15 June 2009


Obama’s Wheel Just Fell Off his Wagon
By Ban Sidhe http://irish4palestine.blogspot.com

Why Oh Why can’t Americans learn NOT to interfere in the elections of other countries? America is up to it's collective arse in what is taking place in Iran right now, including a link to Obama. Don't believe me? Keep reading for an eye opener.

Of course I am talking about the Iran elections here. Perhaps the reason why America cannot refrain from interfering is that they have had success in the past at overthrowing governments they don’t like using the very same tactic they are using now in Iran. The American government is 100% behind what we are seeing take place in Tehran right now. It’s the very same operation they have used before. It is called an “Orange Revolution”

I need to make a preface here. Obviously people, including myself, want to see countries become more progressive, open and democratic. But, (there is ALWAYS a but) that does not translate into covert operations by the American’s and others to fast track the natural process. I believe each country has the right to develop at its own course. Because to force progress before it’s natural time can prove disastrous, for the country, and for American interest. Think Shah of Iran. By imposing the Shah of Iran, who attempted to suddenly turn Iran into a mini-America, against the will of its people at the time. This resulted in his eventual ousting and the Islamic Revolution which gave birth to Iran today.

So, America is at it again attempting to create another “Orange Revolution” what is an “Orange Revolution” Well, it is a well crafted, well funded, well trained covert operation to overthrow Governments at the ballot box by supporting pro-western candidates. This is something America has done for years, each time they learn and adapt the operation based on success or failure. Here is a success example where the Americans used this in Ukraine, notice some of the groups involved:
From Wiki:

Activists in each of these movements were funded and trained in tactics of political organization and nonviolent resistance by a coalition of Western pollsters and professional consultants funded by a range of Western government and non-government agencies. According to The Guardian, these include the U.S. State Department and USAID along with the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, the International Republican Institute, the Bilderberg Group, the NGO Freedom House and George Soros's Open Society Institute. The National Endowment for Democracy, a foundation supported by the U.S. government, has supported non-governmental democracy-building efforts in Ukraine since 1988.[15] Writings on nonviolent struggle by Gene Sharp formed the strategic basis of the student campaigns.
Ok, so it worked this time and no one can argue that Democracy is not a good thing. The problem is how the Americans go about it, additionally it does not always work and it only proves that America meddles in the affairs of other countries. This creates anti-American sentiment, the very thing Obama claims he wants to “change” Using these tactics in Ukraine is not even remotely like meddling in the Middle East, where America is supposedly attempting to re-create ties with Muslims and to show that it no longer is in Israel's pocket and generally respect the will of the voters in Arab countries it does not necessarily agree with, or even like. Hello America, the Middle East is NOT Europe.

Here is a snippet from the Guardian about the "Orange Revolution"
But while the gains of the orange-bedecked "chestnut revolution" are Ukraine's, the campaign is an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in western branding and mass marketing that, in four countries in four years, has been used to try to salvage rigged elections and topple unsavoury regimes.

Funded and organised by the US government, deploying US consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties and US non-government organisations, the campaign was first used in Europe in Belgrade in 2000 to beat Slobodan Milosevic at the ballot box.

Ten months after the success in Belgrade, the US ambassador in Minsk, Michael Kozak, a veteran of similar operations in central America, notably in Nicaragua, organised a near identical campaign to try to defeat the Belarus hardman, Alexander Lukashenko.

That one failed. "There will be no Kostunica in Belarus," the Belarus president declared, referring to the victory in Belgrade.

The operation - engineering democracy through the ballot box and civil disobedience - is now so slick that the methods have matured into a template for winning other people's elections. link
America has a "None Too Good" history with Middle Eastern countries and as such, should stay out of the affairs of Middle Eastern countries other than talking to them and negotiating with them honestly. The US will never gain trust or support among Middle East countries if they are working behind the scenes to over throw them. Even countries that may at this time support a regime change in Iran, will still be sitting there thinking that the Americans could come for them next.... This, exactly is the problem!

Also, I cannot help but notice how there are a great many similarities between how Obama ran his campaign and how an Orange Revolution is run. More on that in a minute.

Now, I was a supporter of Mousavi, well actually I liked Mehdi Karroubi in Iran, like I liked Dennis Kucinich in America, but knew neither one had a chance to win. That said, the reality is that Ahmadinejad does have massive support outside of Tehran. Americans might want to re-read that. Never mind what your US media is telling you, this is the truth. Tehran has a young yuppie population, well educated men and women who are pushing for more freedoms. Fair play to them. However, the majority of the population outside of Tehran are poor people. And it is there Ahmadinejad has massive full support. He has this support because of his policies for the poor. Mousavi on the other hand, wants to cut off aid to the poor and bring in Western businesses and make Iran more of a capitalist country. So this election was about much more than just allowing more “freedoms” for the Iranian people. Wealthy urban Iranians want freedoms, whilst poor Iranians want help and support. Get it? Although that is NOT what your media is telling you this is about.
From the Guardian:

The election results in Iran may reflect the will of the Iranian people. Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin – greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday's election.

While western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad's principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead.

The breadth of Ahmadinejad's support was apparent in our pre-election survey. During the campaign, for instance, Mousavi emphasised his identity as an Azeri, the second-largest ethnic group in Iran after Persians, to woo Azeri voters. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favoured Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over Mousavi.
Much commentary has portrayed Iranian youth and the internet as harbingers of change in this election. But our poll found that only a third of Iranians even have access to the internet, while 18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups

The only demographic groups in which our survey found Mousavi leading or competitive with Ahmadinejad were university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians.
The reality is, that the US government and it’s “groups” and money were, and are, behind Mousavi AND this movement of progressives in Tehran. Just like they were in Ukraine. Whilst they may have had success using this tactic in the past, the Iranians are smart and have seen this taking place in their country. And, as hard as this is to hear, they have the very right to stop America from interfering inside their country.

The very sad part America needs to grasp, is that by leaving Iran alone, it will move forward on its own, at its own speed, in its own way. Iran is responsive to its people, even though America likes to say it is not. Would it happen overnight? No, but for it to be real and to last it must take place naturally, not at the behest of CIA and American intervention in a country that America has already screwed up once (Shah!!) This created the very mess that exists today. And now, Obama wants to create another mess in Iran, and he has.

Another thing that points directly at Obama Admin involvement is this little piece of information. During the Obama campaign we saw many things. We were meant to believe there was a giant groundswell behind him, that this happened naturally. It did not. Some of the same organisations and people who rallied around and supported the Obama campaign in various ways, are also poking their nose into the affairs of Iran. Or at the very least, “studying” it for the US government. One organisation that is studying Iran is called the Internet and democracy project from the Berkman centre for Internet and society at Harvard. Don’t forget Obama taught at Harvard and made many connections there. Many people associated with the Berkman center are associated with Obama. For instance, here’s just one tiny example; Lawrence Lessig:
From Wiki:
Lessig has known president Barack Obama since their days teaching law at the University of Chicago,

To this end, he (Lessig) worked with political consultant Joe Trippi to launch a web based project called "Change Congress".[6] In a press conference on March 20, 2008.
Now, anyone who followed the Obama campaign will know that Joe Trippi was involved in Obama’s campaign AND Howard Dean's campaign. That's just one very small example, research the people in all of these groups, and you'll soon see the same names popping up all over the "Progressive" internet world and also surrounding Obama's campaign to become POTUS.Now back to the Berkman center’s study of Iran
This case study is part of a series produced by the Internet and Democracy project. The initial studies include three of the most frequently cited examples of the Internet’s influence on democracy.

the Internet may be shifting the power dynamics around Sharia debate in Iran. Hassan writes, “The more Iranian cyberspace grows, the more Sharia discourse becomes public and intersubjective and reaches out to the broader world. The emergent Iranian right-based readings of Sharia in cyberspace contain new promises and aspirations, not only for the Iranian people, but also for the entire Muslim world and even for the world community.”
They even have a handy dandy little Iranian blogosphere map here

Ok, so what’s the problem? Here’s the problem. Take a look at the people and agencies who have donated or funded the Berkman Center at Harvard. Here are two examples that are VERY troubling:
Support for Current Activities

We warmly thank the following sponsors for their sponsorship of the Berkman Center's research and events. When sponsorship is project-specific, sponsors will also appear directly on project pages.
United States Department of State

Past Support
While the particular gift may have supported past work, we remain indebted to our past supporters for their generosity and collaboration.
The Open Society Institute of the Soros Foundation
So are you troubled yet? Remember the link earlier in this diary where the State Department was included in the groups who worked in the Orange Revolution in the Ukraine? And now we see the State Department linked directly to the Berkman Center above,(who appear to currently be "researching" Iran) along with Soros, another one involved in Orange Revolutions. So here's the question for Americans: Has the American progressive left under Obama hypnosis sold out and are they now working in cahoots with the State Department to use the Internet to overthrow and interfere in elections on other countries? If so, then this makes them part and parcel of the US government, or at least an agent of the US government, and NOT an impartial group in any stretch of the imagination. They have an agenda and that agenda is obviously the same as the State Departments agenda.

And even more troubling is that today Germany and the British are now getting involved in the Iran kurfuffle and throwing their “two cents” into the arena. Calling for an investigation (at the behest of the Americans) into the Iran elections. This is disgraceful.

So Let’s talk about American elections for a minute, when they are questioned by American voters who feel hard done, do they receive World outrage like we are seeing towards Iran now? Whilst Americans may be sitting on their arses thinking what happened in Iran is a big deal and needs intervention. Let me remind people that I followed the American election very very closely. And, you could argue that that 48 % of the Democrats felt just like the Reformists do now in Iran. And that is a much larger number of voters than are the Reformists in Iran. Many Americans felt cheated, and just maybe they were. But where was the world outrage?

Obama ran a cut throat campaign, and there were many things that troubled huge portions of the American voting public. 18 Million Hillary Supporters felt cheated about votes not being counted, alleged election fraud (ACORN registering dead people and Mickey Mouse!) Obama’s associations with this organisation and other groups. What about the good ole “Democrat For A Day” campaign? Was that above board? There were allegations of caucus fraud when Clinton won Texas in the vote yet the caucuses went to Obama. Police were called to some caucuses and allegations of cheating filled the air and the blogosphere. There were lawsuits filed. Then there was the Florida, Michigan thing and the DNC Rules Committee, the Donna Brazille thing, the removal of talking heads on CNN who were associated with Clinton, e.g. Paul Begala and James Carvelle, whilst those like Roland Martin
Martin first met Obama at a Congressional Black Caucus dinner in 2003 and they have stayed in touch. He was part of a group of liberal commentators granted an audience with the president-elect days before the inauguration. In television, says Martin, "you cannot have the same people talking to folks in a changed America."

In other words, Barack Obama’s ascension to power should be matched by Roland Martin’s ascension to a prime-time hosting seat. link
(who’s daughter actually worked for Obama Campaign) was allowed to remain working for CNN and trumpeting for Obama alongside Brazille on a daily basis. This gave birth to the “No Deal” campaign and the PUMA’s who organised and even went so far as to create television commercials and pressure for a roll call at the DNC convention to place Clinton’s name forward. These Hillary supporters created havoc in the streets, online and even at the DNC’s convention to coronate Obama when they attempted a Roll Call on the floor.

Yet, where was Germany and England when that happened? Why was an investigation not called for that? Is it only when “other” countries have the same types of things happen that those who purport to support democracy decide to “get involved?”

I'm not saying I supported Clinton or Obama, what I am saying is there are many similarities between Iran's election and Americans recent Presidential Election Primaries. I mean really, you cannot have it both ways. What took place in Obama’s election was never seen before, it was totally divisive whilst he continued to run under the premise of a “uniter” and at no time made any attempts to quell his supporter’s attacks on Clinton supporters or the very REAL misogyny that did exist and was encouraged during his campaign towards Clinton. The DNC was fractured and it ended up taking Clinton 4 days to concede and then there was the Denver Roll Call. I remember all of this and much more. To this day the party remains fractured. Yet, where was the outrage from inside America OR outside at this?

American elections are not immune from allegations of fraud and misconduct, even up to the DNC itself, as outlined above. So, I see this no different than what is taking place in Iran, on a MUCH smaller scale than what happened in America! So, America needs to butt out immediately and stop using it’s allied meddling pals like Germany, England and France to continue to attack Iran over Iranian elections. Which if you stand back and look at this, it is no different than what took place in the recent American election of Obama. Yet Obama was not “overthrown” even though there were many more Clinton supporters who felt cheated than there are Reformists who feel cheated in Iran.

The reality is that the Obama administration is using its contacts, its money men, its so called "Progressive" groups (working with the State Department, e.g. the Government) and US government agencies to interfere again in Iran’s politics. This will not help with Americas enemies and will only serve to cement the fact that although the messenger has change from Bush to Obama the result is the same. Wake up America.

UPDATE x1 Iran has ordered an investigation into the Election, that's more than Americans got. Now who is the democracy?

UPDATE x2: Turkey already not happy with US involvment in Iran:
DIP) TURKEY SAYS CONTROVERSIES OVER IRAN ELECTIONS ARE IRAN'S INTERNAL AFFAIRS ANKARA (A.A) - 15.06.2009 - Turkey's foreign minister said Monday controversies over presidential elections in Iran were Iran's internal affairs.

UPDATE X3 shots have been reported in Iran at a rally in Tehran over the election. Way to go America, people will die now.