Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
Back to Main

June 25, 2009
Links June 25 09

Please add your links, views and news in the comments.

Posted by b on June 25, 2009 at 05:58 UTC | Permalink
Comments

Staking out the alt territory on the Iranian election, which holds that Ahmadinejad did win and the opposition is fueled if not based upon the work of foreign agent provocateurs, is too clever and too savvy by half. It’s a nice story and there might be some elements of truth to the various parts but it’s just that, a story. Reality is always much more complex than simple stories. If the American MSM story is equally as simplistic isn’t in dispute by me.
The complexity of Iranian politics and the unwieldy structure of the government based as it is upon shared power between religious and democratic forces, with the religious having the upper hand, is not some simple liberal conservative stand off. For one Khamenei isn’t some well respected icon of Shiite learning and authority. His religious standing is third rate. Shiite tradition is always distrustful of political authority and Khomeini’s design is an odd bastard which many of the real religious heavyweights in Qom have always been uneasy with. In fact the separation of church and state is an old tradition. Before Ahmadinejad a mild reformer won two elections quite handily. His power limited by elites seeking power and money like those anywhere else and who want more and are now willing and eager to use nascent totalitarian tactics to keep and grow it.
Links to a different kind of story. Not definitive. No story ever is.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KF18Ak01.html
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KF25Ak02.html

Posted by: rapier | Jun 25 2009 7:02 utc | 1

The shite tradition is similar to the Catholic Church in that it is hierarchical. That would seem to play against your claim, Rapier, but I am viewing this from a more ideological perspective. Further, I believe this is a force that works against the revolt as the Clergy do lead many.
Confucius said it well, “people can be made to follow, they can’t be made to understand.”

Posted by: scott | Jun 25 2009 8:43 utc | 2

sure the stories always tell more about the person who tells them than the story itself.
me personally I like to read it as diminishing cultural hegemony of old and new colonialist powers.
the ideology of the Islamic revolution is much more than medieval theology – look up
Ali Shariati http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Shariati
and the fact that people may be interested now in thinkers like him, may be interested in Iranian history is a huge PR success for the “Mullahs”
the dissolution of the Eastern block was won by jeans and hard rock, my guess they tried that this time, too
it does not work that way today, and young western Muslim women insisting on wearing a headscarf – and Obama acknowledging that in his Cairo speech – bear witness to that

Posted by: outsider | Jun 25 2009 8:47 utc | 3

There is a whopping factual error in that Guardian piece on “Iran’s Manufactured Revolution”… at which point I stopped reading, though I’m sure the rest of it was fine….

Posted by: 99 | Jun 25 2009 8:57 utc | 4

I came across this article, on ancient North Indian/Bactrian political history, over on the Colonel’s site. Don’t know if y’all will think it off topic, but i thought some here might find it as interesting as i did.

Posted by: china_hand2 | Jun 25 2009 8:57 utc | 5

@ 4. That Guardian piece on “Iran’s Manufactured Revolution” had no value at all. The guy had no credentials on Iran. It was a belief piece, without evidence. The Guardian’s CiF is like that, they hand out slots to all sorts of people, who may have agendas, who may know nothing (as in this case). the columns are just intended to provoke debate. They should not be equated with serious journalism. Though quite often they’re good.

Posted by: Alex_no | Jun 25 2009 9:23 utc | 6

from Wikipedia – the Guardian piece summary of the result of the Orange revolution looks correct to me:
“Despite having ruled out any post-election deals with the parties headed by either Yushchenko or former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, as well as the animus between himself and the president, Yanukovych and Yushchenko alike were forced to come to terms following the former’s electoral victory. In exchange for Yanukovych’s assurance that he will not interfere with the pro-Western international ambitions of the President, Yushchenko commissioned Yanukovych to form a government in cooperation with his own Our Ukraine party on August 3, 2006 (several hours after the deadline for doing so expired). The so-called “humanitarian” ministries, as well as the army and the police, remain headed by Yushchenko’s allies, but the ministries dealing with the economy and finances, as well as all deputy Prime Ministerial posts, came under Yanukovych’s control.
Erstwhile Yushchenko ally and former Prime Minister, Tymoshenko, announced her intention to lead her party into opposition immediately afterwards.[12]
Alliance of National Unity supporters on Maidan Nezalezhnosti in Kiev during the 2007 Ukrainian political crisis.
On May 25, 2007, Viktor Yanukovych was assigned the post of appointed chairman of the Government Chiefs Council of the Commonwealth of Independent States.[13]
In the parliamentary elections on September 30, 2007, the Party of Regions won 175 out of 450 seats (34.37 percent of the votes) in the Verkhovna Rada. Despite increasing its overall percentage of support compared to the 2006 election (when it was 32.14 percent), the party lost 130,000 votes and 11 parliamentary seats.[14] After the Our Ukraine and the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc formed a coalition government on December 18, 2007, the Party of Regions went into the opposition.
In 2009, Yanukovych announced his intent to run for President upcoming presidential election, to be contested in January 2010. He is currently considered one of the leading candidate by different polling sources.[15]”

Posted by: outsider | Jun 25 2009 9:58 utc | 7

b,
Is there anyway that you could tell us how convincing you find the evidence that the USA was behind or partially behind the events taking place in Iran. I am surprised to find that many on the left are very pleased with the events as they would like to see a secular democracy there instead of an Islamic Republic.
In my opinion, the covert arms (there are many) of the American government are working overtime to destabilize the Iranian government and have been for some time.

Posted by: Joseph | Jun 25 2009 10:42 utc | 8

“Iran? The U.S. should mind its own business”
Iranian-American journalist Hooman Majd separates facts from fantasies about the Iranian protests
By Jeanne Carstensen
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/06/25/hooman_majd/index.html

Posted by: thomas | Jun 25 2009 12:34 utc | 9

thanks for the links today – they take my mind off the disinformation campaign going into full sway on another thread
tho one or the iranian hacks from one of the ned funded organisations finally are placing the scurrilous allegation against hezbollah & hamas. hoprfully these lies will condemn them at a later date – but if judith miller & that whole gaggle of ‘journalists’ who cheerleaded the invasion of iraq is anything to go by – it eems they have neither meorty or conscience

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 25 2009 13:31 utc | 10

Interesting comment on this blog post:

A situation I envisaged some time ago.
Should be shouted loud by all MSM.
In the US, I am reading of quiet instructions to US embassies to purchase enough of whatever their local currency is, to last “normal operations” anywhere between 6 and 12 months.
Massive amounts of $ are being dispatched to them for these purchases, which should be “quiet”.
Timescale for a “bank holiday”, – anywhere between 90 days and 180 days.
The only restriction is that they don’t purchase the £.
Add in the IMF, OECD recent words, and Mervs words to the select committee, and you start to get nervous.
I had anticipated the devaluation of the £ and the $ to be slow and controlled, as it would aid S E Asia divestment of $ and £, so some “event” is being considered as a trigger. It could be international sanctions by bond vigilantes, or the BIS or IMF as you suggest.
Really, I have no notion of what the “event” could be, but also, there is Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan-with-nukes, or a miscalculation by Israel, or North Korea, or it could be foney and fraudi rearing up again. It could also be legal action against any or all of the oligarchs, or Fed, or Treasury officials.
I can see a domino effect from the US affecting the UK, but not the reverse!
Interesting times.
Protect yourselves.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jun 25 2009 13:59 utc | 11

The Bilderberg report
More info that you should be reading about… but aren’t!

Posted by: DavidS | Jun 25 2009 14:00 utc | 12

i certainly wish the victory in the amazon would get a little more play, but considering their plight is fuck-all to most folks, it’s not surprising.

Posted by: Lizard | Jun 25 2009 14:56 utc | 13

There’s no way in hell that out healthcare industry, just like our defense industry, could ever break even, much less make a profit, without receiving gobs and gobs of federal subsidies, galore. This is why the private sector would never, ever consider using its own money to finance either healthcare or defense, if these two industries were force to survive on their own with little to no support from Uncle Sam.
So the sooner the American people realize this, the sooner we’ll realize that our so-called “entrepreneurs” who’ve been making a killing in healthcare, just as they are in defense, are doing so at great cost to us as taxpayers. And then the sooner we realize that tax dollars aren’t infinite, meaning they don’t grow on trees, the sooner we’ll realize that we have no other choice but to choose between making deep cuts in either our medical or military apparatus. And unless we as a people value killing brown people halfway around the world over having a healthy population here at home, it’s a no-brainer for us to put the axe to the DoD!

Posted by: Cynthia | Jun 25 2009 15:01 utc | 14

I hadn’t thought of it in those binary terms before (killing people abroad vs. healthy people at home). But while I know which side I would pick, I’ll bet a significant percentage of Americans really do value killing brown people halfway around the world over having a healthy population at home.

Posted by: conqueso | Jun 25 2009 15:15 utc | 15

Conqueso-
Yeah, you’re right about that.
As a little leaguer propagandist I suppose it would depend on how the question was put to the american people.
If you just worded it, “Would you rather have your money spent killing brown people or keeping your family healthy?” I’d guess the healthcare would win.
But it is always worded, ” Do you want your hard-earned tax dollars going to support some half-breed welfare queen and her chitlins or would you rather it spent to keep your family safe from those ass-raping brown people that even as we speak are sneaking 6,000 miles, walking, no crawling like snakes upon the ocean to avoid being seen towards your bed and will be there in two days if we don’t have money for the military?”
Yeah, you know how the TV heads vote then don’t you.
Words are the most dangerous bombs as Uncle $cam is fond of reminding us… but so few listen.

Posted by: DavidS | Jun 25 2009 15:30 utc | 16

Pensioners Kidnap, Torture Financial Advisor Who Lost £2m

Pensioners battered a financial adviser with Zimmer frames before kidnapping and torturing him for losing £2million of their savings. James Amburn, 56, was ambushed outside his home in Speyer, western Germany, bound with masking tape and bundled into a car boot. ‘It took them quite a while because they ran out of breath,’ said Mr Amburn, who was driven to the Bavarian lakeside home of one of the gang. Another couple, retired doctors, joined the kidnappers in the cellar where Mr Amburn was chained and tortured for four days last week.

Posted by: hans | Jun 25 2009 15:31 utc | 17

@R’Giap
They have no credibility and what they don’t seem to realise is that like all propaganda and disinformation that ‘quantity’ does not equate to ‘quality’, in fact, exactly the opposite !
One cannot take seriously the rants when MOA are homogenously and alternately grouped as idealogues, communists, neo-nazis, anti-imperialists, leftist crackpots, etc, and collectively and individually attacked and insulted, etc, etc
As always, the labels and language are used as weapons to provoke, insult, offend, but most of all, as a tool to attempt to disempower, dissuade and suppress.
If one does not respect the voice, why be concerned at all by the insults or barbs … yet such from someone trusted and respected may wound deeply …
Your humanity and sincerity in communications are worth hundreds of posts of the chafe … they’re intent is not to inform or share knowledge or insight …
‘Tis healthier to laugh than cry and given thier insubtantive drivel, repeated ad nauseam, it can be, from a certain perspective, rather humorous … though these events and thier impact are far from so, and they suck up all the air …
@Arnold Evans & Lizard
Thank you for your patient, persistent, reasoned endeavours against the onslaught …
Argh, apologies for my clumsy language … very fatiqued today … my 2c are up

Posted by: Outraged | Jun 25 2009 16:21 utc | 18

@Joseph @8 – Is there anyway that you could tell us how convincing you find the evidence that the USA was behind or partially behind the events taking place in Iran. I am surprised to find that many on the left are very pleased with the events as they would like to see a secular democracy there instead of an Islamic Republic.
In my opinion, the covert arms (there are many) of the American government are working overtime to destabilize the Iranian government and have been for some time.
Bush allocated $400 million for regime change in Iran, Congress another $75 million. Now the Bush administration was of course a lousy spender where all hands try to grab money before it was put to use (Haliburton etc.) but still some of the money was put to use. To whom? For what? Wait a bit and we will find out.
BTW who finances the BBC’s TV program in Farsi, started only two month ago. Making TV isn’t exactly cheap.

Posted by: b | Jun 25 2009 16:34 utc | 19

USA Sends Weapons to Help Somali Government Repel Rebels Tied to Al-Qaeda
what fucking Somali Government ?????

Posted by: DFH | Jun 25 2009 16:47 utc | 20

USA Sends Weapons to Help Somali Government Repel Rebels Tied to Al-Qaeda
that entire washington post article is a heaping pile of bullshit, disinformation, misinformation and outright lies – complete crap.
all this is is justification for AFRICOM. jeebus.

Posted by: DFH | Jun 25 2009 16:51 utc | 21

US reneges on Iraq withdrawal promises

The United States retracts its initial promise of commitment to withdrawing its troops from Iraqi cities by the end of the month of June.
On Wednesday, a spokesman for the US military in Iraq, Brigadier General Steve Lanza, said a number of the country’s troops are to remain in the urban areas after the June 30 deadline, Reuters reported.

Posted by: Outraged | Jun 25 2009 17:12 utc | 22

@DFH – ever noticed our Africa Comments?
Of cause the WaPo piece is full of crap. The U.S proxy government, paid with U.S. money now gets again U.S. weapons. Next: The marines …

Posted by: b | Jun 25 2009 17:36 utc | 23

Hm, interesting …
Back to square one
Israel’s obsession with nuclear weapons …

Of course there are also other reasons why Israelis are terrified of the possibility of Iran or any other Islamic or Arab country in the region developing nuclear arms. Decision- makers in Tel Aviv are trying to keep silent over these reasons so as not to increase motivation for joining the nuclear arms race. Yet according to comments Israeli security experts made before the Knesset’s foreign affairs and security committee, there is a list of reasons for the concern Israel is trying to hide over the possibility of Iran or any Arab country in the region developing nuclear capacities, even if they are considered moderate countries. These reasons include the following:

Posted by: Outraged | Jun 25 2009 18:15 utc | 24

DavidS,
I’ll be the first to admit that I exaggerated how destructive our military is to ourselves and the world around us. But with federal funds becoming increasingly scarce these days, it’s not an exaggeration for me to say that we have no other choice but to make deep cuts in either defense or healthcare. And given a choice between making cuts in something whose mission it is to shoot down, spy on, and lock up others, and making cuts in something whose mission it is to improve the health and well-being of its citizens, anyone with half a brain would choose cuts in defense over healthcare.

Posted by: Cynthia | Jun 25 2009 18:46 utc | 25

Apparently, some agency within Iran is now seeking the public’s help in identifying people taking part in the demonstrations. There has been some discussion and attempts to take the site down through a DOS attack.

Posted by: Obelix | Jun 25 2009 19:23 utc | 26

For the alpha of Google’s Farsi-to-English translator see:
http://translate.google.com/?sl=fa&tl=en#

Posted by: Obelix | Jun 25 2009 19:32 utc | 27

Cynthia–
I agreed with you.
My little diatribe was only trying to be ironic in displaying the way language can be manipulated to make the same people “choose” differently about the same idea.
I don’t think you were exaggerating the destructiveness of our military – just image what could be done if just a quarter of that money was a) put back into people’s wallets as tax breaks, or b) used to fund social programs?
I imagine more happy people, but first you’d have to convince them to give-up their bigscreen tv and they’d rather have you take their gun than their television.

Posted by: DavidS | Jun 25 2009 20:10 utc | 28

For some reason, that reminds of this story some Senator told on the Sunday news shows about this woman who came up to him in an airport recently and told him to make sure the government never got its hands on her Medicare. People are just… I don’t even know.

Posted by: conqueso | Jun 26 2009 0:13 utc | 29

For some reason, that reminds of this story some Senator told on the Sunday news shows about a woman who came up to him in an airport recently and told him to make sure the government never got its hands on her Medicare. People are just… I don’t even know.

Posted by: conqueso | Jun 26 2009 0:13 utc | 30

…anyone with half a brain would choose cuts in defense over healthcare.
I think that should actually read:
…anyone with half a brain would choose cuts in offense over healthcare….

Posted by: china_hand2 | Jun 26 2009 3:30 utc | 31

True, china_hands, our defense has become increasingly more offensive over the years — at least in my lifetime it has.

Posted by: Cynthia | Jun 26 2009 5:38 utc | 32

Back to Main