US and the Jews want to conquer Iran through Mousavi....
http://www.infowars.com/soros-the-cia-mossad-and-the-new-media-destabilization-of-iran/
Soros, the CIA, Mossad and the new media destabilization of Iran
James Corbett
The Corbett Report
June 23, 2009
It’s the 2009 presidential election in Iran and opposition leader Mir-Houssein
Mousavi declares victory hours before the polls close, insuring that any result
to the contrary will be called into question. Western media goes into
overdrive, fighting with each other to see who can offer the most hyperbolic
denunciation of the vote and President Ahmadenijad’s apparent victory (BBC wins
by publishing bald-faced lies about the supposed popular uprising which it is
later forced to retract). On June 13th, 30000 “tweets” begin to flood Twitter
with live updates from Iran, most written in English and provided by a handful
of newly-registered users with identical profile photos. The Jerusalem Post
writes a story about the Iran Twitter phenomenon a few hours after it starts
(and who says Mossad isn’t staying up to date with new media?). Now, YouTube is
providing a “Breaking News” link at the top of every page linking to the latest
footage of the
Iranian protests (all shot in high def, no less). Welcome to Destabilization
2.0, the latest version of a program that the western powers have been running
for decades in order to overthrow foreign, democratically elected governments
that don’t yield to the whims of western governments and multinational
corporations.
featured stories Soros, the CIA, Mossad and the new media destabilization of
Iran
Ron Paul featured stories Soros, the CIA, Mossad and the new media
destabilization of Iran
Soros henchman Evgeny Morozov is extolling the virtues of the new Tehran
Twitter revolution.
Ironically, Iran was also the birthplace of the original CIA program for
destabilizing a foreign government. Think of it as Destabilization 1.0: It’s
1953 and democratically-elected Iranian leader Mohammed Mossadegh is following
through on his election promises to nationalize industry for the Iranian
people, including the oil industry of Iran which was then controlled by the
Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. The CIA is sent into the country to bring an end to
Mossadegh’s government. They begin a campaign of terror, staging bombings and
attacks on Muslim targets in order to blame them on nationalist, secular
Mossadegh. They foster and fund an anti-Mossadegh campaign amongst the radical
Islamist elements in the country. Finally, they back the revolution that brings
their favoured puppet, the Shah, into power. Within months, their mission had
been accomplished: they had removed a democratically elected leader who
threatened to build up an independent, secular
Persian nation and replaced him with a repressive tyrant whose secret police
would brutally suppress all opposition. The campaign was a success and the lead
CIA agent wrote an after-action report describing the operation in glowing
terms. The pattern was to be repeated time and time again in country after
country (in Guatemala in 1954, in Afghanistan in the 1980s, in Serbia in the
1990s), but these operations leave the agency open to exposure. What was needed
was a different plan, one where the western political and financial interests
puppeteering the revolution would be more difficult to implicate in the
overthrow.
Enter Destabilization 1.1. This version of the destabilization program is less
messy, offering plausible deniability for the western powers who are
overthrowing a foreign government. It starts when the IMF moves in to offer a
bribe to a tinpot dictator in a third world country. He gets 10% in exchange
for taking out an exorbitant loan for an infrastructure project that the
country can’t afford. When the country inevitably defaults on the loan
payments, the IMF begins to take over, imposing a restructuring program that
eventually results in the full scale looting of the country’s resources for
western business interests. This program, too, was run in country after
country, from Jamaica to Myanmar, from Chile to Zimbabwe. The source code for
this program was revealed in 2001, however, when former World Bank chief
economist Joseph Stiglitz went public about the scam. More detail was added in
2004 by the publication of John Perkin’s Confessions of an
Economic Hitman, which revealed the extent to which front companies and
complicit corporations aided, abetted and facilitated the economic plundering
and overthrow of foreign governments. Although still an effective technique for
overthrowing foreign nations, the fact that this particular scam had been
exposed meant that the architects of global geopolitics would have to find a
new way to get rid of foreign, democratically elected governments.
* A d v e r t i s e m e n t
* efoods
Destabilization 1..2 involves seemingly disinterested, democracy promoting NGOs
with feelgood names like the Open Society Institute, Freedom House and the
National Endowment for Democracy. They fund, train, support and mobilize
opposition movements in countries that have been targeted for destabilization,
often during elections and usually organized around an identifiable color.
These “color revolutions” sprang up in the past decade and have so far
successfully destabilized the governments of the Ukraine, Lebanon, Georgia and
Kyrgyzstan, among others. These revolutions bear the imprint of billionaire
finance oligarch George Soros. The hidden hand of western powers behind these
color revolutions has threatened their effectiveness in recent years, however,
with an anti-Soros movement having arisen in Georgia and with the recent
Moldovan “grape revolution” having come to naught (much to the chagrin of
Soros-funded OSI’s Evgeny Morozov).
Now we arrive at Destabilization 2.0, really not much more than a slight tweak
of Destabilization 1.2. The only thing different is that now Twitter, Facebook,
YouTube and other social media are being employed to amplify the effect of (and
the impression of) internal protests. Once again, Soros henchman Evgeny Morozov
is extolling the virtues of the new Tehran Twitter revolution and the New York
Times is writing journalistic hymns to the power of internet new media…when it
serves western imperial interests. We are being asked to believe that this
latest version of the very (very) old program of U.S. corporate imperialism is
the real deal. While there is no doubt that the regime of Ahmadenijad is
reprehensible and the feelings of many of the young protestors in Iran are
genuine, you will forgive me for quesyioning the motives behind the monolithic
media support for the overthrow of Iran’s government and the installation of
Mir-Houssein “Butcher of
Beirut” Mousavi.
===
Ayo Belajar Islam sesuai Al Qur'an dan Hadits
http://media-islam.or.id
Jatuh cinta itu seperti apa ya rasanya? Temukan jawabannya di Yahoo!
Answers! http://id.answers.yahoo.com
