Category: D. Rohrabacher

About D. Rohrabacher

Subscribe Feeds

Iran, de protesten en wat de media je niet vertellen………

Posted on by Telmo Claro
De protesten in Iran worden met grote graagte door de westerse media en politici uitgedragen als een welkome opstand tegen de fundamentalistische heersers, zonder rekening te houden met de huidige gematigde regering. Iran is fout punt uit!
Door deze eenzijdige reactie van het westen, krijgen juist de fundamentalistische heersers op de achtergrond de wind in de zeilen, immers het westen is allesbehalve een vriend van Iran of haar burgers. De roep om ingrijpen in Iran klinkt al jaren keihard, niet bepaald in de laatste plaats door de VS en het grootste deel van de NAVO leden. Daar deed de handreiking van Obama weinig aan af, een handreiking die intussen al weer is teruggedraaid door de Trump administratie……

De VS heeft trouwens al veel langer gewelddadige activisten in Iran gesteund, dit om de regering ten val te brengen (waarin ook Nederland een rol speelde) en reken maar dat de CIA zelf ook actief is in Iran……..
De huidige demonstranten zijn bepaald niet vreedzaam, zoals dit wel het geval was tijdens het grootste deel van de ‘Groene Revolutie’ in 2009, ze zijn gewapend en brengen grote vernielingen aan, zoals het in brand steken van gebouwen…… De aantallen demonstranten zijn een stuk minder groot dan men aanneemt in het westen. Politiebureaus en wapendepots zijn door demonstranten overvallen om zo aan meer wapens te komen….
Zoals gezegd: de kans is weer levensgroot dat een deel van de demonstranten in Iran is gekocht door de VS, die een reputatie hebben op het gebied van opstanden organiseren, opstanden die dan moeten uitlopen in het afzetten van een VS onwelgevallige regering……. Voorbeelden van het organiseren van dit soort opstanden door de VS (CIA), opstanden die in een coup moesten uitmonden en wat meestal lukt: Libië, Oekraïne, Syrië (in dit land mislukte de coup tegen Assad) en voor Zuid-Amerika Honduras, Brazilië en Venezuela (let wel: dit zijn de laatst bekende voorbeelden). In het volgende artikel kan u lezen dat Rex Tillerson, de VS minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, e.e.a. toegeeft wat betreft Iran, zo bleek uit een uitgelekt memorandum…..

 Ook in het volgende artikel (van Darius Shahtahmasebi) o.a. de stelling dat de conservatieve krachten in Iran baat hebben bij deze protesten om zo de gematigde president Rohani onder druk te zetten…… Dat de VS zelfs deze krachten zou steunen is niets nieuws, als de VS een regering ten val wil brengen, schijnt alles geoorloofd te zijn (zelfs samenwerking met terreurgroepen als IS en Al Qaida…)……

Everything the Media Isn’t Telling You About the Protests Rocking Iran Right Now

January 2, 2018 at 12:53 pm
(ANTIMEDIA Op-ed) — Over the past week, Iran has been hit with series of protests, reportedly in relation to the country’s current economic climate. Where this particular narrative is headed is of major concern because of the current atmosphere in the Middle East and its deadly dynamics.
Approximately two weeks ago, the truth about U.S. foreign policy was revealed in a leaked memo that purportedly coached Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on how to use human rights as a pretense to attack America’s adversaries
“Allies should be treated differently — and better — than adversaries. Otherwise, we end up with more adversaries, and fewer allies,” stated the memo, which was written by Tillerson’s influential policy aide, Brian Hook. Approximately two weeks ago, the truth about U.S. foreign policy was revealed in a leaked memo that purportedly coached Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on how to use human rights as a pretense to attack America’s adversaries
As part of the U.S. foreign policy playbook, in June 2017, Tillerson himself confirmed that official U.S. policy towards Iran included a regime change strategy. He said:
“We continually review the merits both from the standpoint of diplomatic but also international consequences of designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in its entirety as a terrorist organization. As you know, we have designated the Quds [Force]. Our policy towards Iran is to push back on this hegemony, contain their ability to develop obviously nuclear weapons, and to work toward support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government. Those elements are there, certainly as we know.” [emphasis added]
Around the same time, the Trump administration appointed Michael D’Andrea, the CIA’s “Dark Prince,” to head the CIA’s “Iran operations.” Given the CIA overthrew Iran’s democratically elected government in 1953, relying almost completely on one die-hard agent to do so, this program’s trajectory should be clear.
Barely days after D’Andrea’s appointment, Iran was coincidentally rocked by an ISIS-inspired attack. Republican congressman Rep. Dana Rohrabacher suggested the attack was “a good thing.”
In December, CIA director Mike Pompeo admitted he sent a letter to General Qassem Soleimani, a stalwart leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), saying he will hold Iran and Soleimani “accountable” for any attacks on Washington’s interests in Iraq. This is the same IRGC commander who announced Iran would begin supporting Palestinian forces in the Gaza strip after Trump’s infamous Jerusalem debacle.
Unsurprisingly, U.S. intelligence agencies reportedly just gave the green light to Israel to assassinate this commander, a clear act of war.

 The timing of the current protests has coincided with reports that the U.S. and Israel formulated a joint plan to specifically target Iran. This coincides with Nikki Haley’s grandiose anti-Iran performance, which has been full of deceit and hawkish propaganda. Further, Israel hopes these protests will be an opportunity to take the Iranian government’s attention away from Israel, according to a top intelligence expert.
Even without Iranians taking to the streets, it is clear that the Trump administration and its regional allies have been planning to take the fight to Iran.
Discerning the Truth About the Recent Protests
What should we make of the recent protests sweeping the country?
Even according to the mainstream media, the protests are not exactly what they seem. Iran’s president acknowledged that Iranians have a right to peaceful protest and that the protesters are not necessarily guided by foreign elements as “a number of them are the people who came to the streets because of their (economic) problems.”
“Criticism is different [from] violence and destroying public property,” he also reportedly said.
According to Haaretz, the protests were initially riled up by Iran’s conservative hard-line opposition to put pressure on the current Iranian president, who is considered a moderate. The protesters are not necessarily the democracy-seeking students the media has portrayed them as.
The mainstream media further acknowledged that the Iranian authorities are actively trying to avoid a massive crackdown. From Slate:
“It seems clear that Iranian leaders are trying to avoid a massive crackdown of the surprisingly large protests for now, worried that any huge repression could lead to a crisis similar to what took place in 2009.”
As Reuters explained:

“Iranian moderates are appealing for caution even though some hardliners are calling for an iron fist to crush one of the gravest threats to Iran’s clerical leaders, who came to power in the 1979 Islamic revolution.
“Those divisions are making it hard for the authorities to defuse spontaneous demonstration, especially as there are no apparent protest leaders who can be identified and rounded up.”
The media is still treating the videos of anti-government protesters shouting “Death to the dictator!” as “unconfirmed,” meaning they haven’t been properly verified. Or consider this recent Reuters report, which stated the following:
“Mohsen Nasj Hamadani, deputy security chief in Tehran province, said about 50 people had rallied in a square but most had left after being asked to by police, while a few who refused were ‘temporarily detained,’ the ILNA news agency reported.”
Carl Bildt, former Swedish prime minister and co-chair for the European Council on Foreign Relations quickly took to Twitter to state that there were “[r]eports of signals of international satellite TV networks jammed in large cities of Iran. Would be sign of regime fear of today’s protests spreading.” However, the only reports that can be found online of jammed international TV networks are from at least five years prior to the current unrest. Not surprisingly, Wikileaks cables suggested Bildt served as a U.S. government informant when he was just 27 years old.
In other words, it would pay to be overly meticulous when following the reports on this intricate topic.
To be clear, the protests are not nearly as concerned with Iran’s foreign policy as much as some media outlets are claiming they are. As the Atlantic explained:
“Unlike what President Trump suggests, the protests aren’t about Iran’s broader behaviour and foreign policy. And they’re not about the regime’s support for terrorism…their main concern lies in the price of day-to-day items and goods, such as poultry and eggs, as well as unemployment and access to services.”
The death toll in the protests and the authorities’ inevitable response quickly grew to at least 12 — a damning statistic for the Iranian government. However, whether the following allegations are true or not, the mainstream media has acknowledged that deaths occurred as a result of confrontation, specifically, the claim that armed protesters began storming military bases and police stations. Other government compounds were stormed, as well, with protesters lighting fires in government offices.
These are no longer students who are complaining about the price of eggs or the right to dress in modern clothing (in a remarkable coincidence, just before the protests erupted, Tehran’s police stated they would no longer arrest women for violating the Islamic dress code). Overrunning military bases and police stations with arms doesn’t make you a protester, it makes you a militant. As journalist Ben Norton wrote on his Facebook page, “If ‘armed protesters’ (quite a phrase) tried to overrun military bases and police stations in the US, it would declare martial law.”
Things may not be so dire in Iran to require an armed uprising just yet (just take a look at the thousands of pro-government supporters who have rallied the streets of Iran’s major cities). It would be disingenuous to pay sole attention to the anti-government protesters while ignoring the thousands of those who do support their government. This is not to say that Iranians do not have genuine cause to take to the streets and protest, but it certainly gives good cause to the international community that perhaps — just this once — it would do well to mind its own business.
Even according to some of the biggest corporate media outlets, there is likely foul play if people are taking arms against the Iranian government in the current circumstances. As the New York Magazine acknowledged:
“As The Guardian and New York Times point out, small protests focused on economic issues are normal in Iran, but politically charged protests across the country where people feel safe chanting ‘death to the dictator’ — a knock on Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei — are not. The protests will undoubtedly be an important test for the relatively moderate Rouhani, who has not been spared as a subject of chanting at the rallies; in his remarks on Sunday, Rouhani was clearly trying to walk a delicate line. There is also apparently suspicion among members of his administration and other reformers about what forces may be behind the unrest.” [emphasis added]
The West’s Hypocrisy is Staggering
Despite this, Donald Trump was quick to take to Twitter to condemn Iran and voice his support for the protesters. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert also said in a statement that the U.S. urged “all nations to publicly support the Iranian people and their demands for basic rights and an end to corruption.”
This is the same administration that banned the Iranian people from merely visiting the United States.
Even Hillary Clinton voiced her support for the Iranian people currently protesting against the government. Apparently, Clinton has forgotten about the video of her where she broke into hysterical laughter while talking about the U.S.’ desire to launch a war against Iran, which would undoubtedly kill hundreds of thousands of ordinary Iranians.
We would also do well to remember that after Donald Trump was elected U.S. president at the end of 2016, America was inundated with anti-Trump protests. Los Angeles police arrested at least 462 people at the time. America’s NATO ally Turkey arrested, detained, suspended, and fired tens of thousands of teachers, lawyers, military officers, and court officials (with at least 249 deaths in total) – and yet Donald Trump has only appeared to praise the Turkish government’s crackdown.
America’s Middle Eastern darling, Israel, has also been rocked by thousands of protesters participating in anti-corruption marches specifically targeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel also infamously locked up a young teenage girl who was brave enough to slap an Israeli soldier who had invaded her home.
For the sake of argument, let’s all agree that Iran’s protests are genuine. That fact alone isn’t grounds for an illegal regime change operation given the international standards the rest of the world has been operating under for years. Allowing Trump to take the protests for a ride to serve his own ludicrous foreign policy agenda also undermines the intellect and history of Iran and its people, as the Atlantic explains:
“Iranians aren’t ‘finally’ waking up and ‘getting wise,’ as Trump suggests. Instead, Iran has a dynamic and active civil society, which has created and embraced opportunities for reformation and progress for decades…And many Iranians have paid for these ideals with their lives.”
Don’t buy into the hypocrisy. Donald Trump does not care about ordinary Iranians, and he certainly doesn’t care about Iran’s access to democracy. If Donald Trump cared about the Iranian people’s economic concerns, the simple solution would be to stop unilaterally slamming the country with economic sanctions on a routine basis.
In the words of the Atlantic, Donald Trump “barely understands the country he’s repeatedly demonized.”
We’ve been here before. The groundwork is being laid for a direct confrontation with Iran, and we are naïve at best if we decide to take the bait. America’s footprint in the Middle East was never rooted in any concerns for human rights, and believe it or not, America’s interests and desires are always rooted in money.
The last thing Iran needs right now in order to move towards a more democratic and economically viable country is the direct interference of the United States, a country that has reportedly killed over one million Muslims since the 9/11 attacks.
If the Iranians want to exact change; they can and will do it themselves. As stated by the Tudeh Party of Iran, an Iranian communist party formed in 1941:
“It should be noted that under the critical conditions of the current dangerous regional tensions, the regional reaction – supported by the Trump administration in the US and the right-wing government of Netanyahu in Israel – is seeking to distinctly impact the developments in our country and to replace the current reactionary regime with another reactionary regime.
“The support of these forces…for the Iranian monarchists and those political groups whose agenda is to cooperate with the most reactionary regimes of the region and to persuade the European states to impose sanctions on Iran’s economy – thereby exacerbating the misery for the destitute and disadvantaged people of our country – and to encourage foreign states to interfere militarily in Iran, leaves no room whatsoever for any optimism regarding the future designs of such ‘opposition’…We should not let the past repeat itself whereby the heroic struggle of the nation for freedom, democracy and social justice is hijacked by a bunch of reactionary opportunities who do not believe in the people’s rights or democratic freedoms.”
Correction: A previous version of this article stated the Trump administration was behind the arrests of protesters in Los Angeles after his election in November 2016. It has been corrected to reflect that while police arrested protesters, they did not do so at the direction of the Trump administration as he had not yet taken office. Protesters at his inauguration, however, were arrested and have gone on to face charges this year.

============================

Zie ook:
‘Rutte 3 heeft begrip voor de moord op Soleimani en hoopt dat de VS zich niet terugtrekt uit Irak, een soeverein land >> westerse propaganda……‘

‘KLM vliegt na ‘risicoanalyse’ niet meer in luchtruim van Iran en Irak‘

‘Oorlog tegen Iran: VS heeft lak aan democratie >> Irak wordt gedreigd met sancties en ‘herstelbetaling’‘

‘VS moord op Qasem Soleimani is een oorlogsverklaring aan adres van Iran…….‘

 ‘Iran stelt terecht dat het VS leger een terroristische organisatie is‘

‘Iraakse regering pissig over VS beschuldiging dat Iraanse bewind corrupt is‘

 ‘Trump volgt het scenario van deep state: oorlog met Iran ‘is onvermijdelijk….’‘
‘Rudy Giuliani viert het sterven van Iraniërs en stelt desondanks dat het Iraanse bewind door de VS geweldloos zal ondergaan…….‘



‘Iraanse protesten gezien door de propaganda bril van de VS en de rest van het westen……..‘

 ‘Protesten Iran opgezet door de VS en Israël‘

 ‘Iraanse protesten allesbehalve compleet spontaan (zoals VS ambassadeur bij de VN Haley durfde te stellen…)….‘


‘Rudy Giuliani viert het sterven van Iraniërs en stelt desondanks dat het Iraanse bewind door de VS geweldloos zal ondergaan…….‘

 ‘US Empire Is Running The Same Script With Iran That It Ran With Libya, Syria‘

 ‘Nikki Haley (VS ambassadeur in de VN) bedreigt sjiitisch Iran met militair ingrijpen……‘ (klik ook op de links onder dat bericht)

 ‘VS liegt schaamteloos om het westen verder op te zetten tegen Iran……..‘

 ‘Reagan middels manipulaties tot president gekozen; waarom de gijzelaars in Iran moesten wachten op hun vrijheid….‘

 ‘Saoedi-Arabië beschuldigt Houthi’s en Iran van raketbeschieting en noemt dit een oorlogsverklaring…………‘




en zie:

Warmonger Called Out on Live TV After Pretending to Care About Iranian Protesters

Rex Tillerson (VS BuZA) geeft toe dat de VS een staatsgreep wil uitvoeren in Iran…….. Het is nog ‘iets te rustig’ in dat gebied……..

Posted on by Telmo Claro

De VS minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, Rex Tillerson, heeft toegegeven dat de VS uit is op ‘regime change’ in Iran (ofwel een staatsgreep). Dat het Iraanse volk onlangs nog heeft gekozen voor meer vrijheid en uiteindelijk een echte democratie zal de VS aan de reet roesten, men wil simpelweg een Iraanse regering die onderhorig is aan de VS en daarmee aan Saoedi-Arabië en Israël. De enige mogelijkheid daartoe is het installeren van een dictatoriaal regime, een specialiteit van de VS, dat altijd stelt democratie te willen brengen……….. Overigens voerde de VS (CIA) in 1953 al een staatsgreep uit tegen de democratisch gekozen Iraanse regering van Mossadegh

Tussen de regels door gaf Tillerson toe, dat de CIA al werkzaam is in Iran, toen hij stelde: “Our policy towards Iran is to push back on this hegemony, contain their ability to develop obviously nuclear weapons, and to work toward support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government. Those elements are there, certainly as we know.”

In dit zelfde citaat staat te lezen dat Tillerson ondanks alle bewijzen van het tegendeel, stelt dat Iran bezig is een atoomwapen te ontwikkelen……… Een uitspraak die duidelijk een opmaat is naar militair ingrijpen, niet voor niets is de VS bijna continu bezig de Iraanse marine uit te dagen, met manoeuvres voor de Iraanse kust….. Daarnaast is er Israël dat keer op keer stelt, dat Iran een gevaar is voor de regio en dat het land moet worden aangevallen…… Netanyahu, de premier van de fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël, heeft meermaals laten weten, dat Israël zich het recht voorbehoudt Iran aan te vallen.

Onder Obama werd Israël nog enigszins onder controle gehouden, met het beest Trump aan de macht in de VS is de vrees dan ook, dat Israël daadwerkelijk Iran zal aanvallen. Als dit gebeurt zal de VS deze immense terreurdaad verdedigen, als het al niet zal deelnemen aan die Israëlische aanval.

Stuitend dat Tillerson keihard durft te zeggen, dat Iran een destabiliserende factor is in het Midden-Oosten……. Als er één destabiliserende factor is in het Midden-Oosten, is het wel de grootste terreurentiteit op aarde: de VS…… Met haar illegale oorlogen (de ultieme vorm van terreur) tegen Afghanistan, Irak (met intussen meer dan 1,5 miljoen vermoordde Irakezen), Libië (dat wordt door de VS tot het Midden-Oosten gerekend) en nu weer Syrië, heeft de VS het Midden-Oosten in totale chaos gestort. Daarbij moet niet vergeten worden dat de VS verantwoordelijk is voor het ontstaan van IS (dat het zelfs jarenlang heeft gesteund en bovendien van wapens en voertuigen heeft voorzien, al dan niet via een andere grote terreurentiteit in het Midden-Oosten: Saoedi-Arabië…)…..

De VS heeft intussen zelfs toegegeven het chemisch wapen witte fosfor te hebben gebruikt in de strijd om Raqqa…….. Ofwel: hoeveel bewijs heb je nog nodig, om in te zien , dat de VS grootschalige terreur uitoefent

Afgelopen week spraken veel politici in de VS over de aanslagen in Iran, als was het een zegen. De republikeinse vertegenwoordiger voor Californië, Dana Rohrabacher stelde zelfs dat de VS terreuraanslagen tegen Iran moet steunen, waarbij ze zelfs steun wil geven aan IS, als die Iran nog eens aanvalt……. Voor Syrië heeft de VS Al Qaida van de terreurlijst gehaald, waarbij de VS represailles neemt, als het reguliere Syrische leger deze of andere terreurorganisaties (‘gematigde rebellen’) NB op eigen bodem aanvalt…….. (waar de VS volkomen illegaal op Syrische bodem strijd voert…….)

Eén ding is nu wel duidelijk: Iran staat als volgende op de lijst om te worden teruggebombardeerd in de tijd en in chaos te worden gestort door (ingrijpen van) de VS met hulp van Israël, Saoedi-Arabië en een paar van de Golfstaten……

Sec. of State Tillerson Admits US Policy of Regime Change for Iran

June 15, 2017 at 4:53 pm
(ANTIMEDIA) — In case there was any doubt, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has just confirmed that official U.S. policy towards Iran includes regime change, Think Progress reports.
During a Wednesday hearing before the House Foreign Affairs Committee regarding the 2018 State Department budget, Tillerson was asked whether or not the U.S. supports regime change in Iran. He replied affirmatively, stating that U.S. policy is driven by relying on “elements inside of Iran” to bring about a “peaceful transition of that government.”
Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) also asked Tillerson if the government would sanction the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – a powerful entity inside Iran.
“They are doing bad things throughout the world, on behalf of terrorism and destroying human rights of many people,” Poe said, referring to the IRGC.
“I’d like to know what the policy is of the U.S. toward Iran. Do we support the current regime? Do we support a philosophy of regime change, peaceful regime change? There are Iranians in exile all over the world. Some are here. And then there’s Iranians in Iran who don’t support the totalitarian state. So is the U.S. position to leave things as they are or set up a peaceful long-term regime change?”
“Well our Iranian policy is under development,” Tillerson replied.
“It’s not yet been delivered to the president, but I would tell you that we certainly recognize Iran’s continued destabilizing presence in the region, their payment of foreign fighters, their export of militia forces in Syria, in Iraq, in Yemen, their support for Hezbollah. And we are taking action to respond to Iran’s hegemony. Additional sanctions actions have been put in place against individuals and others.”
Tillerson also added:
“We continually review the merits both from the standpoint of diplomatic but also international consequences of designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in its entirety as a terrorist organization. As you know, we have designated the Quds [Force]. Our policy towards Iran is to push back on this hegemony, contain their ability to develop obviously nuclear weapons, and to work toward support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government. Those elements are there, certainly as we know.”
Tillerson’s reference to Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons above directly contradicts a letter he sent to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan in April of this year. The New York Times explained:
“The letter certified that Iran was complying with the agreement, negotiated by five world powers in addition to the United States and Iran. The International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors the agreement with on-site inspectors and advanced technology, reached the same conclusion in its most recent report.” [emphasis added]
This comes just over a week after Iran suffered an ISIS-inspired terror attack of its own, after which American lawmakers immediately proposed sanctions against the Islamic Republic, further demonstrating that the U.S. seeks to undermine Iran as much as possible. The sanctions were approved by the Senate on Thursday. Further, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) appeared to praise the ISIS attack on Iran, even suggesting the U.S. should support terrorists who commit attacks against the Iranian state.
Unsurprisingly, Iran was quick to respond to Tillerson’s aggressive statements. On Thursday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qassemi called Tillerson’s comments “interventionist, in gross violation of the compelling rules of international law, unacceptable and strongly condemned.”
“Since the 1950s, the United States tried to meddle in Iranian affairs by different strategies such as coup d’état, regime change, and military intervention,” Qassemi also stated.
These efforts have all failed, Qassemi said, adding that the new U.S. government is “confused” and could be “easily manipulated by wrong information.”
As Anti-Media has previously explained, Iran is one of the most heavily engaged entities fighting ISIS (and has been extremely effective in doing so). Even if Iran were supporting Houthi rebels in Yemen (the hard evidence for this claim to date has been woefully lacking), the Houthis are the sworn enemy of al-Qaeda and ISIS – two terror groups the U.S. is currently fighting.
This is not to whitewash Iran for its backing of militias on the ground who have committed atrocities — or Iran’s often heavy-handed treatment of its own people. However, the U.N. just claimed that U.S.-led airstrikes have killed over 300 civilians after barely a week of fighting in Syria (U.S.-backed forces have also admitted using white phosphorous on these civilian populations). Further, the U.S. also maintains close ties with other radical nations that have exported mass violence and suffering on an exponential level.
Clearly, the U.S.’ infatuation with Iran has nothing to do with human rights concerns, and apparently, it must be reiterated that regime change without any official direction from the U.N. is completely illegal.
Iran just elected a reformist for the second time (with a higher voter turnout than the U.S. elections in 2016). This reformist, Hassan Rouhani, is more than capable of cutting deals with the U.S and its allies.
According to Tillerson himself, as explained above, the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran is clearly working effectively, further reducing any concerns regarding Iran’s capacity to pose a nuclear threat to anyone.
Why seek to topple a government elected by its own people? For “democracy” and “freedom?” Or because Iran sells its oil in Yuan, a direct attack on America’s control over the financial markets?
The U.S. has previously interfered in Iran’s political structure. In 1953, the CIA overthrew Iran’s democratically elected leader, Mohammed Mossadegh, and replaced him with a brutal dictator, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. As explained by the Guardian, this interference clearly had little to do with democracy-building or human rights — and everything to do with oil:
“Britain, and in particular Sir Anthony Eden, the foreign secretary, regarded Mosaddeq as a serious threat to its strategic and economic interests after the Iranian leader nationalised the British Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, latterly known as BP. But the UK needed US support. The Eisenhower administration in Washington was easily persuaded.”
As far as we know, only one country has purposely used nuclear weapons against civilian populations and has continually used its stockpile of deadly weapons to topple a number of governments across the globe without facing legal ramifications.
That country is not Iran. As explained by intellectual Noam Chomsky:
“Why is Iran regarded here as the greatest threat to world peace? … They [the intelligence community] say Iran has very low military spending, even by the standards of the region, much lower than Saudi Arabia, Israel, [and] others. Its strategy is defensive. They want to deter attacks long enough for diplomacy to be entertained. The conclusion, intelligence conclusion—this is a couple years ago—is: If they are developing nuclear weapons, which we don’t know, but if they are, it would be part of their deterrent strategy.”
“Now, why is the United States and Israel even more so concerned about a deterrent? Who’s concerned about a deterrent? Those who want to use force. Those who want to be free to use force are deeply concerned about a potential deterrent.”
Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo

 Zie ook: ‘Iraakse regering pissig over VS beschuldiging dat Iraanse bewind corrupt is‘

en: ‘The United States, Israel, and Saudi Arabia Created and Funded ISIS‘

en: ‘VS steunt terreurgroepen als ISIS in Syrië………..‘

en: ‘Iraanse milities die samen met de Koerden ISIS bestreden, moeten Irak verlaten, zo stelt Tillerson (VS BuZa)……..‘

en: ‘Rutte en Koenders verantwoordelijk voor wapenleveranties aan IS!!‘

en: ‘Israël laat alweer haar ware terreur gezicht zien: IS kan tijdelijke ‘geallieerde worden’ in de strijd tegen Iran en Hezbollah………‘

en: ‘VS, de werelddictator: Iran-deal is van nul en generlei waarde (op basis van leugens en achterklap)…….‘

en: ‘CIA valt nogmaals door de mand als wapenleverancier van IS…….‘

en: ‘IS verklaart Hamas de oorlog, opvallend kort nadat een Israëlische veiligheidsdienst IS als eventuele bondgenoot tegen Iran aanwees……..‘

en: ‘Israël ondersteunt IS, aldus de Israëlische ex-minister van Defensie Ya’alon………….‘


en: ‘Al Qaida de bondgenoot van de VS in de strijd tegen…… terrorisme! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘ (intussen heeft de VS ‘Al Qaida Syrië’ van de zwarte lijst met terreurorganisaties gehaald!!)

en: ‘US TRAINED REBELS GIVE WEAPONS TO TERROR GROUP‘

en: ‘Made in America: US-Trained ‘Moderate’ Rebels, With Blessing Of Americans, Seling US Weapons to ISIS‘

en: ‘Exactly how the US trained and armed ISIS‘