LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksIs Fisk suggesting that Mousavi is what the intifada is about?
Is Fisk suggesting that Mousavi is what the intifada is about?
I'd like to get one thing straight, and that's that I emphasise the role of the US/West because I think that it should be exposed and that it does not need to succeed. In many cases it hasn't. When I say succeed, I mean achieve the US's geopolitical goals, that are entirely aimed in the interests of US capitalism. When people are aware of the interventions going on inside their country they can act accordingly.Originally Posted by code twinkle
The main US goal in Yugoslavia was to balkanise the region in order to scupper Russian influence and create small malleable regimes under direct US influence. They are also handy places for NATO bases.
Well thanks for the dismissive tone there.
No idea how the US "balkanised the balkans" - I think history can show that empires coming and going never had much impact on the fundamental nationalist tensions in that region. Again I think you're overestimating the impact of the "cunning plan" of the US there.
As for Iran, nobody, least of all the Iranians, is unaware of the interest of the US and other Western nations in the current situation. My point is that, despite the self-interest of the US, this scenario is about much more than international oil interests - specifically, in my opinion it is as much about domestic regime reform as anything else.
Re the Serbia situation, I was lucky that Noam Chomsky wrote me his opinion to wit
"There were doubtless international efforts to subvert the election by
supporting the opposition, but that's normal Western practice, innumerable
cases. If there were even a hint that a Western political figure were being supported in an
election by some foreign state, particularly an enemy state, that would
destroy his career forever. But the imperial mentality is so deeply
implanted in the West -- not yet in Ireland, I hope, after 800 years at the
other end of the club -- that it's simply taken to be normal if not admirable.
However, I doubt that this was much of a factor. Milosevic had been
hanging on by a thread for years. If the Albanian Kosovars hadn't
boycotted earlier elections, he'd probably have been thrown out. The
bombing of Serbia strengthened his position, much to the dismay of the
reformist elements, but not enough to save him. It was internal
democratizing forces in Serbia that carried it off. I think that is pretty
clear -- though without really in depth research, it's hard to be too
confident."
Personally, I think US political aid had a greater impact on the Serbian ouster than he allows, but I'm with him that it probably wasn't the critical factor.
I have opinions of my own - strong opinions - but I don't always agree with them. - George Bush
Communication War... more infos
On Todays Democracy Now TV show, one of the main features was about the somewhat unknown but hugely important area of surveilance, government control and manipulation of all communication systems; net, phones, vids... (big brother-esque). DN! interviewed Josh Silver, executive director of FREEPRESS.NET.
Deep Packet Inspection: Telecoms Aided Iran Government to Censor Internet, Technology Widely Used in U.S.
Cyber-web
As thousands in Iran turn to the web to make their voices heard around the world, a new report finds telecoms in Europe have helped the Iranian government develop one of the world’s most sophisticated mechanisms to censor the internet. It’s called Deep packet inspection and it’s also being used here at home. We speak with Josh Silver, executive director of Free Press.
Free Press, on their recent report from their site state;
Wall Street Journal article; Iran's Web Spying Aided By Western TechnologyAccording to the Wall Street Journal, Iran and China are likely using Deep Packet Inspection technology to monitor and control the Internet.
This spring, a Free Press report, Deep Packet Inspection: The End of the Internet as We Know It?, argued that DPI technology poses a major threat to the open Internet, giving network providers unprecedented power over Internet users. The use of DPI by U.S. companies like Comcast and Cox has already sparked widespread concern about abuses of Net Neutrality and online privacy.
The Iranian regime has developed, with the assistance of European telecommunications companies, one of the world's most sophisticated mechanisms for controlling and censoring the Internet, allowing it to examine the content of individual online communications on a massive scale.
Interviews with technology experts in Iran and outside the country say Iranian efforts at monitoring Internet information go well beyond blocking access to Web sites or severing Internet connections.
Instead, in confronting the political turmoil that has consumed the country this past week, the Iranian government appears to be engaging in a practice often called deep packet inspection, which enables authorities to not only block communication but to monitor it to gather information about individuals, as well as alter it for disinformation purposes, according to these experts.
The monitoring capability was provided, at least in part, by a joint venture of Siemens AG, the German conglomerate, and Nokia Corp., the Finnish cellphone company, in the second half of 2008, Ben Roome, a spokesman for the joint venture, confirmed.
The "monitoring center," installed within the government's telecom monopoly, was part of a larger contract with Iran that included mobile-phone networking technology, Mr. Roome said.
"If you sell networks, you also, intrinsically, sell the capability to intercept any communication that runs over them," said Mr. Roome...
Last edited by dunk; 23rd June 2009 at 01:54 PM.
[quote]The tone was not intended as submissive, but I've had to say the same thing a good few times. I wanted to make it clear that I'm far from thinking that US influence can determine the outcome of every situation.
Isn't it clearly about both?As for Iran, nobody, least of all the Iranians, is unaware of the interest of the US and other Western nations in the current situation. My point is that, despite the self-interest of the US, this scenario is about much more than international oil interests - specifically, in my opinion it is as much about domestic regime reform as anything else.
Very nice of him to comment. Like him, I lack in depth research, so I'm not going to add anything except that "Balkanisation" of eastern europe was overtly an aim of various neocon thinktanks whose members included Rumsfeld and Cheney.Re the Serbia situation, I was lucky that Noam Chomsky wrote me his opinion to wit
"There were doubtless international efforts to subvert the election by
supporting the opposition, but that's normal Western practice, innumerable
cases. If there were even a hint that a Western political figure were being supported in an
election by some foreign state, particularly an enemy state, that would
destroy his career forever. But the imperial mentality is so deeply
implanted in the West -- not yet in Ireland, I hope, after 800 years at the
other end of the club -- that it's simply taken to be normal if not admirable.
However, I doubt that this was much of a factor. Milosevic had been
hanging on by a thread for years. If the Albanian Kosovars hadn't
boycotted earlier elections, he'd probably have been thrown out. The
bombing of Serbia strengthened his position, much to the dismay of the
reformist elements, but not enough to save him. It was internal
democratizing forces in Serbia that carried it off. I think that is pretty
clear -- though without really in depth research, it's hard to be too
confident."
Personally, I think US political aid had a greater impact on the Serbian ouster than he allows, but I'm with him that it probably wasn't the critical factor.
I not going to pretend that Im some kind of expert on this situation - but I would wager that Mousavi is now a figurehead and rallying point for those in Iran who has lost total faith in the ruling regime - its not his own personal popularity per se - its the fact that he is the only one standing up and calling the emperors new clothes for what they are.
You simply cannot count 32 million paper ballots in 4 hours and call a definite result - its simply not physically possible - there were no exit polls taken - and the margin of victory is simply off the richter scale - thats what this is about. If the result had been closer, going to a run off as nearly everybody had expected - we would not be having this conversation.
Cactus - the result just smelled - I've been involved in enough campaigns now to have a reasonable nose has to how the wind is blowing - most people have and thats why there are relatively few surprises in Irish, European, Indian or anywhere in the world where there are free and open elections - it was the absolute two fingers that the ruling regime gave to the whole democractic process in the Iran that has resulted in the revolts you are seeing now - absolute dismissal of that they have done anything wrong, that the result is unquestionable, the entire shutting down of the media and communication systems and the fact that the other power in Iran , the Spiritual leader, has so obviously taken sides and meddled in the result has left a power vaccum and a total loss of faith in the entire system - particularly among the large and growing middleclass.
I have no doubt that Adhjemidhad would have won after a run off - he indeed has significant popularity among the poor and working class with his classic bread and circuses routine over the last 4-5 years - a huge inflationary populist subsidised culture of the basics of bread,cooking oils and petrol which was financed by the huge petro-dollar revenues of the last few years - but at the end of the day -because of the inflation - has left them little better off than they were 5 years ago - but its the perception that matters (FF have been doing the same to us for the last 12years).
That said - the working class and the poor never start revolutions - they are content with scraps from the top table and circuses (ie the nuclear weapons programme) to keep them amused - been like this since the time of the Caesars- (indeed if you look at the last elections here - the main demographic that stuck rigidly most closely with FF was the DE group - the working class and the poor - its was the middle class and public sector that voted for Joe H and Richie Barrett) - it was the middle class who fomented the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the 1848 and 1870 communes in Europe and the Russian Revolutions at the begining of the last century - to start a revolution you have to have ambition and a belief that you have been stopped from realising your ambitions and that only a overthrow of the current regime will allow you to proceed and make a better world - until the whole thing goes full circle again - societies that are more tolerant and allow a degree of social mobility are those that tend to have the most stable political and social systems.
This , IMHO, is what is going to the heart of the Iranian crises at the moment - the people who are out demonstrating most actively are the sons and daughters and grandsons and daughters of the same men and women who toppled the Shah in 1979 and for primarily the same reason - the Shahs regime had fossilised into a ruling autocracy, the economy had collapsed into a basket case and was divided internally into lots of monopolies controlled and owned by the Shahs families,friends and associates and kept in place by the Savak and Militarry and there was no way in and the US was seen, correctly, as the chief proper-up of this regime.
Well things have turned full circle - social mobility has disappeared, the security forces are primarily concerned with enforcing the new status quo, the economy turned into a basket case years ago after the little light let in during Khatami's modest reform period have been completely shut down and generally the middle class are just screaming to be allowed a little room to breathe - the totally botched elections were simply the final straw for many - how would you feel if ,in the face of nearly all evidence - FF managed to gain an overall majority of 30 at the next election - given all the evidence - you would expect it to be close anyway!) - and the protestors couldn't give a fig about the CIA , PNAC, Israel and the regional geo-political considerations.
Cactus - your beliefs are a matter of faith to you - and I find that people of faith will see ghosts where they want to see ghosts - sadly I'm just very cynical pragmatist with no particular world view or faith, but it does allow me to call a spade a spade ,irrespective of geo-political or ideological considerations and I think you should give the Iranian protestors the benefit of the doubt here and be thankful you live in a country where you can wear what you want, apply for any job you want, talk to who you want and espouse any political belief system and values that you want without fear.
Last edited by Edo; 23rd June 2009 at 01:35 PM.
[quote=cactusflower;1803048]I'm not sure what you mean about the Balkanisation of EE except possibly the break-up of Yugoslavia? If so, it would appear that was going to happen whether the US liked or not, and I don't think coincidence of aims undermines the genuine and lasting achievement of democratising Serbia and the other regional nations.
The tone was not intended as submissive, but I've had to say the same thing a good few times. I wanted to make it clear that I'm far from thinking that US influence can determine the outcome of every situation.
Isn't it clearly about both?
Very nice of him to comment. Like him, I lack in depth research, so I'm not going to add anything except that "Balkanisation" of eastern europe was overtly an aim of various neocon thinktanks whose members included Rumsfeld and Cheney.
I have opinions of my own - strong opinions - but I don't always agree with them. - George Bush
More talk on DPI´s from this computer geek site
Iran, Traffic Analysis, and Deep Packet Inspection
Privacy Advocates and Deep Packet Inspection: Vendors, ISPs, and Third-Parties
Without any evidence, many U.S. politicians and “Iran experts” have dismissed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection Friday, with 62.6 percent of the vote, as fraud.
They ignore the fact that Ahmadinejad’s 62.6 percent of the vote in this year’s election is essentially the same as the 61.69 percent he received in the final count of the 2005 presidential election, when he trounced former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The shock of the “Iran experts” over Friday’s results is entirely self-generated, based on their preferred assumptions and wishful thinking.
Ahmadinejad won. Get over it - Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett - POLITICO.com
To date has any hard evidence been produced that there was fraud?
"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists.'' ~ J. Edgar Hoover
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The following video shows two men who have been shot be Iranian police at a demonstration in Iran. One man has clearly suffered a fatal wound to the head with the back his skull blown open. The other man has a wound to the pelvis.
This is what the Iranian people have to risk when they demand their human rights.[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ivcu-xqg5es&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ivcu-xqg5es&feature=related[/ame]
Reply With Quote