It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran thwarts CIA-backed regime change plot

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 03:39 AM
link   
Actually the Bush government received about 400million for covert ops designed initially at a bombing campaign until exposed by Seymore Hersch -

ALL old news and absolutely true.

www.greenchange.org...
www.geopoliticalmonitor.com...
irancoverage.com...
www.huffingtonpost.com...
www.newyorker.com...
thinkprogress.org...




posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
When are you guys going to realize that countries are no different than animals? It is the survival of the fittest. The top dogs rule and the rest get the crumbs. Nobody is saying that it is right, but that is just the way it is. If Iran really had the capabilities to overthrow our government, I don't think they would hesitate to do so.


This is the reason you are afforded such little intellectual respect. Any undergraduate student of international relations can point to the differences between realism and liberalism , Marxism and the anarchical state, the London school of IR etc,etc however you simply lay carte blanche what is probably the most complicated philosophical question ever postulated -

This simply exposes you as being intellectually defunct, you have absolutely no consideration for the complexities involved and CLEARLY, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT have absolutely no training, research, thoughts or understanding of the complexities of International Relations - that is totally obvious, and yet your ignorance of these issues, your total conceptual vacancy is no impediment to your statements of fact and certainty.

Please TRY and get your head around such concepts as neo-libderalism - which is the basis for the entire modern economy, peace between all modern western nations, your supposition that neo-realism is an absolute is utterly and profoundly wrong and deluded -



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 04:26 AM
link   
I've no doubt our government has tried every trick in the book to get rid of these democratically elected governments-the kind they despise. They have no regard for public opinion or international law.

I put no more faith in american or even european media than Iranian media, as I see no reason or evidence showing one to be more trustworthy. Remember what bill hicks said: "All governments are liars and murderers."



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by audas
 


I have to agree, realism was so 20th century. Neoliberalism seems to predominate among most civilized states in this day and age (except maybe the US and israel).



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 04:55 AM
link   
IMO, the CIA is naught but a nest of vipers, and the most despicable symptom of a corrupt and malign government, willing to assassinate anyone, even their own presidents, to maintain the power of the ruling American oligarchy.

So that they have a hand in overthrowing the Iranian governments multiple times (the Shah, for example) comes as no surprise.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Alpha_Magnum
 


I am glad someone took the time to both mention this event and provide support in the form of sources.

In 1953, the CIA helped to overthrow PM MM and installed the Shah in his stead.

Today, an accusation concerning CIA plots, doing what they do best. The Shah's Oldest Son, Reza Pahlavi, living in the D.C. Suburbs, an unfriendly and uncooperative government in Iran. RP, has been positioning himself to return to Iran and impose a Constitutional Monarchy.


It's Reza Pahlavi, why won't you say it??! Reza Pahlavi. Reza Pahlavi. Reza Pahlavi. Say it!! Is trying to overthrow Iran using the American identity. Its a set up. Say his name!!



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:51 AM
link   
reply to post by huckfinn
 


Try reading the OP and more specifically, the link provided to The Mossadegh Project.

The story of the US/UK overthrow of the shah is all in there.



Don't people read properly anymore?



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 



I read it...it said what I thought it would say. What exactly am I missing here?

Let's say it's true, Iran's claim. What Iranian, group or person, will benefit most from this? If the CIA was successful, who would be the new leaders of Iran?

The CIA isn't doing this for themselves. Its Reza Pahlavi...Say it!!



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 
I'd hardly call the regime in Iran a "democratically elected government". While it is true that Iran holds elections and that the current government was elected by the people, it is hardly a legitimate democracy. Hundreds of potential opposition candidates are banned from running. For all intents and purposes, there is no opposition. It's no different than the elections held in Iraq where Saddam Hussein would receive 99.9% of the vote.

And furthermore, the real power in Iran belongs to the unelected Mullah's. Iran's "democracy" is a farce. So in that regard, your comments are nonsense.

You do, however, make a valid point with regards to the treaty being violated by the U.S. But at the same time, Iran doesn't exactly adhere to the rule of international law, either. Nor are they above meddling in our affairs (IE: Iraq). They have the blood of American soldiers on their hands, and that alone warrants our government's support for regime change. Let's not forget that it was Iran that allowed, and more than likely orchestrated, the taking over of our embassy in 1979 and the subsequent hostage crisis. A U.S. embassy is considered sovereign land belonging to the U.S. Iran invaded that land and held our people hostage, or at the very least, allowed it to happen. That in itself is grounds for war, and Iran never got so much as a slap on the wrist for it.

I could go even further and link the Iranian-backed Hezbollah truck bombings in Beirut that killed hundreds of U.S. Marines, to the Iranian government. But my point is that you are making the Iranian government out to be saints. While we are hardly perfect ourselves and have committed many acts that I deplore, we are still on the right side here. The Iranian government is evil and does not have the best interests of its people at heart. They are hell-bent on the destruction of Israel and the defeat of America. So, in closing, we should be doing a hell of a lot more than just violating a 30-year-old treaty and meddling in Iran's internal affairs, if you ask me!



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by huckfinn
reply to post by budski
 



I read it...it said what I thought it would say. What exactly am I missing here?

Let's say it's true, Iran's claim. What Iranian, group or person, will benefit most from this? If the CIA was successful, who would be the new leaders of Iran?

The CIA isn't doing this for themselves. Its Reza Pahlavi...Say it!!


The CIA is the USA and the only reason the USA does anything at all is and has been from the beginning O I L. If the CIA managed to pull off yet another Iranian coup they might very well try to put in Reza. A coup is cheaper than an all out war. Regardless, due to the American propaganda here at home it is impossible to see Iran correctly. Iran has been another British and American plaything from day one. BP (British Petroleum) was the first face to arrive there and that is all the USA & GBR care about.



[edit on 14-1-2009 by Alpha_Magnum]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by huckfinn
 


you`ve been asked to supply proof of what you claim - and all you say is `its right in front of you`

well , spell it out - supply some `meat` for your claim.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 



I've already put that issue to rest. You'll get your proof soon enough. However, what I think is interesting is speculating on the nature of the Iranian regime and who the CIA is working on behalf of.

Ayad Allawi was their man at the beginning of the Iraq War. Last I heard from him was a dissappointed and broken man.

Maybe their is someone who wants Iran's Oil, but surely there is more to it than that. These Intelligence types often boast of their comprehensive solutions when implementing a regime change. Who's working behind the scenes?

In the 1953 coup they installed the Shah...Who's the CIA's guy now? Is it Reza Pahlavi? How involved is he with this intelligence operation? Who's really working for whom?

Is it the Qajar claimant? Are Pahlavi, Mohammad Hassan Mirza II and Soltan Ali Mirza Qajar cooking up something nasty for the Iranians?

Are Ahmadinejad and Ali Khamenei just role players for their Emperor, doing their part by luring the stupid Americans into a pretty standard trap?



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13
reply to post by budski
 
I'd hardly call the regime in Iran a "democratically elected government". While it is true that Iran holds elections and that the current government was elected by the people, it is hardly a legitimate democracy. Hundreds of potential opposition candidates are banned from running. For all intents and purposes, there is no opposition. It's no different than the elections held in Iraq where Saddam Hussein would receive 99.9% of the vote.

And furthermore, the real power in Iran belongs to the unelected Mullah's. Iran's "democracy" is a farce. So in that regard, your comments are nonsense.

You do, however, make a valid point with regards to the treaty being violated by the U.S. But at the same time, Iran doesn't exactly adhere to the rule of international law, either. Nor are they above meddling in our affairs (IE: Iraq). They have the blood of American soldiers on their hands, and that alone warrants our government's support for regime change. Let's not forget that it was Iran that allowed, and more than likely orchestrated, the taking over of our embassy in 1979 and the subsequent hostage crisis. A U.S. embassy is considered sovereign land belonging to the U.S. Iran invaded that land and held our people hostage, or at the very least, allowed it to happen. That in itself is grounds for war, and Iran never got so much as a slap on the wrist for it.

I could go even further and link the Iranian-backed Hezbollah truck bombings in Beirut that killed hundreds of U.S. Marines, to the Iranian government. But my point is that you are making the Iranian government out to be saints. While we are hardly perfect ourselves and have committed many acts that I deplore, we are still on the right side here. The Iranian government is evil and does not have the best interests of its people at heart. They are hell-bent on the destruction of Israel and the defeat of America. So, in closing, we should be doing a hell of a lot more than just violating a 30-year-old treaty and meddling in Iran's internal affairs, if you ask me!



Yes - the hostage take over was "retaliation" for your meddling - its called blow back - your won fault.

The truck bomb was again - retaliation - you guys just seem to think everything happens out of thin air ...

Oh - and Iran didn't get a slap on the wrist because you decided to trade with Libya and Niccaraguan Drug lords to allow the release of the hostages from Iran (with said weapons from Lybia) to ensure Reagan's election (which he denied any knowledge of however also admitted to knowing about) all of which was done to fund your illegal funding of contra rebels in an illegal dirty war....

You have some fkn nerve there buddy - your country continuously gets an arse wooping and you always ask why - the very next day you go out and invade overtly or covertly another country and then blame said country for their retaliation -

I dont think there is a sane, intelligent person left on this planet that does not think America is the MOST evil, dangerous and utterly criminal country on this earth -

You have totally lost your legitimacy in every respect - perhaps itis time to stop WONDERING why, and start acting like a responsible actor on the world stage instead infantile belligerants who are unable to accept not getting their own way -



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13
reply to post by budski
 
I'd hardly call the regime in Iran a "democratically elected government". While it is true that Iran holds elections and that the current government was elected by the people, it is hardly a legitimate democracy. Hundreds of potential opposition candidates are banned from running. For all intents and purposes, there is no opposition. It's no different than the elections held in Iraq where Saddam Hussein would receive 99.9% of the vote.

And furthermore, the real power in Iran belongs to the unelected Mullah's. Iran's "democracy" is a farce. So in that regard, your comments are nonsense.

You do, however, make a valid point with regards to the treaty being violated by the U.S. But at the same time, Iran doesn't exactly adhere to the rule of international law, either. Nor are they above meddling in our affairs (IE: Iraq). They have the blood of American soldiers on their hands, and that alone warrants our government's support for regime change. Let's not forget that it was Iran that allowed, and more than likely orchestrated, the taking over of our embassy in 1979 and the subsequent hostage crisis. A U.S. embassy is considered sovereign land belonging to the U.S. Iran invaded that land and held our people hostage, or at the very least, allowed it to happen. That in itself is grounds for war, and Iran never got so much as a slap on the wrist for it.

I could go even further and link the Iranian-backed Hezbollah truck bombings in Beirut that killed hundreds of U.S. Marines, to the Iranian government. But my point is that you are making the Iranian government out to be saints. While we are hardly perfect ourselves and have committed many acts that I deplore, we are still on the right side here. The Iranian government is evil and does not have the best interests of its people at heart. They are hell-bent on the destruction of Israel and the defeat of America. So, in closing, we should be doing a hell of a lot more than just violating a 30-year-old treaty and meddling in Iran's internal affairs, if you ask me!


Hezbollah is yet another creation of the USA and GBR. In short the USA and GBR continuously slaps and goads IRAN in an attempt to provoke a war. Iran simply endures it. It has and continues to be the USA and GBR who causes all of the Mideastern conflicts, aggressions and wars. Israel is yet another creation of the USA and GBR who is positioned at the Suez Canal and keeps a foot in the resource door for the USA and GBR. The main reason WW1 was waged is that OIL was discovered in IRAN and IRAQ. It also is a fact the the USA installed Saddam in Iraq and the Shah in Iran. It is also a fact that the USA instigated the Iran - Iraq war. It is also the truth that the USA supplied weapons to Saddam while Israel supplied weapons to Iran....

The USA and GBR have been in the eye of the storm for about 100 years (not the 50 years many here have mentioned). Everything that is happening is over RESOURCE CONTROL and DEPLETION. We hardly ever hear about Saudi Arabia any more, why? True to form the Saudi Oil is nearing the end and so they are no longer relevant, look for yourself..




posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Great thread budski!! S&F

There is much in this post for up and coming events in the world. zins5 had released a video in an earlier thread you had posted of Webster G. Tarpley stating, and before the fact, that the Obama administration was going to change the diplomacy of the leaders of the world almost immediately, and have an over all effect around the world with in 6mo. to 2 years after his inauguration.

[EDIT: For video , please watch and compare these results of the "NOW", video was created in Dec. 2008]





People aren't seeing or they are just rejecting these events as a "Way of the World" analogy, and we both know it is not..

"Sorry fo rso many edit's couldn't get the download/embed to work!!"


[edit on 103131p://0574 by Allred5923]

[edit on 103131p://4374 by Allred5923]

[edit on 103131p://5874 by Allred5923]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by huckfinn
 


so basically your talking crap

`i have proof but you have to wait` - is someone who is making it all up.

calling BS.

its simple - put up or shut up



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by huckfinn
reply to post by Harlequin
 



I've already put that issue to rest. You'll get your proof soon enough. However, what I think is interesting is speculating on the nature of the Iranian regime and who the CIA is working on behalf of.

Ayad Allawi was their man at the beginning of the Iraq War. Last I heard from him was a dissappointed and broken man.

Maybe their is someone who wants Iran's Oil, but surely there is more to it than that. These Intelligence types often boast of their comprehensive solutions when implementing a regime change. Who's working behind the scenes?

In the 1953 coup they installed the Shah...Who's the CIA's guy now? Is it Reza Pahlavi? How involved is he with this intelligence operation? Who's really working for whom?

Is it the Qajar claimant? Are Pahlavi, Mohammad Hassan Mirza II and Soltan Ali Mirza Qajar cooking up something nasty for the Iranians?

Are Ahmadinejad and Ali Khamenei just role players for their Emperor, doing their part by luring the stupid Americans into a pretty standard trap?


FAIL

It is all about OIL (RESOURCE CONTROL).



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Alpha_Magnum
 


You are mistaken, it is not about "Resources" it is about ultimate control of teh whole planet.
I have posted a couple of videos that would be of interest to you to further your knowledge of these events, and also what the "True" expectancy is of the PTB's of the world.
The reason I say "NAY" on your theory of resources is this:"


3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil Assessed 25 Times More Than 1995 Estimate


www.abovetopsecret.com...'

We should prepare as a society, it could be in 10 min.'s or it could be in 2 yrs, but the thing not to over look is that "This is for real" and this act only solidifies these events.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnsky
reply to post by Crakeur
 


Oh we see bias from all media networks toward the countries they're based in.

BBC is pro Britain regardless of what Britain does.
FOX is pro Republican US, regardless of what the Republicans may do.
Russia Today is pro Republican, regardless of what happens.
Press TV is pro Iran, regardless of what they believe.

The list goes on and on and on...

I kind of expected Press TV to have a bias.


As for the US shoving their nose into other countries affairs again, not surprised either. They've been trying to do that to most countries in Central America, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, etc.
They usually get caught, but they always wind up convincing some other poor sap to try it again.

There's really not much wrong with the Iranian government system. It functions very similar to the parliamentary monarchy's of Canada, Britain, and Australia.
Sure, the currently elected party has a few odd concepts going, but that's who they voted for, and that's the point of democracy. If the US has a problem with it, too bad, the people voted.
Their backup government system can be thought of like the Governor General of parliaments in other countries.

Recently I've seen them keep quite the level head.
Many of their citizens want a fight with Israel, but their government has told them to calm down, starting a war is the last thing they want right now.

They've got quite the history of peace. They haven't stepped foot into another country since the old days of empires. I get the feeling they want to keep it that way.


you forgot about CNN and MSNBC having sex with the democrats



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13
reply to post by budski
 
I'd hardly call the regime in Iran a "democratically elected government". While it is true that Iran holds elections and that the current government was elected by the people, it is hardly a legitimate democracy. Hundreds of potential opposition candidates are banned from running. For all intents and purposes, there is no opposition. It's no different than the elections held in Iraq where Saddam Hussein would receive 99.9% of the vote.

And furthermore, the real power in Iran belongs to the unelected Mullah's. Iran's "democracy" is a farce. So in that regard, your comments are nonsense.


in that case, couldn't we also say that all western elections are a shadow of democracy?

Electoral colleges in the US, first past the post in the UK - it can equally be said that in these countries democracy does not prevail.

Indeed, let's go one step further and consider government by corporate lobbying, which equates to your comment about the mullahs - would you call that democratic?

I sure as hell wouldn't.

[edit on 14/1/2009 by budski]



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join