☫ HSBC censored ad

Analysis  Our secularist society's ban on reality

HSBC censored ad on women in Iran

☫ Wikileaks disinformation

Analysis  Information or web 2.0 propaganda pamphlet?

What Wiki'Leaks' is really all about

☫ CNN wishes terrorist 'good luck'

Opinions  Warning: Method works in 'special' cases only

How to wish a terrorist 'good luck'      and keep your job in CNN

☫ What 'human rights' meant

Opinions  Blair and Clinton help put accusations in perspective

What was meant by 'human rights'

☫ Quran burning

Opinions  Gone-wrong or standard secularism?

Quran burning day

☫ A criminal's last will

Analysis  When 'humanism' doesn't serve human beings, but political agendas

If Teresa Lewis was Iranian...           or if Sakineh Mohammadi was not

☫ US regime change attempts

Retransmissions  Because it is always OK when we do it | by Eva Golinger

Washington sets up Venezuela, Iran    regime change student networks [1]

☫ 2009 CIA coup attempt in Iran

The road to the 2009 Iran coup attempt Part 4
 

☫ 2009 CIA coup attempt in Iran

The road to the Iran 2009 coup attempt Part 3

Where did the backwardness go?

When the the image they sold you of an Iran oppressed by backwards Mullahs does not fit with the Islamic Republic's records in science, you can smell something utterly wrong with everything you have ever been told about it.

When early this week Mrs. Clinton claimed Iran was moving towards a military dictatorship, I am sure she never expected her warmonger caricature to be undermined in a matter of days by her very own scientific community. To her frustration, Iran is not only declining to join the US tendency in the region of plaguing it with military dictatorships and occupations, but teaching the world lessons in science in the middle of a planet-wide economic crisis and the toughest of global blockades.

☫ 2009 CIA coup attempt in Iran: The green path of wishful thinking (Part 2)

The road to the 2009 Iran coup attempt Part 2

☫ 2009 CIA coup attempt in Iran: The green path of wishful thinking (Part 1)

The road to the 2009 Iran coup attempt Part 1

Clinton admits US role in Iran 'velvet revolution' unrest

> While some responsible of the attempt of 'velvet revolution' against Iran are facing trials in Tehran and admitting cooperation with foreign powers, intelligence agencies and terrorist groups, the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, makes her own confessions.

Tribute to Marwa Sherbini & Neda Soltan

> I made this video as my personal take on the deaths of these two martyrs of a global war against spirituality: Marwa Sherbini (Egyptian) stabbed to death in a German courtroom by a hater of Islam, and Neda Soltan (Iranian) one of the victims of the artificial unrest in Iran encouraged by media and its associates (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) eager to wipe genuine Islam from that country and forcefully impose secularism on a mainly Muslim population.

خِرمن
兄
弟
Germán

Iran elections: From one 'other side'

> This is a video I made one day before the Iranian elections of 2009, noticing that the world media and its partners (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) had built up an atmosphere to justify protests and unrest in Iran after the imminent and predictable landslide victory of Ahmadinejad. Sadly, they didn't heed my warning on the opening of the video, and those plotters behind the protests got the dead people that they needed to continue with the artificial chaos (just like that they play with and use human life),

The images - illustrating the prevailing atmosphere in Iran before the elections - were completely censored by Western media, which only showed scenes of Moussavi supporters, making people believe they had a chance of going to a second round or even winning, and that his clear defeat - obvious to anyone aware of the Iranian reality - would mean there was a "fraud".

The next videos are of a couple of Iranian friends who I managed to give a space in Western media (an American radio), so they could express their views and try to counter a bit the bias of mainstream media outlets. I took the audio from the radio show in which they participated, and added ad-hoc scenes.

> This is my friend Setareh (24 years old) from Isfahan,

> And this is my friend Mostafa (23 years old) from Mashhad,

خِرمن
兄
弟
Germán

Conclusions about protests in Iran

« Color revolution » fails in Iran

Date: June 27th, 2009

Source: VoltaireNet

Why Should I Look Down On The Iranian People’s Choice?

Date: June 23rd, 2009

Source: VoltaireNet

خِرمن
兄
弟
Germán

Key readings on post-elections Iran

Please make use of critical thinking

The CIA And The Iranian Experiment
Date: June 19th, 2009
Source: VoltaireNet

The 'Stolen Elections' Hoax
Date: June 18th, 2009
Source: Global Research

Based On Terror Free Tomorrow Poll, Ahmadinejad Victory Was Expected
Date: June 14th, 2009
Source: The Huffington Post

Iran Finds US-Backed MKO Fingermarks In Riots
Date: June 21st, 2009
Source: PressTV

Rafsanjani Playing Role In Iran Unrest
Date: June 21st, 2009
Source: Associated Press

Iranian Protests: Another US Orchestrated "Color Revolution"?
Date: June 20th, 2009
Source: Counterpunch

Israeli Effort To Destabilize Iran Via Twitter
Date: June 15th
Source: Charting Stocks

Polling In Iran Shows Real Support For Ahmadinejad
Date: June 14th, 2009
Source: Washington Post

Moussavi Supporter Admits Elections' Numbers Fit
Date: June 14th, 2009
Source: The Independent [Extremely biased but contains key anecdote]

US Poll Shows Ahmadinejad Leading in Iran's Election
Date: June 8th, 2009
Source: VOA [US gov't anti-IRI media]

خِرمن
兄
弟
Germán

Small step for man, a giant leap for a soul

Ian and two other German students I met on my last stay in Tehran, made it by train, crossing Turkey, starting their tour in northwesternly Tabriz; a couple from Oman, spending their honeymoon in the Shirazi oasis, had come through the Persian Gulf; and a guy from Karachi who loved Isfahan (who can blame him!), took a bus running along the Eastern highway crossing at Zanjan from Pakestan, to meet with the piece of land he liked so much.

As if it happening wasn't enough

I arrived to Persia exactly 600 years before having arrived to the West. When leaving it, I came to notice the only ineludible mistake made during my trip: 

Not having planned to stay there for good.

Too simple to believe in it .·.

A country has been interested in attacking another one since long ago. For press to be stating that it has been planning it for some days now, can mean nothing but that war is something just a few weeks ahead no matter what.

The saddest part is that I really feel that there’s just too few people in this world -even considering the ones legally related to the defending country- who will experience such a deep depression as me when TV stations broadcast the first images of the attack. Not only because I am against modern day wars –where a soldier can't even struggle for defending his country-, which would be a too cheap and comfortable statement to make, according to the situation, but because this new episode in the war against our spirits has already started to be lost, while it was so easy and simple to make out of our victory the refreshed starting point for the years to come. Not a single bomb has been dropped and already all hopes are lost.

It all goes a lot further than just noticing the victims escaping from the country in every possible sense, where not only political borders are left behind, but also powerful traditions, unifying religions, and a priceless cultural spirit all become avoided. It is right there where we have started losing the battle, not in having insufficient military strength or in lacking conciliatory diplomatic alternatives. It is what we give up to what makes us weaker, it is what we leave behind that which haunts us.

What hope is there in a devastating war where all that is left to rely on are just some ideals, some good will and picturesque dreams? I would say that a lot. And I would say so not only because I am a young idealist, but also because of the real war’s purposes. Who was naive enough to think a previous war answered to the need of erradicating massive destruction weapons, might be satisfied with the explanation of a new battle to fight against nuclear proliferation. But I guess there is people a lot more inquisitive than the ones pleased with CNN or Michael Moore’s entertaining approaches to supposedly controversial matters.

If one would want to destroy nuclear weapons, why would one secretly encourage the enemy’s country minorities, and finance terrorist groups to invent the idea of national division? Of course the real purpose is to end up with their revolution, but is it only because such revolution is a constant threat to world peace? Is it only because they would prefer more efficient routes for the oil business? Why are the attacked ones always the bad ones? It is not like the western civilization would be defending here some priceless ideals. I know it, I live here. If a tourist would ask me to take him to the most important temple in my city I would probably take him to the biggest city's shopping center I know of. What God is praised there? Probably money in the first place, and not less important, every individuality. Everyone’s whims, everyone’s childish desires, everyone’s selfishness. Is that to be defended destroying another country? Well, perhaps what is really to defend in the west is freedom, tolerancy and diversity. Sounds nice, doesn't it? Ok, so let's stick to those for the moment since we seem to be running out of things to defend over here. What an interesting way of defending those ideals precisely by depriving another country of freedom, not to tolerate national systems that we don’t feel comfortable about, and disintegrating -as much as we can- cultures that are different to ours.

No. No reasons please me. Not only because contradictory ideals were never real ideals for a start, but because it is not reasons what I am looking for. As I said: I live here. And that implies I can feel what is happening here. That implies I can taste the dessert's dust surrounding what our western culture intends to stand for. Nothing. Chaos. Universal homogeneity. A universal language, a universal culture, and a universal religion called indifference. That is what we stand for. That is the reason why the biblical God punished the builders of Babel’s zigurat: not only because they were trying to compare to Him –aren't western science and technology like that?-, but mainly –and always forgotten- because their ideals were the ones of becoming one Single People.

Then there is hope for us. Because they might kill thousands, they might destroy the military power, but that wont make them win, because it is not that what they are looking for. They can, and will make us cry, and make out of frustration a shadow for us to follow every step. But that is as far as we can let it go. Because if we can't stop bombs falling, we can beat an overwhelming opposing force by not losing faith, by standing for the centuries that preceeded us. It will certainly not avoid people dying or suffering the consequences of such an unfair war, but it can surely make of us all soldiers, and if it is true what we say about caring for our people, our culture, and our spirits, we will fight: never selling our souls no matter that the shiny modern world gets better advertisement out there in the streets. We will never allow our own comfort to become a justification, and we will never let money to be praised.

Some people might run away: they really think that there are no chances because their buildings aren’t shinning as bright as others. But it doesn’t matter: they were never from that country to start. Some others, from the attacking country, feel profoundly embarassed about it: they really feel that they will never win anything if their leaders keep fighting for the ones interested in universal homogeinity. But that's alright: their country is not the one their passports state. We all have belonged to both countries at least once in life –since I am not necessarily talking about Iran and the USA-, and it has always been up to us which one wins. It is simply a matter of faith.

خِرمان