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

Written
by Darius
Shahtahmasebi

(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.