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.

 

Are the Iranian Protests Another US Orchestrated "Color Revolution?" Is This the Culmination of Tw

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Are the Iranian Protests Another US Orchestrated "Color Revolution?" Is This the Culmination of Two Years of Destabilization?


www.globalresearch.ca

A number of commentators have expressed their idealistic belief in the purity of Mousavi, Montazeri, and the westernized youth of Terhan. The CIA destabilization plan, announced two years ago (see below) has somehow not contaminated unfolding events.

The claim is made that Ahmadinejad stole the election, because the outcome was declared too soon after the polls closed for all the votes to have been counted. However, Mousavi declared his victory several hours before the polls closed. This is classic CIA destabilization designed to discredit a contrary outcome. It forces an early declaration
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Just a brief taste as to what is to come online over the course of the next few days and linked to the recent events of Iran.


On May 23, 2007, Brian Ross and Richard Esposito reported on ABC News: “The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert “black” operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell ABC News.”

On May 27, 2007, the London Telegraph independently reported: “Mr. Bush has signed an official document endorsing CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs.”

A few days previously, the Telegraph reported on May 16, 2007, that Bush administration neocon warmonger John Bolton told the Telegraph that a US military attack on Iran would “be a ‘last option’ after economic sanctions and attempts to foment a popular revolution had failed.”

On June 29, 2008, Seymour Hersh reported in the New Yorker: “Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership.”

The protests in Tehran no doubt have many sincere participants. The protests also have the hallmarks of the CIA orchestrated protests in Georgia and Ukraine. It requires total blindness not to see this.

I will leave the best part for my next post.

www.globalresearch.ca
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 01:57 PM
link   

U.S. Is Said to Expand Covert Operations in Iran





Monday, June 30, 2008; A02

The Bush administration told Congress last year of a secret plan to dramatically expand covert operations inside Iran as part of a long-running effort to destabilize the country's ruling regime, according to a report published yesterday.

The plan allowed up to $400 million in covert spending for activities ranging from spying on Iran's nuclear program to supporting rebel groups opposed to the country's ruling clerics, veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported in the New Yorker magazine.

While the administration has been waging a low-grade covert campaign against Iran for at least three years -- consisting mainly of cross-border raids targeting groups tied to attacks against U.S. forces in Iraq -- the new policy represents a significant expansion, the report contends. The prospect of a broader covert presence inside Iran also has raised concerns among some congressional and military officials about a possible escalation leading to a broader military conflict, it states.

The article drew a sharp reaction from administration officials, who denied that U.S. forces were engaged in operations inside Iran.

"I can tell you flatly that U.S. forces are not operating across the Iraqi border into Iran, in the south or anywhere else," U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan C. Crocker said yesterday during an interview on CNN's "Late Edition."

Hersh reported that the approval for expanded covert authority was contained in a "Presidential Finding," a highly classified document that lays the legal groundwork for all covert activities by U.S. intelligence officials. The Iranian finding was presented late last year to eight congressional leaders -- the top Democrats and Republicans in the Senate and House, and on the intelligence committees of both chambers -- in keeping with a requirement for congressional notification. In theory, Congress can challenge a proposed covert action by denying funding.

www.washingtonpost.com...

No comment so far by myself, so i will continue to provide some more info just for the hell of it, since many members are not that accustomed to how things go bump in the night.
--


Bush okayed 'soft revolution' in Iran




The US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) received presidential approval for a covert operation in Iran aimed at destabilizing the Islamic Republic by "non-lethal" means, ABC news reported early Saturday morning.

According to the report, the plan includes several non-military measures by which the US could deeply harm the Iranian economy through global measures while simultaneously undermining the regime on a local political level by distributing propaganda and building on an already existing lack of support for the regime among Iranians.




A commentator pointed "ferment among the students and the intellectuals" of Iran as fertile ground from which propaganda and encouragement towards the local population to overthrow the government could bear fruit.


There seems to be an error with the link to this, i have saved the page and will try to fix the link.

www.jpost.com.../JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1178708684692

[edit on 21-6-2009 by tristar]



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Links to this thread added from a prior thread about the CIA choreographed theatrical called the Iran Revolution...

[edit on 21-6-2009 by seataka]

[edit on 21-6-2009 by seataka]



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   
I don't have much doubt that what you've posted is true.

This is the same type of operation I had`hoped was going on in North Korea.

We can only hope.

[edit on 21-6-2009 by dizziedame]



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by seataka
Links to this thread added from a prior thread about the CIA choreographed theatrical called the Iran Revolution...


No the Links within this thread were not added from that thread..!



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Well it certainly would explain Obama’s desire to take a hands off approach publicly to the Iranian elections as well as not falling in lock step with the Israelis regarding hostile reaction to Iran’s nuclear program(s)?

The CIA has a lot of history in Iran and a lot of reasons for wanting an Iran it can control and manipulate.

When the Iranian Islamic Revolution took place it displaced a small but significant class of extremely wealthy international Iranian elitists flush with decades of pilfered oil wealth and a significant number of SAVAK Intelligence Operatives.

Many of these people though have maintained potentially dangerous liaisons and business interests inside of Iran despite the current regimes opposition to them and view of their past crimes.

Simply put not only has a network continued to survive inside of Iran of CIA, SAVAK and Persian Royalty and elitists but it is a fairly sizable one just waiting for the day.

Now interestingly enough what is the CIA truly promoting inside of Iran? As even the dunderheaded headed Obama wisely put it “How do we know the opposition candidate will be any more reasonable or easier to work with here in the United States regarding U.S. and Israeli interests?”

The reality is that ‘we’ don’t, but merely assume because that political faction stands in opposition to the ruling one it will be a ‘better’ and ‘friendlier’ one, which as a pure hypothetical is impossible to truly know.

After all there was a huge number of Americans who felt Obama would promote ‘transparency’ in government, ‘redistribute’ wealth domestically in a favorable fashion to the underclass and ‘restore’ the vitality of our economy in short order while promoting a significant and welcome platform of ‘change’.

None of this of course has occurred as we approach the six month mark of his administration, none of this appears to be happening anytime soon on the horizon and in reality the opposite of all that promise and assumption has occurred.

So how do we know a different regime and government in Iran would actually be different or better?

We don’t, and just as Obama has proved himself, people are far to easy to manipulate as they hunger and wish for different than what they have, but require no certainty or guarantee that they will receive something truly ‘different’ or inquire as to just precisely how different and how it will be done…they just enjoy hoping in ‘change’ for the pure sake of ‘change’ on the assumption that ‘change’ has to be for the better.

I think Obama is doing a fine job at proving ‘change’ does not necessarily mean for the better, and it was as foolish for America voters to believe in that ‘change’ and him, as it would be for them to place a similar faith in an Iranian ‘opposition’ candidate in a society and culture most Americans know not one fundamental or accurate thing about.



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
I think it is insulting to the Iranian people to assume this revolution is any more than slightly influenced by outside influences. I have no doubt the CIA and other agencies are doing what they can to benefit from this revolution but to say they're behind it is stupid. This revolution seems to be all fed up Iranians.



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Given that the average american knows more about sports or fast food or Hollywood stars than global politics and its implications across the world would be an understatemant.

But lets keep in mind, this is exactly how they should be kept, they may cry for freedom and liberty but have no intentions of moving into that direction. As you so well pointed, the "change" motto was a genius stroke given that he was not of white color or was he born in some southern state, so it created the brick and mortar that was necessary to decapitate any responses that arose or will arise in the near future. I care not what he looks or sounds like, its the words that come out his mind(s) that he voices that are very troubling to say the least.

He obviously has not provided any forward momentum to the average family, although he has been handed two crisis which he must choose. Either go to war or go to war, either way it will be very interesting to see his so called change and reform in policy with foreign nations who have all seen the ideological stand of the U.S. as very untrustworthy and skeptical of its intentions.

There are far too many who were tricked in believing that he is to be more aware of problems, but the fact of the matter is, there are no indications that his change or transparency will ever evolve and if they do they certainly will not affect the average american in a positive way. This has already been felt and to think its only the beginning.



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by CuriousSkeptic
I think it is insulting to the Iranian people to assume this revolution is any more than slightly influenced by outside influences. I have no doubt the CIA and other agencies are doing what they can to benefit from this revolution but to say they're behind it is stupid. This revolution seems to be all fed up Iranians.


So the Orange revolution in the Ukraine was some color that they thought of which by the way all those flags and shirts you happened to be viewing from your t.v. were printed in China and were shipped through the Black Sea to the Ukraine port by a transport ship with U.K. holdings but resided in the Cayman Islands.

So now we have a Green revolution. As green has been the color of C.I.A. in the past as recognition, so as much as this might surprise you, well it sure as hell surprised me when i begun seeing these fingers and wrist bans popping up in photos of protesters wearing the green color.



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
Green also means money (and nature too) but the impression it makes to me is it means money. I don't mean to make a poke at the Irish over this but I too was surprised to see them wearing green...

It actually hurt my eyes, and I don't mean that in a good way.

The wealthy and arrogant will NEVER give up.

They lost Iran, and they will do anything to reclaim their deeds to the land just as their wealthy Cuban brothers lost their deeds to Cuba and are doing everything they can to try retake Cuba.

Granted, while the glory days of the elite-funded Cuba re-taking operations are all but over save for some pathetic 'why won't you please care about the rich who lost their properties' hand wringing there and there and Fidel Castro's 'imminent death' false alarm 'gasms, the Iranian Elite abroad are still alive and kicking and they have their backers in the US and Israel funding them along with tax payer's money






[edit on 21-6-2009 by star in a jar]



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by star in a jar
 


As time approaches we should see another color coming from N.Korean students, my guess would be the color Blue



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


Green is the color of Islam.




The color green has a special place in Islam. It is used in the decoration of mosques, the bindings of Qur'ans, the silken covers for the graves of Sufi saints, and in the flags of various Muslim countries. Green has been associated with Islam for many centuries. It is not clear why this is so. Some say green was Muhammad’s favorite color and that he wore a green cloak and turban. Others believe that it symbolizes nature and life, hence the physical manifestation of God. In the Qur'an (Surah 18:32), it is said that the inhabitants of paradise will wear green garments of fine silk. While the reference to the Qur'an is verifiable, it is not clear if other explanations are reliable or mere folklore. Regardless of its origins, the color green has been considered especially Islamic for centuries. Crusaders avoided using any green in their coats of arms, so that they could not possibly be mistaken for their Muslim opponents in the heat of battle.

Symbols of Islam
en.wikipedia.org...

Green in Islam
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


Indeed it is, was wondering when someone would pick it up.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 08:46 AM
link   
these protests won't really destablise iran, the opposition are just as happy to have the clerics as supreme over lords of the universe as the current government. what difference would it make. if the CIA want to destablise iran they would have to undermine the clerics and nothing that is happening seems likely to do that.

i don't think the CIA had a huge amount to do with the colour revolutions either, the colors are usually colours of nationality or party and if the CIA had orchestrated them they would have trumpeted their success.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 09:23 AM
link   
I don't know, but once Iran and North Korea's people stand up to their governments, and Israel and Palestine forgive and forget, there will be world peace



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


if only it was so simple, there are plenty of ongoing conflicts to keep the blood shedding all over the world. even a quick look on wiki reveals the extent of human atrocity and suffering, and even by their own admission, this page is certainly not comprehensive.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by pieman
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


if only it was so simple, there are plenty of ongoing conflicts to keep the blood shedding all over the world. even a quick look on wiki reveals the extent of human atrocity and suffering, and even by their own admission, this page is certainly not comprehensive.


Actually, the world seems far more peaceful now than it was prior to say 1970.




posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 


There are indications that the theocratic factions of Iran, which happen to have the last word on who runs the show, are showing cracks from within. This is creating many neighbors to feel nervous and we yet have not heard the official stand on the re count from China and Russia. They only gave there congratulations on the election victory.

It also duely noted that right up to the last moment Iran was not to attend SCO meeting, in fact the meeting between Iran's leader and Russian president was cancelled. This created mega ripples between the two nations and was looked as a hostile move from Iran towards Russia. As i mentioned the last minute flight from Iran to meet the Russian president was held the moment the plane touched down and then they proceeded to attend the SCO meeting.

The poker chips are on the table and everyone is seated at that table.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


i'm sure there are cracks and infighting in the theocracy, i just don't think it'll destabilise the entire system.

as far as russia and china go, there is about as much chance of them being overly critical of iran as there is of the us being critical of the saudi's, even if they were inclined to be critical, which i doubt considering their political histories.

reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


i commend the optimistic outlook, i'm afraid i find it hard not to be cynical. you might well be right.

[edit on 23/6/09 by pieman]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join