You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.

Breaking: Iran Says It Will Soon Exclude The Dollar From The Country's Foreign Revenues And Reserves

Tyler Durden's picture




Developing story from BNO. Quotes state media reports.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:05 | Link to Comment RockyR
RockyR's picture

need more info, tyler.

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:33 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:52 | Link to Comment RichardP
RichardP's picture

BNO = Breaking News Online

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BNO_News

 

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 12:50 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 12:50 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 13:23 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 19:48 | Link to Comment geopol
geopol's picture

WORLD DOLLAR PANIC IMMINENT?
We need to recall that the value of a modern currency is not determined inside the country, but
rather on the international foreign exchange markets. This is where the fatal vulnerability of the US
dollar is located. In the ruined form of the Bretton Woods system which has prevailed for almost 40
years since Nixon's colossal historical vandalism of August 15, 1971, the US has emerged as the
only country with a permanent license to finance imports by simply printing more of its own
currency and sending those banknotes overseas. Every other country has to manufacture and export
something that others want to buy in order to earn the necessary foreign exchange to pay for its own
imports. The US license to print has made this country the buyer of last resort and the dumping
ground for the unsold junk of the world, leading in the process to high permanent unemployment
here. There are many signs that this inherently unworkable arrangement has now reached the
breaking point.

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:07 | Link to Comment Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

Just when you thought they had run out of ways to beg for an ass-whuppin'.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 18:33 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:15 | Link to Comment VegasBD
VegasBD's picture

Ten things you probably didnt know about Iran

 

Belief: Iran is aggressive and has threatened to attack Israel, its neighbors or the U.S.

Reality: Iran has not launched an aggressive war modern history (unlike the U.S. or Israel), and its leaders have a doctrine of "no first strike." This is true of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as well as of Revolutionary Guards commanders.

Belief: Iran is a militarized society bristling with dangerous weapons and a growing threat to world peace.

Reality: Iran's military budget is a little over $6 billion annually. Sweden, Singapore and Greece all have larger military budgets. Moreover, Iran is a country of 70 million, so that its per capita spending on defense is tiny compared to these others, since they are much smaller countries with regard to population. Iran spends less per capita on its military than any other country in the Persian Gulf region with the exception of the United Arab Emirates.

Belief: Iran has threatened to attack Israel militarily and to "wipe it off the map."

<!-- OAS_AD('Right'); //-->

<a href="http://judo.salon.com/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.cgi/www.salonmagazine.com/o..."><img src="http://judo.salon.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.cgi/www.salonmagazine.co..." width="300" height="250" border="0" alt="" /></a>

Reality: No Iranian leader in the executive has threatened an aggressive act of war on Israel, since this would contradict the doctrine of 'no first strike' to which the country has adhered. The Iranian president has explicitly said that Iran is not a threat to any country, including Israel.

Belief: But didn't President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threaten to "wipe Israel off the map?"

Reality: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did quote Ayatollah Khomeini to the effect that "this Occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" (in rezhim-e eshghalgar-i Qods bayad as safheh-e ruzgar mahv shavad). This was not a pledge to roll tanks and invade or to launch missiles, however. It is the expression of a hope that the regime will collapse, just as the Soviet Union did. It is not a threat to kill anyone at all.

Belief: But aren't Iranians Holocaust deniers?

Reality: Some are, some aren't. Former president Mohammad Khatami has castigated Ahmadinejad for questioning the full extent of the Holocaust, which he called "the crime of Nazism." Many educated Iranians in the regime are perfectly aware of the horrors of the Holocaust. In any case, despite what propagandists imply, neither Holocaust denial (as wicked as that is) nor calling Israel names is the same thing as pledging to attack it militarily.

Belief: Iran is like North Korea in having an active nuclear weapons program, and is the same sort of threat to the world.

Reality: Iran has a nuclear enrichment site at Natanz near Isfahan where it says it is trying to produce fuel for future civilian nuclear reactors to generate electricity. All Iranian leaders deny that this site is for weapons production, and the International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly inspected it and found no weapons program. Iran is not being completely transparent, generating some doubts, but all the evidence the IAEA and the CIA can gather points to there not being a weapons program. The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate by 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, including the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, assessed with fair confidence that Iran has no nuclear weapons research program. This assessment was based on debriefings of defecting nuclear scientists, as well as on the documents they brought out, in addition to U.S. signals intelligence from Iran. While Germany, Israel and recently the U.K. intelligence is more suspicious of Iranian intentions, all of them were badly wrong about Iraq's alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction and Germany in particular was taken in by Curveball, a drunk Iraqi braggart.

Belief: The West recently discovered a secret Iranian nuclear weapons plant in a mountain near Qom.

<!-- OAS_AD('x10'); //-->

<a href="http://judo.salon.com/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.cgi/www.salonmagazine.com/o..."><img src="http://judo.salon.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.cgi/www.salonmagazine.co..." width="300" height="250" border="0" alt="" /></a>

Reality: Iran announced Monday a week ago to the International Atomic Energy Agency that it had begun work on a second, civilian nuclear enrichment facility near Qom. There are no nuclear materials at the site and it has not gone hot, so technically Iran is not in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, though it did break its word to the IAEA that it would immediately inform the UN of any work on a new facility. Iran has pledged to allow the site to be inspected regularly by the IAEA, and if it honors the pledge, as it largely has at the Natanz plant, then Iran cannot produce nuclear weapons at the site, since that would be detected by the inspectors. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted on Sunday that Iran could not produce nuclear weapons at Natanz precisely because it is being inspected. Yet American hawks have repeatedly demanded a strike on Natanz.

Belief: The world should sanction Iran not only because of its nuclear enrichment research program but also because the current regime stole June's presidential election and brutally repressed the subsequent demonstrations.

Reality: Iran's reform movement is dead set against increased sanctions on Iran, which likely would not affect the regime, and would harm ordinary Iranians.

Belief: Isn't the Iranian regime irrational and crazed, so that a doctrine of mutally assured destruction just would not work with them?

Reality: Iranian politicians are rational actors. If they were madmen, why haven't they invaded any of their neighbors? Saddam Hussein of Iraq invaded both Iran and Kuwait. Israel invaded its neighbors more than once. In contrast, Iran has not started any wars. Demonizing people by calling them unbalanced is an old propaganda trick. The U.S. elite was once unalterably opposed to China having nuclear science because they believed the Chinese are intrinsically irrational. This kind of talk is a form of racism.

Belief: The international community would not have put sanctions on Iran, and would not be so worried, if it were not a gathering nuclear threat.

Reality: The centrifuge technology that Iran is using to enrich uranium is open-ended. In the old days, you could tell which countries might want a nuclear bomb by whether they were building light water reactors (unsuitable for bomb-making) or heavy-water reactors (could be used to make a bomb). But with centrifuges, once you can enrich to 5% to fuel a civilian reactor, you could theoretically feed the material back through many times and enrich to 90% for a bomb. However, as long as centrifuge plants are being actively inspected, they cannot be used to make a bomb. The two danger signals would be if Iran threw out the inspectors or if it found a way to create a secret facility. The latter task would be extremely difficult, however, as demonstrated by the CIA's discovery of the Qom facility construction in 2006 from satellite photos. Nuclear installations, especially centrifuge ones, consume a great deal of water, construction materiel, and so forth, so that constructing one in secret is a tall order. In any case, you can't attack and destroy a country because you have an intuition that they might be doing something illegal. You need some kind of proof. Moreover, Israel, Pakistan and India are all much worse citizens of the globe than Iran, since they refused to sign the NPT and then went for broke to get a bomb; and nothing at all has been done to any of them by the UNSC.

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:21 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 07:50 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 11:59 | Link to Comment Enkidu
Enkidu's picture

I don't agree that it is propaganda. Iran is not aggressive and does not seem to initiate wars - unlike the USA - a country that is permanently at war with someone or the other - and who has troops stationed throughout the world. Why does the US have 50,000 troops in Germany and Japan? Why do they have CentComs and WestComs? In fact, they have thewhole world divided up ready for an attack? They have to keep bombing folks so that new orders pour into the military businesses!

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 18:38 | Link to Comment Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

There's a difference.  Iran is interested in genocide.  America is not.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 18:38 | Link to Comment Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

There's a difference.  Iran is interested in genocide.  America is not.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 19:38 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 22:45 | Link to Comment TumblingDice
TumblingDice's picture

How have you arrived at this conclusion? What makes you think this? I just want to understand your thought process here.

Sun, 10/18/2009 - 10:39 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 12:07 | Link to Comment alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

Iran hasn't attacked another country since the 15th century. Israel can't seem to go 15 months without attacking someone.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 13:09 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:32 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 06:36 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 11:57 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 20:32 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Anon, be consistent.

Either you believe in conspiracy theories or you don't. If you only believe the ones you like or feel are supported by evidence you think is correct, you can't bash other people for doing the same. Or is it you like conspiracy theories that are popular and thus low risk to believe in and support?

I'm not saying you are correct or incorrect. I'm asking you to be consistent in your standards. This is a valid request. Please don't be emotional. Simply explain your logic for believing some conspiracy theories but berating others for doing the same thing you are.

Sun, 10/18/2009 - 00:23 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 08:58 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

All the more reason to get a name and icon and start dancing. Still an Anon but now identifiable from the other Anon's.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 12:25 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 00:20 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 05:13 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 18:49 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 20:33 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 12:26 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 12:39 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 22:06 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 06:24 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:37 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:52 | Link to Comment Daedal
Daedal's picture

Reality: Iranian politicians are rational actors. If they were madmen, why haven't they invaded any of their neighbors? Saddam Hussein of Iraq invaded both Iran and Kuwait. Israel invaded its neighbors more than once. In contrast, Iran has not started any wars. Demonizing people by calling them unbalanced is an old propaganda trick. The U.S. elite was once unalterably opposed to China having nuclear science because they believed the Chinese are intrinsically irrational. This kind of talk is a form of racism.

 

'Rational'? You really want to use that term? You mean the same politicians who shoot innocent people in the street for disputing the election results?

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:14 | Link to Comment TumblingDice
TumblingDice's picture

rationality is such a misunderstood term.

At least my computer is going to be rational and send this message when I hit save.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:44 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

The entire MSM reporting of  a 'rigged' election was a lie... sorry.

The opinion polls where 2 to 1 in favor of Ahmedinijad prior to the election.

There was an effort made to destabilise the Iranian regime for months even years prior to the election... they spent hundreds of millions and even funded known terror organisations to assist them... want to guess who?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_presidential_election,_2009

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/05/bush_authorizes.html#

$400 million actually to assist known terrorist organisations to plot civilian bombings... and... this is where it gets interesting...

To steal the elections after the fact... curious?

http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/cia-has-distributed-400-million-dollars-inside-iran-to-evoke-a-revolution/

I thought everyone knew this already... be sure to check out the links...

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:53 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 15:08 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

I for one would welcome the removal of autocratic theocracies anywhere they exist.

I am no fan of what oppressive regimes do to control 'their' own citizens nor what militarily adventurous 'regimes' do to 'liberate' other nations for their own political, economic or military purposes.

That said I still believe that no-one in Iran is going to nuke Israel or the United States... that would be insanity.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:55 | Link to Comment Daedal
Daedal's picture

That's all very fascinationg, but your response to my comment is absolutely meaningless since it does not address my point. At no point did a speculate as to whether or not the election was rigged. Nor did I opine on any other actions taken by any other government. The only thing I chose to comment on was something that appeared to be a glaringly obvious disconnect between the description of the politicians in charge and how they treat their own citizens. That being:

The current Iranian regime was described as 'rational', a word I questioned with the following facts about the regime's actions toward recent protests, which resulted in people being shot for protesting, or for just being at the protest. http://mrsgrapevine.com/2009/06/graphic-video-iranian-woman-killed-in-pr...

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:01 | Link to Comment Cheeky Bastard
Cheeky Bastard's picture

The USA allows by law the execution of mentally retarded people, including under aged children ( adolescents ). The USA by law allows for people to promote Nazism, where in every other country they end up in jail, the USA is waging 2 wars against countries that did nothing to the security or sovereignty of the USA.

 

Now i ask you, just by pointing out some examples; who are the rational ones here ( hint; no one ). Also the US has elected a president which believed that waging wars is OK because Jesus told him it was ok. I see no difference, except the difference in the hegemonistic nature.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:08 | Link to Comment Daedal
Daedal's picture

Ok, for disclosure (and hopefully to get my point across), I do not approve of American emperialistic foreign policy of preemptive war waging.

My point had nothing to do with Bush's beliefs and actions no more than my opinion of Michael Jackson's beliefs and actions. My point was simply that the Iranian regime, which was described as 'rational', is not so. That point, for the Nth time, is not a mutually exclusive assertion about the rationality of other politicians, including politicians of other countries with which Iran may have desagreements with, Comprende?!

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:12 | Link to Comment Cheeky Bastard
Cheeky Bastard's picture

Daedal; i agree fully. And to answer your question; there is not regime ( government ) which is rational, never was and never will be.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:15 | Link to Comment Daedal
Daedal's picture

Well, in that case, we're in agreement.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:38 | Link to Comment I am a Man I am...
I am a Man I am Forty's picture

Agreed CB, governments are the problem.  Some are worse than others, but they are all bad.  They can destroy property and mass murder, nuff said.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 03:01 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:12 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Never ceases to amaze me how stupid people had to be to elect Bush.

Even calls Chirac to tell him that God wants him to invade Iraq...

How did the MSM miss this one? Gee I don't know...

http://www.wvgazette.com/Opinion/JamesAHaught/200907220060#

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 03:58 | Link to Comment aswipe
aswipe's picture

Please... John Kerry was a better alternative?

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 08:10 | Link to Comment Emmanuel Goldstein
Emmanuel Goldstein's picture

Yes, John Kerry would have been infinitely preferable to the dry drunk frat boy with the ego problem who took his orders directly from God.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 15:44 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

It's difficult to argue with your reasoning...

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 16:20 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 00:09 | Link to Comment Pedro
Pedro's picture

Who better than God can give orders?  You liberal elitist?

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 16:19 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

You are right...

I thought about that after I posted... the choices suck.

Al Gore and John Kerry. Nothing really would have been all that different... perhaps a little less foreign adventurism no patriot act and a perhaps tens of thousands fewer dead... then again maybe not.

Sun, 10/18/2009 - 09:02 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

And that's the whole point of a two party system that is actually one party with two factions.

No matter which way you take at the fork in the road, you still wind up at the same place.

Screwed but (in our minds) free to chose.

Sun, 10/18/2009 - 00:38 | Link to Comment TumblingDice
TumblingDice's picture

to my knowledge there were many other 35 or older natural born US citizens that served as alternatives. You do know that as long as they meet the qualifications you can vote for whomever you want, right?

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:38 | Link to Comment I am a Man I am...
I am a Man I am Forty's picture

I would add shooting college students at Kent State to the list as an excellent example.  Burning all those people in Waco was some pretty sick stuff too.  The ruby ridge thing will bring a tear to your eye.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 07:26 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 11:15 | Link to Comment I am a Man I am...
I am a Man I am Forty's picture

As opposed, to let's say, taking it out on the guys that did the beating.  Makes sense.  

Your rock misses you.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:06 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Which politician exactly shot the protestors?

Read your above post.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:10 | Link to Comment Daedal
Daedal's picture

You ask me that quesiton, but do not hold your own points to the same criterian. I don't recall Bush shot any Iraqi or Afghani either, but that doesn't mean he's not responsible for them being shot.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:19 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

"Neda" translated from what I understand means "voice"... how appropriate... and convenient... a little too convenient perhaps?

What a rallying point for a revolution designed to overthrow a regime (which it is... I won't argue there...)

 http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/cia-involved-in-nedas-shooting/

Check out my above posts and follow the links... then we'll talk.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:29 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 15:18 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Thanks. :-)

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:59 | Link to Comment tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

s

zerO, of course the Iranian ambassador to Mexico is going to be talking his book.   hardly a reliable source in this case (though i also choose to believe that the cia's greasy prints are somewhere around the election drama for sure).

what i find rather humorious is that the US state dept called twitter & 'asked' them to postpone routine maintenance during the Iranian protests:
http://bit.ly/I5EUq

then the FBI turned around & busted a dd  protestor for using twitter during G20:
http://bit.ly/3XwOuk

hypocrisy is one of america's greatest goods ya know,
available for the domestic market and for export.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 11:42 | Link to Comment BoeingSpaceliner797
BoeingSpaceliner797's picture

Hypocrisy is the number 2 export of the U.S., behind only fraud.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 15:26 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

All informational sources are to be considered suspect.

The consensus of government, MSM and the majority of economists is that we are out of the recession. Information that I can easily verify on line suggests otherwise. Question motivations and follow the money-trail.

I just think that $400 million should give you alot of bang for the buck when it comes to attempting to overthrow some repressive theocracy... so we should carefully scrutinize any 'facts' that emerged to see if there are 'fingerprints'. If this wasn't part of a CIA Op (totally possible)... then what the f*ck did the $400 MM buy us?

Just asking.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 16:24 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 08:01 | Link to Comment ConfederateH
ConfederateH's picture

Looks like Turkey is joining Syria and Iran in Zero's alliance of peace.

How Turkey was lost

All you thug-regime cheerleaders and believers in America's supreme evilness will soon be able to savor the coming world war and the end of the era of western prosperity.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 02:55 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 07:15 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:07 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:09 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:37 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:01 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

 "From the Persian Empire to Thermopylae to events over the last 25+ years."

Are you serious buddy... check out your ancient history sometime.

Cyrus The Great (the Persians you know) liberated the Jews... freeing them from their Babylonian exile... I thought he was a hero in your culture...

You had better run along and change this Wiki entry...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_the_Great

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 11:37 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:53 | Link to Comment Problem Is
Problem Is's picture

And the real reason Iran is threat to US corporate power:

Iran's recent move to dump the US dollar for euros.

Remember Bush's "Axis of Evil" ?

AXIS OF EVIL MEMBER NUMBER 1:

Saddam Hussein changed all Iraqi oil transactions in the UN food for oil program from USD to Euros on Sept. 24, 2000. The move paid off for the "Saddam-iser" as the Euro appreciated 30% against the USD in 2001.

AXIS OF EVIL MEMBER NUMBER 2:

North Korea changed all foreign transactions from dollars to euros effective Nov. 2002.

AXIS OF EVIL MEMBER NUMBER 3:

iran began talk of a free trade zone similar to Swiss duty free trade zones for the express purpose of oil and commodity transactions among middle Eastern and Asian countries in Euros. The proposal was put forth in 2001 as Iran was monitoring Iraqi windfalls from the USD to Euro swap in UN oil for food...

Other countries that have been threatened for not playing with Bernanke Bucks by the US Corporate Military:

Libya, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba...

Not the only reason the US Corporate Owned Military wants to kick Iran's booty. But it is funny how this USD v Euro seems to always lead to US threat of military butt kick.

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:56 | Link to Comment Dr Brown
Dr Brown's picture

Belief:  You work for the Iranian government as a mouthpiece of propoganda.

Reality: ?

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:21 | Link to Comment I am a Man I am...
I am a Man I am Forty's picture

Why don't you challenge something specific that he said, maybe do a little research as opposed to claiming he works for the Iranian government.  I knew most of this stuff from years of research because I am well aware the US government constantly lies to us.

I think the citizens and the militaries around the world need to tell their politicians to pound sand and tell them to hit the negotiating table or hit the road.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:25 | Link to Comment Cheeky Bastard
Cheeky Bastard's picture

<sarcasm> I am a man I am .... but it is much easier to attack the person than the views; get with the flow; facts don't matter when we talk about Islamic countries; don't you know that the are just savages occupying the territory of the chosen ones ? </sarcasm>

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:38 | Link to Comment Cistercian
Cistercian's picture

 The truth of your statement is scary.The Iranians are Human Beings.I am completely disgusted by the demonization of the Iranians in our idiotic, "let's all cheer for war" media.

It is just sickening.No reality is necessary , just hate will do.

 My country is run by super villains.

 Only profit matters.....kill them all.

 

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 16:30 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 07:58 | Link to Comment Dr Brown
Dr Brown's picture

it's called a joke, man.  I neither reject everything this poster writes, nor eat it all up without some critical analysis.  but with regards to my post, it is in jest.  take a chill pill.

 

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:24 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:26 | Link to Comment MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

We won't nuke em'. We'd have to make really long sideways straws to get the oil if we did that. Can irradiated oil be processed and used safely?

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:50 | Link to Comment Cistercian
Cistercian's picture

 The oil would be fine.If we used something really dirty, the surface would be too hot to work on for a time ,however.

 If we lost New York, I have to disagree with you.We would nuke them.Ultra harshly.And it would happen very, very quickly I imagine.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 02:17 | Link to Comment MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

Cistercian,

Heavy handle you pick for yourself. I was half joking with the assesment we won't nuke. We are the only ones who have in all the world. I am aware of sideways technologies to drill oil. If we lost New York, I am certain we would do it and get everything we deserve if we did. Hell on earth, with fire and brimstone.

Dropping the dollar and giving other entities the courage to do the same is another kind of "nuking" is it not?  On this playing field we do not have parity.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 03:05 | Link to Comment Cistercian
Cistercian's picture

 True enough.The whole economic warfare aspect is ugly and out of control.And running the printing press like a maniac ensures the dollar going away as a global reserve currency.The FED is destroying the dollar far more effectively than Iran ever could.The whole corruption/evil/idiocy thing.

 

 As to the handle...a Cistercian is probably as far away as one can be from a greed addled

minion of the squidsters.It also implies that there are truths which are objectively true, unlike the pernicious situational ethics that is now so in vogue, and used so effectively to deceive the public.

 

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 11:46 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

 

We haven't see nothin' yet.  This process in now on an exponential growth trajectory.

Besides, if desired all that is needed is a neutron bomb to take care of it.  There are also non persistent chemical & biotoxic agents and oh so much more.

Some consideration to the name..

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 17:17 | Link to Comment Emmanuel Goldstein
Emmanuel Goldstein's picture

About the Fed destroying the Dollar faster, definitely.

All the talk of dropping the Dollar globally is just the expected reaction to the Feds policies. The US is doing this to itself.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:00 | Link to Comment Pedro
Pedro's picture

as only Beavis can say it "Uhhh huhuhuhu, what?"

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:02 | Link to Comment Cheeky Bastard
Cheeky Bastard's picture

i, for one, applaud you for your effort put into writing this post and give you + 10000 for the truth which is written in it. good job.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:52 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

The truth is out there...

How people can be so lazy with the answers easily available at their fingertips is what I find frightening.

Easier to get your opinion from a network talking head I guess.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 11:35 | Link to Comment Green Sharts
Green Sharts's picture

i, for one, applaud you for your effort put into writing this post

Cut and paste plagiarism doesn't take much effort.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=26057&cpg=1


Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:43 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 15:54 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Apparently the IAEA has consistantly gone on record saying the opposite.

Check your facts buthead.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-02/21/content_10860981.htm

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:48 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:50 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Good post VegasBD...

It's about time somebody told it the way it is...

MSM is wheeling out the Iranian WMD dog and pony show... looks like a lot of sheeple are buying tickets...

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 00:54 | Link to Comment Cheeky Bastard
Cheeky Bastard's picture

Iran=Iraq=Afghanistan=Vietnam=Korea....=Which ever future war.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 06:50 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

"MSM is wheeling out the Iranian WMD dog and pony show... looks like a lot of sheeple are buying tickets..."

I couldn't have said it better.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:11 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 05:12 | Link to Comment KevinB
KevinB's picture

Please send me some of your Kool-Aid. It must be verrry good.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 09:16 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 10:43 | Link to Comment anonymike
anonymike's picture

VegasBD, Bravo for the bit of balance you've provided. A very similar list, with Iran replaced by USA, would contain a much larger list of documented realities which would be far more troubling for the mindless sheeple and others that actually still have any faith in the corrupt leadership of our country in both major parties... Our government can not be trusted about anything on any level. No lie is too big. If we don't stop them, our evil leadership will probably again start a major needless war in an attempt to end the recession/depression. Iran is simply the most convenient opportunity at this time, in spite of the realities to the contrary. Everyone needs to do everything they can to stop such a war from starting, and you're definitely doing your part. Thanks.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 17:46 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:35 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:36 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:41 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

Will Hugo Chavez try and follow suit?

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:50 | Link to Comment TumblingDice
TumblingDice's picture

Let it Loose Hugo, even if Obama is your bestest friend...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnSu2Ol1TSM&feature=related

PS I do think many countried will follow suit, if not formally, then by simply not holding dollars any longer. They know that the dollar has to go down if the US is to meet its obligations, but they dont have to be the ones stuck with the zombie greenback. It will help the helicopters strategy (since every1 will be selling dollars) but not in a good way, since there will be lost control.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 22:23 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

Great video TD.  Thanks

There are lots of folks (small & medium sized nations) demanding settlement in various forms of barter refusing to use US dollars.  This process is reaching the point where it is easily discernible in the public domain.

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:46 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:01 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:46 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:06 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 09:46 | Link to Comment Rollerball
Rollerball's picture

"...so Bush mugged him (for purely WMD violations not to control oil) ..."  

OAM (old anonymous man), you forgot to mention your other disability - dementia praecox.  We'll have to leave it there, as we return you to your regularly scheduled MSM matrix programming.  

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:46 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:52 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 09:01 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 11:54 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

bwhaaahaaahaaa

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:53 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 22:55 | Link to Comment Fritz
Fritz's picture

If Iran's military was a car, it would be a Yugo.

I think Costa Rica could kick their ass.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:00 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:12 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:05 | Link to Comment MountainHawk
MountainHawk's picture

So, how big a deal is Iran's move in the whole scope of things, does this really have meaningful implications?

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:07 | Link to Comment FischerBlack
FischerBlack's picture

Seems like a total non-event to me.

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:08 | Link to Comment Howard_Beale
Howard_Beale's picture

It will be fun to watch the BRICs try to get around the buck. They can't since Russia's GDP is -9%, China is a fallacious bubble with silly numbers, Iran is just in the game for fun--so what do we really think of this? If the US doesn't buy oil in any currency due to a severe downturn in the economy, they all get squat. Game over.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 17:06 | Link to Comment Emmanuel Goldstein
Emmanuel Goldstein's picture

The US NOT buying oil regardless of currency required?

Fat chance, the US will ALWAYS buy oil no matter what is asked to pay for it. The only game over in your scenario is the one being played by the US.

Go ahead, put your flag away. Waving it here won't produce the rally around the red white and blue reaction that you are looking for. There are clearer heads in this room.

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:09 | Link to Comment Michael
Michael's picture

I don't understand why everyone wouldn't want to wipe Israel off the map for the 9/11 inside job they had a hand in.

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:18 | Link to Comment Howard_Beale
Howard_Beale's picture

Maybe because those of us that lost 20 or more friends on 9/11 don't have any proof of your allegations. I worked on 104 WTC1. Don't put your totally unprovable crap here.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 16:53 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:26 | Link to Comment Howard_Beale
Howard_Beale's picture

double post...

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:27 | Link to Comment Michael
Michael's picture

Not totally unprovable. More proof is surfacing every day. I just love the one where the Israelis were warned to stay away that day.

Fri, 10/16/2009 - 23:44 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:12 | Link to Comment Apocalypse Now
Apocalypse Now's picture

Gee anonymous your vapid argument of appealing to emotion has no effect, I lost many of my liberties that day with the patriot act that was written before 9/11 and the loss of trust in some branches of government.  Hundreds of thousands have died for our liberties which are more important than the illusion of security used to get the public to move towards a chosen agenda.

That said, I dare you to read the following two links:

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hundreds.html

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/200...

Important excerpts:  Israel recognized for the first time Wednesday members of a hardline group dismantled some 50 years ago in Egypt for carrying out bomb attacks aimed at destabilizing relations between Egypt, the United States and Britain.

"Evidence linking these Israelis to 9-11 is classified. I cannot tell you about the evidence that has been gathered. It is classified information." FBI statement

SENATOR GRAHAM on Foreign country involvement: "It will become public at some point when it's turned over to the archives, but that's 20 or 30 years from now. And, we need to have this information now because it's relevant to the threat that the people of the United States are facing today." (24) (emphasis added)

Senator Graham is suggesting that US intelligence knows which foreign government helped the terrorists, but the government isn't going to tell us for another 30 years! Given the current state of anti-Muslim war hysteria being promoted by the media and government, common sense dictates that if an Arab government was ever discovered to have sponsored 9-11, we'd be seeing the evidence night and day on the controlled media, and hearing about it non-stop from all the President's warmongers as well as the Israeli-occupied US Congress and Senate. This alone is evidence that no Arab government was involved in 9-11.

Research the Lavon Affair, the USS Liberty attack, and Operations Northwoods before you question what is possible.  In addition, the same firm that ran drills on the morning of 9/11 of ironically planes being crashed into the WTC ran drills on the morning of the London bombings 7/7 of a bombing - both times the drills were duplicates of what actually happend - if you think that is a coincidence you are mistaken.  These events are part of the PRS system (problem, response, solution) to convince the population to give up freedoms in the interest of their personal safety and country sovereignty to a global government that "will protect you - from horrible terrorists or world ending comic book global warming".  If you believe this you are the sheeple, the lemmings easily influenced.  You should all know the Benjamin Franklin quote by now.

 

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:14 | Link to Comment Michael
Michael's picture

US Surveillance and Rights Reduction Act aka Patriot Act

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:23 | Link to Comment Michael
Michael's picture

Benjamin Franklin They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 01:52 | Link to Comment Apocalypse Now
Apocalypse Now's picture

Yes. 

I would like to add that most wars throughout history have been about resources (land, water, gold, food, energy) or religion. 

Relevant Hermann Goering quote:

“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

I actually admire Obama for taking an unpopular position by voting not to go to war with Iraq (nothing to do with 9/11, everything to do with oil).  There are powerful interests that want a war with Iran for access to their strategic oil reserves, it will be interesting if the crowd responsible for awarding him the Nobel Peace Prize or the hawks will ultimately win out (and Iran's actions will of course influence its future).  I don't think we really know if Iran is a threat since we get propaganda instead of unbiased information.  They could be a threat (financially and oil supply) but they may not be a real threat (militarily).

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 02:30 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 15:49 | Link to Comment Apocalypse Now
Apocalypse Now's picture

Quite correct, I should have stated his very public position on the record that we shouldn't go to war with Iraq, and I do respect Ron Paul.  The difficulty with voting against funding after starting a war is that it becomes an issue of providing armor to your soldiers and can be twisted by adversaries. 

My point is about taking unpopular positions, however you pointed out an important point that he represented an area that was anti-war so perhaps his position was popular.  On a national stage it was an unpopular position at the time but it turned out to be the correct position and he did aspire to go national.  With the gulf area gravitating out of the petro-dollar, even geo-politically we will not hold on to the temporary advantage.

Only a handful of representatives voted against the "un-patriotic" act, and they also have my respect for upholding the constitution.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 16:06 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

BTW... Great posts Apocalypse.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 09:30 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 13:19 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 10/17/2009 - 16:05 | Link to Comment Apocalypse Now
Apocalypse Now's picture

You are a scared little child, too scared to even register.  For the record "when haveoializedicine" makes no sense here on earth.  I am neither on the right or left, but completely objective.  Although you provided no substantive argument other than childhood name calling, I will actually honor your poor post with a reasoned logical comment just for your enlightenment.

As for the Patriot Act, the suspension of habeus corpus essentially makes our Presidents into emperors.  Anybody could be called an enemy combatant and be held indefinitely with no rights, especially a political opponent of the ruling party.  In addition, they were able to use state letters to take internet provider information without a court order.  Many of these unconstitutional provisions have been struck down in court.  Listen to what the judge said in striking down the national security letters:

In a sharply worded 120-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero found in favor of the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed a lawsuit on behalf of an unidentified Internet service provider challenging the FBI's use of a type of administrative subpoena known as a national security letter. Such letters do not require court approval and prohibit targeted companies from revealing that the demands were ever made.

Marrero, whose court is in the Southern District of New York, ruled that the provision in the Patriot Act allowing such letters "effectively bars or substantially deters any judicial challenge" and violates free-speech rights by imposing permanent silence on targeted companies. Writing that "democracy abhors undue secrecy," Marrero ruled that "an unlimited government warrant to conceal . . . has no place in our open society."

"Under the mantle of secrecy, the self-preservation that ordinarily impels our government to censorship and secrecy may potentially be turned on ourselves as a weapon of self-destruction," Marrero wrote. ". . . At that point, secrecy's protective shield may serve not as much to secure a safe country as simply to save face."

The constitution was designed to protect you dear naive anonymous from your government, and is what differentiates our great country from all the others.  Individual rights and freedoms, without it YOU are nothing.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 16:28 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

+1000

Very astute observations and very well said.

Sun, 10/18/2009 - 10:51 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 15:30 | Link to Comment ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Thanks...

I must warn you I can be slightly retarded at times... it's the meds you know.

Get an avatar and a cool name... And don't forget to tell us all what you think especially if you disagree... that's how we all learn here. :-)

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 17:04 | Link to Comment MinnesotaNice
MinnesotaNice's picture

Apocalypse Now...

Let me step in here as what you might consider a non-anonymous poster...

"Gee anonymous your vapid argument of appealing to emotion has no effect, I lost many of my liberties that day with the patriot act that was written before 9/11 and the loss of trust in some branches of government." 

So recognizing that you have a right to your own opinions... I also have a right to my opinions... and here they are:

  1. You seem like quite an angry man... capable of little empathy... to lose 12 friends on 9/11 is significant and should have at least been acknowledged.   To respond in such an angry way to someone's pain says a lot about who you are as a human being.  You remind me of 4th grade bully on the playground... with the whole world revolving around you and your perspectives.
  2. Many governments "help" in numerous ways within the borders of other countries... ranging from meddling to outright overthrow of the existing governments... so to single out Israel as the mastermind... is well a little skewed.  
  3. I did take you up on your dare to read the links... and your first source is well... let me say... a little light... and your second source... let me say... a little biased. 
  4. To suggest that the events of 9/11 were developed to convince the population to give up freedoms in the interest of their personal safety... well I don't have a comment for how ridiculous I feel that is.
  5. And to think that Israel would be the mastermind behind 9/11 and sacrifice so many of their own... is a little incredulous.

So continue on spewing out your anti-semitic bullshit... but it doesn't fly with this gal.  And there is little you can say to intimidate me... but I am sure you will try with all the bluster and bravado you can manage... so good luck  :-)

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 17:19 | Link to Comment MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

MinnieNice,

You have called him out and I acknowledge I am in the process of "not minding my own business."

I further acknowledge that when I saw him post that opinion, I kind of groaned.

Why?

Cause I like Apocalypse Now. I respect most of what I see him post, look forward to it a little when I see Marlon above a post. He does not post much.

I too would have wanted to see him be more sensitive regarding the losses people have sustained. But I don't see all the things you have accused him of. He is not a bully. He is not, as near as I can tell, racist. Could be I am dense. And everyone can thoink on each other and attack each other and quite frankly I don't know you so it does not really matter, but what the hell. I am stepping in and saying this guy has been pretty consistent, I enjoy his posts, I enjoy you.

And he may never see any of this!

Please be open to the possibility that there has been a misunderstanding. I am open to it that I am wrong, he is anti-semetic, and a bully, but that is not what I have seen in the past. What you may be seeing you don't like is male socialization which priviledges logic/efficiency over sociability/concern for others. It is a way of knowing clash.

I will be interested to see what happens next. I will learn alot about the functioning of my own radar regarding blog posts and their posters.

Sat, 10/17/2009 - 17:37 | Link to Comment MinnesotaNice
MinnesotaNice's picture

Hey MsCreant...

I am always open to the possibility that there has been a misunderstanding... and I also agree that male socialization escapes me from time-to-time :-)

I agree that some of his posts are insightful... but this one imo was over the top... and likely I may have gone a little over the top because of that fact.  And you are right... he may never see these posts... and if so we learn nothing more about the intent... and perhaps he did not mean to come off so callous to another person's tragedy. 

Thanks for your perspectives... and as you say it will be interesting to see what happens next. 

 

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!