Category Archives: Military

As president, ‘anti-war’ Bernie Sanders would consider a preemptive strike against Iran/N. Korea

Last January, President Trump ordered the killing of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani, described by an ex-CIA operative as “the single most powerful operative [terrorist] in the Middle East today,” on the grounds that Soleimani posed an “imminent” threat to America’s national security.

Reacting to the Soleimani assassination, some in the blogosphere are convinced that Trump had caved in to Israel’s wishes, and that a U.S. invasion of Iran was next, which could ignite nothing less than a third world war.

Erstwhile pro-Trumpists even declared the Soleimani assassination to be a deal breaker that convinced them to switch their support to socialist Bernie Sanders because he (Sanders) could be “a real American president” who is not “an Israeli stooge” and instigate a U.S. war against Iran — never mind the fact that Sanders is Jewish and had volunteered and lived in an Israeli kibbutz. (See “Shocking: Jim Fetzer turns against Trump in favor of Bernie Sanders because of Soleimani assassination”)

According to World Socialist Web Site, however, although Sanders presents himself as an opponent of war, responding to a survey from the New York Times, his campaign said as president, Bernie Sanders would be prepared to launch a “preemptive strike” against Iran and North Korea. Below are excerpts from the World Socialist Web Site article:

Bernie Sanders has won the popular vote in both the New Hampshire and Iowa presidential primary contests in considerable part by presenting himself as an opponent of war. Following the criminal assassination of Iranian General Qassem Suleimani last month, Sanders was the most vocal of the Democratic presidential aspirants in criticizing Trump’s action. His poll numbers have risen in tandem with his stepped-up anti-war rhetoric.

He has repeatedly stressed his vote against the 2003 invasion of Iraq, reminding voters in the Iowa presidential debate last month, “I not only voted against that war, I helped lead the effort against that war.”

However, when speaking to the foremost newspaper of the American ruling class, the New York Times, the Sanders campaign adopts a very different tone than that employed by the candidate when addressing the public in campaign stump speeches or TV interviews.

The answers provided by Sanders’ campaign to a foreign policy survey of the Democratic presidential candidates published this month by the Times provide a very different picture of the attitude of the self-styled “democratic socialist” to American imperialism and war. In the course of the survey, the Sanders campaign is at pains to reassure the military/intelligence establishment and the financial elite of the senator’s loyalty to US imperialism and his readiness to deploy its military machine.

Perhaps most significant and chilling is the response to the third question in the Times’ survey.

Question: Would you consider military force to pre-empt an Iranian or North Korean nuclear or missile test?

Answer: Yes.

A Sanders White House, according to his campaign, would be open to launching a military strike against Iran or nuclear-armed North Korea to prevent (not respond to) not even a threatened missile or nuclear strike against the United States, but a mere weapons test. This is a breathtakingly reckless position no less incendiary than those advanced by the Trump administration….

Moreover…the so-called progressive, anti-war candidate fully subscribes to the doctrine of “preemptive war” declared to be official US policy in 2002 by the administration of George W. Bush. An illegal assertion of aggressive war as an instrument of foreign policy, this doctrine violates the principles laid down at the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi officials after World War II, the United Nations charter and other international laws and conventions on war. Sanders’ embrace of the doctrine, following in the footsteps of the Obama administration, shows that his opposition to the Iraq war was purely a question of tactics, not a principled opposition to imperialist war.

The above question is preceded by another that evokes a response fully in line with the war policies of the Obama administration, the first two-term administration in US history to preside over uninterrupted war.

Question: Would you consider military force for a humanitarian intervention?

Answer: Yes.

Among the criminal wars carried out by the United States in the name of defending “human rights” are the war in Bosnia and the bombing of Serbia in the 1990s, the 2011 air war against Libya that ended with the lynching of deposed ruler Muammar Gaddafi, and the civil war in Syria that was fomented by Washington and conducted by its Al Qaeda-linked proxy militias.

The fraudulent humanitarian pretexts for US aggression were no more legitimate than the lie of “weapons of mass destruction” used in the neo-colonial invasion of Iraq. The result of these war crimes has been the destruction of entire societies, the death of millions and dislocation of tens of millions more, along with the transformation of the Middle East into a cauldron of great power intervention and intrigue that threatens to erupt into a new world war.

Sanders fully subscribes to this doctrine of “humanitarian war” that has been particularly associated with Democratic administrations.

In response to a question from the Times on the assassination of Suleimani, the Sanders campaign calls Trump’s action illegal, but refuses to take a principled stand against targeted assassinations in general and associates itself with the attacks on Suleimani as a terrorist….

Sanders thus supports the continued presence of tens of thousands of US troops on the Korean peninsula, just as he supports the deployment of US forces more generally to assert the global interests of the American ruling class.

On Israel, Sanders calls for a continuation of the current level of US military and civilian aid and opposes the immediate return of the US embassy from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv….

Sanders…attacking Trump from…for failing to aggressively prosecute the conflict with Russia and China….

In a recent interview Ro Khanna, a Democratic congressman and national co-chair of the Sanders campaign, assured Atlantic writer Uri Friedman that Sanders would continue provocative “freedom of the seas” navigation operations in the Persian Gulf and the South China Sea, while committing a Sanders administration to “maintain some [troop] presence” on the multitude of bases dotting “allied” countries from Japan to Germany.

Millions of workers, students and young people…attracted to Sanders because they have come to despise and oppose the vast social inequality, brutality and militarism of American society…will soon learn through bitter experience that Sanders’s opposition to the “billionaire class” is no more real than his supposed opposition to war. His foreign policy is imperialist through and through, in line with the aggressive and militaristic policy of the Democratic Party and the Obama administration….

Sanders is no more an apostle of peace than he is a representative of the working class….

See also:

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20
 

Pentagon bans Bible verses on dog tags, while Pres. Trump upholds right to pray in public schools

No Bible Verses on Soldiers’ Dog Tags

The Pentagon caved in to (((Mikey Weinstein))) of the atheistic Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) again.

Caleb Parke reports for Fox News, Dec. 3, 2019, that for the past 20 years, U.S. military members have been able to wear dog tags with Bible verses on them, giving them light and hope in some of their darkest times. For some Gold Star families, this is one of their most cherished possessions to remember their loved one who gave the ultimate sacrifice.

Founded by Kenny Vaughan in 1998, Shields of Strength is a Texas-based company that makes Christian jewelry, beginning with a dog-tag with a Bible scripture which Vaughan had made for himself. The company now makes dog-tags with Bible verses for military members and their family, as well as other Christian-theme jewelry and apparel.

After Fox News reported on Shields of Strength last July, Weinstein complained to the Department of Defense (DOD), demanding the DOD ban the Bible verses dog-tags. “Soon after,” each military branch pulled or threatened to pull the trademark licenses that had been issued to Kenny Vaughan from Shields of Strength.

Berry, a Marine Corps combat veteran who served in Afghanistan, told Fox News: “Just when I didn’t think Mikey Weinstein could stoop any lower, he pulled a stunt like that. He’d rather take it away from them just to raise his own publicity than support our service members … that’s pretty cowardly and that’s cruel.”

Vaughan said he’s seen soldiers, who have to leave their Bible behind, carry their Shields of Strength dog-tags with them; oftentimes, the soldiers would stand in line for hours just to get one: “The love of Jesus changed my life forever. It’s the most valuable thing I have to offer anyone is God’s Word. No one needs it more than a young man or woman fighting for our freedom and we’re going to fight for them.”

An acquaintance of mine who’s a Constitutional Law attorney, says:

“While I would absolutely oppose the military issuing such tags (even with a request from the servicemember) it is outrageous that servicemembers can’t voluntarily inscribe their own tags. From a legal point of view, if the military allows any inscriptions at all (like “I Love Mom”) then banning religious ones is content discrimination. That triggers strict (constitutional) scrutiny.”

Prayer in School

Meanwhile, on January 16, 2020, President Trump followed through on his promise to the Evangelicals for Trump rally in Miami on January 3 to “safeguard students’ and teachers’ First Amendment rights to pray in our schools” through a directive from the Department of Education.

As reported by the AP and Christianity Today, the Department of Education issued a guidance on school prayer, the first updated guidance since 2003. The directive orders states to verify that school districts have no policies limiting constitutionally protected prayer, refer violators to the Education Department, and provide ways for making complaints against schools.

From the Department of Education’s press release of January 16, 2020:

[F]or the first time since 2003, the Department will …issue today updated guidance on constitutionally protected prayer in public elementary and secondary schools. The Department is required by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act, to update this guidance every two years. The guidance explains the ESEA’s requirement that states report which local educational agencies have not certified that they do not have any policy that prevents, or otherwise denies participation in, constitutionally protected prayer. The ESEA also requires states to report complaints against a local educational agency that allegedly denies a person, including a student or employee, the right to engage in constitutionally protected prayer. The guidance clarifies that the ESEA requires states to provide a clear process for students, parents, and teachers to report violations of their right to pray. Under the ESEA, states must fulfill these reporting requirements by November 1 of each year.

Christianity Today reminds us that public schools have been barred from leading students in classroom prayer since 1962, when the Supreme Court said it violated a First Amendment clause forbidding the establishment of a government religion. Later decisions extended the ban to school graduation ceremonies and, under certain circumstances, school athletic games.

Civil liberties groups say the firewall protects religious minorities and ensures fair treatment of all faiths. But many Christians say courts and schools have pushed too far against the right to free religious expression. Surveys find that Americans remain largely in favor of prayer in public schools:

  • According to General Social Survey data analyzed by political scientist Ryan Burge, just 20–35% of Christians support a ban against requiring reading the Lord’s Prayer or the Bible in public schools, and the religiously unaffiliated are evenly divided on the question.
  • A 2019 Pew Research Center survey found 41% of teens in public schools, including 68% of evangelicals, said they view teacher-led prayer in class as appropriate. A majority of teens in general (82%) and evangelical teens (64%) say there are no religious support or prayer groups that meet in their school.

South Dakota’s Republican Governor Kristi Noem, 48, is also fighting back against the Left’s tyranny.

In March 2019, Noem signed a law requiring every public school throughout the state to display an “In God We Trust” sign on their premises beginning in the fall semester. The law went into effect last July. (H/t Tom Wigand)

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20
 

The mystery of Soleimani’s red ring: a Masonic ring also worn by other elites

On January 3, at the direction of President Trump, missiles shot from American drones killed Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad, Iraq.

Soleimani was a major general in Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps  and commander of its Quds Force, a division primarily responsible for military and clandestine operations outside of Iran. He was described by an ex-CIA operative as “the single most powerful operative in the Middle East today” and the principal military strategist and tactician in Iran’s effort to combat Western influence and promote the expansion of Shiite and Iranian influence throughout the Middle East.

Trump justified the assassination on the grounds that Soleimani was a terrorist who posed an “imminent threat” to American lives. The U.S. Defense Department said Soleimani had approved the attacks on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad on December 31, 2019, and was planning further attacks on American diplomats and military personnel.

The January 3 drone attacks incinerated the two vehicles carrying Soleimani and his companions. We are told that what remained of Soleimani was his hand wearing a ring with a large, oval, red stone like the one seen in countless photos of Soleimani.

But, as Deplorable Patriot shows in his post, “Could  Iranian general Qassem Soleimani fake his death if someone gave him a hand?,” the red ring on the severed hand is not the same ring seen in photos of Soleimani when he was alive. The silver metal setting that holds the red stone is different: the setting in the severed-hand ring is grooved, but the setting is smooth in photos of Soleimani.

Add to the intrigue and mystery is the discovery by eagle-eyed netizens like Mimi B that American celebrities (Oprah Winfrey, Tom Hanks) and political elites (Hillary Clinton, Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, John Podesta), as well as the current president of Iran, Hassan Rouhani, have also been seen wearing rings with a large oval red stone similar to Soleimani’s. (Note: Arnold Schwarzenegger should not be included in the composite pic below — the ring he was wearing has a blue stone.)

Go here for close-ups of the red rings on Oprah, et al.

What does the red ring signify? Membership in some secret organization?

More intrigue still.

According to the jewelry website La Blingz, Soleimani’s ring is a Free Masons ring — the Sterling Silver Masonic Masonic Red Onyx Statement Ring, now marked down from $150 to $69.99.

Tweeter Mike Bravo points out Soleimani’s associates also sport the red Masonic ring.

Notice how in the picture above, Soleimani was wearing THREE similar-looking rings with red oval stones? Below is a close-up of his two hands:

Since he owned and sometimes wore several big red-stone rings at the same time, the ring on the severed hand said to be Soleimani’s may be one of them. Does this mean the hand did belong to Soleimani and he is dead after all?

H/t Maziel

See also:

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20
 

Could Iranian general Qassem Soleimani fake his death if someone gave him a hand?

Before discussing Soleimani there are a couple things to keep in mind that are brought up in these 2  clippings from stories that were published in 2008 and 1990.

In March 2008  the following story was published by Fox News.

The Headline was “Severed Fingers of Kidnapped Westerners Sent to U.S. Officials”

“MIAMI – A senior U.S. official confirmed to FOX News that the severed fingers of five Western hostages were delivered to U.S. government officials in Iraq, giving the men’s relatives hope that they are still alive.

The Austrian weekly magazine News first reported the delivery of the five fingers in Wednesday’s edition, citing unidentified authorities working on the case.   

One of the kidnap victims in Iraq was a University of Florida student. The hostages have been missing for more than a year and U.S. authorities in Baghdad recently were sent their severed fingers.

Four of the men had been working as contractors when they were captured in a brazen ambush of their 43-truck supply convoy on Nov. 16, 2006.The men were working for Crescent Security Group, a Kuwait-based private security company.

They were kidnapped by men in Iraqi police uniforms who ambushed the convoy they were escorting near the southern city of Safwan.Patrick Reuben, a Minneapolis police officer whose twin brother, Paul Reuben, is among the missing, said late Wednesday the FBI told his family that “the fingers were confirmed to be those of the hostages.”

DNA samples had been identified 4 of the hostages.  “John Young of Kansas City, who was seized with them.  None of the fingers belonged to him”.

The story also informs us that the Western hostages appeared in two hostage videos released in December 2006 and January 2007 where demands were made for the United States to withdraw troops from Iraq and to free all Iraqi priosners.

In January, 1990 AP  News ran the following story.

Police: Boy Killed for Ransom from Drug-Dealing Brother

“NEW YORK (AP) _ A kidnapped 12-year-old boy whose finger was cut off to persuade his drug- dealing brother to pay ransom was found dead in a pile of plastic bags just days after the brother was killed, police said Monday.”

In this case the family was able to identify the body without the need for DNA testing.

Hostages severed fingers or other body parts delivered with the kidnappers demands is not a new concept.    The problem is that it doesn’t really prove the hostage is the person they say it is. The only way to know for sure it’s the person is through DNA testing.   This is common knowledge.  It’s the same procedure when it comes to identifying remains of mangled bodies in car accidents,  fire victims or a foot found in the woods without a body attached to it.  If the body is missing or destroyed beyond recognition the only way to get a positive identification is with a DNA test.  In some cases the victim may have some form of identification on them but that is not a 100% guarantee.

“Okay, DNA,  two  stories from 1990 and 2008.  What’s the point?”

These two stories are just 2 examples out of thousands of how body parts have been used to identify people.  The severed fingers story is more relevant to what I am discussing today.  There are 2 main points to keep in mind.  DNA testing was required to identify the identity of the fingers owners.  Second point just proof that people in Iraq completely understand how body parts can be used to prove identity when a complete body is not present.  (Shiite Muslim militias alegedly were the kidnappers of the 4 men)

It’s not inconceivable that people in the Middle East  could fake a persons death and leave a body part behind to to identify  the body.  Perhaps a hand with a ring on one it’s fingers.

“People have faked their own deaths”

  • TOM CAREW, author of “Jihad!” Carew was really Philip Sessarego. Served in the regular British army, not the SAS. Sessarego had faked his death in a car bombing in Croatia and reinvented himself as the dashing Carew in 1993.
  • DAVID FRIEDLAND, New Jersey state senator.  Faked his death in a scuba-diving accident in the Bahamas.
  • JOHN STONEHOUSE,  British Labour lawmaker.  Faked his own death by leaving his clothes in a bundle on a Miami beach in 1974. (20 years after his death it was revealed that Stonehouse had been a Czech spy throughout the 1960s)
  • KEN KESEYK, published novel “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”.  Parked on a cliff-side road in California. In his truck was suicide note.   He wrote “Ocean, Ocean, I’ll beat you in the end” . A friend smuggled him into Mexico in the trunk of his car.

These are just a few examples of people that have faked their own deaths.  Three of these examples were facing jail time.  Each felt they had to escape in order to keep their freedom or to stay alive.

In 2011 Igor Vorotinov’s  dead body was found.  He turned up alive a couple of years later.  He used someone elses body to fake his own death.

Could  Iranian general Qassem Soleimani fake his death if someone gave him a hand?

There is no doubt in my mind that the the drone nailed the vehicles that it targeted. In case you missed it,  below is a video of the airstrike and the aftermath.

 

 

 

 

 

As you can see in the video both vehicles are destroyed.  Obviously, everyone in those vehicles were killed.  So the question is “who were in the vehicles?”

There are mixed stories as to how many people were in the vehicles.  My focus is on just one of the people that we are told was riding in one of the vehicles and is now dead.  That would be Qassem Soleimani.

We are told the missle strike killed him.  I found these 2 photos on Twitter along with the following message,

“Bad Death With One Hundred Virtues Do you, your father, be a martyr of anything? This fate awaits the rest of the IRGC commanders and those around them “

 

*second image is a link because the image is pretty gruesome

Second image click here

 

The tweet didn’t say if the body in the second image was Qassem Soleimani.  To the best of my knowledge, the hand with the ring is all that’s left of him.

This is the part that where I see some problems.  Besides being told Soleimani was in one of the cars, all we have is a hand with a Ring. They have confirmed they belonged to Soleimani simply because he wore a ring with a red stone.

For all we know that hand and ring could belong to this guy, He has a hand.  He has a red ring,

random
Just some Random unknown guy.

 

I went ahead and found some images of  Soleimani while he was wearing his rings. I tried to match them with the ring on the severed hand   My results were that none of the images I found matched  the severed hand.  I’ve provided two images of my comparisons.  You will notice the the setting of the severed hand is different the the rest.  I found additional images and had the same results.sol2

Here is a closer view.

sol1

Sorry, but a severed hand with a ring with a red stone is not enough to convince me.  It’s disappointing that so many people do not question this.  DNA?

I’m sure Trump and Pompeo think the evil general is dead.  That was their mission.  The airstrike was a perfect hit.  Looks like a perfect kill.  I would bet there were US assets on the ground to verify the hit.   But there are some questions that should be asked.

  • It’s this not a  perfect time to take advantage of Trump’s huge ego?
  • I Did anyone pay attention to the plane that Soleimani flew in on?
  • Did anyone see who got off the plane when the two cars departed?
  • Did anyone check the passenger log/crew log?
  • Where was the planes next destination and were it’s passengers?
  • Why did Iran respond with such a weak attack?
  • The US killed their most loved general.  Iran responded by killing how many Americans? Zero.   I really find that hard to believe?
  • In a head to head war, the US would crush Iran and bring it to it’s knees in a few days at the most.  Why is Iran being made out as some huge threat to the USA?
  • The U.S. has pursued Soleimani  for decades The State Department revealed last year that his  operations within Iraq since 2003 killed more than 600 American personnel. He has been sneaking around organizing  terrorist groups or years.  As untounhable as Soleimani thinks he is, he’s not stupid.  He has to know he is a target.   So why was his trip to Iraq not kept in secret?
  • We are told Soleimani went  to Iraq to meet with politicians and military allies.  Trump had planned 8 months ago to take out Soleimani. Around June or July of 2019 Iran claimed to have captured 17 CIA agents.  Is it not possible that some of those captured agents talked?
  • Is it possible Soleimani learned about the hit on him and took precautions.  Maybe the two cars were decoys and he stayed on the plane. Did he fool the world?
  • Soleimani has been reported dead on several occasions in the past.  It didn’t get much attention.  Why all the attention now?
  • Where is the DNA proof?

These are all important questions that require answers.

What it gets down to is  either you trust the information presented to you from the MSM, our government, Iran, Iraq or any other government or you don’t trust it.

Will you accept a severed hand wearing a ring with a red stone as unconditional truth?  Keep in mind that no match was found for the ring.

Remember that In April ,1979,  the current regime had taken control of Iran.
In November,  1979,  Iranian students seized US embassy personnel. Fifty-two hostages were held for 444 days until January 1981.  This was done right after they learned that the  Shah of Iran(ex-leader and king of Iran) went to the United States for cancer treatment.  The current regime has no love for the USA.

No matter how you look at it,  this is something that should be discussed and investigated.

Additional General information on Iran.

This does not include any current spy vs spy,  CIA, etc  operations that may or may not exist.  I like to think this is the minimun amount of knowledege a person should before they can make any sort of accurate analysis on Iran.  Some will say more, some will say less.

FACTUAL KEY HISTORICAL INFORMATION ON IRAN 

This is just review of  what I felt were the key events.  Many events were left out.  The data is still accurate. And the end result the same.

The Nazis were in Iran in WWII. Iran didn’t kick them out. During its occupation by the Nazi’s Iran was controlled by monarch Rezā Shāh. At the Tehran Conference of 1943, the Allies(USA, USSR,GB, France,Australia, etc) issued the Tehran Declaration. It gave Iran independence and boundaries when war ended.(USSR didn’t leave until 1946). Mohammad Reza Pahlavas had taken his fathers place as Shah(King of Iran).  In 1949 He was able to get the Senate of Iran formed. In 1951 Reza(the Shah) appointed Mohammad Mosaddegh as Prime Minister(PM) after he was approved by the Parliament.

Mosaddegh took control of the British built/owned oil refineries which caused problems for Iran.   A British boycott of Iran’s oil had been iniated and enforced. . During Mosaddeh  time as PM part of his land reform act was that land owners give 20% of their land to its tenants. During his time as PM Iran he implemented his socialist ideologies and was destroying Iran’s economy.

In 1951, Realizing that the opposition would take the vast majority of the provincial seats, Mosaddegh stopped the voting when it reached 79 deputies. Just enough to form a parliamentary quorum. He suspended the elections using Foreign influence as the reason.

In 1952.  Mosaddeh made some requests to parliament that would have given him more power in the government, while weakening the Shah’s position. After being denied the request, he resigned.

Mosaddegh loyalist, the National Front, Islamist, Tudeh. socialist parties along with various Nationalist started protest and causing problems. They called for the assassinations of the Shah and other royalists. Major strikes broke out in all of Iran’s major towns, with the Bazaar closing in Tehran. Over 250 demonstrators in Tehran, Ramadan, Ahvaz, Isfahan, and Kermanshah were killed or suffered serious injuries. After 5 days the military quit trying to maintain order.

The shah put Mosaddegh back as PM.  Mosaddegh then managed to get full control of the military. He then continued to work against the Shah until he was removed.

As his dictatorial powers grew, his political supporters were turning on him, By 1953 Mosaddeh had lost a lot of support from members of parliment and others throughout the government, including one of his key political allies, House Speaker Ayatollah AbolGhasem Kashani.

Iranians distrust in Mosaddeh grew. Largley because of the failing economy.  Britain had been boycotting Iran after he took control of British refineries so no money had been coming in from oil.
In April, 1953 in America funds were appoved to be used to pay for activities, operations that could assist in the removal of PM Mosaddegh. Britain wanted its refineries back. America was worried about his close ties to communism(so we are told). Mosaddeh had supporters that were socialist and communist supporters. Part of the CIA’s plan was to make it appear like Mosaddegh he was a communist.
In August 1953, the Shah formally dismissed the prime minister in a written decree, an act that had been made part of the constitution during the Constitution Assembly of 1949. Mossadegh escaped and then turned himself in. He ended up getting 3 years solitary confinement in a military prison in December, 1953. He died under house arrest in 1967. They buried him in his living room. He wasn’t allowed to have a funeral.
Martial law ended in 1957. Iran began modernization economic growth at an unprecedented rate. The US paid for a large part of Irans reconstruction.

In early June 1963 several days of massive rioting occurred in support of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini following the cleric’s arrest for a speech attacking the shah.

In the early 70s region’s strongest military power. Iran had problems with leftist guerrilla groups such as Mujaheddin-e-Khalq (MEK)that attacked the regime along with foreign targets. We are told 1978 the first major demonstrations took place of the Islamic Revolution. The movement, itself, had started long before this date.

In January 1979 Mohammad Reza Pahlavi left the country after strikes and demonstrations paralyzed the country.
In February 1979 Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Tehran.
On February 11, 1979  Iran’s military gave up again declared itself “neutral” after guerrillas and rebel troops overwhelmed troops loyal to the Shah in armed street fighting.
In April 1979 officially became an Islamic Republic.
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini became Supreme Leader of Iran until his death in 1989.
Talking points

MOHAMMAD MOSADDEGH(PM)

Mohammad Mosaddegh was removed because he abused his power. The Shah could have ruled with an Iron Fist, but he chose the route where his country prospers.  When the Shah had regained control of the country. Iran had did exactly that, prosper. Mosaddegh desire for power held Iran back. He reduced the size of the army, Iran’s army couldn’t even keep control of country.  Two times we witnessed this. Ultimately, this is how the Shah lost control of the country. Too small of an army. ( Exactly what Obama was trying to do with the military in the USA. Reduce our army so it could be overpowered.)
Attempting to overthrow a king of a country is usually a penalty of death. Mosaddegh got very lucky.

MORE OBVIOUS TRUTH THAT GET SKIPPED

People keep referring to Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi as a dictator. That simply isn’t true. From 1501 until 1979 Iran had been a monarchy ruled by an emperor almost without interruption. When Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlav replaced his father initially there were hopes that post-occupation Iran could become a constitutional monarchy.

The Shah willingly gave up some of his power and kept a” hands-off role” in government. allowing parliament to hold a lot of power.

“Some elections were held in the first shaky years, although they remained mired in corruption. “Parliament became chronically unstable, and from the 1947 to 1951 period Iran saw the rise and fall of six different prime ministers. Pahlavi increased his political power by convening the Iran Constituent Assembly, 1949, which finally formed the Senate of Iran, a legislative upper house allowed for in the 1906 constitution.”

“His father, Rezā Shāh was all about moderization. He encouraged women not to wear their hijabs. He wanted his people to wear the same type of clothing the people in the west were wearing. He wanted his people to evolve. His mistake was not kicking out the Germans in WWII. They had him convinced that they were going to win the war.
His son Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlav gave Iranians even more freedom.”

The Shah was the one that was overthrown by a dictator, Say yid Ruhollah Khomeini(9 years as Supreme Leader of Iran).
The Supreme leader is above the president in Iran. The current one is Say yid Ali Djamena. Almost 31 years as Supreme Leader.
The Supreme Leader is elected and overseen by the Assembly of Experts. Candidates for membership at the Assembly of Experts (including the President and the parliament are appointed by the Guardian Council, whose members in turn, are appointed by the Supreme Leader.

All directly-elected members of the Assembly of Experts still require the Supreme Leader’s approval even after the Guardian Council’s vetting process.

The supreme leader is considered always right.

The Supreme leader is never questioned.
The Supreme Leader is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces and the provisional head of the three branches of the state the Judiciary, the Legislature, and the Executive
Elections in are currently for show in Iran.

The Supreme leader is a dictator.

Final thoughts

People should be perfectly clear that from the years 501 to 1979 Iran had been controlled by a king or emperor.  Much like Great Britain with an Islamic twist.  The current form of government  has only existed since 1979.  They like to call it a theocracy and presidential democracy.  The truth is the country is controlled by 1 man, the Ayatollah.  He has final say and controll of  everything.  He  cannot be questioned. How would you define him and his role?

The problem is not Iran in general.  The problem is Islamic agression.  Qassem Soleimani isn’t loved because of the country he is from.  He’s not loved because he defends Iran.  All Iranians don’t love him.  He is only loved by Muslims.  He is a soldier of Islam.  He fights for Islam.  That is why Muslims in other countries love him.

You will not find one christian in the Middle East that loves Soleimani.  Not unless they are from America and are a liberal or democrat.  Christian democrats and Christian  liberals in America seem to love Soleimani.  Actually, I’ll rephrase that.  Satan worshipping democrats and Satan worshipping liberals love Soleimani. Iran’s army isn’t the army of Iran, to protect Iran.  It’s the army of Islam, to protect Muslims.

Islam becomes the religion of peace only when every person on the planet is Muslim.

 

 

Always fact check and do your own research.

Respectfully, Deplorable Patriot

*CIA operation “Ajax” took place during the year of 1953

 

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20
 

Petition to U.S. Navy not to name ship after homosexual pederast Harvey Milk

On December 13, 2019, construction began on the future U.S. Navy Ship (USNS) Harvey Milk, a fleet oiler named for the openly homosexual man whom the U. S. Navy had dishonorably discharged after being caught in a San Diego park popular with homosexual men.

Milk was also a pederast who, as an adult, preyed on teen boys.

In 1964 when Milk was 34 years old, he began “a romantic relationship” with a 16-year-old teen named Jack Galen McKinley who was prone to depression and threatened to commit suicide if Milk did not show him enough attention. (See “Construction begins on US Navy ship named after Harvey Milk who preyed on underage boys”)

If the U.S. Navy wants to honor a homosexual by naming a vessel after him/her, surely they can find someone who was not a pederast.

Return to Order has a petition for you to sign, asking the U.S. Navy not to name the vessel after Milk.

The petition reads:

A United States Naval replenishment tanker is being named after the late Harvey Milk, the first openly homosexual and pederast elected official! …

This promotion of unnatural vice and sin is completely contrary to the military spirit, and naming a military vessel after a symbol of homosexual sin is a blight to the military’s code of honor. Above all, this is an affront on God, Who will not bless those that contradicts His order. Please sign our petition, urging the U.S. Navy to rename the “Havey Milk” and to stop promoting homosexual sin.

The petition has a goal of 20,000 signature. As of this morning, 15,609 people have signed.

To sign the petition, click here.

H/t Big Lug

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20
 

Omar Condemns “Crippling” Iranian Sanctions

Apologies for another post about this anti-American womyn…

Hard to believe Omar has PTSD after watching her in my previous post with her giggling at such a serious event. LIAR.

Omar doesn’t have PTSD. What her and her Iran-supporting demorats have is TDS.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20
 

Ilhan Omar Laughs & Jokes Around As Her Colleague Discusses US Casualties In Iraq

I would expect nothing less from the womyn who said this about 9/11:

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20
 

TDS on full display: Demorats spread Iranian propaganda about U.S. troops killed

Last night Iran retaliated against the U.S. with missile attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. Thank God no U.S. casualties were reported (at the time I scheduled this post).

But man, liberals on Twitter were sure rooting for them and spreading Iran’s propaganda. Just to own President Trump. Take a look at some of the false tweets last night:

”Reckless for MSNBC to mention Iran claiming 30 US service members were killed when US officials are saying no casualties at this time.”

From Raw Story: 30 US soldiers killed in Iraq ballistic missile attacks: Iran state media

The one sane demorat on Twitter last night? Joe Biden. Go figure. Here was his tweet last night:

I’m going to hold off on commenting on the news tonight until we know more, but there is one thing I will say: Jill and I are keeping our troops and Americans overseas in our prayers. We hope you’ll keep them in yours.

When the sane demorat on Twitter is Joe Biden you should probably log off.

Bonus funny: The following was my favorite of all the U.S./Iran tweets last night (I added the white flag, thought it made it much more believable):

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20
 

Know your enemies: They are pro-Iranian, anti-American progressives in the U.S.A.

Dangerous people they are, spreading pro-Iranian propaganda.

Just shows how much they really care about the safety of our soldiers in the sandbox.

Michael Moore tells the Ayatollah of Iran that Democrats will take care of Trump for them

Bernie Sanders compares Trump approving strike on Soleimani to Putin ‘assassinating dissidents’

NBC News correspondent reports U.S. turned Soleimani into ‘a martyr, if not a saint’

Trump ‘Tossed Stick of Dynamite Into Tinderbox’ With Drone Strike, Says Joe Biden

Keep it up, demorats. We WILL remember in November.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20
 

Shocking: Jim Fetzer turns against Trump in favor of Bernie Sanders because of Soleimani assassination

On January 3, at the direction of President Trump, missiles shot from American drones assassinated Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad, Iraq.

Soleimani was a major general in Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps  and commander of its Quds Force, a division primarily responsible for military and clandestine operations outside of Iran. He was described by an ex-CIA operative as “the single most powerful operative in the Middle East today” and the principal military strategist and tactician in Iran’s effort to combat Western influence and promote the expansion of Shiite and Iranian influence throughout the Middle East.

The air attack that killed Soleimani and four members of Iraqi militias followed attacks on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad on December 31, 2019, by supporters of an Iran-backed Iraqi militia.

The U.S. Defense Department said Soleimani had approved the attacks on the American embassy and was planning further attacks on American diplomats and military personnel. Trump justified the assassination on the grounds that Soleimani posed an “imminent threat” to American lives. But the assassination was not approved by Congress, nor did it have the consent of the Iraqi government, leading to controversy regarding the legality of killing an Iranian military leader over Iraqi airspace.

It is not just Democrats and Hollyweirdos who are in an uproar over President Trump’s greenlighting of the drone assassination. Shockingly, Jim Fetzer has joined the anti-Trumpers, convinced that the Soleimani assassination signifies Trump’s caving in to Israel.

Note: James Fetzer is a professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota-Duluth, and the author and editor of countless volumes on conspiracies and false flags, including the banned-by-Amazon.com Nobody Died at Sandy Hook: It Was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control, which is available free in PDF format.

On January 4, 2020, Fetzer wrote these comments on his blog:

After having tolerated his previous pro-Israel moves–the Embassy to Jerusalem, Golan Heights to Israel, defunding the UN Palestinian-refugee effort and the expanded definition of “anti-Semitism”–this for me is the last straw. I can no longer support this Netanyahu-stooge for President of the United States. I am going to have to find a more suitable candidate, which will be tough sledding. But I am fed up with the Trump disaster.

On January 5, 2020, Fetzer wrote these comments on his blog:

I am distraught. He [Trump] appears to have gone stark raving mad.

Actually, I believe he has virtually destroyed his prospects for reelection at a single blow. He was supposed to get us out of these wars in the Middle East, not start new ones. And now the Democrats have a bona fide reason to impeach him, which even I would support. I can no longer stand with this gullible sap who should have known better. He allowed himself to be played by [Israeli Prime Minister] Bibi [Netanyahu]. I would rather have a real American president than an Israeli stooge. I can no longer endorse him. Bernie [Sanders], ironically, may be our best bet, especially were he to run with Tulsi, where their foreign policies are virtually indistinguishable and she strengthens him in ways no other running mate could. A stunning 2020 reversal.

Latest reports are that Trump’s poll numbers are UP. I am dismayed but the American people are extremely ignorant of history, even relatively recent history. This is more than embarrassing. I can no longer support him.

In other words, Fetzer no longer supports Trump because he believes Trump is an Israeli stooge. Instead, Fetzer declares his endorsement of Bernie Sanders for the presidency — a socialist Jew who volunteered in an Israeli kibbutz for several months when he was 22, supports gun control, and who will collapse the U.S. economy with his multitrillion-dollars Medicare-for-all and the climate-change Green New Deal.

Super Troopers Smh GIF by Fox Searchlight - Find & Share on GIPHY

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:
error0
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20