Archive for September, 2010

China says U.S. currency act violates WTO rules [Xinhua]

Posted in China, China-US relations, Economic crisis & decline, Obama, Protectionist Trade War with China, USA, WTO, Yuan appreciation on September 30, 2010 by Zuo Shou / 左手

BEIJING, Sept. 30 (Xinhua) — China said Thursday that a trade bill passed by U.S. lawmakers targeting the yuan violated World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, and reaffirmed protective trade measures would not help sort out U.S. domestic problems.

The U.S. House of Representatives Wednesday passed the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act to allow the United States to impose trade sanctions against its trade partners for allegedly manipulating their currency, in a move Chinese officials say indicates rising U.S. trade protectionism.

With November’s midterm elections approaching, the 348-79 vote sends the measure to the Senate.  The bill must gain Senate approval and be signed into law by President Barack Obama.

“The U.S.-proposed anti-subsidy investigation into Chinese imports on the grounds of exchange rate violates WTO rules,” Yao Jian, spokesman of China’s Ministry of Commerce (MOC), told Xinhua Thursday.

With mounting domestic political pressure arising from high unemployment and lackluster economic recovery, U.S. lawmakers are increasingly arguing that an under-valued yuan gives Chinese imports an unfair trade advantage at the expense of millions of American jobs.

Yao refuted the claim that China had gained a trade advantage by means of an under-valued yuan.  The outcome of trade between the two countries was instead dependent on the trade and investment structures.

Although China had a trade surplus with the United States, it also had hefty trade deficit with many Asian countries, he said.

A trade surplus should not be blamed on an under-valued yuan, neither should it be used as an excuse for trade protectionism, he said.

Yao said Sino-U.S. trade relations had long been mutually beneficial as China was the United States’s fastest-growing export destination.

Continue reading


U.S. House of Representatives passes Chinese currency bill [People’s Daily]

Posted in Anti-China propaganda exposure, Bourgeois parliamentary democracy, China, China-US relations, Economic crisis & decline, USA, Yuan appreciation on September 30, 2010 by Zuo Shou / 左手

September 30, 2010

The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill to press China to let its currency rise faster, amid accusations that China suppressed the value of its currency and placed a drag on U.S. job creation.

The House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee backed the proposed Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act last Friday, clearing the way for the full House to take up the measure this week.

With November’s midterm elections approaching and pressure from recession-weary voters, U.S. lawmakers were weighing bills that would slap sanctions on Chinese goods.

China Tuesday urged U.S. lawmakers to recognize the importance of Sino-U.S. trade and economic ties and to avoid protectionist measures against China.

Safeguarding healthy and stable development of the Sino-U.S. trade and economic ties was in the common interest of both countries, said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu.

Source: Xinhua

Article link here

Real US motives in pressing China on RMB issue [People’s Daily]

Posted in Anti-China propaganda exposure, Black propaganda, Bourgeois parliamentary democracy, China, China Youth Daily, China-US relations, Early 21st Century global capitalist financial crisis' US origins, Economic crisis & decline, USA, Yuan appreciation on September 30, 2010 by Zuo Shou / 左手


September 19, 2010

An increasingly vocal movement is rising in America to force China to appreciate the RMB.  Hundreds of congressmen jointly wrote a letter to the Obama Administration calling for action.  The U.S. Congress held a two-day public hearing to discuss legislation to “punish” China.  Various interest groups were waving flags and shouting battle cries.  U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner also made an unprecedented tough gesture.  Furthermore, congressmen all united behind the banner of protecting American jobs.  But, is this what they are really thinking of?

Since the outbreak of the financial crisis, the U.S. economy has continued to decline. In particular, the soaring unemployment rate has reached a very high level, exceeding the critical point of 10 percent in 2009, and it is now still as high as 9.6 percent.

With only less than two months ahead of the U.S. midterm congressional elections, the congressmen who cannot find an effective method to solve the unemployment problem — the key to keeping their seats — have chosen the RMB issue as their target in the country’s dense trade protectionist atmosphere.

According to the logic of congressmen and some economists, the artificially undervalued RMB exchange rate has given China’s export products unfair comparative advantages, which widen the trade deficits between China and the United States, and subsequently have taken away job opportunities in the United States.

Many reasonable Americans refuted the logic in theory and practice.  Philip Levy, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute said economic data shows the RMB exchange rate is not the reason behind the trade deficit between China and the United States, nor is it necessarily associated with the unemployment rate in the United States.

On Sept. 15, a piece of less-noticed news came from the other side of the earth when American congressmen were heatedly discussing how to force the RMB exchange rate to appreciate at a hearing of the House Education and Labor Committee.  China’s Anshan Iron and Steel Group Corp (Ansteel) signed an official agreement with U.S-based Steel Development Company (SDC) in Beijing to build a steel mill in the United States.

Under the agreement, the two sides will jointly establish a plant to produce deformed steel bars with an annual output of 300,000 tons in Amory, Mississippi in the southeastern area of the United States.  This is Chinese enterprises’ first steel production project in the United States.

However, the project, which will not only stimulate the American economy but also create job opportunities, encountered unexpected obstacles in the United States.  Fortunately, the U.S. government finally approved the investment, setting a precedent for a Chinese steel company to build a steel mill in the United States.

The success of Anshan Iron and Steel Group reminds us of a large number of Chinese companies’ failure to open up shop in the U.S. market.  For example, China National Offshore Oil Corporation tried to acquire the Union Oil Company of California; Huawei tried to purchase U.S. software supplier 2Wire Inc. and Motorola Inc.’s wireless equipment unit; and Northwest Nonferrous International Investment Company tried to purchase a tiny Nevada gold mining company Firstgold, but all the proposed purchases were blocked by the U.S. government.

From a purely economic point of view, these investments would have helped to accelerate the U.S. economic recovery and create many job opportunities for the American people.  However, because they were from China, the U.S. congressmen who had given top priority to increasing employment seemed to forget the severe unemployment problem in their country, and started playing the “U.S. national security” card again and again.

The U.S. congressmen and interest groups are opposed to Chinese currency policies and have been forcing China to revalue the RMB, and their reason is that the undervalued RMB has led to job losses in the United States.  When Chinese companies planned to invest in the United States, which would create a large number of job opportunities, they still said no, and their new reason is that these investments will threaten U.S. national security.

Derek Scissors, an expert on the Chinese economy at the U.S.-based Heritage Foundation, explained that the U.S. opposition to China in terms of the RMB and investments seems to be self-contradictory, but in fact, the ultimate purpose is the same, which is to harm China.

Continue reading

Ahmadinejad and the 9/11 attacks – evidence shows significant numbers of world citizens skeptical of official 9/11 narrative [Al-Jazeera]

Posted in 9/11, Afghanistan, Canada, Economic crisis & decline, Egypt, EU, European Union, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Pentagon, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, USA, Zionism on September 30, 2010 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Surveys show large segments of the world population agree with the Iranian leader’s “US government involvement” claims.

24 September 2010

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, has again managed to steal the global spotlight, after levelling a series of rhetorical attacks on the US and Israel – the “Zionist entity” in his words – during an address to the UN General Assembly.

Specifically, he told world leaders on Thursday that the “majority of the American people, as well as most nations and politicians around the world agree” that “some segments within the US government orchestrated” the September 11, 2001, attacks in order to “reverse the declining American economy” and to justify US military operations in the Middle East to “save the Zionist regime”.

Western diplomats, including the US, Canada and the 27-member EU bloc, walked out during the [speech].  PJ Crowley, the US assistant secretary of state, told Al Jazeera that the statement was “totally outrageous”.

But, for better or worse, significant segments of the world’s population are sympathetic to Ahmadinejad’s [reportedly] “conspiratorial” view of the 9/11 attacks which killed about 3,000 people.

Standard view

The US government has determined that 19 hijackers, mostly born in Saudi Arabia and belonging to al-Qaeda, crashed two passenger jets into the World Trade Centre in New York City and one into the Pentagon, located outside Washington, DC, on September, 11, 2001.

A fourth plane crashed into a field in rural Pennsylvania after some of its passengers attempted to retake control of the aircraft.  There were no survivors from any of the flights.

Some of the group’s members, including Osama bin Laden, the head of al-Qaeda, had trained in Afghanistan prior to the attacks – training which precipitated the 2001 US-led invasion of the country.

Bin Laden initially denied, but later admitted in a taped statement aired on Al Jazeera in 2004, planning the attacks.

About 46 per cent of the world’s people believe that al-Qaeda launched the 9/11 attacks, while 15 per cent think the US government was behind the assault, and seven per cent blame Israel, according to a 2008 world public opinion study carried out by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) Attitudes at the University of Maryland, which interviewed 16,063 people worldwide.

But Ahmadinejad views himself as a leader in the Arab and Muslim worlds. And, in these regions, surveys show significant sectors of the population believe that the US and Israel launched the 9/11 attacks to meet their own geopolitical goals. [emphasis mine]

In Jordan, 31 per cent of those polled by PIPA believe Israel was behind the attacks, while only 11 per cent blame it on al-Qaeda.  Likewise, 43 per cent of Egyptians blame Israel, and 12 per cent think the US was responsible, while only 16 per cent think al-Qaeda brought down the towers.

A 2006 poll from Scrippsnews says 36 per cent of Americans consider it “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that US government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried or launched the attacks themselves.

Continue reading

Media Disinformation and Demonization of Iran’s leader: The Facts About Ahmadinejad’s Sept. 23 2010 UN Speech []

Posted in 9/11, Afghanistan, Brazil, China, Corporate Media Critique, Economic crisis & decline, George W. Bush, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Media smear campaign, NATO invasion, New York Times lie, Obama, Pakistan, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Russia, Syria, Turkey, US "War on Terror", US foreign occupation, US Government Cover-up, US imperialism, USA, Yemen on September 30, 2010 by Zuo Shou / 左手

The Iranian leader did not accuse the U.S. of conspiring to murder thousands of its own people [on 9/11] to create a pretext for launching wars, [contrary to some headline reports] conveyed by the US media.

“[Although he’s been obviously and maliciously misquoted on more than just this occasion]…From time to time President Ahmadinejad is his own worst enemy because of his incautious remarks. In judging him it’s more important to watch what he does than what he sometimes says.  He has taken no aggressive foreign action and there is no proof Iran is building nuclear weapons. His government’s military strategy is entirely defensive…

 …For different reasons, the U.S. even more so must be judged by its performance, not its words.  While Washington talks “peace” [and presumes to condemn Ahmadinejad based on false premises] , it is fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen, vastly increasing its drone attacks, and is now deploying Special Operations forces in 75 countries, 15 more than last year.  And while Obama [at times] speaks softly, he constantly wields — directly in Ahmadinejad’s face — the big stick of a potential crushing attack by the U.S. and Israel.”

by Jack A. Smith

September 26, 2010

A large portion of the American people, on  the basis of media reports, probably think that during his UN speech Sept. 23 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that the U.S. government secretly arranged for the 9/11 attacks.  He did not say that, however.

 In its Sept. 24 article about the speech The New York Times headline reads [misleadingly]:  “Iran Leader Says U.S. Planned 9/11 Attacks.”  The first paragraph declared:  “President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran made a series of incendiary remarks in his speech to the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday, notably the claim that the United States orchestrated the Sept. 11 attacks to rescue its declining economy, to reassert its weakening grip on the Middle East and to save Israel.”

 On the basis of his remarks the U.S. led 33 nations in theatrical walk out from the General Assembly while he was talking [said walkout now a ritually absurd gesture of insult by the US, UK and their allies when attending Ahmadinejad speeches].  And the next day, in an interview with the BBC’s Persian service, President Barack Obama said Ahmadinejad’s 9/11 remarks were “offensive. It was hateful…[blah, posture of righteous indignation, blah]…”

 On Sept. 25, the Times published a correction: “A headline on Friday with an article about an incendiary speech in the United Nations General Assembly by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran summarized his remarks about the Sept. 11 terror attacks incorrectly.  In his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad asserted various theories about the origin of the attacks, including the possibility that they had been planned by the United States.  He did not say that the United States had planned the attacks.” [emphases mine]

 The Times was one of many U.S. newspapers, TV and radio news reports that suggested Ahmadinejad accused the U.S. government of secretly instigating the attack — a conspiracy theory believed by some Americans and others [as an alternative to the US government’s official conspiracy theory]. Following are the few paragraphs pertaining to this matter from the Iranian leader’s text:

 “It was said that some three thousands people were killed on the 11 September for which we are all very saddened. Yet, up until now, in Afghanistan and Iraq hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, millions wounded and displaced and the conflict is still going on and expanding.

 “In identifying those responsible for the attack, there were three viewpoints.

 “1- That a very powerful and complex terrorist group, able to successfully cross all layers of the American intelligence and security, carried out the attack.  This is the main viewpoint advocated by American statesmen.

 “2- That some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order also to save the Zionist regime.  The majority of the American people as well as other nations and politicians agree with this view.

 “3- It was carried out by a terrorist group but the American government supported and took advantage of the situation.  Apparently, this viewpoint has fewer proponents.  The main evidence linking the incident was a few passports found in the huge volume of rubble and a video of an individual whose place of domicile was unknown but it was announced that he had been involved in oil deals with some American officials.  It was also covered up and said that due to the explosion and fire no trace of the suicide attackers was found.”

 Ahmadinejad did not suggest these were his views.  He was incorrect to claim that a majority of Americans subscribe to a well known [non-mainstream] conspiracy theory that is strongly held by a minority [of varyingly-reported significance] in the United States.

 In a 2009 poll conducted by Public Policy Polling, 14% of the American people believe “President Bush intentionally allowed the 9/11 attacks to take place because he wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.”  Many of the people who hold this view are war opponents, but it is not the perspective of the large majority of the U.S. peace movement.

 In 2006, a Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll reported that “more than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East.”

Continue reading

Ahmadinejad on Israel: “Wiped off The Map”. The Misquote of the Century, Hyped by Western Media to Justify anti-Iran policies [Mossadegh Project /]

Posted in Anti-Arab / Antisemitism, Anti-Islam hysteria, Black propaganda, Capitalist media double standard, Corporate Media Critique, EU, European Union, False flag, George W. Bush, Iran, Iraq, Islamophobia, Israel, Israeli Nukes, Media smear campaign, NATO, Palestine, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, State Department, Tony Blair, U.K., US imperialism, USA, USA 21st Century Cold War, USSR on September 30, 2010 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Global Research Editor’s Note

The following text by Arash Norouzi first published by the Mossadegh Project and Global Research in January 2007 confirms that the alleged “Wiped Off the Map” statement by Iran’s president was never made.

The rumor was fabricated by the American media with a view to discrediting Iran’s head of state and providing a justification for waging an all out war on Iran.  The article provides [evidence] of media manipulation and “propaganda in action”.

Iran is blamed for refusing to abide by the “reasonable demands” of “the international community”.  

Realities are twisted and turned upside down.  Iran is being accused of wanting to start a war.  Inherent in US military doctrine, the victims of war are heralded as the aggressor.  

The threat to global security comes from the US-NATO-Israel military alliance, which is now threatening Iran with a pre-emptive attack with nuclear warheads. 

If Iran is attacked, we are potentially in a World War III scenario. 

It is essential to dispel the fabrications of the Western media. 

Iran does not constitute a threat to to Global Security.

Iran does not possess a nuclear weapons program.  Iran does not constitute a threat to Israel.

Michel Chossudovsky, 25 September 2010 

Wiped off  The Map: The Rumor of the Century 

by Arash Norouzi

Global Research, January 20, 2007
The Mossadegh Project

Across the world, a dangerous rumor has spread that could have catastrophic implications.  According to legend, Iran’s President has threatened to destroy Israel, or, to quote the misquote, “Israel must be wiped off the map”.  Contrary to popular belief, this statement was never made, as the following article will prove.   


 On Tuesday, October 25th, 2005 at the Ministry of Interior conference hall in Tehran, newly elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivered a speech at a program, reportedly attended by thousands, titled “The World Without Zionism”.  Large posters surrounding him displayed this title prominently in English, obviously for the benefit of the international press.  Below the poster’s title was a slick graphic depicting an hour glass containing planet Earth at its top.  Two small round orbs representing the United States and Israel are shown falling through the hour glass’ narrow neck and crashing to the bottom.  

 Before we get to the infamous remark, it’s important to note that the “quote” in question was itself a quote— they are the words of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the father of the Islamic Revolution.  Although he quoted Khomeini to affirm his own position on Zionism, the actual words belong to Khomeini and not Ahmadinejad.  Thus, Ahmadinejad has essentially been credited (or blamed) for a quote that is not only unoriginal, but represents a viewpoint already in place well before he ever took office.   [Emphasis mine – Zuo Shou / 左手]  


     So what did Ahmadinejad actually say?  To quote his exact words in farsi: 

   “Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.” 

 That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e.  It is the word “Regime“, pronounced just like the English word with an extra “eh” sound at the end.  Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime.  This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map.  [Regimes aren’t indicated on maps… – ZS]  Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase “rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods” (regime occupying Jerusalem). 

 So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want “wiped from the map”?  The answer is: nothing.  That’s because the word “map” was never used.  The Persian word for map, “nagsheh“, is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech.  Nor was the western phrase “wipe out” ever said.  Yet we are led to believe that Iran’s President threatened to “wipe Israel off the map”, despite never having uttered the words “map”, “wipe out” or even “Israel”. 

      THE PROOF: 

   The full quote translated directly to English: 

      “The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time”. 

   Word by word translation: 

     Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from). 

     Here is the full transcript of the speech in farsi, archived on Ahmadinejad’s web site 


 While the false “wiped off the map” extract has been repeated infinitely without verification, Ahmadinejad’s actual speech itself has been almost entirely ignored.  Given the importance placed on the “map” comment, it would be sensible to present his words in their full context to get a fuller understanding of his position.  In fact, by looking at the entire speech, there is a clear, logical trajectory leading up to his call for a “world without Zionism”.  One may disagree with his reasoning, but critical appraisals are infeasible without first knowing what that reasoning is. 

 In his speech, Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West’s apparatus of political oppression against Muslims.  He says the “Zionist regime” was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure domination of the region and its assets.  Palestine, he insists, is the frontline of the Islamic world’s struggle with American hegemony, and its fate will have repercussions for the entire Middle East.

Ahmadinejad acknowledges that the removal of America’s powerful grip on the region via the Zionists may seem unimaginable to some, but reminds the audience that, as Khomeini predicted, other seemingly invincible empires have disappeared and now only exist in history books.  He then proceeds to list three such regimes that have collapsed, crumbled or vanished, all within the last 30 years: 

 (1) The Shah of Iran- the U.S. installed monarch 

(2) The Soviet Union 

(3) Iran’s former arch-enemy, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein 

In the first and third examples, Ahmadinejad prefaces their mention with Khomeini’s own words foretelling that individual regime’s demise.  He concludes by referring to Khomeini’s unfulfilled wish: “The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.  This statement is very wise”.  This is the passage that has been isolated, twisted and distorted so famously.  By measure of comparison, Ahmadinejad would seem to be calling for regime change, not war. 


 One may wonder: where did this false interpretation originate?  Who is responsible for the translation that has sparked such worldwide controversy?  The answer is surprising. 

 The inflammatory “wiped off the map” quote was first disseminated not by Iran’s enemies, but by Iran itself.  The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran’s official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference.  International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Time magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring to the source.  Iran’s Foreign Minister soon attempted to clarify the statement, but the quote had a life of its own.  Though the IRNA wording was inaccurate and misleading, the media assumed it was true, and besides, it made great copy.

Amid heated wrangling over Iran’s nuclear program, and months of continuous, unfounded accusations against Iran in an attempt to rally support for preemptive strikes against the country, the imperialists had just been handed the perfect raison d’être to invade.  To the war hawks, it was a gift from the skies. 

  It should be noted that in other references to the conference, the IRNA’s translation changed.  For instance, “map” was replaced with “earth”.  In some articles it was “The Qods occupier regime should be eliminated from the surface of earth”, or the similar “The Qods occupying regime must be eliminated from the surface of earth”.  The inconsistency of the IRNA’s translation should be evidence enough of the unreliability of the source, particularly when transcribing their news from Farsi into the English language.  


 The mistranslated “wiped off the map” quote attributed to Iran’s President has been spread worldwide, repeated thousands of times in international media, and prompted the denouncements of numerous world leaders.  Virtually every major and minor media outlet has published or broadcast this false statement to the masses.  Big news agencies such as The Associated Press and Reuters refer to the misquote, literally, on an almost daily basis.  

 Following news of Iran’s remark, condemnation was swift.  British Prime Minister Tony Blair expressed “revulsion” and implied that it might be necessary to attack Iran. U.N. chief Kofi Annan cancelled his scheduled trip to Iran due to the controversy.  Ariel Sharon demanded that Iran be expelled from the United Nations for calling for Israel’s destruction. Shimon Peres, more than once, threatened to wipe Iran off the map.  More recently, Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, who has warned that Iran is “preparing another holocaust for the Jewish state” is calling for Ahmadinejad to be tried for war crimes for inciting genocide.  

 The artificial quote has also been subject to additional alterations. U.S. officials and media often take the liberty of dropping the “map” reference altogether, replacing it with the more acutely threatening phrase “wipe Israel off the face of the earth”.  Newspaper and magazine articles dutifully report Ahmadinejad has “called for the destruction of Israel”, as do senior officials in the United States government. 

 President George W. Bush said the comments represented a “specific threat” to destroy Israel.  In a March 2006 speech in Cleveland, Bush vowed he would resort to war to protect Israel from Iran, because, “..the threat from Iran is, of course, their stated objective to destroy our strong ally Israel.”  Former Presidential advisor Richard Clarke told Australian TV that Iran “talks openly about destroying Israel”, and insists, “The President of Iran has said repeatedly that he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth”.  

Continue reading

BP: The Unfinished Crimes and Plunder of Anglo-American Imperialism – Scandal sheet of UK/US violations of Iran up to 1979 []

Posted in Africa, Anti-communism, Anti-fascism, BP oil spill, China, CIA, Corporate Media Critique, DPR Korea, Fascism, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Korean War, Lenin, Nazism, Sino-Korean Friendship, south Korea, State Department, Torture, U.K., U.K. War Crimes, US imperialism, USA, Vietnam, World War II on September 29, 2010 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Running down the list of criminal Anglo-American “heroes” and their accomplices in the odious historical exploitation of Iran’s resources and perpetration of the CIA’s  infamous and bloody Operation Ajax:  William D’Arcy, Winston Churchill, Reza Shah Pahlavi, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Dwight Eisenhower, John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, General Fazlollah Zahedi, Kermit Roosevelt, Jr.;

countered with the opposition, however limited, of elected Iranian leader Mohammed Mossadeq on behalf of the Iranian people. –  Zuo Shou / 左手

Iranian Prime Minister Mossadeq on issuing the nationalization decree of AIOC (Anglo-Iranian Oil Company) in the ’50s:

“We are nationalizing the AIOC because it has systematically over several decades refused to engage in a constructive dialogue with us. Working hand in glove with the British government it has trampled on our national rights.  Their conduct was one of unspeakable arrogance.  Our battle for the end of the company’s domination has finally arrived and we shall triumph.  It is a war against a beast that has corrupted officials at every level of the government.  It has pillaged our ancient nation over decades.  It has reduced us to poverty and humiliation.  Above all, ours is a struggle for the conquest of our political freedom…”

September 20, 2010

by Frederic Clairmont

In the light of British Petroleum’s grotesque crime, as yet unfinished, against humanity in the Gulf of Mexico, it is well to recall briefly BP’s no less hideous crime perpetrated in its earlier incarnation as the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC) and, later, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC).

At the turn of the 20th century, William D’Arcy, financial tycoon and politician, pursuing the advice of his financial associate and empire builder Cecil Rhodes, frantically began his quest for oil in the Persian Gulf.  Little did they realize that one of the most dazzling El Dorados in the long and tortured history of British imperialism would soon be born. Geopolitically it would have reverberations well beyond the Persian Gulf region.  It was one of the most decisive steps in the march of imperial globalization, accelerating the concentration of capital and the imperialist rivalries that are its normal concomitant.

In 1908, D’Arcy’s quest was consummated with one of the biggest oil discoveries of all time, and APOC was established a year later. The British government would subsequently gobble up a sizeable chunk of the total shares in APOC. It was only decades later that BP was privatized by Thatcher.

In record time, Abadan in Persia became the world’s largest oil refinery. Not only did the advent of APOC herald one of the major triumphs in the struggle for global oil and the striving for ever-larger market shares, but its ascendancy blazed new horizons for a galloping imperialism in what was to become one of the world’s major strategic commodities with the onrush of the automobile age. The reverberations of the production and marketing of this commodity – earlier labelled black gold by Rockefeller – at a moment when imperialism’s first major holocaust, the Great War (1914-1918), was about to erupt revolutionized the world economy.

APOC’s ascendancy owed nothing to the free play of market forces idealized by mythmakers of economic liberalism, but to the role of Big Capital and the thrust of imperial financial power for enhanced control of world markets. Like the earlier conquests and brutal territorial annexations of Cecil Rhodes, it signallized the marriage of Big Capital and the imperial political-military complex. The pivotal actor in this compulsive planetary drive to market supremacy and control was Winston Churchill (1874-1965), soon to become First Lord of the Admiralty…

Full article continued at this link