    “Iranians were immune to the racial Nuremberg Laws on the grounds that they were pure blooded Aryans. In 1939, National Socialist Germany provided Iran with what they called a Germany Scientific Library. The library contained over 7500 books selected “to convince Iranian readers…of the kinship between the National Socialist Reich and the Aryan culture of Iran”(Lenczowski. 1944, p. 161). In various pro-Notsee publications, lectures, speeches, and ceremonies, parallels were drawn between the Shah of Iran and Hitler, and praise the charisma and virtue of the Fuhrerprinzip (Rezun. 1982, p. 29).

    In 1941, the Allies forced Reza Shah to abdicate the throne to his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. His pro-Notsee followers in the Iranian government such as Fazlollah Zahedi and Mohammad Hosein Airom shared similar fates”

    http://iranian.com/main/blog/siavash300/hitler-norooz-greeting-reza-shah-great.html

    http://iranian.com/main/blog/jahankhalili/german-news-second-world-war-die-deutsche-wochenschau-nr-752.html

    Signed Photograph of Adolf Hitler for Reza Shah Pahlavi (pro-Hitler father of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi) in Original Frame with the Swastika and Adolf Hitler’s (AH) Sign – Sahebgharanie Palace – Niavaran Palace Complex. The text below the photograph: His Imperial Majesty – Reza Shah Pahlavi – Shahanshah of Iran – With Best Wishes – Berlin March 12, 1936 – The signature of Adolf Hitler

    Like

  6. Here is a very thoughtful critical email that I received, preceded by my response:

    Excellent analysis. If I had had your experience with that web site I either would not have used it or would have prefaced it with words to the effect that you used here:

    “Perhaps the aim of this fairly obviously questionable story about Khomeini is to discredit the idea that his overthrow of the Shah had western backing. Who knows?”

    It is a very common disinformation technique after all.

    Dave

    Regarding the article “Did we pull the plug on the Shah” I believe there could be a lot behind the contention that western interests covertly supported the overthrow of the Shah. The writers quoted in the article impressed. There was one exception. This was the part which purported to provide biographical information on Ayatollah Khomeini.

    If he were really the son of an Englishman this information would be widely known in Iran. Middle Eastern societies place a greater importance on familial relationships. If he were the son of a non-Muslim and a westerner this fact would have to be acknowledged for it would be to his disadvantage within the Shia religious hierarchy. To try to keep such information secret would be foolish and detrimental.

    The two juxtaposed photos of him where one has him in western garb appear to be based on the same original where photo-shopping has produced a new version. It looks as though the original has been rotated a few degrees and then either brightened or darkened. Then new features are built in around the core of the face. I presume the one on the left is the original but maybe not!

    So the alleged side by side photos of Khomeini in Shia religious and western garb are very highly suspicious. The notion that he secretly was not of Iranian parentage is most dubious.

    Perhaps the aim of this fairly obviously questionable story about Khomeini is to discredit the idea that his overthrow of the Shah had western backing. Who knows?

    An “anonymous poster” on AANGIRFAN is not what could be called a trustworthy source. This website has a history of putting questionable material under the noses of readers. On July 30, 2005 it carried a story from Arctic Beacon where the Bin Laden brothers in 1987 told two NASA research scientists about US government plans to cause 9/11. [1]

    Arctic Beacon is a website which accuses “The Jesuits” of enormous malfeasance in world affairs. Draw your own conclusions.

    On July 31, 2005 AANGIRFAN had a story about a Kay Giggs, a woman who claimed to be the wife of a senior US military officer. She heard all the details from him ‘usually while he was drinking before going into one of his drunken stupors’. There were stories of strange goings on, strange rituals and secret societies. In connection with 9/11 she manages to mention a host of guilty parties including, believe it or not, one “Basil Cardinal Hume”. It was all so very confused and incoherent. [2]

    On Dec 22, 2010 AANGIRFAN tackled the question as to whether Julian Assange was gay. [3]

    On the other hand the story for Dec 06, 2010 provokes thought. It deals with Wikileaks and the question as to whether it may actually be a construct of the intelligence world. It is a coherent piece. [4]

    On Feb 09, 2011 the website referred to an article by Michael Collins Piper posted on American Free Press which dealt with how instability and turmoil in the Arab world played into the hands of Zionism. The AANGIRFAN piece went on to attack long time critic of Zionism Ralph Schoenman and suggest he was a “disinformation agent” and a “deep cover CIA agent”. The article also referred to the 1969 moon landing as a hoax. [5]

    It is furthermore important to mention that there is no person or organisation identified in its profile as being responsible for the site. So, here is a mystery.

    One must note there is a disclaimer at the top of the site to the effect that views expressed on the site are not necessarily endorsed by whoever runs it.

    There is some very thought provoking and valuable material posted on AANGIRFAN. However, there is also some classic disinformation placed before the public. The professionally run disinformation operation contains a mix of truth and untruth. The truth is there to provide a carrier signal for the broadcast of the untruths. Disinformation on the web works by salting valid information with untruth so that actual reality becomes discredited in the mind of the viewer or so that the viewer becomes confused or else disillusioned with the search for verifiable fact.

    It is hard for a current events/history website to be always 100 percent accurate in what it presents. However, the quality of the material on AANGIRFAN is very uneven. Profundity is set side by side with nonsense. We can not be assured the website has been set up deliberately as a disinformation source. However, nonetheless, this is a valid presumption. Even if it were not deliberately set up as a disinformation ploy it inevitably functions as such because of the mix of material it contains and the effect this will have of readers/viewers.

    Even if we understand a website as a disinformation source this does not necessarily mean we avoid it at all costs. Instead we may decide to use it but with due care and discretion. For example AANGIRFAN contains many wonderful and thought provoking and well presented articles. If we were to avoid accessing the site altogether, we might miss some of these treats. If an individual has a deep knowledge of the subjects that interest him or her then they can develop skills for recognizing disinformation. With these skills misleading articles and video presentations can be mentally cast aside and relieved of their power to cause harm.

    We may discover a worthwhile article at a disinformation site and trace it to where it was originally placed online. If we want to reference it in an article of our own then we can reference the site where the article was originally put online. This will avoid the negative connotations of referencing a web resource tainted by an association with disinformation.

    [1] http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/30199.htm
    http://aangirfan.blogspot.ie/2005_07_01_archive.html

    [2] http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/29982.htm
    http://aangirfan.blogspot.ie/2005_07_01_archive.html

    [3] http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2010/12/assange-is-gay.html

    [4] http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2010/12/assanges-wikileaks-is-fake.html

    [5] http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2011/02/piper-schoenman-truth-lies-on-egypt.html

    Like

    • I cannot argue the points made about the aangirfan site (except that number 5 I happen to agree with, the moon landing was a hoax). The site has both doozies and duds. I once linked there under my favorites, but removed it after the debacle regarding the easily disproved “Hitler was a Jew, Rothschild, Zionist” meme perpetuated by Jim Condit and the like. But at the same time, every now and then, I will post a link to material that has been vetted by other sources (as in my recent link to the facebook pics of black friend of the Roof guy). I didn’t want to clog up that post with all the same pics (they can also be found elsewhere).

      As I remember another occasion, a regular commenter here was attacked and called disinformation, etc. Although I can’t vouch for people that comment here, I have had personal telephone communications with the man and feel he is genuine, whether or not he is accurate all the time. I can’t say that for some of the commenters at Aangirfan’s site, especially when they come here and attack me over the Boston Bombing and other issues like their gullible attraction to the bash Hitler crowd (mentioned above).

      Frankly, at this point (and it isn’t Hitler worship), anyone who continues to use the Hitler card when it is so easy to refute (and especially lash out at me or other commenters here) I consider a shill or stupid or both.

      As for the last comment:

      We may discover a worthwhile article at a disinformation site and trace it to where it was originally placed online. If we want to reference it in an article of our own then we can reference the site where the article was originally put online. This will avoid the negative connotations of referencing a web resource tainted by an association with disinformation.

      This is why I mentioned it was from Facebook (I don’t have a facebook account, so couldn’t link directly).

      Like

You Got Something To Say? Please keep your maw respectful and gab on topic.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s