In the wake of the New Iranian Revolution, will social media come under attack?

Perhaps it's obvious to say that there are political undercurrents at work in the Iranian Revolution 2009 we're witnessing, but it goes well beyond the streets of Tehran. This is a global phenomenon and it bodes ill for the Old Ways.

If you're reading this blog you're probably a little more savvy than most, but for those who are new to social media this coup attempt is shining a light on something certain elements within our political structure have tried to keep hidden: Iranians are just like us.

That might not seem like such a radical statement, but when you're in the business of demonizing people it's an earth-shattering revelation. Here in America, our government and our media have been in the business of demonizing Iran for the last 30 years. If the revolution succeeds and Ahmadinejad is thrown into the dustbin of history then our government will not have a despotic Iran to kick around any more. Early indications are that the people of Iran and Mousavi's hypothetical government will favor normalizing relations with America, or at least responding favorably to Obama's overtures.

You might think this would make the neocons very happy, but that is not the case. Blogger Andrew Sullivan has been on top of the revolution from the get-go and he says: "Even I am a little taken aback by the neocons' desire for an Ahmadinejad victory."

The sad truth is that a lot of people are scared of change and they don't like it when their favorite whipping-horse suddenly grabs the reins with his teeth.

Given the incredible impact that social media has had in this election/coup it should not be surprising if hardline forces --not just in Iran -- take a dim view of social media in the future.

The first thing the illegitimate Iranian government did when it saw trouble brewing was to block Facebook and Twitter. Cell phone service was taken down in many areas. Mousavi's website was taken out by government forces.

It's obvious why: Social media is an inherently democratizing force.

Allowing people to connect outside of traditional, controlled channels is dangerous for any repressive regime. People can share news instantly, they can plan, they can support each other and they can warn each other of danger. This used to be the province of the authorities with their rigid hierarchies, their walkie-talkies and their chains of command.

Now anybody with a cellphone can change the world with a hashtag.

I say again: Iranians are just like us. They love Facebook and have a Mousavi fan page with 50,000 supporters. They have been using Twitter (and Twitpic) extensively. (Check out this page for a list of English language Iranian twitterers). And videos depicting the mostly-peaceful marches today are already showing up on YouTube:



As night falls things are getting more violent. It's too early to declare victory, but I think the world is starting to see that the divisions our mainstream media has helped our government create are largely an artifice of ignorance and omission. We are all the same on Facebook. We are one on Twitter.

Social media is the bane of dictators everywhere, and I wouldn't have it any other way. But we have to be ready for the backlash against social media by those hardline forces stuck in the past. They may start to attack social media out of fear. We can't let those repressive forces have their say anymore. If Iran can stand up for democracy, we can too.

Viva la Revolution!! The Iranian People Show How to Stand Against Tyranny!

There's something thrilling going on in Iran.

You wouldn't know it from the coverage on many mainstream media news outlets this weekend (Fox, CNN and ABC, I'm looking in your direction), but there's a revolution going on in Iran!

It's a good kind of revolution; pro-freedom, pro-democracy and mostly peaceful (though many protestors are being beaten by police and Hezbollah thugs). The people of Iran are standing up for truth and justice and they are not being intimidated by theocratic thugs and government lies.

It makes me wonder why our U.S. media isn't really standing with the people of Iran. Maybe it's because I'm getting cynical in my (heh) old age, but I think it has something to do with the loss of their favorite boogey-man. It's getting harder and harder to portray Iranians as fanatical terrorists bent on the destruction of the West:

Perhaps the most moving scene involved a group of young demonstrators, displaying the green colours of Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the defeated challenger, breaking into English and chanting: "We want freedom."

In an instant, these television pictures from Tehran delivered a stark reminder that Iran is not a backward country of medieval fanatics, but a modern nation with 70 million people, two thirds of whom are under 30 and have the same interests and aspirations as their Western counterparts.

These are my peers. My fellow-Twitterers. My friends. My brothers and sisters.

This is the real Iran:

No more distortions. No more hate. No more fear-mongering, Fox News! No more! We are the same, the Iranian People and those of us in the United States who still value and cherish freedom.

There is no difference between us beyond geography. Many of the Iranians even speak English and they are young and internet-savvy: they have been using Twitter to organize on the fly and there was a collective moan when Facebook was blocked. This is a youth movement that is cracking the edifice of lies that have served the hardliners on both sides for far too long.

Just don't watch television if you want the real scoop:

Today, as global geopolitics is shaken to its core by events in Iran, I turned on cable news this morning, and saw endless ads for a Larry King Jonas Brothers “interview”, Morning Joe yukking it up discussing Kuwaiti massage therapists, a video of a tomato throwing contest on CNN, talk radio blowhard Bill Bennett…and occasionally a phone call from Christiane Amanpour in Tehran. I can’t even bring myself to turn on the network morning programs, I might vomit.

The mainstream media is rapidly smothering itself into a coma of irrelevance. Do they think we're too stupid to get the news from somewhere else? Heck, I don't even need the media at this point; I can get info directly from the participants in the struggle via Twitter.

Bloggers like Andrew Sullivan are covering the protests virtually nonstop. With the Huffington Post on the case, who needs the MSM?

At this point, Big Media is just playing catch-up. They were asleep at the switch for several days, but now seem to be paying attention again... but they are definitely not leading; they are following.

I should note that I'm taking it for granted that the election was stolen. They apparently did not even do a good job of it. From the numbers I've seen, Ahmadinejad didn't even finish second! He finished 3rd, behind another reform candidate! Mousavi, the challenger and probable winner, was actually told by the Interior Ministry that he had won and to prepare his victory speech (which they insisted must be gracious and not boastful) before turning around and declaring Ahmadinejad the winner by a landslide. The numbers belie this laughable claim. The official results have Mousavi losing his home turf (preposterous) and big urban areas where he has polled higher than Ahmadinejad.

Let's face it: This election was straight-up rigged. The Iranians know it and they're not standing for it, which is more than I can say for Americans (*cough-2000-cough*). Now is our chance to repent for our laziness and apathy and support the democracy-loving Iranians with all our hearts!

I stand with the Iranian People in solidarity. We stand for Democracy, Freedom and Justice! May the winds of change bring peace and prosperity to Iran. Peace be upon you!

Fearsome Iranian Speedboats!!!

Did you hear?! Our poor navy was ravaged by FEARSOME IRANIAN SPEEDBOATS!!! Oh my!

The Pentagon has released its own video of Sunday's incident, showing small Iranian boats swarming around U.S. warships in the Strait of Hormuz.

In the recording, a man threatens in English, "I am coming to you. ... You will explode after ... minutes."

Sure, the tape is a fake and speedboats menace warships the same way a matchbox car menaces a Hummer, but still!! Fearsome Iranian Speedboats, man! I've asked Jeebus about this and he says we need to invade Iran right away before they send even more Fearsome Iranian Speedboats at us!!

I don't see why we're not nuking Iran right now!! The guy faking an Iranian accent in the fake video clearly said we would "explode after... minutes"! What more do you need?! A crude skull & crossbones flag with "Death to the Great Satan" written on it?! Just imagine the horror! We need to nip this Iranian menace in the bud NOW!

If we put up with Fearsome Iranian Speedboats today, what will Iran send after us next?! My God, they could send Marauding Iranian Helicopters or even Dreadful Iranian Bedouins (and their Camels) to Missouri!!! OH DEAR GOD WHAT WILL WE DO?!!!

Write your congressmen! We need to nuke Iran before their Fearsome Iranian Speedboats strike again!!

Dear God, Cheney plans to nuke Iran

The buzz has been growing over the last few weeks. The Bush Regime, led by Count Cheney, have been inching closer and closer to attacking Iran.

Now we hear about nukes being "accidentally" flown across the country:

A B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear warheads and flown for more than three hours across several states last week, prompting an Air Force investigation and the firing of one commander, Pentagon officials said Wednesday.

How does an organization like the Air Force manage to "mistakenly" get ahold of nukes and fly them around the country? Somehow I think the only accident was letting the public find out about it.

The military has extremely stringent rules regarding the handling of nuclear weapons and you can't just send a junior officer over to the weapons depot and have him sign for a nuke. This goes up the chain a long way, and now it's being spun as a mistake. Bullshit.

The story gets weirder. The plane was flying from North Dakota to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana:

Barksdale Air Force Base is being used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations. Gee, why would we want cruise missile nukes at Barksdale Air Force Base. Can’t imagine we would need to use them in Iraq. Why would we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle East operations?

His final point was to observe that someone on the inside obviously leaked the info that the planes were carrying nukes. A B-52 landing at Barksdale is a non-event. A B-52 landing with nukes. That is something else.

Is the Bush Regime moving the nukes into place for a strike on Iran? That certainly seems to be a possibility. It would be totally fucking insane, but that's not outside the MO of this regime. Keep your eyes peeled, kids. Uncle Cheney is gonna have a surprise in store for you.

The Democratic Congress has completely sold us out

I just wish I was surprised about this ugly turn of events. Unfortunately, I'm not. Just a little disappointed.

Just as the Democrats work tirelessly to demonstrate to the voters that it makes zero difference which party controls Congress, the political establishment forces all candidates for the presidential nomination to sever any compromising ties to sanity and common sense.

It's not a very good article, but I thought the above paragraph was well-written and to the point. Cockburn had be going until he ripped on people pursuing impeachment:

The left is as easily distracted, currently by the phantasm of impeachment. Why all this clamor to launch a proceeding surely destined to fail, aimed at a duo who will be out of the White House in sixteen months? Pursue them for war crimes after they've stepped down. Mount an international campaign of the sort that has Henry Kissinger worrying at airports that there might be a lawyer with a writ standing next to the man with the limo sign. Right now the impeachment campaign is a distraction from the war and the paramount importance of ending it.

Uh, not quite, dumbass. Bush is still the commander in chief. He needs to be removed before the bloodshed will end. If he's still president he will not draw soldiers out of Iraq, even if there's no money to support them. He doesn't give a fuck!

Oh, and he'll probably cook up some reason to go into Iran if things start winding down in Iraq. Get a clue, dude. Go after the source of the problem. Why do you think we're in Iraq in the first place? This is Bush's war.

As for the Democrats and their capitulation on the spying thing (not that they were even under that much pressure): Wow. Talk about a knife in the back of Lady Liberty. I keep arguing that there's an Oligarchy, a Ruling Class, and that it doesn't matter which party you choose because the elite control both, and the Democrats keep proving my point. Thanks, but I'd rather you show some spine, guys.

Bush & Gen. Pace: No "Plan B" Strategy for Iraq (There was a "Plan A"?!!)

From Digg. Full story here.

A group of governors asked Bush and Marine Gen. Peter Pace about their backup plan for Iraq. What would the administration do if its new strategy didn't work? The conclusion they took away was that there is no Plan B. "I'm a Marine," Pace told them, "and Marines don't talk about failure. They talk about victory."

"Plan B was to make Plan A work."

Talk about some scary shit. Are these two running a war or a comedy show?

If the Democrats don't smell weakness here and move in, it's because they're controlled by the same folks who control the neocons. I was hoping there was another game in town, but it looks like We the People are alone in this fight. And most of us would rather watch Larry the Cable Guy than put pressure on our representatives. We know this is stupid.... are we still going to stand for it?

Sometimes I think the world would be better off without us. If we can't fix this maybe our species doesn't get to survive. We're destroying our planet and killing each other. All these years and we still haven't figured it out.

"The ultimate Plan B is pull everybody out," said Stephen D. Biddle, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and an adviser to the Defense Department. "Nobody wants to do that. Most are looking at the middle ground between surge and pullout."

Well, let's go for Plan-fucking B already, asshole!! "Nobody" wants to do that? Who the fuck are you talking to, Biddle?! Get us the fuck out of there. NOW! We don't want to be an Empire anymore, okay? So fuck off and die.

Biddle, who noted that new Iraq strategy proposals "proliferate hourly" in the public domain, said another variant is to set up "heavily defended forward operating bases out in the desert somewhere [and] either sit there and mind our own business and do nothing except be present -- enabling us to say we're still there -- or, in a somewhat more activist flavor, to conduct raids of various kinds" against al-Qaeda bases and rescue missions for Iraqi military units.

Oh great, we can be warlords in western Iraq and Somalia just like all the other gangsters and thugs. We could conduct raiding parties like pirates or vikings. Brilliant. This fucking egghead is just brilliant. This weak-ass, spineless piece of shit is suggesting the United States of America assume the position of the lowest of the low -- a marauding band of beggars and thieves.

First of all, al-Qaeda is mostly an illusion, a creation of the CIA during the Afghan war against the Soviets. Secondly, they were just an excuse to kick our country in gear. The Powers That Be decided that they wanted us to be aggressive and bloodthirsty to further the consolidation of their empire so they cooked up 9.11 to whip us into a frenzy. But now the excitement has worn off and we're stuck in the middle of the desert with a bunch of people who are so crazy they're killing each other more than us.

Let's face reality, wake up from this nightmare, impeach Bush/Cheney and bring the troops back home! Then we can apologize to the world, undertake massive economic reforms, investigate the wrong-doings of the government going back 60-some years and put things right politically. We've really let things get all fucked up, so we've gotta clean house. First on the list are those spineless scorpions -- the neocons. Then we can get the vampire bats (fat aristocracy/business) and the filthy rats (criminal networks) and the scheming spiders (secret ruling cabals) who have woven this network of fear and exploitation.

Can we agree that this war is bankrupt? It's all over but the crying... and some more killing if the neocons get their way. That's why we have to sweep them from power. If we don't act soon we can expect more of the same. Attacking Iran would be colossally stupid... in other words, it's right up the neocons' alley.

Cheney's Handwritten Notes Implicate El Presidente Bush in Plame/CIA Leak Affair

The two biggest criminals in this country are both implicated in the Plame affair. As Scooter Libby's trial progresses and things look worse and worse for Cheney's ex-right-hand-man his defense team is casting blame in every direction... including toward "the top."

Last week, Libby's attorney Theodore Wells made a stunning pronouncement during opening statements of Libby's trial. He claimed that the White House had made Libby a scapegoat for the leak to protect Karl Rove - Bush's political adviser and "right-hand man."

"Mr. Libby, you will learn, went to the vice president of the United States and met with the vice president in private. Mr. Libby said to the vice president, 'I think the White House ... is trying to set me up. People in the White House want me to be a scapegoat,'" said Wells.

Cheney's notes seem to help bolster Wells's defense strategy. Libby's defense team first discussed the notes - written by Cheney in September 2003 for White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan - during opening statements last week. Wells said Cheney had written "not going to protect one staffer and sacrifice the guy that was asked to stick his head in the meat grinder because of incompetence of others": a reference to Libby being asked to deal with the media and vociferously rebut Wilson's allegations that the Bush administration knowingly "twisted" intelligence to win support for the war in Iraq.

However, when Cheney wrote the notes, he had originally written "this Pres." instead of "that was.

The "meat grinder" is generally taken to mean "the DC press corps". So, after re-inserting "this Pres" into Cheney's note it reads: "not going to protect one staffer and sacrifice the guy this Pres. asked to stick his head in the meat grinder because of the incompetence of others."

It's not surprising that strategy concerning the Plame affair would be discussed at the highest levels. But Bush has been denying all along that he knew anything about the leak.

When Cheney testifies will he throw Libby under the bus like Addington? I can't wait to find out. What happens when the top two liars in the country are implicated in a scandal, tied to an illegal war that's been used to justify illegal wiretapping? Well, if Republicans are in charge: Nothing. However, I have a smidgen of hope that the Democrats will pursue impeachment. They'd better hurry up about it because I keep hearing more and more noise about starting a war with Iran. It sounds like the preparations for a joint U.S./Israeli strike are almost complete.

VP Cheney Threatens Iran with his Cock

The neocons push closer to war with Iran, as shown by the blunt comments made by El Presidente Cheney in Newsweek:

He repeated the Bush administration's stance that the United States seeks to resolve the dispute over Iran's nuclear program through diplomatic means, but that all options are on the table.

"I think most of the nations in that part of the world believe their security is supported, if you will, by the United States. They want us to have a major presence there," Cheney said in an interview with Newsweek magazine, according to a transcript released by the White House on Sunday.

"When we -- as the president did, for example, recently -- deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat," Cheney said.

Allow me to translate in case Captain Cheney's comments were too subtle: "Iran, you best watch THE FUCK out, ya heard? We're comin' for your shit, so you might as well run now, bitches. Represent, sluts!!! We gonna fucks you up!"

The above is an official translation.

Cheney proceeded to whip out his dick and let the fucker smash on a table with a menacing thud:

Responding to other comments -- including criticism from Brent Scowcroft, and others who have worked with Cheney in the past -- he says, "Well, I'm vice president and they're not."

Yeah, you're a big man, Dick. The whole article sounds like one big "fuck you" to everyone who's ever criticized him... which means: just about everybody. I'm sooo glad he isn't even bothering to hide his megalomaniacal tendencies or paranoid hatred of all who disagree with him. It's refreshing.

Now, is anyone planning to remove Bush/Cheney from power soon? I dunno, like maybe the Democrats? They sure don't seem to be moving very fast. They'd better hurry the hell up 'cause from the sound of things we're gonna be having a blood kegger in Tehran by the end of the year. I'm sure Persian blood may not taste as sweet as Arab blood, but Cheney will still do a fucking kegstand on their country unless we get him the fuck out of office.

The neoconservatives like to point to "appeasement" by the UK during Hitler's rise to power in order to justify their invasion of Iraq. I think we should use Chamberlain's appeasement to justify removing Cheney from power before it's too late. Appeasement of fascists is never a good idea. Cheney, as a fascist, should know.

War of Global Aggression: White House Wanted 2002 Iraq War Resolution to Include Entire Middle East

In an interview in GQ Magazine, Republican Senator Chuck Hagel reveals that the Bush administration tried to get Congress to approve military action anywhere in the Middle East -- not just in Iraq -- in the fall of 2002 during the run-up the War in Iraq.

Here's an excerpt from the interview:

GQ: It’s incredible that you had to ask for that.
Hagel: It is incredible. That’s what I said to Andy Card. Said it to Powell, said it to Rice. Might have even said it to the president. And finally, begrudgingly, they sent over a resolution for Congress to approve. Well, it was astounding. It said they could go anywhere in the region.

GQ: It wasn’t specific to Iraq?
Hagel: Oh no. It said the whole region! They could go into Greece or anywhere. I mean, is Central Asia in the region? I suppose! Sure as hell it was clear they meant the whole Middle East. It was anything they wanted. It was literally anything. No boundaries. No restrictions.

GQ: They expected Congress to let them start a war anywhere they wanted in the Middle East?
Hagel: Yes. Yes. Wide open. We had to rewrite it. Joe Biden, Dick Lugar, and I stripped the language that the White House had set up, and put our language in it.

This is really chilling stuff. Right here, in front of our faces, we have evidence (from a Republican no less) that the Bush regime was planning a war of global aggression back in 2002. What more is there to say? The neocons have been planning a series of invasions for years (probably long before 2002) which would allow them to reshape and control the whole Middle East, from Iran and Syria to Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Iraq is only the first step; that's why the neocons are so determined to stamp out opposition to the war.

Do you still think the talk of going into Iran is just talk? I'm betting battle plans have been drawn up and they are entering the final phase of preparations. The key is to trick us into war. Keep your eyes open for a false flag attack.

Princess Fake-eye: The Dashing Dame of Ancient Iran

The Discovery Channel News is writing about a 4,800 year old woman found buried with an artificial eye composed of tar and animal fat, with carefully etched capillaries that may have looked quite realistic:

Sayyed-Sajadi added that whoever made the eye likely used a fine golden wire, thinner than half a millimeter, to draw "even the most delicate eye capillaries."

Parallel lines were also drawn around the pupil to form a diamond shape.

Two holes at the sides helped hold it in place in the woman's eye socket. Sayyed-Sajadi said remaining eyelid tissues are still evident on the eyeball, as are markings that suggest the woman developed an abscess in her eyelid due to frequent contact with the object.

The eyeball was found with the skeletal remains of its wearer in an early cemetery. The researchers believe the woman was between 25 and 30 years old when she died.

She was so young when she died. I wonder if she was a princess, to have such wealth and power that you can have a custom-made fake eye constructed for you. It's quite fascinating to hear what skill the craftsmen had even back then, to make something so close to what we have now.

It makes me wonder about our past... our real past, I mean, not just the picture we can construct from what little is left of it. The difference between our knowledge of the distant past and the actual reality of how it played out, is the difference between Pluto and the sun.

Have you ever really thought about what really may have happened? About how many of our stories about great events and noble leaders are nothing more than fairy tales, pleasant fantasies to grease the gears of power.

I suppose we may never know the truth. But I fear it will become all too clear soon. The sands of time are running low and the pages of history are being written as I write this, but for good or ill I cannot know; I just have a feeling that we're about to witness something big. Or maybe we won't witness it because it will happen behind the scenes, but we will still feel it affects as clearly and as potently as any previous event. Change is the one thing we can count on.

Well, one thing's for sure: time will make us all into skeletons like Princess Fake-eye.

Daniel Ellsberg, leaker of the Pentagon Papers points to government involvement in 9/11 conspiracy

InfoWars has an interview with Daniel Ellsberg on the coming war with Iran, the government's involement in false flag terror attacks and more.

This may seem like some heavy shit, but Ellsberg knows a thing or two about the government. Daniel Ellsberg is the guy who leaked the Pentagon Papers back in 1971. The Nixon Administration made his life a living hell and tried to track him down and put him on trial, or kill him. The New York Times was ordered by President Nixon to cease publication of anything related to the Pentagon Papers immediately, which sparked a case that went to the Supreme Court. The Court decided in favor the Times allowing further publishing.

Ellsberg knows what the government's capable of; he used to help them come up with their crazy schemes as a military analyst for the RAND Corporation. He eventually used his access to leak documents providing an important insight into the government's inner workings which revealed a contempt for "the public" and a sinister resistance to accountability or oversight. Also revealed were attempts to goad enemies into firing on us, including the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

In recent years Ellsberg has been arrested many times as he's protested various government lies and atrocities. Now he's joining a growing group of people including scholars, engineers, pilots and military officers who are questioning the events of 9/11. Of the upcoming war with Iran Ellsberg says:

If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country.

I urge you to do some research and consider the possibility that our government may have had forehand knowledge of the attacks -- and the even more horrible possibility that the government was complicit and an active partner in the attacks.

We have to think about this before the War on Iran. We can't let the Bush Administration and its neo-conservative masters take our rights -- our lives -- away from us so easily. If these allegations are true then we are dealing with a government far more ruthless and psychotic than most Americans realize.

Quite frankly, I'm nervous even publishing this post. But people are starting to speak out, including celebrities Charlie Sheen, Richard Linklater (who claims to have convinced Bruce Willis), Tom DeLonge (from Blink 182) and scholars/researchers like James Fetzer, Dr. Steven E. Jones, Michael Ruppert and many more. It seems that Hunter S. Thompson was researching 9/11 when he died. Strange that he would kill himself before finishing his inquiry, isn't it?

We shouldn't have to feel afraid of our government. We shouldn't have to deal with government censorship and lies and terrorism carried out against its own people. I hope that the government didn't really have any involvement.... but I know how these fascists work. 9/11 is a perfect 21st century Reichstag Fire. Cui Bono?

And if Iran somehow manages to "attack us" will the government declare martial law like Ellsberg says? How important is freedom to the Bush cabal? Do you really think that they will go to bat for regular people or do you think they will use the crisis to expand the government's power? What's to stop them from increasing the government's powers to overtly totalitarian levels after our system of checks and balances has been stripped away in order to fight "The War on Terror"?

In a way, it doesn't matter whether the government is behind the attacks or not. They're so busy getting rid of our rights that it's a moot point.

I guess the terrorists -- whoever they are -- have won.