Stay up-to-date via RSS!

Via Bellatrys, LondonYank has a Dkos diary revealing exactly where the story that Iran was going to slap Godwin’s law around a bit story came from:

Amir Teheri, AKA “Iranian expatriates” as the YNetNews report described him, a rather interesting use of the plural I feel.

Now while I half expect the charge that I might happily poo-poo any random ex-pat Iranian for no better reason than he says mean things about Iran just as the US Government is gearing up for YAIORMC (or Yet Another Invasion of an Oil Rich Muslim Country), and that I am therefore a paranoid and shrill leftist, to be leveled my way in writing all this, Amir Taheri is a real piece of work.

Aside from being a WingNut Daily writer, like the inscrutable Vox Day, he is also author of a rather interesting review of someone else’s Neo-Con manifesto entitled “NeoConservatism: Why we need it“, which I think anyone who’s not a actively a Neo-con shill will admit, puts Amir into the category of “propagandist” without to much room for maneuverability.

Highlights from the little unrestrained ideological gushing (which surely earns the word, reading like nothing less than the smell of a teenage girl’s damp panties as her hawt Teacher brushes past her during class) in the middle of the piece include such gems as;

But neo-conservatism is also hated by the remnants of the left who have not yet recovered from the shock of the Soviet Union’s sudden collapse. They blame the early neo-conservatives under President Ronald Reagan for policies that made it impossible for the USSR to continue its existence at any level. The vast majority of those who oppose neo-conservatism, however, are liberals in the West who sincerely believe that it is no business of the Western powers to save other nations from their despotic rulers. These liberals argue that different nations have different cultures that are all equally worthy of respect. And since the West has no means of knowing whether or not the people of, say Burma, really wish to be freed from their military regime there is no moral justification for regime change.

…so to recap, The Left, evil incarnate, friend to all Stalins (like Gamera!), protector of despots, hater of the tyrant destroyer krushchev Reagan (who didn’t sell arms to Osama Bin Laden or support the Taliban in afghanistan, not after the canonization at any rate), who openly flaunt our deep seated hatred for the people of Burma, because the West obviously has never heard the name Aung Sang Suu Kyi, damn us! Which wouldn’t jump out so much to me if I hadn’t done charity work with Burma Campaign UK in ’03, a group that had to take the “neo-conservative” Labor government of britain to court in 1999 after they argued that sanctions against the Burmese Regime was illegal, in much the same way that Reagan argued that sanctions against apartheid south africa wouldn’t do any good.

Or indeed, in much the same manner that Neo-Cons have routinely argued was doing no good against Saddam during the build up to the Iraq Invasion.

And of course, such utter fabrications should be no surprise coming from a man who, in 2005 during the Paris Riots, Declared:

It is now clear that a good portion of France’s Muslims not only refuse to assimilate into “the superior French culture,” but firmly believe that Islam offers the highest forms of life to which all mankind should aspire.

Of course, as the rioting was neither organized, to the point where fatwas by the national Muslim organisations of france condemning the riots were flatly ignored by the youths involved, especially those second generation portugese immigrants who got involved in the riots, who I can guess, knowing the portugese and their inscrutable hispanic ways after all, were probably the mysterious and unknown “some” who Amir says “are even calling for the areas where Muslims form a majority of the population to be reorganized on the basis of the “millet” system of the Ottoman Empire: Each religious community (millet) would enjoy the right to organize its social, cultural and educational life in accordance with its religious beliefs.” This was of course written from the comfort of his London crib of course, not having been near those sections of France in his life.

Of course, Amir reveals that the true cause for the riots was not racism and marginalization of France’s ghetto youth, no of course not, the real person to blame is of course Stalin;

In these suburban towns, built in the 1950s in imitation of the Soviet social housing of the Stalinist era, people live in crammed conditions, sometimes several generations in a tiny apartment, and see “real French life” only on television.

Because the employment discrimination and police harrassment was as nothing compared to the Stalin Rays produced by things like the Council Estates of Amir’s adopted home town of London, England, who utilize a similar architectural and social concept, and thus produce an undeniable link between “Stalinist” Collectivism and the 7/7 bombings!

But wait! Amir can prove his heavily biased and Neo-Con friendly ways in an even more batshit fashion!

You know I’ve often found myself wondering, while my mind idles during a dull period of the work day, “Mildred, Where is the country that Bill Clinton, a former president of the United States, feels ideologically most at home? And before you answer, remember that the condition that such a country must fulfill is that it must hold several consecutive elections that produce 70 percent majorities for “liberals and progressives.”

Well Amir holds nothing back in selectively quoting from this interview Clinton had in february last year, declaring that Clinton “feels ideologically most at home” is no where else but Iran!

Of course, as Clinton does nothing more or less than praise the people in Iran’s “moderate” camp that opposes the Komeini adoring fundies of Iran’s government, who Amir also often proclaims a hatred for, though this piece does make me question that somewhat, (and to get an idea of what “moderate” means in Iranian politics, they are for the hanging of homosexuals and the stoning of adulterous women, but are “pro-west”, or roughly equivalent to “centrist” democrats just before an election in other words) and who clinton “identifies with” out of all the groups in Iran, which is a rather more nuanced concept than most wingnuts can manage I guess.

Of course, in a surprise twist, Amir then goes on to absolutely slam the American Two Party System of Democracy, noting that “while there is no democracy without elections there can be elections without democracy” after informing us that “elections in the Islamic Republic were as meaningless as those held in the Soviet Union? Did he not know that all candidates had to be approved by the “Supreme Guide”, and that no one from opposition is allowed to stand?” and that “such terms as “progressive” and “liberal” are used by the mullas as synonyms for “apostate”, a charge that carries a death sentence?”

Don’t you just love Canada, eh? Where Ann Coulter (who’s possibly the current head of Iran’s Supreme Council*) apparently wanders the street, spraying graffiti, urine and eating the brains of the living no doubt, on her off days.

No voter irregularities get mentioned of course and if a NeoCon propagandist like Amir can’t find any reason to question whether the parties that did make it onto the Iranian ballot were voted into power fairly then they must be okay, especially in contrast to the unanimously elected reigns of the Soviet Tzars, or the 90%-100% voting majorities that voted for the coalition approved parties (after a few false starts obviously and some voting irregularities of course) in the seemingly endless supply of post-Saddam era Iraqi elections (if at first the votes don’t come out right, try, try again).

All of which, reminds me of something you said in your review of NeoConservatism: Why We Need It Amir;

Murray believes that good and evil do exist as distinct categories and could be readily identified by anyone in possession of a system of values.

All of which logically means that you’ve either proven Murray objectively wrong, or that you don’t possess a system of values.

Maybe you should try taking a walk through Canada sometime Amir, maybe Ann can teach you the true meaning of the term “convert or die”.

*not really

This entry was posted on Sunday, May 21st, 2006 at 7:10 pm and is filed under Filtered Propaganda. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.