Sunday, September 30, 2012





ارزشمنـدترین خانـه جـهان در تـهران

هیاهوی خیابان امام خمینی تهران و میدان حسن آباد آنقدر زیاد است که کمتر کسی درب یک موزه نبش خیابان شیخ هادی را پیدا می کند. به گزارش مهر، "موزه مقدم" درست در میان های و هوی بازار خرید و رفت و آمد مردم به بانک مجاورش قرار دارد. همین که از ورودی هشتی خانه وارد شوی، زندگی ماشینی را پشت سر می گذاری. دیوارهای این خانه اجازه ورود این همه هیاهو را به حریم خانه که ارزشمندترین خانه جهان نام دارد، نمی دهد.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

ارزشمندترین خانه جهان به واسطه داشتن اشیای تاریخی و گرانبها به گرانترین خانه جهان در سالهای دهه 30 و 40 توسط پروفسور پوپ مورخ آمریکایی که مقاله ای با عنوان بررسی هنرهای ایران در مجله "سپید و سیاه" نوشته بود، معروف شد و هنوز هم جزو یکی از منحصر به فردترین خانه های ایران و جهان است.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

این خانه متعلق به محسن مقدم پسر کوچکتر احتساب الملک شهردار دوره ناصر الدین شاه قاجار است.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

محسن از کودکی به نقاشی علاقه زیادی نشان می داد. در مکتب کمال الملک نقاشی یاد گرفت حتی در تابلوی معروف کمال الملک از کلاس درسش نیز محسن مقدم به تصویر کشیده شده است محسن برای تحصیل نقاشی به همراه برادرش حسن، به سوئیس رفت و در زمان جنگ جهانی دوم برگشت اما دومین بار برای یادگیری باستان شناسی و تاریخ سفر کرد و این بار با دست پر همراه گروه های باستان شناسی در برخی از محوطه های تاریخی مانند دیلمان و شوش به کاوش و نظارت و بازرسی پرداخت.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.net

او جزو اولین باستان شناسان ایرانی بود که به همراه اساتید باستان شناسی در محوطه های تاریخی فعالیت می کرد.

گروه اینترنتی پرشیـن استار | www.Persian-Star.org

محسن مقدم از شاگردان استاد کمال الملک، باستان شناس و مؤسس دانشگاه هنرهای زیبا و استاد دانشگاه تهران بود که با همسر فرانسوی زبانش تصمیم گرفتند همه هم و غم خود را برای برپا کردن یک موزه از اشیای گرانبهایی که در حال از بین رفتن است بگذارند.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

زوج باسواد عمارت مقدم از همان سالهای ابتدایی ازدواجشان تصمیم میگیرند که هیچ وقت ازدواج نکنند .آنها نگهداری از اشیای تاریخی موجود در خانه شان را فرزندان خود می پنداشتند که باید برای نسلهای بعد نگهداری شوند.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

خانه ای که اکنون به عنوان موزه مقدم از آن یاد می شود از خانه های مجلل دوره قاجار و دارای بخش های اندرونی و بیرونی است .اما در کنار تمام اجزای این عمارت مجلل، کاشی های زرین فام و گرانبهایی را می توان یافت که مقدم برای پاسداری از آنها، جایی مناسب را در دیوار برای آنها در نظر گرفته بود تا از آسیب در امان بمانند برخی از این کاشی ها در دنیا منحصر به فرد هستند.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

اما کلکسیون پارچه استاد مقدم نیز جزو یکی از کلکسیون های پارچه در دنیاست. این پارچه های قیمتی اکنون به صورت فریز شده در داخل مجموعه نگهداری می شود. امکان بازدید عموم از آنها وجود ندارد, جز یکی از پارچه ها که آن هم درون قاب شیشه ای نگهداری می شود.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

در کنار تمام در و دیوارهای کاشی کاری شده و زیبای عمارت مقدم، اتاق کوچکی راه ورودی به زیرزمین خانه است که تمام در و دیوار آن با سنگ های قیمتی و نیمه قیمتی و صدف و مرجان های زیبا نقش داده شده است.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

مقدم در دفترچه خاطراتش نحوه بدست آوردن بسیاری از اشیای تاریخی موجود در این خانه را شرح داده و گفته که یا آنها را از دستفروش های بازار و یا از مالکانی که قصد تخریب خانه های تاریخی خود را با تمام ملحقاتش داشتند خریده است.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

برخی دیگر از این اشیا درحال خروج از کشور بودند و یا در حراجی های کشورهای بیگانه دست به دست می شدند که مقدم با ثروت خانوادگی اش آنها را خریده و به ایران برگردانده است. اما بسیاری دیگر از این اشیای تاریخی توسط سفرا و فرهنگیانی که مهمان مقدم بودند به این خانواده هدیه داده شده است مانند اشیایی که حدس زده می شود از بیت المقدس به او هدیه شده است.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.net

اما در بین تمام این آثار برخی مانند سفال قرمز رنگ چشمه علی که متعلق به هزاره پنجم قبل از میلاد است، قدمت زیادی دارد که هیچ کس نمی داند چطور سر از این خانه در آورده است، به همین دلیل اداره کل موزه های دانشگاه تهران که اکنون مدیریت این موزه را بر عهده دارد می خواهد به بررسی مبدا این اشیا بپردازد.

گروه اینترنتی پرشیـن استـار | www.Persian-Star.org

مقدم در سال 1351 خانه پدری خود را با تمام آثار ارزشمندش وقف دانشگاه تهران کرد و در سال 1366 دار فانی را وداع گفت.

گروه اینترنتی پرشین استار | www.Persian-Star.org

پس از مرگش نیز همسرش در سال 69 تولیت موزه را در اختیار مستقیم دانشگاه تهران قرار داد و سرانجام پس از چند سال عملیات مرمت، در مرداد ماه سال 88 در این خانه به روی بازدیدکنندگان گشوده شد.
The Tender Tyranny of American Liberalism Redux

['Notes' in this article are linked to in the online page- should you want to check out the references]
Liberalism itself is a synthetic creation of the power structure, a humanitarian facade behind which the dirty work of policing the world can go on uninterrupted by idealistic spasms in the body politic.[1]
Journalist Eric Norden’s perceptive critique, “The Tender Tyranny of American Liberalism,” appeared in the early years of the Vietnam era, accurately identifying how a predominantly liberal worldview projected by the ruling technocracy and its intellectual adherents acted to subordinate genuinely Left-progressive ideas and social movements at home while ensuring the furtherance of US imperial designs abroad. Today Norden’s insights are worthy of reconsideration in light of how the Left remains largely devoid of its own voice or vision and more than ever liberalism provides ideological cover for aggressive Anglo-American militarism, the prerogatives of transnational corporations, and an ever-expanding police state.
 
Since the 1800s liberalism and its utilitarian philosophical bearings have been a central intellectual and popular means by which gunboat and “free trade” diplomacies alike are justified to the public at large.[2] It is also a foremost rationale through which aggressive social control is exerted on the population at home, more recently by political leaders who symbolize and embody real social struggles in American history and thereby may exercise a more valid claim to “feeling their constituents’ pain.”
The modern-day liberal handily anticipates and deflects criticism of her policies through a trumpeted alarm for a variety of social and political issues—student performance, public health, environmental degradation and the alleged atrocities of foreign enemies, waving about an array of solutions, from “educational initiatives” and “carbon credits,” to “humanitarian” military actions.
 
Norden argues how the era of American liberalism that began with Franklin Roosevelt’s election established a combined cult of personality and Keynesian welfare state that has diminished the possibilities for a more radical and participatory politics. A few short years following the establishment of Students for a Democratic Society, many in the Left continued to be hoodwinked and sidetracked by an oppressive militarized state effusing liberal bromides. For example, the Great Society’s ambitions obscured the reality that the American-orchestrated “genocide in Vietnam [was] a liberal genocide,” SDS President Carl Oglesby asserted.
[T]he menacing coalition of industrial and military power, the brutality of the blitzkrieg we are waging against Vietnam, the ominous signs around us that heresy may no longer be permitted … [are] creatures, all of them, of a government that since 1932 has considered itself to be fundamentally liberal.[3]
In light of this, a miracle of social engineering and propaganda is manifest in a population that readily identifies despotism with Hitler’s Nazism or Mussolini’s fascism, while the exploits of authoritarian social controllers carried out under the cloak of liberalism remain almost entirely unexamined. “Think of the men who now engineer” Vietnam, Oglesby writes.
[T]hose who study the maps, give the commands, push the buttons, and tally the dead: [National Security Adviser McGeorge] Bundy, [Secretary of Defense Robert] McNamara, [Secretary of State Dean] Rusk, [Ambassador to South Vietnam Henry Cabot] Lodge, [Ambassador to the United Nations Arthur] Goldberg, the President himself. They are not moral monsters. They are all honorable men. They are all liberals.”[4]
 
Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta, Susan Rice, Samantha Powers and John Brennan are the ideological heirs of America’s holocaust in Indochina. Their warm and caring humanitarian patina allows the monstrous US-NATO war machine to proceed without question or incident. They plan the drone kill lists and oversee the accelerated tours of duty for US servicepersons. Their associates decide which branches of Al Qaeda mercenaries will be armed and dispatched into civilian areas to maim, kill and destroy. The wars and dislocation in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria are now undeniably liberal wars, carried out by our moral, liberal leaders.
 
Closer to home Ben Bernanke and Timothy Geithner, strong advocates and practitioners of Keynesian fiscal alchemy, at once monetize the war debt while disenfranchising the working class, retirees and poor by creating billions of dollars, most of which are then forked over to corrupt bankers and hedge fund managers who proceed to sit on the money or further inflate the markets through speculation. Bernanke, Geithner, and their technocratic peers at the Fed and Treasury are cultured and thoughtful liberals, professing heartfelt concern for “jobs” and social uplift.

Until recently, Cass Sunstein was Obama’s Information Czar. The law scholar professed an appreciation for “rational” public discourse and exchange. Yet in his academic writings Sunstein exhibited unbridled disdain for unconventional speculation and critique of government activities and policies (“rumors” and “conspiracy theories” in liberal parlance) to the extent of advocating COINTELPRO-style “cognitive infiltration” of groups discussing and circulating such ideas. Sunstein’s liberal credentials are indisputable.
Over the past several decades America’s chief war mongers and advocates of technocratic social control exude the aura of kind and caring masters who have been unwillingly forced into war due to humanitarian concerns; a “responsibility to protect” foreign peoples from the alleged oppression of their leaders, many of which are modern, pro-western US allies. The fruits of the violent Arab Spring color revolutions are a case in point.
 
Things are Growing Better
 
Today the world is told by the Nobel Peace Prize president how a new era of humanitarian interventionism has arrived through the establishment of the Susan Brown and Samantha Powers-inspired Atrocities Prevention Board. According to Presidential Study Directive 10 of August 4, 2011 laying the groundwork for the APB, and completed during the ultra-violent US and NATO-orchestrated guerrilla war and air bombardment of Libya, Obama identifies the prevention of mass atrocities and genocide as “a core national security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States.”[5] Almost as if on cue, the administration’s liberal backers applaud such maneuvers.
Much like Vietnam, R2P military ventures are carried out under the aegis of liberalism and would be roundly condemned by liberals as so much subterfuge were they meted out by a professed “conservative” administration. In reality, had Obama been in office and embarked on the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq while uttering the appropriate humanitarian-sounding shibboleths he would have succeeded with nary a peep from most if not all of the Left-liberal intelligentsia.
 
In the 1950s and 60s liberalism constituted the ideological armature of the Cold War consensus which provided for the massive Keynesian military buildup and the eventual recolonization of the Third World under brutal IMF and World Bank auspices. At the same time, however, social programs such as Medicare and the expansion of public higher education were in their infancy, thus providing concrete appeasement for the US population. Norden points to the Great Society as liberalism’s “giant con, designed to assure the American people that, whatever horrors we perpetrate abroad, our hearts are still in the right places; whatever injustices persist at home, things are growing better.“[6]
In the absence of such compensation the American public today is afforded a simulacra of 1960s social struggle while similar imperial wars are waged abroad and barely a finger is lifted as America’s infrastructure crumbles, industrial jobs are continually outsourced, and the earth sustains what are likely her greatest environmental catastrophes in the Gulf of Mexico oil “spill” and the dire Fukushima nuclear meltdowns. In fact, the American liberal establishment overlooks such trifling events, content in the notion that it has “overcome” racism with an African American in the highest office, even as he busies himself dutifully enacting the policies of zombie banks, insurance and pharmaceutical conglomerates, and the military-industrial-surveillance complex.

Liberalism’s Enduring Quest for Ideological Conformity


[D]espite their protestations of moderation, liberals are the most ruthless of ideological fanatics. If challenged on this point, the average lib will ooze the milk of human kindness from every pore, his eyes melting over to the consistency of hot butterscotch sauce. Is he not against “extremism” in every shape and form? But those who really cross liberalism are pursued with cold implacable fury, up to and even beyond the grave.[7]
While American liberalism exudes understanding and open-mindedness as its principal outward expressions, it is not satiated until it has achieved consensus on its terms and subsumed all intellectual challengers. What is more, it seethes in the notion that one or more political outlooks exist apart from what its disciples have endorsed and mandated. Thus efforts are methodically employed to discipline public discourse and thought along lines favorable to the liberal project of political (read: cognitive) correctness.
 
Much like in the 1960s, as Norden suggests, one method for accomplishing this is through liberals’ relativism. In this view there is “no absolute truth, no absolute good and evil, permitting only a monochromatic wasteland of differing shades of gray.” Such an outlook “leads to despair and pessimism; and ultimately, to a nihilistic manipulation of any and all values. It also, of course, provides a ready handle with which to dismiss all ‘extremism,’ and to proclaim, as liberal guru Daniel Bell does so triumphantly, ‘The End of Ideology.’”[8]
In the 1960s the liberals’ wholesale destruction of Indochina and its peoples to forestall the alleged “domino effect” was the most visible and cold-blooded of their ventures. Yet liberalism’s efforts to chasten and guide public discussion regarding the domestic activities of the deep state for which it stands are oft-forgotten. The assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Malcolm X (later Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy) are especially poignant examples of liberalism’s overwhelming pretense that has only intensified in recent years.
When Malcolm X persistently violated liberal discursive protocols by straying from the milquetoast center through his intellectually incisive observations on American race relations he was routinely castigated in liberal venues for his transgressions. Shortly before Malcolm’s death he told his biographer, “Watch how they will accuse me of hate.” True to form, the traditional liberal venues sprang to life barely after Malcolm’s corpse was cold.
“Malcolm X’s life was strangely and pitifully wasted,” the New York Times declared the day after the civil rights leader’s murder.
 
But this was because he did not seek to fit into society or into the life of his people … The world he saw through those horn-rimmed glasses of his was distorted and dark. But he made it darker still with his exaltation of fanaticism. Yesterday someone came out of that darkness he spawned and killed him.[9]
The hugely egotistical Lyndon Johnson, second only to FDR in his liberal credentials, simultaneously waged the Vietnam War and the so-called “War on Poverty.” When Martin Luther King Jr. called Johnson out for his extravagant hypocrisy in his notable April 4, 1967 “Beyond Vietnam” address at Riverside Church, Johnson fumed with indignation and subsequent evidence indicates high federal government involvement in King’s execution exactly one year later.[10]
 
Along similar lines today, public figures critiquing liberalism’s foremost projects—the Affordable Care Act, “global warming” or “climate change,” President Obama’s biography, or Osama bin Laden’s uncertain departure—are correspondingly singled out for blistering and slanderous condemnation complete with tailor-made epithets: “climate [change] denier,” “birther,” “deather,” “hater,” even “racist” and “white supremacist.”
 
Given these excesses in political guile, is it any surprise that one of the most powerful contemporary bastions of liberalism and shameless appropriators of the civil rights struggle, the Southern Poverty Law Center,[11] classifies an activist organization called We Are Change as a “hate group,” simply because its members have routinely questioned the US government’s often implausible explanations of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks? True to its liberal bona fides, if Malcolm X were alive now the SPLC would no doubt label him an extremist, hater, and racist—perhaps even a conspi-racist.
 
Little has changed since 1965. The rabble capable of articulating the world as they see it are usually clumsy at learning how to identify and navigate certain avenues of “tasteful” dissent–the select few open to those who recognize and accept liberalism’s definition of and monopoly over reason itself.

“Moving Forward” and the Disavowal of Historical Agency
 
Speaking for the liberal intelligentsia in 1964, at a time when there was considerable skepticism over the establishment’s account of JFK’s assassination, historian Richard Hofstadter warned of the dangers awaiting intellectuals who might drift into the treacherous waters of “the paranoid style.” In an ideological move characteristic of an openly totalitarian society and taken to a whole new level by the liberal thought police at organizations such as the SPLC, Hofstadter was more than subtly suggesting how journalists and academics alike jeopardized their standing by questioning the state along certain lines.
 
Once the evidence surrounding JFK’s death pointed to “a well-organized conspiracy within agencies of the federal government,” Norden reminded his readers, “the liberals looked the other way. JFK could be mourned, but not avenged: too many apple-carts would be upset in the process.” In the end liberals fell in lockstep, “moving forward” while simultaneously betraying the principles they claimed to uphold and once and for all denying their own historical agency.
 
Since 2001 some of the most vocal detractors of the 9/11 Truth movement have not been conservatives but rather left-liberal intellectuals, the foremost among these being Noam Chomsky. Chomsky’s pronouncements and leadership in this regard are exemplary yet also consistent with his liberal technocratic forebears, setting the tone for the collective silence of left academicians and the so-called progressive alternative media. “This [September 11] attack was surely an enormous shock and surprise to the intelligence services of the West,” Chomsky commented,[12] echoing the early responses of the Bush administration almost to the word.
 
Chomsky’s remarks deserve attention given his notoriety among the left. “One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement,” he remarked shortly after the event, “has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis.”[13]
 
The “radical” intellectual guru also helped to establish the liberals’ overall spineless stance toward September 11 and put into motion the eventually fractured 9/11 Truth-antiwar movement. Such cowardice was readily on display in the establishment left’s main news and opinion outlets. As political analyst Webster Tarpley notes, shortly after 9/11 The Nation
produced an anthology of its most important post-9/11 articles. A key contributor to this collection was Jonathan Schell, who wrote in his introduction: “It was clear from the start that Islamic fundamentalists were responsible, almost certainly in the service of the Al Qaeda terrorist organization, but the magnitude of the force involved remain hazy in the extreme.”[14]
Confining itself to historical examples indicating how political intrigue and coups are a mainstay in foreign lands, liberalism stubbornly clings to the childlike notion that America is that rare exception where political leaders and institutions have the very best of intentions and carry out policies with the overall public interest in mind. Those who question the avuncular goodwill of liberals’ idealizations are likely “’extremists’” with a “’conspiratorial view of history’”—tantamount to Malcolm X, 9/11 Truth, or Nazi skinhead types. Yet “history is not, of course, a succession of conspiracies,” Norden concludes. “[W]hat liberals conveniently forget was that there are conspiracies in history. The world, much less America, is not the tidy design of the League of Women Voters; it can happen here.”[15]
 
Alongside liberalism disciplining its own adherents from improper thought and thereby distracting the public from further interrogating the deep state’s role in the 1960s political assassinations or the September 11 attacks, in the past few decades alone the US public has witnessed overall liberal complicity in if not sole authority over the murderous Iraqi sanctions following the Gulf War, the above referenced unconstitutional wars waged on phony humanitarian grounds, the long-running and costly occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, slow-burn economic devastation, the gutting of the Constitution, and now under Obama’s National Defense Authorization Act a surveillance state complete with the capacity to jail or murder citizens on political grounds.
 
Americans and the citizenry of nations elsewhere have continually been asked by much of the Anglo-American intellectual and political class to direct their frustrations at swarthy-looking bogeys or the “right wing” as the causes of their rapidly transforming world. Yet the most pressing and indeed grave public concerns have largely gone unexamined and unchallenged not because of Muslim others, the “neocons,” the Koch brothers, or the cartoonish talking heads at Fox News. That such elaborate crimes persist and go unpunished attests to the enduringly profound and magnificent fraud of American liberalism and its continued short-circuiting of the American political imagination.

 

به ویدئو دو دقیقه ای زیراز 'لابی گرای' نئو کان / صهیونیست متعفن و جنگ طلب آمریکائی 'پاتریک کلاسون'(که به زبان فارسی نیز تسلط دارد) گوش دهید...او بگونه بیشرمانه زمینه سازی دروغین را برای شروع جنگ با ایران را تبلیغ ,ترویج و تشویق میکند

پیمان پایدار 

NeoCon Lobbyist - We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran



"Patrick Clawson is director of research and head of the Iran Security Initiative at the [Washington] Institute. A Persian speaker, he is the author or editor of eighteen books and studies on Iran as well as more than 150 articles on the Middle East. Previously, he served at the National Defense University, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, among other institutions." The full "affair" - i.e, luncheon on Friday September 21, 2012 - can be seen here.

Update, Sept 28, 2012: [55 min in]
Episode #224 - Secret Israeli WW3 False Flag
                    Agenda Exposed; Bombshell Interview"On tonight’s live episode of the Pete Santilli Show, Pete reveals the details of an explosive 24 minute interview he had today with Dr. Patrick Clawson, Director of Research for the Washington Institute. During the interview, Santilli asks pointed questions about Clawson’s public remarks given at a luncheon on Friday September 21, 2012. Clawson’s remarks will shock the American public; you don’t want to miss this episode! Pete Santilli is the first alternative or main stream media personality to conduct an interview with Patrick Clawson, and Clawson loses his composure when Santilli confronts him on his remarks."

Pentagon’s Shift to the Asia-PacificPartners in Global Warfare: NATO Reinforces  Region

Global Research, September 25, 2012

On September 24, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization granted Iraq the second Individual Partnership and Cooperation Programme under the auspices of the bloc’s latest military collaboration and integration framework, partners across the globe.
The latter program (for which the substantives are occasionally capitalized), NATO’s latest, incorporates to date eight nations in the broader Asia-Pacific region (including West Asia, the Middle East) that have supplied troops for the U.S.-led military organization’s war in Afghanistan under International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) command or are subsumed under NATO consultative arrangements and training programs like the Afghanistan-Pakistan-ISAF Tripartite Commission, the NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan and the NATO Training Mission – Iraq.
The partners across the globe currently are Afghanistan, Australia, Iraq, Japan, Mongolia, New Zealand, Pakistan and South Korea. Among the 50 nations providing NATO with troop contingents for the war in South Asia are additional Asia-Pacific states not covered by other international NATO partnership formats like the Partnership for Peace (22 nations in Europe, the South Caucasus and Central Asia), the Mediterranean Dialogue (seven nations in North Africa and the Middle East, with Libya to be the eighth) and the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, which targets the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates).
Those states –  Singapore and Malaysia are likely the next candidates for the new global partnership, as are Latin American troop contributors like El Salvador (present) and Colombia (announced). The inclusion of the last will mark the expansion of NATO, through memberships and partnerships, to all six inhabited continents.
In the past two years there has been discussion about NATO establishing a collective partnership arrangement, which could include individual partnerships as well, with the ten members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which are, in addition to Malaysia and Singapore, mentioned above, Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, the Philippines, Vietnam and Thailand.
During the NATO summit in Chicago this May, Secretary General Rasmussen met with what were identified as 13 partners across the globe.
Regarding the new partnership agreement with Iraq, the NATO website reports that it follows and builds upon the eight-year NATO Training Mission-Iraq, which was employed to train thousands of Iraq officers, soldiers and oil police, and “inaugurates a full-fledged partnership.” (2)
The Alliance further stated, “The signing of the partnership accord marks the formal accession of Iraq to NATO’s ‘partnerships family,’” which will create the basis for the Western alliance “assisting Iraq as it builds a modern security sector which can cooperate with international partners.”
That is, the NATO-trained Iraq armed forces are being recruited into the Western military axis’ international nexus.
Four days earlier NATO signed an Individual Partnership and Cooperation Programme with South Korea in Brussels which, the NATO press release on the occasion stated, “follows seven years of progressive engagement from a dialogue that was initiated in 2005.”
In June NATO Secretary General Rasmussen traveled to New Zealand and signed the same agreement with the nation’s prime minister, John Key.
The first Individual Partnership and Cooperation Programme was signed with Mongolia this March. (Though an agreement with the same title was signed with Switzerland in the same month.) That country borders China and Russia; in fact, of the eight current partners across the globe, three – Mongolia, Pakistan and Afghanistan – share borders with China and two others, Japan and South Korea, are its near neighbors.
In conjunction with the U.S., NATO is striving to assemble the remnants of defunct or dormant Cold War-era military blocs in the Asia-Pacific region, all modeled after NATO itselfthe Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) and the Security Treaty between Australia, New Zealand and the United States of America (ANZUS) – to replicate in the East against China what NATO expansion has accomplished in Europe over the past 13 years in relation to Russia: its exclusion, isolation and encirclement by military bases, naval deployments and interceptor missile installations.
The U.S. has recruited Japan, South Korea and Australia into its global sea- and land-based missile shield grid, with a recent report indicating the Pentagon plans to add the Philippines to the list with the deployment there of an Army Navy/Transportable Radar Surveillance mobile system of the sort already stationed in Japan, Israel and Turkey.
Following Mongolia, New Zealand, South Korea and Iraq, NATO intends to sign Individual Partnership and Cooperation Programme accords with its remaining partners across the globe: Afghanistan, Australia, Japan and Pakistan.
Like South Korea with its neighbor to the north, Japan is embroiled in a showdown with China, and Afghanistan and Pakistan are involved in armed conflicts, with NATO waging a nearly 11-year war in Afghanistan and periodic incursions and attacks across the border in Pakistan.
The formal consolidation of military partnerships with the above nations will provide NATO the rationale for direct participation in hostilities in the Asia-Pacific region as a manifestation of the bloc’s repeated claims to being a global military force.
Notes
1) Partners Across The Globe: NATO Consolidates Worldwide Military Force, http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2012/04/26/partners-across-the-globe-nato-consolidates-worldwide-military-force/
Copyright © 2012 Global Research

Dollar Hegemony in the Empire of the Damned

Global Research, September 26, 2012

Many commentators and economists wonder if the US is able to turn its ailing economy around. The reality is that it is bankrupt. However, as long as the dollar remains the world currency, the US can continue to pay its bills by simply printing more money. But once the world no longer accepts the dollar as world reserve currency, the US will no longer be able to continue to pay its way or to fund its wars by relying on what would then be a relatively valueless paper currency.
And the US realises this. Today, more than 60 per cent of all foreign currency reserves in the world are in US dollars, and the US will attempt to prevent countries moving off the dollar by any means possible. It seems compelled to do this simply because its economic infrastructure seems too weak and US corporate cartels will do anything to prevent policies that eat into their profits or serve to curtail political influence. They serve their own interests, not any notional ‘national interest’.
Paul Graig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury, notes that much of the most productive part of the US economy has been moved offshore in order to increase corporate profits. By doing so, the US has lost critical supply chains, industrial infrastructure, and the knowledge of skilled workers. According to Roberts, the US could bring its corporations back to America by taxing their profits abroad and could also resort to protective tariffs, but such moves would be contrary to the material interests of the ruling oligarchy of private interests, which hold so much sway over US politics.
So, with no solution to the crisis in site, the US is compelled to expand its predatory capitalism into foreign markets such as India and to wage imperialist wars to maintain global allegiance to the dollar and US hegemony. And this is exactly what we are seeing today as the US strategy for global supremacy is played out.
Over the past two decades, the US has extended its influence throughout Eastern Europe, many of the former Soviet states in central Asia and, among other places, in the former Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria and Pakistan. But with each passing year and each new conflict, the US has been drawing closer and closer to direct confrontation with Russia and China, particularly as it enters their backyards in Asia and as China continues to emerge as a serious global power.
Both countries are holding firm over Syria. Syria plays host to Russia’s only naval base outside of the former USSR, and Russia and China know that if the US and its proxies topple the Assad government, Tehran becomes a much easier proposition. Ideally, the US would like to install compliant regimes in Moscow and Beijing and exploiting political and ethnic divisions in the border regions of Russia and China would be that much easier if Iran fell to US interests.
A global US strategy is already in force to undermine China’s growth and influence, part of which was the main reason for setting up AFRICOM: US Africa Command with responsibility for military operations and relations across Africa. But China is not without influence, and its actions are serving to weaken the hegemony of the US dollar, thereby striking at a key nerve of US power.
China has been implementing bilateral trade agreements with a number of countries, whereby trade is no longer conducted in dollars, but in local currencies. Over the past few years,China and other emerging powers such as Russia have been making agreements to move away from the US dollar in international trade. The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China,South Africa) also plan to start using their own currencies when trading with each other. Russia and China have been using their own national currencies when trading with each other for more than a year.
A report from Africa’s largest bank, Standard Bank, recently stated:
“We expect at least $100 billion (about R768 billion) in Sino-African trade – more than the total bilateral trade between China and Africa in 2010 – to be settled in the renminbi by 2015.”
Under Saddam, Iraq was not using the dollar as the base currency for oil transactions, neither is Iran right now. Even Libya’s Muammar Gadhaffi was talking about using a gold backed dinar as the reserve currency for parts of Africa. Look what happened to Libya and Iraq as a result.
In 2000, Iraq converted all its oil transactions to euros. When U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, it returned oil sales from the euro to the dollar. Little surprise then that we are currently watching the US attempt to remove the Iranian regime via sanctions, destabilization, intimidation and the threat of all out war.
In the meantime, though, Iran is looking east to China, Pakistan and central Asia in order to counteract the effects of US sanctions and develop its economy and boost trade. In order to sustain its empire, US aggression is effectively pushing the world into different camps and a new cold war that could well turn into a nuclear conflict given that Russia, China and Pakistan all have nuclear weapons.
The US economy appears to be in terminal decline. The only way to prop it up is by lop-sided trade agreements or by waging war to secure additional markets and resources and to ensure the dollar remains the world reserve currency. Humankind is currently facing a number of serious problems. But, arguably, an empire in decline armed to the teeth with both conventional and nuclear weapons and trapped in a cycle of endless war in what must surely be a futile attempt to stave off ruin is the most serious issue of all.
Originally from the northwest of England, Colin Todhunter has spent many years in India. He has written extensively for the Deccan Herald (the Bangalore-based broadsheet), New Indian Express and Morning Star (Britain). His articles have also appeared in various other publications. His East by Northwest website is at http://colintodhunter.blogspot.com
Copyright © 2012 Global Research

Saturday, September 29, 2012

در مراسم تشییع جنازه دکتر محمدحسن گنجی

پدر علم جغرافیا و هواشناسی ایران


فریاد دکتر اقتداری و"وظیفه شرعی" حداد عادل

امروز در مراسم تشییع پروفسور گنجی در مرکز دایره‌المعارف بزرگ اسلامی، خبرنگار شبکه 5 به سراغ دکتر منوچهر اقتداری رفت. به یک باره بغض دکتر ترکید. جلوی دوربین با صدای بلند گفت: "بگذارید بگویم که این حکومت، حقوق بازنشستگی گنجی را قطع کرد تا او به نان شب محتاج شود. بگذارید بگویم که اینها حقوق ایرج افشار و محمد امین ریاحی و خیلی‌های دیگر را قطع کردند. به خدا این دولت، این حکومت، با دانشمندان ما بد کرد، بد کرد، بدکرد..."

حداد عادل که کنار استاد ایستاده بود، لابد فکر کرد "وظیفه شرعی" او حکم می‌کند که این شبه افکنی نسبت به "نظام مقدس" را جواب بدهد. با قیافه‌ای معصومانه و حق به جانب رو به دوربین قرار گرفت و گفت: "البته بنده باید توضیح بدهم که در ده سال گذشته حقوق بازنشستگی این عزیزان از نو برقرار شد."

حدود دو سال پیش که با دکتر گنجی مصاحبه کردم، دکتر با دلی شکسته گفت: "بعد از 37 سال خدمت در دانشگاه تهران با رتبه استادی و در پست معاونت دانشگاه بازنشسته شدم. پنج سال بعد که انقلاب شد، حقوقم را قطع کردند. حالا بعد از بیست و چند سال که حقوق نگرفته‌ام، ماهی 600 هزارتومان به من می‌دهند. آیا این در شأن مقام و خدمات من است؟"

دکتر می‌گفت: "اول انقلاب که حقوقم را بریدند، به یک دارالترجمه رفتم. برای ترجمه شناسنامه 15 ریال و برای ترجمه گواهینامه تحصیلی 35 ریال می‌گرفتم و این طور زندگی می‌کردم. حتی مجبور شدم کتابخانه‌ام را که بزرگ‌ترین سرمایه‌ام بود، بفروشم."
*****************************
 
اونوقت حقوق ماهانه یه مشت ملای بی سروپا ,در مجلس کثیف اسلامی, سه میلیون تومانه!! خود بخوان حدیث این مجمل
پیمان پایدار



 

دسته گل آقای كاتب ,نماينده گرمسار
در مجلس شورای اسلامی دور نهم ,در فيليپين




--









Paul -Laurent Assounپل- لوران اسون

واژگان فروید Le vocabulaire de Freud


ترجمه دکتر کرامت موللی

چاپ اول 1386, نشر نی , تهران
صد و بیست صفحه

قسمت پانزدهم

قسمت اول تا پنجم بترتیب در 6 م, 11م , 15 م , 18م و 31 م ماه می
قسمت ششم تا دهم بترتیب در 4 م, 8 م و 13 م و 18م و 29م ماه ژوئن
قسمت یازدهم تا چهاردهم  در2م , 7م, 9 م  و19 م ماه ژولای2012 درج شده است

************************************

Psychose پسیکوز

*این مقوله در روان شناسی مرضی به معنای اختلالی عمیق است که دررابطه میان هویت فردی و واقعیت خارجی به وجود می آید . پسیکوز انواع مختلف دارد:پارانویا, اسکیزوفرنی , شور جنون آمیز(1) و مالیخولیا . درعرف فروید ,پسیکوز عبارت است از این که فرد تحت فشار توقعات رانشی خود به ترک واقعیت ناچار شود و آن را به نحوی خاص خویش از طریق هذیان مجددا بیافریند .
(1)Manie

**جای تعجب نیست که فروید در وهله اول برای کشف علل پسیکوز به مکانیسم دفع امیال*روی آورد , یعنی همان راهی را انتخاب کرد که برای درک نوروزها برگزیده بود . لذا به قرینه نوروزهای شناخته شده در مورد پسیکوز نیز به نوروزی    قائل شد که آن را ناسیسیک خواند . مع الوصف او این نکته را خاطر نشان میکند که در مورد اخیر تصورات کاملا نقض شده و من نفسانی تحت فشار افکار هذیان آمیز دستخوش دگرگونی میشود .

وی در مطالعه ای که در مورد شخصی پارانویاک(2) به نام شربر به انجام رسانید , مسئله پسیکوز را مورد مطالعه قرار داد . در پارانویا(3) رد و انکار امیال همجنس دوستانه به بازگشت لیبیدو به سوی من نفسانی می انجامد و هذیان کوششی در جهت بازیافتن واقعیت از دست رفته عالم خارج است .
(2)Paranoiaque (3)Paranoia

در اسکیزوفرنی فرد کلمات و عناصر کلامی را به جای اشیا می گیرد . یا به عبارتی دیگر, تصورات مربوط به الفاظ به تصوراتی که مربوط به اشیا هستند تبدیل میشوند- تصور لفظی به تصور شیئی مبدل میشود .

واقعیت عالم خارج در پسیکوز تحت تاثیرو فشار رانش ها قرار میگیرد و نقص میشود. در همان حال , رانش ها در پی قبولاندن خود به هذیان مبدل میشوند . 

***  فرد پسیکوتیک به خصوص بنا برتخریب وجودی اش واجد رابطه ای غیر ممکن با واقعیت خارجی است که با روی آوردن به هذیان سعی در ترمیم آن میکند . لذا حقیقت نزد او حالت حکم سالبه به انتفا موضوع(1) را دارد و از دسترس او کاملا به دور است . به عبارتی دیگر, رابطه اش با عالم خارج چنان است که گویی اصل وجود(2) نداشته است .
(1) Forclusion
(2)تفصیل این مبحث در کتاب مبانی روان کاوی (فروید-لکان),نشر نی  ,تهران 1384 آمده است .

مراجع:
-ملاحظاتی روان کاوانه در باب موردی از پارانویا 1911
-سوگ و مالیخولیا 1916
 -ملاحظاتی



ادامه دارد: پیمان پایدار
**************************

Week in Review: Drone Slaughter and the Covert War on Iran

Global Research, September 28, 2012

israelus2