Iran for beginners.

international | anti-war / imperialism | opinion/analysis Tuesday May 25, 2004 17:35 by iosaf the ipsiphi

a refresher of December 2002. so that you may better understand Mr Chalabi's problems today.

The US Propaganda machine, realising that the illegal war on Iraq has proved to be the nemesis they have so long avoided, are now desperate to shift blame.
and in the process prepare a "do Iran" situation. I would like to remind you that Iranians were invited to "do Iraq" by the US machine in December of 2002, which is the point at which I believe "the war" began if only in "covert mode".

The British establishment and public have long ago accepted that they were fooled into supporting a war by believing an intelligence report which was cobbled together off the internet. You may search here for "scud" and you'll get as much info as was passed to Blair, Bush and Aznar.

The Americans are now blaming Chalabi, an Iraqi who they supported and drafted to their government of occupation.

They turned on him in the last week.
If I may give you any advice at all, any "minima moralia" it this:-
Never accept a political position in a conflict zone from the US. It's akin to signing your own death warrent.

I am not spoon-feeding you today. I'm just going to tell you how it was so you can work out how it is.

Iran _did_ play a crucial role in the pre War period. In december of 2002, Muhamed Baqir Al Hakim was allowed cross the border between Iran and Iraq just south of Kurdistan with 50,000 loyal troops.
This started a covert war and allowed Kurds to secure their region. Bush at that point was bullying Belgium and France over the Turkish question.

Muhamed Baqir Al Hakim was a shia, and the plan was for his presence in Iraq to help quicken the establishment of a Shia zone in the east of Iraq which area is presently covered by the U.S. and Polish control zones.

Ayatolah Muhamed Baqir Al Hakim was killed shortly after the beginning of the US/K entity took control of Iraq.

Muhamed Baqir Al Hakim was thought to be the most likely man to achieve peace of some sort. Long before (the now also dead) Salim was presented as "the most likely man to achieve peace".

As I said I'm not spoonfeeding you.
I had thought last August and September that his card, and that of his 50,000 supporters had been played. I knew the 50,000 soldiers who outnumber the british 5 to 1, and account for a third of the US presence were poorly armed, and hardly trained and really didn't pose a normal military threat to the occupation, and so I stopped making mention of them, awaiting the day the US would return to this level of the "multi-dimensional chessboard" which is both their illegal occupation of Iraq and their resistance to the cultural and geo-political onslaught of a generation of Western Intellectuals who wish see their hegemony dismantled within four decades.

Now it seems the US in desperation to shift blame will play these Iranian Shia cards again, but this time accusing Chalabi of inviting this resistance force in, to support Iranian foreign policy.

Today's US media are pushing this line.

Use your own mind.
Form your own opinion.
I shall not be accused of dis-information on this one. But one warning, you will find in any research of Chalabli, Iran and Baqir Al Hakim, links that will tie in Italian Construction firms, chemical weapons, arms dealing, heroin routing and just to make it bedtime compatible in this year of Snuff Videos, a little bit of religion to boot.

If I wrote anymore, I'd be rash. = I'm not going to contradict the US/CIA on this one, just say, we are very intelligent in Europe, as they know, and we knew every twist and turn they might take to get control, to keep control and to justify control of Iraq's oil, and establish a system of puppet and client regimes from Sharon's Isreal to Afghanistan.

If Iran planned the war, it made a mistake.
And my knowledge of Iranians suggest to me that this is not so. They are a shrewd people who have since the presidency of Carter survived very concerted attempts to destabilise their regime.

Ireland too as I have pointed out before gave succour and refuge to many exiles after the Islamic revolution. Iran and Syria were always going to be "next" on the list. So if you now accept the WMD never existed, then be prepared for one year preparation of doing "Iran".

bakground on the Iranian Shiia Iraqi resistance:-
www.trepca.net/2003/0803/030825-lajme.htm
my good pal Chomsky, who knows how to communicate with academic types:-
generositywithoutborders.org/oh/Chomsky.pdf
my good pals the Guardian:- drawing the Kurdistan link to ayatolah Bakir.
www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/ story/0,7792,914242,00.html

the late 90s when all the characters were thought of as "good boys" who would help bring democracy to the Middle East.
www.muslimedia.com/archives/world98/unitycon.htm

the French without whom we honestly wouldn't have last so long.
www.unregardmoderne.com/ spip/viewvoir.php3?id_mot=43&debut_article=290

and finally those of Cambridge, who as the reader will know, provided with the Swedish the only truthful information in the lead-up to the War, when I didn't even trust the French.
It's a dsicussion reference to the "mystery"
"who killed Bakar?"
http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg04782.html

Sorry if this is frustrating for the reader, journalist etc., to know that in this information age, you can not find more that two sentances from Cambridge, guardain, france, Chomsky and Ipsiphi on a man who was "the hope of the west".

I suppose Chalabi would be able to help us more. In common parlance we call such denial of information "googlewashing".
I call it a clear sign "not to write/speak".
I invite any student to follow the clues, and write the essay, and "ahem" do _their best_ to stop the invasion of Iran by the good guys.


you know what to do:-
check google and your popular search engines and affix succint and witty comments.