Secret Team: The CIA and Its Allies in Control of the United States and the World

[hacksecret]

http://www.ratical.com/ratville/JFK/ST/

http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Team-Allies-Control-United/dp/0939484358










http://khunnamob.globat.com/backup/khunnamob/www.khunnamob.info/board/show.php-Category=khunnamob&No=620&forum=6&page=23&PHPSESSID=5df051bc51e3404a3b6bdcb9f62a03ba.htm



Secrets of the CIA, Parts 1 - 7

The most extreme example of this, of course, is Fox News, best described as political porn.
If the Fox outfit did not deflect attention from more insidious designs, it would be laughable,
even indulged for the low-class, beer drinking' entertainment that it might bring to certain demographics.
In practice, however, it cannot be distinguished from a state run organization reduced to merely
dramatizing with idiocy and sound effects the official narratives of the day, the officially sanctioned
and sanitized news.

Should you have doubts about press complicity with CIA/government lawlessness,
I urge you to consider, as an example, revelations from
Dan Rather about what CBS did to curry favor with the White House
; or what can happen to a corporate, fully politicized, fourth estate:
the Iraq war. Once called Yellow Journalism
, it is now cleverly called "fair and balanced". In the worst cases, journalism has
become little more than a CIA 'front'.

After World War II, these psywar techniques continued. C.D. Jackson,
a major figure in US psywar efforts before and after the war, was simultaneously
a top executive at Time-Life. Psywar was also used with success during the 1950s
by Edward Lansdale, first in the Philippines and then in South Vietnam. In Guatemala,
the Dulles brothers worked with their friends at United Fruit, in particular
the "father of public relations," Edward Bernays, who for years had been lobbying
the press on behalf of United. When CIA puppets finally took over in 1954,
only applause was heard from the media, commencing forty years of CIA-approved
horrors in that unlucky country.[2] Bernays' achievement apparently impressed
Allen Dulles, who immediately began using US public relations experts and front groups
to promote the image of Ngo Dinh Diem as South Vietnam's savior.[3]
The combined forces of unaccountable covert operations and corporate public relations,
each able to tap massive resources, are sufficient to make the concept of "democracy"
obsolete. Fortunately for the rest of us, unchallenged power can lose perspective.
With research and analysis -- the capacity to see and understand the world around them --
entrenched power must constantly anticipate and contain potential threats.
But even as power seems more secure, this capacity can be blinded by hubris and isolation.
--Daniel Brandt, NameBase NewsLine, Journalism And The CIA

So it naturally follows that the robber barons and their fourth estate business partners
should indeed benefit from the puppet they all worked so vigorously to enthrone.

Corporate Interests merged with State Interests

The corporate interests of America are now almost entirely at one with
the political interests of America. The people are either relegated to the outskirts
as unimportant bystanders or are caught in the cross-fire as casualties of a hostile
corporate takeover by American and even foreign corporations. We "the people"
do not matter in a country where corporate profits are tied to state policy,
which then uses those same corporations to tell us what is real and what is fabricated,
what is true and what is false. --Laura Alexandrovna, Our Cold Civil War

The CIA is symptomatic of a militarized society, in which the CIA and
the military play important roles in a circular self-justification. Much is made of the fact
that the military provides opportunities for high school dropouts, the disadvantaged
who might not otherwise get an education or a job. What is to be said of a society for
which the export of death and destruction becomes essential to its economic well-being?
As Gore Vidal argued persuavesively in his "The Decline and Fall of the American Empire
",the military/industrial complex is a drag on the economy. The Pentagon budget,
he argues, is an economic black hole. He sites, as an example, the construction of a 'tank'!
Once built, the economic life of the tank is finished. The tank becomes a liability,
an expense to be maintained. It produces nothing, adds nothing! The Pentagon soaks up
monies that might have been budgeted for truly productive programs like education,
training and infrastructure. What is to be said about a society that finds it necessary to
send young people off to die in immoral wars in order to get them employed and off the streets?

Eisenhower saw Big Brother's approach but could not have known how it might have been
avoided. The revolution, decades in the making, is like a slow boil. We did not even know
when we were "done", but cooked we are! We are like one of many puzzles that originated
in the mind of the ancient Megarian logician, Eubulides of Miletus.

http://nonlaw.forumotion.com/forum-f1/topic-t346-25.htm

https://khunnamob.globat.com/backup/khunnamob/www.khunnamob.info/board/show.php-Category=khunnamob&No=791&forum=4&page=24&PHPSESSID=5df051bc51e3404a3b6bdcb9f62a03ba.htm

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GJ01Ak04.html

http://socialistworld.net/eng/2009/02/2701.html

27 February 2009
History

Iran 1979: A revolution that was taken from the working class

Why did counter-revolution triumph instead?
Chris Moore from The Socialist, weekly paper of
the Socialist Party (CWI England and Wales)

Iranian
president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, recently addressed thousands of
supporters at Tehran’s Azadi (Freedom) Monument, to celebrate the 30th
anniversary of the Iranian Revolution - a revolution carried out by
the working class that toppled a brutal Western puppet, the Shah.

But why did the revolution eventually result in the imposition of a theocratic dictatorship?
Can the Iranian working class resume its revolutionary ambitions, this time against
the repressive Islamic regime?

In February 1979, the hated monarchical dictatorship of Mohammed Reza Shah
was finally swept away by a general strike, with oil workers in Khuzestan in south west Iran
at its heart. Millions of protesters poured onto the streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities.
This mass movement ended the so-called ‘Peacock Throne’
and Pahlavi dynasty. It was described by eyewitness Edward Mortimer in
the Spectator as “a genuine popular revolution in the fullest sense
of the word: the most genuine, probably since 1917.”
But unlike the Russian Revolution, the Iranian working class lacked
a Bolshevik-type party and leadership that could act independently decisively
for the working class, and a socialist programme which could show a way forward.
Without such a leadership, a religious movement came to the fore to
direct political opposition to the Shah and take power.

Background to revolution

The history of the Iranian working class is full of heroic struggles.
Under the impact of the 1917 Russian revolution, the Gilan Soviet Republic
was set up in northern Iran. But this was butchered by Reza Khan, the Shah’s father,
who came to power through a military coup in 1921. Khan was always
a pawn of British imperialism, which replaced him in 1941 with his more
malleable son.The Iranian working class has suffered from tragically
inadequate leadership. The main workers’ party prior to the revolution,
the Tudeh (Communist Party), was formed in 1941. Leading massive strikes,
it built tremendous support during the Soviet Union’s occupation of Azerbaijan
in northern Iran, while Britain occupied the south. In 1946, Khuzestan oil workers
led what was called the largest industrial strike in Middle Eastern history and
the Central Council of Iranian Trade Unions became the largest union federation.
By 1951 a popular movement, led by the radical nationalist
prime minister Muhammad Mossadeq and his National Front, ejected Britain
from the oilfields and nationalised them. The ‘mighty’ Shah fled into exile in 1953.
But as Iran was an oil-rich and strategically important country,
both US and British imperialism instigated a coup to return the Shah.
The leadership of the 100,000 strong Tudeh effectively did nothing and
fled to its Stalinist masters in Moscow.

Terror and industrialisation

To secure his rule the Shah began crushing all organised political opposition
and trade unions were banned. During the Cold War, the US wanted to build
Iran as a fortress for the West, massively supporting its rearmament.
Backed by the CIA, the horrendous Savak secret police organisation, formed in 1956,
became increasingly indiscriminate. After the Shah’s fall, one grisly cell was discovered
with bed frames adapted into human cookers and with a bacon slicer type contraption
for hands and arms.Terror alone was not enough to preserve the regime,
there was another rebellion in 1963. Thousands were slaughtered and Ayatollah Khomeini
was exiled, not to return until 1 February 1979 when a crowd of five million greeted him.

In 1963 the Shah launched his ‘White Revolution’ of massive industrialisation,
including a transformation of the countryside. Using oil revenues to buy out and enrich
the mainly absentee landlords his aim was for them to invest in industry, so transforming
them into a capitalist class. Imposing capitalist farming techniques, over 1.2 million peasants
were driven from the land, flooding into the urban areas to live in appalling living and
work conditions.The Shah’s economic policy was borrowed from the National Front
and explains why their support ebbed way. The Tudeh party suffered repression but it was
politically incapable of laying the basis of a workers’ movement to overthrow capitalism,
hankering only for a new Mossadeq.Growing oil revenues fattened
the opulent Peacock throne. During the 1973 Israel/Egypt war,
imperialism’s puppet cut some of its strings, becoming one of
the most militant members of OPEC (Organisation of Oil Exporting Countries).
Oil embargoes quadrupled the price of oil. In 1976 Iran produced 295 million tonnes of oil,
10% of world production.Breakneck industrialisation was creating
a working class that was beginning to feel its strength and demand its share of the new wealth.
Anger was fermenting and a reckoning was on the horizon.

Revolutionary explosions

US imperialism appeared blind to the growing prospect of unrest.
President Jimmy Carter in December 1977 toasted the Shah,
calling his ‘great leadership’ “an island of stability in one of
the more troubled areas of the world”. The CIA reported in late 1978
that the Shah would continue to hold power for at least the next ten years.
But the economy was moving into crisis.

The price of oil dropped after 1976 and inflation was rampant. Austere economic measures
created increased unemployment and suffering for workers.
Despite the bloody repression, protests exploded in the workplaces, mosques,
universities, among the poor masses and in the myriad of stalls and traders in the bazaars.
In 1977, 50,000 urban poor people blocked bulldozers sent to clear slums in Tehran.
The shooting of theology student protesters in the holy city of Qom in January 1978
sparked a general strike.After mid summer the situation escalated dramatically
as textile, machine tool, sanitation, car assembly, paper mill and other workers took action.
Major strikes took place in Tehran, in the province of Fars and in Khuzestan, and especially
the city of Ahwaz.Increasingly demands went beyond pay
and redundancies, calling for democratic rights, ‘Death to the Shah’,
‘Vengeance against… his American imperialist friends’. Others wanted
a ‘socialist republic based on Islam’.

October saw the steel workers from Esfahan in central Iran call for the expulsion of
all Savak and military personnel from the plant.Striking Khuzestan oil workers
were only producing fuel for necessary uses.
A desperate Shah sent in the troops and 3,000 protesters
were massacred in Jaleh Square, Tehran.

Workers responded by widening the general strike. Rail workers stopped
the army elite and others from travelling. Custom workers only allowed essential
products like medicines and baby food into the country. The masses were
rallying behind the oil workers’ call for regime change and for the Shah to go.
With the army increasingly fraternising with the crowds,
the monarchy was doomed and it fell on 11 February 1979.

Workers’ leaders

So how did a movement led by right-wing political Islam prise power away
from the Iranian working class? Comprising three to four million among
a 35 million population, the working class was numerically bigger than
it was in Russia in October 1917. Crucially, the Tudeh had not grasped the lessons of
Trotsky’s theory of the ‘Permanent Revolution’, that was confirmed by events
during the Russian revolution, relating to semi-industrial countries like Russia and Iran.
Trotsky explained that a weak national capitalist class, reliant on landlordism
and imperialism, was incapable of carrying through the historical tasks of its own
capitalist revolution, ie introducing democratic rights, a representative parliament,
land reform, etc. This task would fall to the working class, bringing the peasantry
with them. But once achieved, workers would not want to hand over power to the capitalists
but would want to struggle to bring about a workers’ government and socialist society.
Instead of leading the Iranian working class in a struggle for power,
the Tudeh were in the straightjacket of the Stalinist ‘two-stage’ theory. It argued that
the struggle for socialism was postponed to a future date after the establishment and
development of a capitalist state. Subsequently the Tudeh only called
for a ‘Democratic Islamic Republic’ and rallied behind the capitalist Islamic clerics.
Their leader was even nicknamed “Ayatollah”.Other significant left
radical groups also failed to organise within the ranks of the working class.
The Fedayeen came from youth supporters of the Tudeh, who took up armed struggle
with guerrilla tactics after the failure of the 1953 coup.Suffering military defeat
in the mid 1970s they re-emerged on 10 February 1979 to defeat the Shah’s Immortal Guard
and drive the final nail in his regime. The Islamist Mojahedin-e Khalq guerrillas called for
an Islamic society without the clergy. Neither group could show a way forward by coordinating
the movement nationally and disarming the Islamist clerics politically and militarily.

Religious movement

The failure of the Stalinist bureaucracy along with left Arab movements
aided the growth of political Islam. They aped those capitalist nationalists who portrayed
themselves as playing a progressive role by advocating ‘Arab socialism’, while not
fundamentally challenging the capitalist system.
So when the Shah’s ‘White Revolution’ started to dispossess one of
the biggest landowners, the Islamic church, of its land, it was forced into opposition to
the regime and a process began which enabled the clergy to eventually take power.
With all political organisations banned under the Shah,
opposition tended to gather in the mosques. The clergy had a well
organised network, with 10,000 mosques, 180,000 members, 90,000 mullahs
and 50 ayatollahs. Khomeini’s letters and tapes were smuggled in,
copied and distributed. With half the population living in rural areas
and two-thirds illiterate, the poor and dispossessed were stirred by
the radical sermons.

They interpreted the call for the overthrow of the Shah as a struggle against
totalitarianism and the demand for an ‘Islamic Republic’ as for a ‘republic of the poor’.
Even an oil worker commented to a US correspondent: “Khomeini… will take power
from the rich and give it to us”. An image was portrayed of an Islamic state where
freedom and democracy would replace corrupt western and non-Islamic influences.
Added to this, the bazaars tended to flourish around the mosques,
paying a zakat (tax) to them. When the Shah attacked the bazaars, blaming them
for rampant inflation, Khomeini exploited the situation and drew in their support.
Social centres also gathered around the mosques and they played a crucial role
in offering support and food to the dispossessed peasants streaming into the cities.
This pushed some clergy in a left direction, with one cleric calling for public ownership
of industry and a classless society.

เสียงปืนแตก!

มิเสียแรงที่แปลหนังสือเรื่องปฏิวัติฝรั่งเศส "รัญ เมืองลุง" จึงเปรียบเทียบ
"วีดิโอลิงค์ทักษิณ" เทียบเท่า "เทปเสียงโคไมนี" ประมุขทางศาสนาของชาวอิหร่าน
ถ้าจำกันได้ ปี 2522 เกิดการปฏิวัติอิสลามที่อิหร่าน โดย อยาโตลาห์ โคไมนี
ที่ลี้ภัยอยู่ในฝรั่งเศส ซึ่งได้อัดคำปราศรัยของเขาลงเทป ทยอยส่งเข้าอิหร่าน
เผยแพร่ต่อประชาชนนับแสนนับล้านตลับ แทบไม่น่าเชื่อ เทปคำปราศรัยของ
โคไมนี ปลุกระดมประชาชนให้ลุกขึ้นโค่นล้มระบอบชาร์ปาละวี
ในที่สุด ระบอบศักดินาอิหร่านก็ล้มลง และมีการสถาปนาสาธารณรัฐอิสลาม
ตั้งแต่บัดนั้นเป็นต้นมา

"รัญ เมืองลุง" จึงสรุปว่า ทักษิณกำลังทำคล้ายโคไมนี ในแง่ยุทธวิธีการต่อสู้
การโฟนอินและวีดิโอลิงค์ของทักษิณ สร้างความหวาดกลัวแก่พวกอมาตยาธิปไตยและ
รัฐบาลอภิสิทธิ์อย่างมาก "รัญ เมืองลุง" จึงมั่นอกมั่นใจในชัยชนะของมวลชน "กองทัพแดง"
"โลกทั้งโลกอยู่ฝ่ายประชาธิปไตย อมาตยาธิปไตยเป็นระบอบการปกครองที่ถูกล้มเลิกไปนานแล้ว
อมาตยาธิปไตยไทยกำลังเสื่อมลงทุกวันๆ" นั่นเป็นทัศนะอันแหลมคมของนักทฤษฎีเสื้อแดง
ที่เชื่อมาโดยตลอดชีวิตว่า "อมาตยาธิปไตยกำลังเสื่อมลงทุกวัน" ฉะนั้น บทจบของมหากาพย์
เสื้อแดงหนนี้ จะลงเอยด้วยสูตรสำเร็จเดิมๆ หรือไม่นั้น ย่อมขึ้นอยู่กับผู้มีอำนาจอยู่ในมือ ณ ปัจจุบัน
จะเลือกทางไหน? ยุบสภา หรือดันทุรังรักษาอำนาจ ทางเลือกมีไม่มากครับ!

and "Son of Sam" type. It is worth noting that the late Khomeini was a creation
of British Military Intelligence Div. 6, MI6. This detailed work spelled out
the step-by-step process which the US Government implemented to put
Khomeini in power.15. To export "religious liberation" ideas around the world
so as to undermine all existing religions, but more especially
the Christian religion. This began with the "Jesuit Liberation Theology",

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]

[hacksecret]