Saturday, March 24, 2007

Lets hear about Iran

 I read the email from your friend Marty and found it interesting that your friend wanted to know what Iranians in general think of the current affairs in our country.

While I am no expert or have any academic credentials in political science, but as some one who has been very much affected by politics of our country such as yourself, I tend to keep up and have a natural inclination and obligation to better understand political matters in order to make some sense of the personal tragedy that we endured to answer some lingering questions.

 

With that being said, my view of the current hostile position of the American government towards Iran and that of Iran to the US government differs from that of the main stream belief that these two "enemies" will have a show down and that they threaten one another for regional power, etc……..

 

Without going into details on the birth of the "Islamic Government" the involvement of foreign elements in helping to structure this until then unknown form of state titled "Islamic republic"* .I will simply make one suggestion on the current affairs and that is; the rhetoric and the aggressive tone of the Bush administration has been a true blessing for the Iranian government and its current front man Ahamdi Nejad. Iranians are living in the darkest period of their modern history, excepting a very small minority directly tied to the "religious" government. The average person is and has been suffering from a collapsed economy, lack of higher education, high unemployment rate, out of control inflation, extremely poor medical and health care system, wide spread corruption in every branch of government, political, intellectual and cultural repression, over population not too mention a very seriously threatening pollution problem.

 

Mr. Bush's continuous threats in regards to attacking Iran or sounding off boldly about its nuclear plans, has caused not only the average person on the streets of Tehran to side with his or her government but more interestingly even many Iranians living in exile are acting out of nationalistic fervor and defending the position of the otherwise hated Mullahs against the foreign bully. We have witnessed this through out the course of the history and more recently in the United States itself, when a failing government uses a war or threat of a war (terrorist) to sir up nationalistic movements and create support for its otherwise failed, repressive policies.

 

Is this just a coincidence? Hardly, when reviewing the events since the occupation of Iraq and installation of the US backed Iraqi government one can not wonder; why is it that almost all of the new ministers and official selected by the Americans have had long standing ties with the current regime in Tehran? And in some cases lived as exiles in Iran during the saddam ruling!  Furthermore, why is it that one of the first countries that the US backed Iraqi government established political ties with was Iran! And the first official visit outside by the Iraqi prime minister was to Iran!

 

Conspiracy theories are one thing, but here we are dealing with raw facts. The "Islamic republic of Iran" was the first of its kind created nearly thirty years ago not by a group of illiterate mullahs out of the holly city of Ghom, but by think tanks in Washington, London, Rome and Tel Aviv.  

All one has to do is to look at the map of this region since to see that every secular government has been replaced or is being threatened to be replaced by an "Islamic" government or one heavily influenced by fundamentalist. In the mean time the US has managed to set up a military bases in almost every country in the region, excepting the original bad boy of the Middle East Iran!  

 

 

*Please read: From "Hostages to Khomeini" available on Amazon used books.  

-- from "Anonymous"

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Re: You Support our Troops

Here's a review of that book, (those that are flattering point out the this
McGowan is at a conservative Manhattan institution -- carefully avoiding
the misnomer of a "think tank"):

not the whole story, Billy, August 20, 2004
Reviewer:T. Martin "mart0063" (kingston, new york United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Suggesting that the press is liberal by looking at journalists is a little like suggesting the automotive industry is left wing by observing the work force. There are, of course, the CEOs and board of directors who decide what to make and how much. In viewing the press Mcgowan ignores the editors and corporate owners who went for Bush 2:1 last election. They of course have the ultimate say in what is reported and those distortions can be, and have been, more pernicious. Moreover, their bias is a market bias that seeks not to offend not because of a liberal bias but because of a bias for the bottom line.

  Comment | Was this review helpful to you? 
Yes No ( Report this)

If Bush is among the "most revered" it will also be "by the fewest # of people".

This man's purpose in life is to raise the stature of 3 republicans of the '20s
(Coolidge, Harding, and Hoover), from "mediocre" to "there was ONE worse".

Bush the First didn't say it, but Reagan did,   "The government IS the problem".
Bush II makes it simple.   "I'm the Problem". 

What has puzzled me all these years is your fanatical loyalty to Reagan.  The
statement above that he frequently made is absurd.   His next logical step
should have been, "I'd like to fire all the incompetent bureaucrats, but I can't".
Since he was the _chief_ executive, all the incompetents worked for him.
Bush II's job has to make that so-called incompetence visible throughout
the government,   right up to himself.  

His one good point last week was recalling something his boy "Al" had
told him, that "Al" wasn't able to remember.

You are on the wrong side of history on this one.   I don't suppose you
caught the votes last week, where Bush wanted to skirt the Freedom
of Information act, as regards his "presidentail library" at SMU?   The
closest he came to getting his way in the House was 310 - 110 against
sealing the records to the public.   Other votes were 390 - 30 AGAINST.
By my count, that's at least 175 republican congressmen (and women)
who don't share your universal acclaim.

I expect the senate to start to swing away from him, too.. as has Norm
(Chameleon) Coleman, who now wants us to believe he is a moderate.
("My 95% bush-aligned vote is a coincidence").  Since the republcans have
a sufficient number of seats up for grabs to loose the filibuster opportunity,
not to mention give the Democrats veto-override power in the unlikely
event we are saddled with another republican president! 

Other than your "faith", what evidence can you offer that this guy
is doing a "remarkably brilliant job"?

-=- Marty
p.s. on the "liberal bias" subject, I"'m still trying to figure out if it matters
or not.   You see, everytime i hear it, it's offered as fact, e.g. as if the
observer were stationary.    you will hear more on this later; the data
is coming in!
.
On 3/15/07, EWRONKA@rochester.rr.com <EWRONKA@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
I like your brother's book on Liberal Bias:


http://www.amazon.com/Coloring-News-Crusading-Diversity-
Journalism/dp/1893554287/ref=sr_1_2/103-7913563-2383832?
ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1173961608&sr=8-2


I think the obervation of bias in the news is like the observation of
velocity.

If your in a car driving 5 MPH to thge right and looking at a car
driving 25 MPH to the left, Its understandable you see the car as
moving swiftly to the left.

Conversely if your driving 50 MPH to the left and looking at a car
going 25 MPH to the left, it would appear that its actually moving in
the other direction...

As I said it doesn't matter. Its all subjective. I think the press is
free and is where it is for extremely natural reasons, and expect it to
propagate around.




And as for waiting on repudiation by me of Bush & Cheney, I would not
advise you to hold your breath. I believee he is doing a remarkably
brilliant job and believe he will go down in history even more revered
than Reagan or Roosevelt.


Re: Misperceptions, the Media and the Iraq War


for  the full report,  follow the link:

Study Finds Widespread Misperceptions on Iraq
Highly Related to Support for War


Full Report
Questionnaire

A new study based on a series of seven US polls conducted from January through September of this year reveals that before and after the Iraq war, a majority of Americans have had significant misperceptions and these are highly related to support for the war in Iraq.

The polling, conducted by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, also reveals that the frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals' primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely.


....


--
Marty McGowan  
24 Herning Ave, Cranford NJ 07016
Mailbox:                  mcgowan@alum.mit.edu
Shaken, not Stirred: threemartinis.blogspot.com