Propaganda 101: Getting the U.S. Ready for War With Iran

Right now as we speak, the Bush administration is using a known terrorist group (MEK) to wage a covert war against Iran. Nothing unusual, I suppose. We've been monkeying around with Iran ever since the end of WW2.

The administration is using the Iranian hostage crisis and claims that the newly elected, or selected president, was among those students who took our citizens hostage. More than anything, this looks like propaganda aimed at the US public to bolster long held animosities, to fuel the fires of hatred against the Iranian regime in order to smooth the way for the next step in BushCo.'s PNAC plan.

Don't fall for it.

Latest Bush administration war propaganda: Iran's president-elect as hostage taker

By Larry Chin
Online Journal Associate Editor

More importantly, time has run out. Or, more accurately, the Bush administration has blown up the clock, not even allowing it to tick. The attack on Iran is already underway (see Planned US-Israeli attack on Iran, Iran: Next Target of US Military Aggression, and Target: Iran).

As Scott Ritter noted in US War With Iran Has Already Begun: "Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003 [the official start of the Iraq war]. Likewise, history will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but, rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran."

The "he was a hostage taker" propaganda is one of hundreds of tell-tale signs of mushrooming crisis. We are not blind.
www.onlinejournal.com...

maybe I'm missing something,

had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran."


can you shed the light on these bombings ? Are these the bombings the Iranians themselves have said is the work of other Iranians ?

The Bush administration has been using the MEK ( a known terrorist group, on the U.S. State Dept.'s terrorist list until recently) to cause trouble inside Iran. Before the invasion of Iraq (2003) they were the only real terrorist group operating inside (Northern) Iraq. Now that they've been co-opted into the PNAC crew, they're working to de-stabilize Iran from within. These guys are wackjobs. Terrorists. Doing BushCo's covert dirty work.

All this talk about hunting down ter'rsts and you're with us or against us is pure BUNK!

They're jockeying for regime change in Iran just like they went after Saddam. It's covert. Their foot soldiers for the moment just happen to be these terrorists.

Plausible argument, but why Iran?



What better target could you ask for? Iran is being squeezed between Afgan and Iraq.. American forces ready to pounce on both sides.

And if you take into account the Coalition of the Willing then you have Iran even more squeezed...

This discussion about the US population being groomed for an Iranian war is actually pretty old. I remember having these discussion shortly into the Iraq war on this very site. But alot of people shrugged it off and called it nonsense.. now the "reports" coming out about Iran is at an almost daily basis.. one cant help but wonder..

The stage has been setup, the actors have been chosen, and we're being seated.. will you watch the whole show? Or just the parts they want you to?

..

[edit on 7/5/2005 by QuietSoul]

Well, if you've been following PNAC and read books like "The Grand Chessboard" from guys like Zbigniew Brzezinski and other people related to Bush Senior, Rummsfeld, Cheney and so on, you could've seen this comming from as the early to mid 90's.

The things that have been happening over the least few years have been scripted years ago. Including 9/11 which was designed to be the new pearl harbor to get the US people to aprove of these military actions.

ECK,

Originally posted by EastCoastKidTheir foot soldiers for the moment just happen to be these terrorists.

This is not a new tactic. It has been done for decades all across the globe by the US.

The use of tactics that are expressly illegal in the US, for achieving regime change in foreign nations.

Cheers

BHR

I'm afraid the recent quote that we are close to finding OBL, but he is being aided by nations is a prelude to the drums W will be beating....we can catch OBL, but Iran won't let us.....

then maybe Israel sends a missile into Irans Nuke facility, Iran retaliates....thus giving us the ability to say we didn't start the war, we are just protecting an ally...

Maybe the government was really caught off-guard by 9/11. Maybe the government got cought with is 'pants' down. Now the Government and other nations have realized the threat from radical Islam and have decided to 'nip it in the bud' before they (the radicals) have an opportunity to cause severe damage. Since the late seventies that entire region has been on terrorist watch lists and designated terror-states (supporting, training, etc).
Out of all the countries the most dangerous would be Iran. As I mentioned in a thread a long time ago, 'We' (coaltition of the willing) have decided to cleanse that region and bring (attempt) democracy to the middle east. (Maybe this is was is needed for the next golden age starting 2012)
How would you do it? Get control of afganistan and Iraq inorder to have Iran surrounded. I also believe any war with Iran will be joined and backed by all the european countries including France and Germany......just wait and see......................

Is this the beginning of WW3?

WW3 is in its beginning, And come on Ferretman do you really believe that? with PNAC's reports n all?

we (the US) cannot even handle iraq!!!

how can we wage a war against another country too!?!?!?

didnt we put the MEK in some detention camp because of its relations with Saddam Hussein who use them?

en.wikipedia.org...

From the Iran-Iraq war until the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, the MKO was supported by the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein, which provided military equipment, funding, and bases for the organisation. After initially having the headquarters of the organisation in Paris, France, this was subsequently moved to Iraq, as well. Apart from the military action against Iran, Saddam Hussein also used the MKO to occasionally quell internal uprisings, particularly among the Kurds in 1991.

The MKO was the main force involved in attacking the US embassy in Tehran in 1979 and taking American hostages. Khomeini then had to decide whether or not to support this action. At that time the MKO was by far the most active and powerful revolutionary militant force in Iran. Khomeini decided to support them. Nearly all the pictures of the hostage takers (if not all) are of the MKO members. Many of them later became dissidents and were involved in acts of terrorism against the Khomeini regime.



After the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 the MKO's weaponry was seized and the personnel initially placed under armed guard in a camp outside Baghdad. In August 2004, despite its own labeling of the MKO as a terrorist group, the United States granted the personnel in Iraq Geneva Convention protection, making deportation to Iran illegal. Earlier in 2004 there had been persistent rumours that Iran and the United States were negotiating exchange of MKO leaders for al-Qaida operatives held by Iran. This change in policy has led to increased speculation that the MKO may be used by the United States in potential future operations against Iran.

You let your enemy think you are weak. Puts their defenses down.....

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
I'm afraid the recent quote that we are close to finding OBL, but he is being aided by nations is a prelude to the drums W will be beating....we can catch OBL, but Iran won't let us.....

then maybe Israel sends a missile into Irans Nuke facility, Iran retaliates....thus giving us the ability to say we didn't start the war, we are just protecting an ally...

i don't know..why would iran be concerned with obl
this is really about being seen as a country with nukes not about terrorism, that is just being used as a ploy

iran is a siite state and they are not in the same belief path as obl who is an extreme fundamentalist unlike shiites, who don't seem to mind wthe western way as as long as the shiites mullahs control they way you breath.

obl's method of operation is to take away the rights of all and for only a few to be in charge like the taliban!
i think obl, if found in iran, would be in big trouble.
their views are not the same look at the shi'ites in iraq?
like christianity there are different views of the nation of islam and the ways it runs ones life.

shouldn't this thread be called tehran 101

not one word about nk here even though we will have to deal with them soon!
they are not going away, just today they said they will not disarm!
someone is going to have to push a little harder, if they are not concerned with nk
than when nk invades sk with nerve gas and we nuke nk killing millions of innocents nks, is that what g-dub is waiting for?
if they get squir-lee, we nuke?
sounds real stupid to me
once again nk is not going away as much as g-dub wants to believe if he ignores them they will not go away

just a thought

i don't know why i thought it said pyongyang 101, my bad, oh well

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

One entry found for propaganda.
Main Entry: pro·pa·gan·da
Pronunciation: "prä-p&-'gan-d&, "prO-
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, from Congregatio de propaganda fide Congregation for propagating the faith, organization established by Pope Gregory XV died 1623
1 capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect.

With Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's resume' there is no need to embellish

Ahmadinejad is doing a fine job all by himself showing the true colors of the Islamic revolution Iran has suffered for decades.

Following the 1979 Islamic revolution he became a member the ultra-conservative faction of the Office for Strengthening Unity [OSU] Between Universities and Theological Seminaries. The OSU was established by Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, one of Khomeini’s key collaborators, to organise Islamist students against the rapidly growing Mojahedin-e Khalq (MeK). When the idea of storming the American embassy in Tehran was raised by the OSU, Ahmadinejad suggested storming the Soviet embassy at the same time.

With the start of the Iraq war in 1980, Ahmadinejad rushed to the western fronts to fight against the enemy and voluntarily joined special forces of the Islamic Revolution's Guards Corps (IRGC) in 1986. He served in the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps intelligence and security apparatus.

Ahmadinejad was a senior officer in the Special Brigade of the Revolutionary Guards, stationed at Ramazan Garrison near Kermanshah in western Iran. This was the headquarters of the Revolutionary Guards’ "Extra-territorial Operations" -- mounting attacks beyond Iran’s borders. His work in the Revolutionary Guards was related to suppression of dissidents in Iran and abroad. He personally participated in covert operations around the Iraqi city of Kirkuk.

With the formation of the elite Qods (Jerusalem) Force of the IRGC, Ahmadinejad became one of its senior commanders. He directed assassinations in the Middle East and Europe, including the assassination of Iranian Kurdish leader Abdorrahman Qassemlou, who was shot dead by senior officers of the Revolutionary Guards in a Vienna flat in July 1989. Ahmadinejad was a key planner of the attack. He was reported to have been involved in planning an attempt on the life of Salman Rushdie.

Ahmadinejad and Atomics

As president, Ahmadinejad would probably take a more confrontational approach to the United States, to Sunni Arab neighbors, to Afghanistan, and certainly toward Israel. In mid-June 2005 he told a news conference he could not foresee improved ties with any country that "seeks hostility" against Iran, a reference to the United States. "The US administration cut off ties unilaterally to lay waste to the Islamic republic," he argued. "They want to restore them today for the same reason."

Ahmadinejad's supporters said he "will punch in the mouth" all those who advocate relations with the United States. Rafsanjani had said in campaign interviews that he would seek to improve Iran's troubled relationship with the United States. Ahmadinejad represents a younger generation whose formative experience was the Iran-Iraq War.

Ahmadinejad, in comments that drew sharp criticism from the Foreign Ministry, accused Iran's nuclear negotiators on 20 June 2005 of being weak and bowing to European pressure at the negotiation table. According to Ahmadinejad, "those who are handling the talks are terrified, and before they even sit down at the negotiating table they retreat 500 kilometers.... A popular and fundamentalist government will quickly change that."

Global Security

It can hardly be said that a PNAC style cabal made up or controlled Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's actions past, present nor future.

For further documentation of the Mullacracy's ties to al Qaeda and it ruse on going nuclear,

Timmermans documents for "Countdown to Crisis"


ECK your use of the term propaganda aptly applies to steps the Iranian government has taken to descibe its past and current actions in regards to internal politics, its support of foreign terror groups, its nuclear program, its relations with other countries.

Flat and simple the regimes long term goal is to export Islamic revolution to other countries either covertly or overtly - whichever they can get away with.

Twisting Iran's actions and US response into a supposed PNAC conspiracy is so over the top and shows just how far some will go to attack the current administration.

I remember many here claimed that Iran or North Korea should be attacked rather than Iraq in 03' , now that Iran is on the horizon as a national issue making headlines its morphed into the same do nothing, negotiate, buy-off, play for time tactics promulgated with Iraq prior to the invasion by hardline Bush haters.

I really suggest reading Countdown to Crisis before spouting off on PNAC conspiracies.

QuietSoul posted a map in a posting above where it shows the obvious hemming in of Iran by the invasion of Iraq (keystone of middle east) and Afganistan, the enlistment of Pakistan as an ally, the military presence in Turkmenistan and other countries north of Iran.

The strategy has been apparent for a couple of years and really should only surprise those that choose not to see it.

Are we to believe Iran is exporting its form of Islam benignly?
Are we to believe that a great deal of terrorism is not supported by Iran?
Are we to believe that Irans nuclear program is for only peaceful use?
Are we to believe that the rank and file Iranian does not want change?

I don't subscribe to any of the above but feel one would have to in order to believe in the PNAC conspiracy as put forth here.


[edit on 5-7-2005 by Phoenix]

With Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's resume' there is no need to embellish

The current push to attack Iran predates Ahmadinejad's election by years.

I suspect we'd be seeing much the same now even had Rafsanjani won the election - much like the current Iraq war, the decision was made years ago, regardless of political developments in Iran, or their cooperation/non-cooperation with the IAEA.

The only thing stopping it now is the strength of the continuing insurgency in Iraq - it's tying down forces that would otherwise be used in Iran. It's also hurting the administration's popularity at home, but that can be dealt with by allowing/staging another mass-casualty terrorist attack on US soil - one which can be blamed on Iran.

The US did not invade Iraq - it invaded/is invading the Middle East, in an attempt to use force to redraw the political map there, and ensure the US unfettered access to the region's oil.

And the same will happen with Iran as it has Iraq. The original allegations will prove false over and over untill everyone forgets about it.

What are the bets the end result will be becuase "they need a regime change", pretty pattern eh.

The thing that amuses me most is the abilty by many to not be able to comprehend why hateful comments or feelings are made by an "enemy" of the US.

It seems the realisation that this dislike or hatred comes from the way the US has treated a country is an impossible thought.

Anyone who disagress or dislikes the US is just "jealous" of its freedom right?

I don't think the American Gov will attack Iran it is already to power full I am saying this because the the people the who run US gov are mostly Israelis and Iran is quite close to Israel and it can easily wage war on it not a big problem for it, Iran can easily destroy Israel how well forget the Arab - Israel war Iran is well powered and has missiles that reach Israel in THOUSANDS so were it all ends in talks, Iran is being working on its Nuclear program for Years and during the era of the Shah so what made the Iranians show there Nuclear program well because American politics is just next door in Iraq and it feels that another Israel is emerging, in the Middle East, having said this is because there is a lot of Israeli politics going on the whole world.

And to make another thing clear is that US will not attack Iran because if they do attack it would be bad NEWS around the world, the will see of thousands of Iranins and Americans die, that is not good for Bush campain,

Yes Thousnads will die of both if they go to war sides Americans cant use Navy to attack Iran with Smart Missiles, because Iran has a Navy to and quite strong you dont wont to see in the news Iran-US war American air carier ship destroyed and it goes the same with Iran will have it ships destroyed.