This is Google's cache of http://azarmehr.blogspot.com/2010/04/us-export-ban-on-haystack-is-lifted.html. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 22 Aug 2010 13:49:50 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more

Text-only version
 

Thursday, April 15, 2010

US Export Ban on Haystack is Lifted

Posterity will read about the madness and cowardice of today's Western politicians and bureaucrats in standing up to the tyranny in Iran and laugh and cry at the same time. That is if there will be a posterity left in the West before the messianic junta in Iran succeeds in spreading its network even further and brings down the Western democracies.

To the average Western self hating 'useful idiot', the West is against a popular anti-imperialist government in Iran and if the sanctions against the Islamic Republic are lifted everything in Iran will be hunky-dory, see Mehri Honarbin's speech amongst an audience of like minded 'useful idiots' here: http://tinyurl.com/y58kazh

The reality is of course totally different from what these pampered Socialists imagine things to be like. Here is a small glance at the reality which is really more like a farce. Companies like Nokia Siemens Network have been able to sell spying equipment to the messianic junta in Iran with complete impunity, Nokia Siemens Network exports enable the Iranian government to eavesdrop and track down pro-democracy activists which ultimately leads to their arrests and imprisonments. Nothing happened to Nokia Siemens Network, yet the likes of Austin Heap who gave up his six figure salary job in order to create anti-censorship software that helps Iranian activists and citizen journalists beat the internet censorships imposed by the Iranian regime have come under US sanctions which ban the export of encryption software to Iran!

Austin Heap and his small team of Internet technology experts have had their PayPal assets frozen and any US citizen who has tried to help them raise funds have been advised by their lawyers to stay well clear of Haystack or they could risk having their assets ceased!

The same preposterous sagas can be told about how the Iranian regime broadcasts its propaganda in all languages via the satellites and yet jams all satellite signals coming into Iran which it deems as a threat to its survival, again with complete impunity.

Yesterday, finally there was a glimpse of sanity and common sense however. The US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) finally lifted the ban on export of Haystack to Iran and issued it with an export license.

Meanwhile the US exports to Iran continue to grow by ten folds.
Despite conflict, U.S. does business with Iran: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25588135/

18 comments:

Jared Israel said...

Let me offer a somewhat different perspective on two counts. First, to accept the faux Left's self-definition as "socialist," as you do here and have done previously, is to propel any young person drawn to class justice -- which is the source of any authentic impulse to the Left -- into sympathy for these Islamist apologists. Why acknowledge Galloway et al's ridiculous pretense of being Leftists, when in fact, on an organized level, at this time there IS no Left, at least in the West!
Second, whether their behavior will or will not backfire in the long run, the Western Establishment (as represented by Obama, Brown, the Pope, etc. )is not acting irrationally in aiding the IRI regime. Aiding the Ayatollahs has been their underlying strategy ever since the State Department sent Ramsey Clark to make pro-Khomenei statements in Iran and later picked him up at the airport in Paris and drove him in a US diplomatic vehicle to Khomenei's residence in France, a fact duly reported in the media at the time, thus broadcasting to the Iranian military that the US was backing the Islamists. Over and over, the US, Vatican, and others have aided the IRI regime, and then, later, tried to cover their tracks by expressing horror over what is in fact the fruits of their own labors. Why should actions, consistent over a period of 30 years, be seen (or, anyway, presented) as insanity interrupted by moments of sanity -- instead of a pro-IRI strategy interrupted by occasional concessions to public relations? If Obama's banning Haystack was insane, was Bush's involving Iran in planning Afghanistan's constitution (in 2002) also insane? What about invading Iraq, which, as Israeli generals predicted, could ONLY aid the IRI? Also insane? If Iranian exiles like you attacked the Western powers as *duplicitously* aiding the IRI, if you noted that they only take anti-IRI-regime measures to appease domestic opinion and that therefore it is up to ordinary people in the West to force the Establishment to retreat from their strategy -- i.e., if you told the blunt truth -- this would a) undermine the faux-Left apologists (whose strength is that they seem to be standing up to the bullies, the super powers) and b) would engender support among Western students and others, who would see that the Western Establishment is relying PRECISELY on the Islamists to control and repress ordinary people in the Third World. And that, therefore, real anti-imperialism REQUIRES opposing the IRI regime.

Waybec said...

Unfortunately it's corporate greed which now rules the world! Presidents and Prime Ministers reduced to nothing more than managers to all the shadey double dealings and lobbyist's going on behind closed doors. Yet more Money get's stuffed into the selfish back pockets of the mega-rich at the expense of wrecking economies, the environment and democracies! Ha, the working life of a politician: Start's out pitching the grand ideals, only to pick up the same old pitch fork to bury them! Ultimately it's Western leaders brought off by big business and lobbyists that also fuel the religious fanatics and regimes in this world! But then again, we in the West are always good at blindly shooting ourself in the foot. Slapping on the sticking plaster, instead of addressing the root cause before it can spread its infection! Same ol' story I'm afraid. Cowboys and gangsters really pulling the strings! Short term gains that just stoke the longer bloody wars of the future!

Azarmehr said...

You are right JI

barmakid said...

Jared,

"...would engender support among Western students and others, who would see that the Western Establishment is relying PRECISELY on the Islamists to control and repress ordinary people in the Third World."

Explain that to me. How exactly is the west controlling and oppressing people in the third world? OR if you meant something else, WHY would the west want to repress ordinary people in the third world?

Second, the "west" is NOT a monolith. Different countries have different interests. You can't bunch them up in one group because the media does it or because it makes it easier to talk about. Venezuela is in the "west" and so is Bolivia - I think it's safe to say they are left-wing governments who support the IRI.

Third, I don't know who Galloway is, but to say there is no left in the "west" is absurd. ABSURD.

And for you to water down the issue to the point that claiming, "they only take anti-IRI-regime measures to appease domestic opinion" is ridiculous.

NO, they really don't. One simple anecdote about one of Khomeini's lackeys being picked up by Americans doesn't cut it. It doesn't mean the "west" supports the IRI. You are completely disregarding the nuances of international relations and using some premeditated and cynical framework instead to draw these baseless inferences about the "west" and their relationship with the IRI.

The only real significant thing (aside from during the Iraq-Iran war) that can be discussed were security discussions between the Americans and Iranians after 9/11.

And what's happened since then? Hmm...

And you should really understand, they are not "aiding" the IRI, they are aiding their own interest. And in the short-term that means dealing with the IRI.

PEace,
barmakid

Winston said...

this is good news

Jared Israel said...

In reply to Barmakid's incoherence:
1. Nobody uses "West" to mean Bolivia or Venezuela. It refers to Western Europe, the US and Canada.
2. The US did NOT drive a 'Khomeini lackey' to see Khomenei. While Khomeini was in France, famous former U S Attorney General Ramsey Clark went, after a publicly announced State Department briefing, to Iran, where he proclaimed that Khomeini would win. Correctly seen as a State Department message, this impacted the wavering military. To underline Clark’s status, the US embassy drove him with fanfare to Tehran airport, and the US Embassy in Paris publicly drove him to Khomeini, whom the State Dep't thus showcased as the US choice, just when, as Brzezinski admits, the US was inciting Islamist rebellion in Afghanistan. See http://tenc.net/interviews/brz.htm Similarly, in 2002, Bush entertained Turkey’s Erdogan, CALLING HIM “PRIME MINISTER” when he was banned from the PM job, and Turkey’s parliament was about to decide whether to lift the ban! These messages are sent to help Islamism.
3. Contrary to Barmakid, following "the Iraq-Iran war," the US did aid the IRI. Desert Storm hobbled IRI nemesis Hussein, and the U.S. installed pro-IRI forces in in Iraq following 2003. (Albright says helping Iran was an unintended consequence of the invasion. Yeah, and filet mignon is an unintended consequence of killing cows.) And Afghanistan? Listen to IRI Deputy Minister Safari addressing Western officials in ‘07, obsequiously praising the Western takeover of Afghanistan. http://www.rolafghanistan.esteri.it/video/IRAN.wmv That's reality. The mutual public attacks are circus for plebeians. (As for the present, Obama/Clinton’s repeated wish to "reach out" to Ahmadinejad, and subsequent negotiations, provided just the status-makeover Ahmadinejad needed.)
4. Barmakid can’t believe the West exploits the 3rd World. Well, the Western establishment that overthrew Mossadeq, ultimately for economic reasons, and which devoted 30 years of policy to 'opening' China in the mid '70s, is still in power. To facilitate economic exploitation of 3rd World countries, the Establishment operates a two sided scam. One side pays lips service to human rights while the other side runs the Third World with an iron hand, using anti-imperialist verbiage to justify anti-democratic policies to prevent independent, working class self-assertion. Why did the head of the elite International Development Law Organization, run by Western states and the Vatican, say, in 2002, that Sharia has "all the elements that are really required to underpin a human rights agenda"? (AP dispatch, p. 2, http://www.tenc.net/archive/IDLO-02-Afghan-clips.pdf ) Because Islamist domination works best for repressing populations in ‘emerging’ nations, creating ideal conditions for relieving them of labor and wealth.
5. Barmakid says the West is NOT aiding Iran, but then says it isn't 'aiding' because Western powers "are aiding their own interest." I say: the West nurtured the IRI by crushing Hussein; by handing them Afghanistan on a plate; by making Bosnia an IRI semi-colony; by supplying the IRI with technology to track internal dissenters and on and on and that this does reflect Western establishment interests. To develop a passionate Western mass movement against pro-IRI policies we need to show ordinary people that their leaders have been duplicitously aiding the IRI, whose brutality, clothed in anti-imperialist verbiage, aims to make Iran – and other Third World countries -- safe for exploitation.
6. Some organizations & states claim they are Leftist -- even as they worship Islamist killers and endorse the Nazi canard that "the Jews run the world" – but it doesn’t mean it’s true. The 'Leftist' claim was dubious when made by the USSR and its Communist parties. Now, made by 'I-kneel-to-serve' Galloway, or Peron/Chavez, and even Khamenei (!), it is tragedy repeated as farce.

Neda Mehregan said...

Jared Everything you say is spot on and the same assertions that ordinary Iranians have known all along.

That the IR is nothing more than a puppet regime, implementing the West's policies of exploitation and repression for the advancement of their economic and political goals.

It therefore follows that all those who are working for the IR are working for the West and against the interests of their own country and people. That's why we call them kha'en va mozdoor.

Anonymous said...

Jared Israel says NOTHING new *SIGH* but sounds like she been reading lotta books too cuz of words there. Tell winston,,, second thought, dont tell him he is known since long time,,, only bird dropping every now and then.

barmakid said...

Jared, I'm INCOHERENT!!?

LOL. Have you ever heard of a PARAGRAPH? Lol. And you responded to nothing I said, you chose a couple sentences, misinterpreted what I was saying, and then responded to your own thoughts. LOL.

Do you hear that Potkin? His example of the West oppressing people is their overthrowing of Mossadeq. LOL. Nothing to say about that?

When you get to the point of making unsubstantiated accusations that are backed up by quotes from officials at the Vatican for God's sake (no pun intended) that's when you know your thoughts and opinions are not grounded in rationality, but in ideology.

Furthermore, I didn't say I don't believe the west is exploiting the "third world". YOU SAID, "that the Western Establishment is relying PRECISELY on the "Islamists" to control and repress ordinary people in the Third World."

So I ask: How are they doing so? I didn't ask how they did it 30yrs or 10yrs ago. I'm asking how they are doing it NOW. And not to the governments, but to the "ordinary people."

I mean, I'm simply asking you.

I've said before, "that we prefer the order and certainty of despotic governments than the chaos and uncertainty of developing democracies."

But you have this idea that ever since the overthrow of Mossadegh the "west" has been on a one track path to oppressing "ordinary people" and buttressing the "Islamists."

That's retarded. Just as retarded as calling me an Iranian exile and using quotes from Christian organizations about Islam to reach the truth.

International relations are more complicated than your naive, ideological prognostications about them.

The fact that you have Neda saying everything you said is "spot on" should tip you off to how horribly mislead you are. LOL

Oh yea, and what happened to saying there's no "left" in the "west". LOL. That's your response? To talk about the faux communism of the Soviet Union and HITLER!? LOL. Calm down Leo Strauss, In the United Stated we have vibrant liberal activism, as do you in the UK.

Liberal/progressive policies have steered the world's progress, no matter if people like you decide to use Chavez, the USSR, and other faux leftist to validate your preordained theories and discredit the genuine liberals of the world.


You're an idiot bro. And please, if you choose to respond, respond to what I ACTUALLY said, not to yourself.

PEace,
barmakid

p.s. If you live in the UK, it's because of people like you that the Torys will never gain the premiership. You stain the right with your incredibly mislead and overly zealous hatred of anything other than your ideology.

But you have friends on this blog that are just as retarded as you: Winston, Neda, Sohrab, and apparently, Azarmehr.

من نمیفهمم چرا من را بعنوان یک دشمن میبینید ولی اگر دوست داری من دشمنت باشم دشمنت خواهم بود

barmakid said...

Neda,

"It therefore follows that all those who are working for the IR are working for the West and against the interests of their own country and people. That's why we call them kha'en va mozdoor."

Ok... so why do you live in the UK?

If the west is working for the IRI and the IRI for the west, then why would you pay taxes to such a government like the UK?

You are paying taxes to a government that is helping the IRI!! OMG!! Traitor!! Wait, what I meant to say was IDIOT.

PEace,
Barmakid

Neda Mehregan said...

Barmakid
You're still incoherent.
(new paragraph)
Who said I live in the UK? Living in a country and paying taxes, is one thing, working for the Islamic Republic is another.

If you equate the two, you are the one who is a retard.

Jared Israel said...

Barmakid tries to divert the discussion into a flame-fight by means of provocative falsifications.

For example, Barmakid claims I quoted the Vatican praising Islamism, when in fact I quoted the head of the VERY important IDLO, which is run by the foreign ministries of the U.S., Italy, Germany, etc., praising Islamism as good for human rights; he or she claims I talked about Hitler, when in fact I noted that Britain’s 'hard' Left shows it is phony by accepting the Hitlerian lie that the Jews run the world; he or she implies I am a Rightist, when anyone reading what I wrote (not to mention my website, emperors-clothes.com) can see I am NOT on the Right; and on and on.

My original comments were addressed not to Barmakid, whoever he, she, or they is or are, but to a REAL person -- Potkin -- whom I urged not to accept the IRI apologists’ claim that they are Socialist Leftists because a) it is not correct, since the impulse to the Left is based on concern for class justice, and b) it lends the IRI apologists undue credibility.

Barmakid's bait, that Liberals are Leftists and therefore the Left is everywhere, is a silly, provocative word game, since I am obviously talking about British MP Galloway, et al, who claim to be the Socialist (i.e., 'hard') Left (not liberals) and who should be exposed as attacking the basic principle of any real Left because they attack the working class by supporting the IRI, a regime that crushes working class action, which is why it has historically been aided by the West (as I showed in earlier comments: 1991 Gulf War, 2003 invasion of Iraq, invasion of Afghanistan, etc.)

As for how Islamism and other anti-democratic forms facilitate Western economic exploitation, one need only consider the immense profits of Western companies in so-called Third World countries, where workers are ruthlessly repressed, most harshly of all in Islamist states, and therefore make peanuts; where health and safety regulations are a joke; etc. The IRI is a modern remake of what used to be called Indirect Rule – where the West relies on Third World ruling classes to establish 'order,' meaning to prevent social resistance. The British Empire was the trail blazer in using Islamic extremists this way.

Barmakid uses name-calling against me and others, and provocative misunderstandings, because a) he/she (or they) has no arguments and b)in order to provoke me and others into a diversionary flame so that people reading it would not think about the important question I have raised, and which I urge Iranian exiles to consider.

That key question is: how can we get Western students to actively support the struggle in Iran?

I was one of the national leaders of the effective wing of the US student movement in the late 1960s. I learned that the key to mobilizing students is exposure of hypocrisy. People hate hypocrites worse than murderers, and they hate hypocrites who lie and manipulate to aid murderers worst of all!

If Iranians in the West show Western students how their governments are duplicitously aiding the IRI, they can thereby promote a mass movement to hinder Western governments from carrying out their pro-IRI strategies. It can be done, but the precondition for doing it is to strongly attack the lie, told by Galloway et al, that he and his fellow IRI apologists (Chomsky's writing partner Ed Herman is one of them in the U.S.) are the ('hard') Left.

Jared Israel said...

Barmakid is not merely incoherent; he or she is dishonest, trying to divert discussion into a flame-fight by means of provocative falsifications.

For example, Barmakid claims I quoted a Vatican official praising Islamism, when in fact I quoted the chief of the VERY powerful IDLO, which is run by the FOREIGN MINISTRIES of the U.S., Italy, Germany, etc., praising Islamism as being good for human rights. A cynical and significant statement! He or she claims I talked about Hitler, when in fact I noted that Britain’s 'hard' Left shows it is not on the Left at all by accepting the Hitlerian lie that the Jews run the world. He or she says I have a Tory-like ideology, i.e., I am on the Right, when anyone reading what I wrote (not to mention my website, emperors-clothes.com) can see I am NOT on the Right; and on and on.

My original comments were addressed not to Barmakid, whoever he, she, or they is or are, but to a REAL person -- Potkin -- whom I urged not to accept IRI apologists’ claim that they are Socialist Leftists because a) it is not correct, since the impulse to the Left comes from concern for class justice, which they abhor, and b) it lends the IRI apologists undue credibility.

Barmakid's bait, that Liberals are Leftists and therefore the Left is everywhere, is a silly, provocative word game, since I am obviously talking about British MP Galloway, et al, who claim to be the Socialist (i.e., 'hard') Left, NOT liberals. They should be exposed as attacking the basic principle of any real Left, because they attack the working class by supporting the IRI, a regime that crushes working class struggle, which is why the IRI has historically been aided by the West (as I showed in earlier comments: open U.S. support for Khomeini at the decisive time in 1979; 1991 Gulf War; 2003 invasion of Iraq; invasion of Afghanistan; etc.)

As for how Islamism and other anti-democratic forms facilitate Western economic exploitation, one need only consider the immense profits of Western companies in so-called Third World countries where workers are ruthlessly repressed, most harshly of all in Islamist states, where workers are therefore paid a tiny fraction of what they would take home in the West; where health and safety regulations are a joke; etc. The IRI is a modern remake of what used to be called Indirect Rule – in which the West relies on so-called Third World ruling classes to establish 'order,' meaning to prevent social resistance. The British Empire was the trail blazer in using Islamic extremists this way.

Barmakid engages in name-calling against me and others, and provocative misunderstandings, because a) he/she (or they) has no arguments and b)in order to intimidate and to provoke me and others into diversionary flame fights, so that people reading this discussion would forget about the important question I have raised, and which I urge Iranian exiles to consider.

That key question is: how can we get Western students to actively support the struggle in Iran?

I was one of the national leaders of the effective wing of the US student movement in the late 1960s. I learned that the key to mobilizing students is exposure of hypocrisy. People hate hypocrites worse than murderers, and they hate hypocrites who lie and manipulate to aid murderers worst of all!

If Iranians in the West show Western students how their governments are duplicitously aiding the IRI, they can thereby promote a mass movement to hinder Western governments from carrying out their pro-IRI strategies. It can be done, but the precondition for doing it is to strongly attack the lie, told by Galloway et al, that he and his fellow IRI apologists (Chomsky's writing partner Ed Herman is one of them in the U.S.) are ('hard') Leftists fighting their governments, when in fact they are a hidden accessory to a duplicitous Establishment strategy.

barmakid said...

Siiggghhh

Neda,

I'm not "equating" anything. YOU ARE. Let me remind you:

"That the IR is nothing more than a puppet regime, implementing the West's policies of exploitation and repression for the advancement of their economic and political goals.

It therefore follows that all those who are working for the IR are working for the West and against the interests of their own country and people."

So if the West is helping the IRI why do you live in the West? You are paying taxes to a government that oppresses your people (according to you).

So based on your own suggestion,

"If you equate the two, you are the one who is a retard." If therefore follows that you are, indeed, the RETARD. LOL.

And Jared,

You clearly don't understand that liberalism is a leftist ideology. Allow me to present how the AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY defines "left":

"The people and groups who advocate LIBERAL, often radical measures to effect change in the established order, especially in politics, usually to achieve the equality, freedom, and well-being of the common citizens of a state."

Given that even at your age you still don't understand these concepts it makes sense why you would believe in the absurdity that the "West" is actually supporting the IRI. LOL

And again, the "west" is NOT A MONOLITH. The USA isn't even a MONOLITH. They do not act in unison!!

You are so uninformed it's hard to have a constructive debate, so the only avenue to resort to is name calling so as to confront your ridiculous views with an equal dose of ridiculousness.


PEace,
barmakid


p.s. If you wanted to argue with yourself you could have done that in front of a mirror. You responded to nothing I said and only repeated your own unsubstantiated claims about the nature of international relations.

barmakid said...

And Jared,

It is typical of your ilk to define leftism via the most extreme fringes of the left that might think "the jews run the world". LOL.

Well, that's not what it means to be on the left. Only someone who wasn't a leftist and does not understand our passionate and progressive drive to bring economic and social equality to citizens would utter such an absurdity.

Only someone like you would think that being on the left has anything to do with Judaism. Wtf do Jews have to do with liberalism/leftism!? LOL

And quoting the IDLO does not substantiate your outlandish claim that that the "west" supports the IRI. LOL. Maybe they are using a different strategy of tolerance and cultural relativism. No, of course not. Someone with a coarse mind-set like yourself couldn't even consider such an alternative.

You say: "the West nurtured the IRI by crushing Hussein; by handing them Afghanistan on a plate; by making Bosnia an IRI semi-colony; by supplying the IRI with technology to track internal dissenters and on and on and that this does reflect Western establishment interests."

So this was their plan all along? LOL. This sounds more like a list of mistakes Geeorge Bush made (except Bosnia of course). LOL

All of your examples are in retrospect. It's like saying the "west" created Osama bin Laden in order to have him attack the "West" today. People say that without even considering context. And you my friend are not considering context.

Of course the IRI commander would praise the invasion of Afghanistan! Why wouldn't he? The Taliban is their arch enemy!

Have you ever read Robert Baer's book, "The Devil We Know". Probably not (it doesn't seem like you've read many books) but if you had you would be presented with the context in which all these strategic blunders were made.

You sound like AHMADINEJAD for God's sake:

"To facilitate economic exploitation of 3rd World countries, the Establishment operates a two sided scam. One side pays lips service to human rights while the other side runs the Third World with an iron hand, using anti-imperialist verbiage to justify anti-democratic policies to prevent independent, working class self-assertion."

Come on Potkin, you actually agree with that nonsense? I mean it seriously sounds like it came out of Ahmadinejad's mouth himself!

And then he goes on to say, "by supplying the IRI with technology to track internal dissenters and on and on..." as an example of oppression. WHAT THE FUCK IS THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD YOU CYNICAL, CONSPIRATORIAL WAD OF USELESSNESS.

And what about reports of Obama's interference with Twitter's maintenance schedul so as to help the Green Movement? How does that fall into your theory?

You clearly don't understand the motus operandi behind US foreign policy. It can be summed up in two words: Access to markets (well, three words I guess:))

continued....

barmakid said...

continuation...

And to say that they turned Bosnia into an IRI colony and completely disregard the lives they saved when they did what they did is quite telling of your ignorance and one-track mind (not to mention incredibly callous). Sure, the unexpected (or even expected) consequence might have had that outcome, but you make it as if the sole motive was to give Bosnia to the IRI.

You are no different then this George Galloway fellow. Two sides of the same coin.

If they are so foolish to have their liberalism/leftism lead them into supporting the IRI then you are equally as foolish to believe what it is that you believe.

Leftism isn't about Jews.

Liberals don't just exist in England. If you meant only England, then don't say the left doesn't exist in the west. It does. and it does in the UK too, just ask Nick clegg.

The past has a context.

You shout imperialism louder than Chavez himself.

Chavez does not have a monopoly on the left.

And neither does Galloway for that matter.

I simply cannot understand how Azarmehr agrees with you. Neda, maybe. She's an uninformed, overly-zealous idiot.

Barmakid

Neda Mehregan said...

Barmakid why don't you stop your incoherent verbal diarrhoea and run along and pick up your pay check from the IR.

Jared Israel said...

Barmakid has continued his incoherent effort to depict me as a Rightist, trying to discredit me.

In his first comment he called me a Tory. I responded that this was preposterous, since I am, obviously, not on the Right. (I am a fairly traditional Left-wing socialist, with politics similar to Julio Alvarez del Vayo, foreign minister of the Spanish Republic that was destroyed by Fascism. To confirm that decent leftism has a long history, check out the 1947 piece where del Vayo accuses the West of empowering Arab Fascism, just as the West empowers IRI fascism today, and del Vayo’s fear that the USSR will hook up with Arab Fascists http://emperor.vwh.net/history/br.htm#vayo )

Busted for lying, barmakid does the only thing a post-modernist can: lies again.

BARMAKID QUOTE STARTS HERE:

"It is typical of your ilk to define leftism via the most extreme fringes of the left that might think 'the jews run the world'. LOL.

"Well, that's not what it means to be on the left. Only someone who wasn't a leftist and does not understand our passionate and progressive drive to bring economic and social equality to citizens would utter such an absurdity."

BARMAKID QUOTE ENDS HERE

So according to barmakid a) I am a Rightist who b) used Galloway's antisemitism to discredit the Left.

In fact, what I wrote in my first comment was:

"to accept the faux Left's self-definition as 'socialist,' as you [i.e. Azamehr] do here and have done previously, is to propel any young person drawn to class justice -- which is the source of any authentic impulse to the Left -- into sympathy for these Islamist apologists. Why acknowledge Galloway et al's ridiculous pretense of being Leftists?"

And what I added in my second comment was:

"Some organizations & states claim they are Leftist -- even as they worship Islamist killers and endorse the Nazi canard that 'the Jews run the world' – but it doesn’t mean it's true [i.e., that they are Leftists – JI]."

As I explained repeatedly, I was using 'Left' in the limited sense of 'hard' or socialist Left.

Obviously I was NOT trying to discredit leftism through Galloway's antisemitism. Rather I was denying that Galloway COULD BE a leftist, since his support for the IRI shows that he 'abhors' (as I wrote) class justice, and because as an antisemite he's a racist. Meaning, a REAL 'hard' leftist would fight for class justice, against the IRI and all racism.

Now, either a) Barmakid has a reading and/or drug problem, and/or b) he, she or they is or are on a mission or assignment to discredit me, or at least render this thread incoherent with lies.

Why? Perhaps because I raised the issue: "HOW DO WE GET NON-IRANIAN STUDENTS TO SUPPORT THE IRANIAN REBELS"? And she, he or they DON'T WANT Iranian students in the west mobilizing non-Iranian students to protest the blatant dishonesty of the 'international community' regarding the IRI. So: destroy the discussion.

Regarding mobilizing students, a lesson of protest movements is: understatement is ALWAYS appreciated by the powers-that-be and RARELY produces results. (That’s why the powers-that-be appreciate it!) The KEY to stimulating non-Iranian student sympathy and action is for Iranian Diaspora students, academics and others to aggressively expose the hypocrisy of Western institutions' dealings with the IRI and IRI opponents!

The bad guys understand the underlying principle. Galloway cries "police brutality" even as police coddle his demonstrators! Why?

Because the squeaky wheel gets the grease. The only way to get support – even if, like Galloway, one is an establishment asset – is to attack the authorities as unfair. Well, regarding the IRI, the authorities ARE unfair. The organizing focus to create a non-Iranian movement supporting Iranian rebels must be to expose the 'international community' claim that it is trying to help Iranians as a LIE.