May 19, 2011 § 1 Comment
The phrase “divide and conquer” has been synonymous with the greatest military minds in history such as Julius Ceaser and Sun Tzu. To the global elite who govern us the phrase ‘divide and conquer’ is being used literally on whole countries in order to pursue their goals. This strategy can be seen in the Middle East where dozens of ‘revolutions’ are occurring to topple age-old despots who are useless to the global elite.
One can look no further than the growing unrest that is occurring in Yemen, Syria, Pakistan and Egypt.Nor can one ignore the growing tension growing in Israel as they scramble to finally finish off Palestine. While Turkey struggles to rule as stronger Kurdish attacks are to occur.
Already the media machine has begun its war mongering. Already it has began to brainwash ignorant Americans that Pakistan is a true terrorist state. That it was actually hiding Osama bin Laden and it is funding extremists. Pakistan is already faces its own problems the most important being the differing views amongst its tribes of people who with a American funded “revolution” will surely balkanize the region.
Already Iraq has collapsed. While Saddam Hussein was a tyrant he still kept the country together. The Sunni’s and Shiite populations were under control and living in harmony. Now that harmony has been distrubted by foreign intervention, the country is in economic ruin and the people are in disarray. Already Iran has been isolated from the world. The image that the country is run by some sort of Nazi that is trying to create nuclear weapons is still fresh in the minds of the sheeple. As Israel runs training operations in Iraq with the blessing of the United States and the UN Iran can only wait for the inevitable.
One must understand how this whole thing has been planned ages ago. How these revolutions are only a step to a greater catastrophe that being World War III. The global elites have already began their plan. The Middle East is falling apart with pseudo states ready to emerge. Soon our maps of the Middle East will truly be like those proposed by Bernard Lewis.
May 8, 2011 § Leave a comment
AHMED THE HOLOCAUST DENIER?
Word by word translation:
Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
“..The word “regime.” pronounced just like the English word with an extra “eh” sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase “rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods” (regime occupying Jerusalem).”
“So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want “wiped from the map”? The answer is: nothing. That’s because the word “map” was never used. The Persian word for map, “nagsheh” is not contained anywhere in his original Farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase “wipe out” ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran’s president threatened to “wipe Israel off the map.” despite never having uttered the words “map.” “wipe out” or even “Israel.”
^ The best article I have found to disprove this fallacy.
THE NUMBER GAME AND HOW THE MEDIA DISTORTED THE TRUTH
Other sources of evidence:
“…They ignore the fact that Ahmadinejad’s 62.6 per cent of the vote in this year’s election is essentially the same as the 61.69 per cent he received in the final count of the 2005 presidential election, when he trounced former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani.”
Now, the only people here suffering are the Mousavi protestors who believe they are right and their vote was actually stolen. This is propelled my Mousavi himself and possibly outsiders as well..
The simple fact that Mousavi claimed victory before the results came out is confusing…to say the least.
“According to a wide variety of news sources (for example, London Telegraph, Yahoo News, The Globe and Mail, Asbarez.com, Politico), “Before the polling closed Mr. Mousavi declared himself ‘definitely the winner’ based on ‘all indications from all over Iran.’ He alleged widespread voting irregularities without giving specifics and hinted he was ready to challenge the final results.” Other news sources, which might not have been aware that the polls were kept open several hours beyond normal closing time in order to accommodate the turnout, reported that Mousavi made his victory claim the minute polls closed.”
This article by Paul Craig Roberts an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration explains that Mousavi was prime minister from 1981-1989 and knew about the Beirut bombing which killed American solders and he was the same guy who started Iran’s nuclear program. So why is he suddenly a “reformist” and better than Ahmed.?
“..More evidence of orchestration is provided by the protesters’ chant, “death to the dictator, death to Ahmadinejad.” Every Iranian knows that the president of Iran is a public figure with limited powers. His main role is to take the heat from the governing grand Ayatollah. No Iranian, and no informed Westerner, could possibly believe that Ahmadinejad is a dictator. Even Ahmadinejad’s superior, Khamenei, is not a dictator, as he is appointed by a government body that can remove him.”
Lastly, the famed statistics which have “shown” the elections were a fraud:
>>But Silver doesn’t find the evidence compelling. He examined results for the presidential race between Barack Obama and John McCain, plotting six points on the chart where results would have come in on election night, and found a similar linear progression. He says it’s not hard to find such progression in other elections as well.<<
>>Silver also examined how conservatives fared in Iran’s 2005 election to see if individual provinces voted differently this time. He found a couple of anomalies, but only one that stood out glaringly: In Lorestan, where conservative candidates altogether got only about 20 percent of the vote in 2005, Ahmadinejad alone got 71 percent of the vote this year.<<
“[It’s] nothing I would consider conclusive proof,” Silver says
>>In earlier versions of this report I mentioned that “fraud is certainly a reasonable inference in light of reports that ‘Iran’s Guardian Council has admitted that the number of votes collected in 50 cities surpass the number of those eligible to cast ballot in those areas’ (Press TV, 2009).” Whether that finding by the Guardian Council is evidence of fraud is disputed. The Guardian Council itself reportedly found nothing suspicious in their
investigation, citing the fact that voters in Iran can vote wherever they choose.<<
^ This article gives the reader a perfect example of how the media chooses to present its news. It focuses most of its attention in favour of fraud yet concludes that statics may not be able to show the whole picture based on a number of other factors. So, if you havent read the whole article you come to the conclusion that the Iranian elections are fraud.
In conclusion, ive given more than enough evidence showing the Western world has influenced Iran and this case cannot be any different this time. The lies that are surrounding Iran in our media outlets are only to be used as a reason to invade the country for its riches just as Amerika has done in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s the same tactics being used with just a different name…
May 1, 2011 § Leave a comment
I always thought Muammar Gaddafi was batshit insane, the guy is surrounded by female bodyguards, he’s so batshit paranoid he sleeps in a tent and refuses to travel in a plane for longer than 2-3 hours. Lets not forget the dress code which I swear is the clothing of the future.
Just look at him:
My opinion on the guy didn’t change during the start of the Libyan Crisis where he had ordered his army to shoot down peaceful protestors. However, at this point i had no idea who the hell the opposition was.. These “reformers” as the mass media states. The main question that has never been resolved is why did this uprising begin out of the blue? Gaddafi has been in power for over 40 years and despite being bat shit insane he was the man who provided Libyans some of the most basic necessities which were lacking.
Like roads. Hospitals. Running water. Shit most African countries can only dream of.
But the fact that Libya is one the most developed nations in Africa due to this one man is downplayed and never discussed in the mass media. To the mass media Gaddafi is a bloodthirsty liar who believes these reformers are from Al Qaeda. Laugh at him the television says and the vast majority of the world does.
“Haha, look at that crazy asshole” the sheeple say
But does he have a point?
I can honestly say i was part of the sheeple until I decided to search the internet (god bless it) and came upon this:
Now, I don’t believe al-Qaeda even exists for a boatload of reasons but that’s not the issue today.
The issue is these reformers. These people who fight for FREEDOM! FOR EQUALITY! FOR DEMOCRACY!
These same “reformers” which are fighting for “democracy” in Libya are the same fundamental Islamists that went to Iraq and Afghanistan to help out in the insurgency. The same people who have links to ‘Al-Qaida’. In simpler terms, the bad guys according to the powers in charge.
So why are the major powers so supportive of these individuals? Why is there such an uproar against Gaddafi now? Didnt the world powers know who they were selling weapons (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1360079/How-Britain-sell-arms-Gaddafi-Libya-bleat-democracy.html) to a bloodthirsty tyrant who kills its own protestors? (the only evidence is coming from grainy videos and posts from random people on twitter ).
I wish I knew the answers. I can only guess and pose questions which will probably never be answered in my lifetime.
Some possible reasons:
1) Libya has oil
A lot of people seem to point towards this notion saying Gaddafi was ready to nationalize all the oil ports and such but is waging war for such a valuable commodity counter productive? The money, time and resources wasted on this expedition would clearly outweigh any financial gain from securing oil in Libya.
2) Humanitarian Intervention
Probably the most bullshit reason. If the UN suddenly gave two shits about tyrants and despots the UN would be in constant war. Countries like Israel would have a no fly zone, North Korea wouldnt exist, Saudi Arabia wouldnt exist, tyrants in Burma, Liberia, Ivory Coast, Congo would be persecuted and executed. The list can go on and go. This issue isn’t because the world powers suddenly started to care about Bob in Benghazi it’s rather more political.
Is it a coincidence the only countries not in AFRICOM are beyond hope and in civil strife? Just take a look, the countries not in AFRICOM are either facing economic ruin, in some sort of civil strife or a combination of the two.
4) Disrupt Chinese and Russian economic progress
It’s a hunch which would require more research on my part. From the random news bits its seems clear that both China and Russia have some vested interest in the country.
Anyways, Gaddafi may be insane. He may be a tyrant. He may be a terrorist sympathizer. He may be all these things but please don’t just accept the mass media as if it’s some sort of absolute fact. Search a bit, read some other opinions. We live in the age of the Internet knowledge is literally everywhere!
Please, don’t just laugh every time Gaddafi pops onto the screen and say “Ha, Charlie Sheen got nothing on this guy !! LOL”