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.
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.
این خانه متعلق به محسن مقدم پسر کوچکتر احتساب الملک شهردار دوره ناصر الدین شاه قاجار است.
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.
او جزو اولین باستان شناسان ایرانی بود که به همراه اساتید باستان شناسی در محوطه های تاریخی فعالیت می کرد.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Sunday, September 30, 2012
 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]
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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]
"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."
"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
Url of this article:http://www.globalresearch.ca/partners-in-global-warfare-nato-reinforces-pentagons-shift-to-the-asia-pacific-region/
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 itself – the 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/
2) Iraq: NATO Forges New Strategic Partnership In Persian Gulf, http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/iraq-nato-forges-new-strategic-partnership-in-persian-gulf/
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
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
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
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
Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/week-in-review-drone-slaughter-and-the-covert-war-on-iran/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/week-in-review-drone-slaughter-and-the-covert-war-on-iran/
Will Israel Launch a False Flag Against Iran to Start
War?, Washington’s Blog, September 28, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)