Iran, Poilievre And Petty Anti Politics

First off, before continuing further: Did you click the "I condemn Hamas" button?

Best click it again. To save your soul.

And, yeah, same here. I may not be a fan of Anthony Blinken, but, with that press briefing in San Francisco and US President Joe Biden going into the "dictator" weeds, again, that grimace said it all; I could feel Blinken's pain. Insulting him now would be like bombing already suffering people. Pointlessly cruel. I'm sure there's an example of that somewhere?

That's gotta be one tough and needlessly demanding administration to be in.

Plus, he did, again, urge the Indians to collaborate with Canada on the Nijjar murder investigation at their recent 2+2 meeting; that must've pissed them off.

So, I'm willing to give Blinken a bit of leeway... but it's probably best if he were to expect more insults from me in some future.

Speaking of leeway: During a CBC panel discussing Canadian PM Trudeau's "maximum restraint" comment made to Israel—Netanyahu's response the only one expected, hence, a political move by Trudeau—current affairs pundit and journalist Chantal Hébert took the time to highlight that which explains the highly-moderated position I presently hold in regards to Trudeau's Liberal government: Presently, the world is nothing but messy big pickles and fans eagerly waiting for shit to hit them, making this period a real bad one to be a Western leader in should one hope to stay leader and to end their term with any popularity left at all.

She's the only one I've heard put any real weight on that aspect. Overlooking this rather than filtering genuine from manufactured leads to too much of the mess being intentional yet not seen for the opportunistic ploys they are, such coming from political-power poles (see: dicks) who are muddling matters and mudding waters, making messes messier, and giving little thought to a future clean-up or about acting in a way befitting their claims, because duping people yesterday only needs a few more lies today to satisfy and elevate one's navel in other people's destructive tomorrow.

Is white nationalism making a move to assert itself a better place in Canada? Don't be fooled by fools claiming to be chasing terrorists while they cheer for a terror.

Hence, at this juncture, among the viable ones, I can't think of a worse option for Canada than Pierre Poilièvre. What's below provides another example for why.

Anti-Pro-Good Versus Pro-Anti-Bad. The Winner: No Good

That event, the protestors hitting the US base in Turkey, the way all the Western majors announced it and referred to the angry mob as pro-Palestinian rather than anti-US, anti-imperialist, peace activists, or the likes, which were equally valid given the circumstances, the lack of Palestinian colours, and their goal, that got a pronounced eyeroll and hearty chuckle out of me, though that practice gets real annoying real fast.

You can tell who genuinely cares about an event and its actors and who is focused on using that event to push an agenda through the choice of nouns, adjectives, and adverbs they use, and who it is that's doing the verbing to whom, and if passively or actively, often, quite passively aggressively. And when a compound noun replaces a proper one, it's fair to say that the Pentagon OK'ed it if relating to a conflict or foe in the making.

Oh, and pronouns. Using the correct one communicates much. I hear.

Not too long ago all that wasn't under a Western leash fell under either Russian-backed, Russian-supporting, Russian-funded, Russian-armed, Russian-raped, Russian propaganda, or Putin Lover.

Lately, all's Iran.

Even when Iran isn't a part of the picture nor anywhere to be seen.

Which just goes to show: the power of visualization. Believe in it. 

Close your eyes; don't hold back; see the evil you need to kill. Take a selfie. Looks and feels like Iran, doesn't it? So step aside, unless you were planning on doing some terroristy thingies yourself?

Were you?

Nope. T'was rhetorical. We'll know if you're doing something we think qualifies as terrorism, so, don't worry. Until we tell you to...

Better click the "I condemn Hamas" button again to prove your virtue and intent.

More popular still, however, is that confused and abused label, "terrorist" that's oftentimes accompanied by "barbaric" or a similarly vulgar set of characters, which ties in to a Firstpost piece, or three, with two "Vantage" ones, which I'll discuss in the context of the India-focused series.

I will, nonetheless, say that the usage of "terrorist" should present huge quandaries for all, especially due to the fact that foe and blame, good and right, should be seen as being so clear cut that such interpretations should allow anyone to apply that "terrorist" label to one side when, clearly, doing so demands an ill-defined notion that categorizes "non-terrorism" as anything with a formal-looking army that the media doesn't label as a "terrorist".

Does Washington like them and does the Pentagon have a use for them? No? Then the file gets an "Evil Terrorist" stamp.

And people without the stamp can make ridiculously bogus claims about "command centers" that gullible people believe if it concerns people whose file is 'stamped'.

If we're perfectly frank: Given what the Palestinians have had to endure, the spiritual drain and psychological toll after months, years, always on edge, always tense, always struggling; a big bang and clatter, the jolt, drastic change, pressure, the trembling earth, all's silent, massive volumes of air pushed out, sucked in; destruction. Trauma. Eight units. Next door. Good friends. All dead.

Just another morning. Routine. A senseless Semitic beating under a burning Zionist sky.

I'd love to offer you a coffee, but we're drinking our urine to stay alive these days...

Plus, the kitchen is a bit of a mess, but we think we found which pile of rubble it is.

The backlash seen on 7-Oct by the Palestinians that's been qualified as "savage" and "barbaric" is an entirely normal—and expected—response that's noticeable across the vast majority of natural, earthly species if forced to endure sustained abusive treatment.

At some point, we all crack. Mother Nature says it's as natural as hitting puberty. And I think she mentioned something about Zionists and zits.

What's truly abnormal and disquieting is that a monster like Netanyahu, and the hardline Zionists who support him, have been allowed to murder so many because far too many lack the humanity needed to see Palestinians as people, which is also needed to see that what they've been submitted to makes the Zionists the fiercer, more ruthless terrorists, and any mention of the Holocaust from them places them among the most despicable terrorists ever seen.

And it is possible to hold such a view, and still see only wrong in all that unfurled on 7-Oct. But to believe that such an event was out of the blue, refusing to honestly examine the motivation and give credence to one side's suffering, denying its existence or validity... well, one may say "Never again" whilst also just be making mouth noises, having absorbed nothing of the true lessons that, indeed, should have been learnt.

Terror can Only Come from those Without Capitalist-Certified Corporate Backing

In all that I'm seeing, there's one clear equation, and it counters all mediatized claims and all that's parroted as reason to spit on those who don't: One group is irritated and instigated and poked and prodded and dehumanized and, finally, provoked into "unprovoked full-scale" evils within a reality that negates or redirects any evils from one side and good from the other.

Being brainwashed into seeing the West as virtuous white knights sprinkling Democracy & Freedom magic with its Capitalist pixie dust makes the West even less 'good', more evil, in my opinion.      

Rarely are any of the tragic conflicts and wars presented to us by media and history as clear fights between "good" and "bad" ever remotely close to that. I've yet come across a genuine case that presented one group whose entire motivation for inflicting harm on another came from within, and is accurately reducible to "we just felt like it, because we're evil."

Actually, if one considers certain levels of greed to be evil, that's the type of excuse the West is likely to make after wiping out a country's future, but only because poorer folks unable to print money can't afford an army that lets them steal everyone else's money, which makes these "terrorists" if not on their knees praying for food today so they can work for a Western Corp. tomorrow... "and maybe, just maybe," you think. "I'll be able to save enough for a bomb one day, and I'll regain my dignity and sovereignty."

Drats! Why'd you have to think that? Couldn't stop before going that far? Well, you should have, because now you've left us with no choice but to consider you a terrorist, haven't you?

That is... unless you've got a corporate backer?

Iran. Still not Hating it Enough to Let Us Bomb it to Freedom?!

For Iran, they just got lazy, it seems, and stamped the entire country's file "evil" and treated all that's delineated by its borders as one big terrorist state and terrorist mill.

"Of course! Because it is," you exclaim.

Why? What makes you so sure? Is it the "Iran-backed" or "Iran-funded" qualifier that's tacked on liberally and for PR purposes, not for accuracy. Like "damage", if in guerilla marketing. Or some military?

The way the Western world treats Iran, expecting all nations to do so as well or face sanctions, none of that is justified if one considers all the terrorists that came out of Saudi Arabia and trained in US-funded camps in Pakistan.

Like the latest TikTok trender, Osama Bin Laden. Hey, at least it wasn't Victoria Nuland, right?

Yet, neither Pakistan or Saudi Arabia have had to face a level of abuse and demonization that comes anywhere close to what the US and West have subjected Iran to.

The country is hostile to the West? Well, duh! why d'you think?!

Twenty-six years under a brutally abusive Shah imposed by the US after the people had voted into office the guy the US didn't like out of fear he'd be too friendly with Russians, that would do it, I think. And motivate all kinds of threats, too, if one is then forced to face all kinds of attacks simply for having retaken control of one's country.

Not a hard cause-and-effect chain there; as straightforward as they come. Unless a neocon or a hegemaniac.

The US screwed over a county and destroyed it, and when Iranians dared to retaliate, the US then destroyed it good and solid by sanctioning the hell out of its every need, inflicting incalculable suffering on kids and women the most, making sure the country would deepen its ties with fundamentalism, which now provides another reason to do it more harm. Fucking psychotic!

And that's what makes all the continued idiocy to irritate the Iran government and make sure Iran is perceived as a foe so hard to bear. And their "intent", that brings to mind Hamas' infamous "charter" that has more meaning to those who refer to it to slaughter innocent civilians, an aspect I'll discuss another time, though I'll have you recall the normalization that was taking place and mention that Arabs say a lot 'crap' when angry, but they're just like regular people in that, if you treat them like people, they don't become the kind of angry that has people say such 'crap'.

Yet, it becomes quite clear that hate and power-lust fuses brain cells and forces shit to one's brain, giving us the only real valid reasons should one contrast Iran's case against that of other nations, the US being guilty of far worse itself, in general, and toward Iran, even matching Iran's unforgivable act of terrorism cited by the West as reason to defecate on Iran.

Which makes the type of manipulation presented to amplify asinine steps meant to solidify an antagonistic relationship rather than taking ones aiming to build a constructive one truly loathsome. Even if a theocracy. Freedom doesn't have to mean being imposed a Wall-Street-friendly pretend-democracy, you know.

The so-called democracy of those who actually throw the word around as a form of attack and defense is almost nothing but pure BS and empty promises with a costly and polluting popularity contest. It's a way overrated word these days.

Democracy, Freedom, and all the other "values" Washington and buddies likes to wrap around itself... Knee-deep in BS wearing a coat made out of manure is just about all that's now accurate, especially now, as Gaza turns to rubble.

Which reminds me: The annual UN vote to lift sanctions on Cuba was had last month; only two countries voted against: US and Israel. The US not complying is why other nations want to give it a wedgie whenever the US lectures others and manipulates the UN to help it do so. 

The real problem with Iran and Syria is that they're key geopolitical pieces and its leaders don't play nice, i.e. they refused to be subjugated to the US' Rules-Based idiotic abuses.

And, because, should one badly mishandle made-up rules too often, one will lose the base, which is why others are backing Iran and Syria in ways they didn't previously dare.

While Gaza is being "mowed", the US keeps complaining about their troops in Iraq and Syria being hit, this providing a reason for the US to launch an air strike or two against Iran-backed whatevers.

However, what the hell are troops doing in Iraq or Syria? And why isn't the US being more transparent about it's illegal military base recently set up in northern Syria, which it occupies illegally, to take resources. Illegally. Can't expect much from any group or government willing to poison civilians in another country and put the blame on its leader in order to manufacture a cause in need of a violent effect, I suppose.

Which brings us to a planned effort passed off as news concerning Iran.

Not sure how much of an effect it had at large and whether it's been able to mobilize a broad support from Canadian citizens, but it has stirred pressure and opened up more crap to stir into the already toxic maelstrom of hatred that conflicting global goals and populist-provoking politics continually find a way to add toxicity to while the time's irrational ruling elites debate the type and size of safety label needed on the mix, dumping the neolib toxic waste needed to justify the neocon's toxic waste into the brew until they do.

When a Turd is a Prick

Conservative opposition leader Pierre Poilièvre is generating or dumping, not sure which, but he's definitely stirring needlessly toxic crap in the already toxic mix.

And Global News is the vehicle. What's sickening is how he—and National Post, too; Conrad Black has an agenda—is promoting hate and racism through the tribal tactics that parallel many from the US Republicans, including putting the blame for a rise in hatred that one is contributing to on the other party, of course.

Low-level, scummy politics is what Poilièvre seems to be playing, which is what comes through the "news" I discuss below. What comments from Poilièvre suggest is that  the conservatives are gearing to use this as a pretext to go hard on a foreign agent registry, this to be used to boot many out of the country, and block immigration, and not just for Iranians.

That said, despite being clear on one end for such a move, I'm also not sure why there's a sudden obsession with having Canada list Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organisation now. And Global seems real keen on getting it done.

A plan to make it happen played out over the last week in a sustained fashion that continued with more pressure being applied even on a Sunday, with a piece centred on comments made at the 15th Halifax International Security Forum, though not ones made by anyone with defense and security responsibilities or ties. It was the comments made by an Iranian-American journalist and activist, the same ones that were featured in a Global News piece that marked the start of that campaign.

The report was obvious fearmongering that was all pretense and facts crafted out of manipulated impressions and offered as reason why any good, moral democracy faced only one option: ban anyone from Iran that may have had direct links with the regime or waved to anyone with such links.

I found it a bit much, and simply didn't buy into the BS that figures a tad too much throughout anything offered given the many prejudices that were needed to close the gaps and tie the bits between what was offered and the conclusions that were pushed.

There are serious problems with anything offered as justification to list the IRGC as a "terrorist organisation", and a political end that relies on a significant, regime-linked organisation within Iran having such a designation is required to justify blowing the shit out of Iran "legally", for their oil is still a problem unless the West own it!

But they're the bad guys!

•     •     •

First off: Above all else, I assess. Sure, my own sentiments and the desired outcome I hope for get mixed in there and there's a certain level of subjectivity that's present, which shines loudly at times, and blah, blah, blah and so on, but all of that is elementary, yet, that level of subjectivity is only an issue brought up either as a form of defense, though more commonly as an attack, usually as a self-feeding ad hominem of sorts that aims to demonize the person putting forth a given assessment simply for forwarding it. The logic, it seems: If one thinks it and says it, one must, therefore, support it.

Simply ridiculous, of course, yet, masses, impression, response and direction always seem to go together in unreasoned ways, expressed through purely reactionary means fueled by dyed-in-the-wool modes that serve the relativistic notions that provide the shared basis absorbed as absolutes that give irrational mobs a temporary purpose and a sense of control over all that lies beyond their reach or understanding.

Everybody simply knows that X is bad, so normal people obviously react to Y with hatred of X; only evil scum dare question whether X is responsible for Y.

With that, media and governments simply have to suggest the "bad" through headlines and unverified stories that exploit the presuppositions we've collectively forged and absorbed as tacit knowledge, and the actual facts hardly matter at all, so long as there's plenty of confusion and a clear divide between the proper interpretation of facts and which facts are factual. 

We've had countless examples of that baseness of thought applied to important issues, or I wouldn't have found myself nagging and ragging against "tribalism" as much as I have.

What's Global News' interest in this? Because, frankly, they're acting far more like lobbyists on this than a news outlet. I encourage the CRTC to investigate whether earmarked funds have been donated or if any type of sponsorship played into the outlet's reporting.

I don't differentiate between "good manipulation" and "bad manipulation" when the targeted end result of that manipulation rests on skewed views, these having hardened into the stereotypes that feed the biases we take for a given and allow to factor into an assessment of a situation in a pre-process manner that presents the situation to be assessed as one that already contains the auto-injected result of that pre-process formula and filter, thus, most aren't approaching the matter in a manner that truly matters.

Because most function that way is why much money is invested in demonization and dehumanization efforts before the US wages an illegal war that's accepted as a global-security-assuring intervention.

The Campaign they Call a Report

On 10-Nov-2023, Global News, offering a piece entitled, “Far worse than you can imagine’: How Iran’s regime has ‘spread its tentacles’ in Canada,” established itself a willing propagandist and fearmonger, the Global Canadian channel’s news outlet taking a somewhat unconventionally crass route to deliver empty hatred based on tenuous links, gross exaggerations, and irrational interpretations that don’t fit a fair and logical view of the world, betraying the kind of irresponsible manipulation that’s been drummed up for a specific agenda-related purpose and not actually to deliver any meaningful news.

On 11-Nov they aired the video version of the report, opting for a more immediate punch to their title: ‘You will be shocked’: How Iran’s regime is threatening Canadians here at home.

That aim of the report? The headlines suggests the following: paint Iran as an ominous, far-reaching monster whose very roots must be slain.

What they provide to substantiate that expectation, however, their efforts meant to pressure the Trudeau government into putting an official "terrorist" stamp on the IRGC, did seem to stir up the right emotions in any Islamophobe that became aware of Global's report, but it all fails miserably, none of it providing any real substance that can possibly justify what's demanded.

Unless the decision isn't judicial, but purely political.

"Violently oppresses its own citizens" says the summary. Really? Those kinds of accusations turn vile real fast and paint one an ignorant idiot and bigot almost as fast given all that's quite clearly not considered to contrast against, this made evident in what is offered to back such an accusation, deep biases making sure our rules of morality only apply to some 'other'.

Go take a tour of US jails and talk to prisoners. While there, do notice the disproportionate number of Blacks and Latinos in 'captivity'.

Speak to Julian Assange, or Edward Snowden.

Take a trip by Guantanamo, please, and do take the time to learn about the liberties taken by the US and allies as concerns anyone they felt like calling a terrorist; seize how many were arrested and how many were actually convicted despite many Muslims having spent several years in jail needlessly enduring harsh conditions and treatment only to be suddenly released years later... no explanation given. None. Which isn't a good enough reason to stop the Freedom & Democracy pushers from enslaving people and ruining lives.

Go speak to minorities in India, in Myanmar, East Timor, or those in Ukraine between 2014 and 2022, or those in many countries across the globe with a brutal dictator that was installed and backed by the US or another Western, colonialist power. 

Ask someone like Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, a Muslim cleric, who claims to be under house arrest once a week, finding himself unable to deliver the Friday prayers since 7-Oct, these having been disallowed at the region’s biggest mosque in Srinagar, the main city in Kashmir; he states:

“From the Muslim perspective, Palestine is very dear to us, and we essentially have to raise our voice against the oppression there. But we are forced to be silent,” He said he  (Source)

That reminds me: Talk to Palestinians and ask yourself why Zionists aren't on that terrorist list and why doesn't Global News have an agenda for that? 

By the way, Global News were the ones who had that ridiculous "anti-Iranian" headline to refer to an in-solidarity-with-Iranian-citizens march I'd briefly poked fun at a couple months ago.

•     •     • 

Properly deconstructed, peeling away what the piece impresses on readers or viewers—the article transcribes their video segment, essentially—the emotions that are tugged and the hard claims forwarded versus what’s truly substantiated by the examples if contrasted against the overlooked reality that plagues the world, which includes all nations, even North Korea—telling it like it is—that one sees rely on that ominous, far-reaching monster image being a given, and it’s Canada that’s the target of this piece.

Essentially, the piece presents victimized Iranians trying to flee the evil of the governing regime back home but finding themselves unable to do so because the regime and its nefarious Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) are everywhere, hiding in some closets in every nation, whereas in Canada, they’re in closets, pantries, basements, car boots, and in any café across the country, the Canadian government having done its best to become “the backyard playground for the Islamic Republic.”

But if the two primary subjects are all they have to offer, then it's ridiculous propaganda that had to have been done for a specific purpose. The first, however sorry I feel for the man, that's mostly insulting, if you ask me, as it's just a cheap move to establish an illogical link, as I'll discuss below.  

And, as these things usually go, the masses having a hard time distinguishing between significant ideologically-driven entities that put an ethnic or religious or nationalistic identity, or a combination of these, at the forefront of their aims and activities, and those who, simply, belong to said identity, which makes the Global piece hate-promoting anti-Iranianism above all else.

The comments certainly reflect that. It truly is disappointing to see the levels of intolerance rising to the surface like they have, anything that involves certain groups now eliciting openly racist comments in a manner that reminds me of the suddenly permissive and racist turn that came with Trump's campaign and win. Those types of comments weren't so blatant and ubiquitous in Canada like they are now, and those that were seen faced heavy push back and deletion, which isn't true today.

And with nothing but first names like Kathy, Allen, Claire, Rob, John, Rick, Nancy, David, Mike, and last names like Bradley, Ellis, Palmer, Wallace, Robichau, Dunbar, or Lambert, one can expect one-way, eurodom views and plenty of ignorance as concerns the issues presented, these validating those stereotypes that are targeted by racism.

So, what’s the political aim behind that bit of reportage, is what I found myself wrestling with? And why is Global trying to play this like a scandal, with no other major outlet jumping on board?

The answer came Thursday with another Global report accusing PM Trudeau of not wanting to "condemn the IRGC", and confirmation of that answer followed later on in the day with another from Global and a headline suggesting that Trudeau was to add the IRGC to the "terrorist organisations list".

So, it's a purely political move. Why? 

Yesterday, Sunday, they had another piece titled, "‘A real threat to democracy’: Iranian-American activist urges Trudeau to act". 

It offered this immediately after the intro: 

“Iranian-Canadians in Canada, we love Canada. We love peace and security and democracy. We love Canada to be a shelter for, you know, decent people. And you’re putting the lives of Canadians in danger,” Alinejad said in an interview at the Halifax International Security Forum.

“That’s what I can say, because otherwise he’s going to come up with a lot of empty words saying that you stand with the people of Iran. Now, please sit down and make decisions. How to protect human rights, how to protect democracy in Canada. That’s very important.”

The intro paragraphs were these:

An Iranian-American activist is accusing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of “empty words” and “cliché” over the federal government’s handling of alleged Iranian agents operating on Canadian soil.

Masih Alinejad, a Brooklyn-based journalist and women’s rights activist, told The West Block host Mercedes Stephenson that the Canadian government must do more to address threats against Iranian Canadians from the Islamic republic’s agents.

Near its close it also affirms this:

Alinejad is pushing the Canadian government to add the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) as a terrorist entity, which would impose penalties on people and organizations dealing with the IRGC in Canada and bar members of the military branch from entering Canada. The U.S. labeled the IRGC a terrorist group in 2019.

Let me wrap my head around this...

She's an Iranian-American "journalist/activist" who's never lived in Canada speaking as if an Iranian-Canadian at a neocon event, doing so to push fear about the Iranian regime in order to pressure the Canadian government into adding the IRGC to the Canadian terrorist list. And doing it in a rather insolent way, I find, given the all that doesn't quite fit, nor would such a measure actually diminish the risk of a possible assassination carried out against her if Iran still had such a plan, if at all.

In the first report, what Alinejad offers—and gets repeated in all subsequent pieces—in support of her claim that the regime is a menace to Iranians no matter where they are, more so in Canada, is a failed possibility of alleged attempt to assassinate her, organized by the regime, we are told, despite no clear ties with Tehran having been established.

And the same can be said for the three individuals implicated: despite one suspect having ties to Iran and the existence of communication exchanges having been carried out with someone in Iran, there are no ties with the IRGC, hence, adding them to the list wouldn't have done anything to prevent that attack.

The alleged attempt occurred in the US, and they "labeled the IRGC a terrorist group in 2019." 

Per the DOJ, the arrest of the man loitering near her house occurred on 29-Jul-2022.

Yet, she says she lives in fear and with 24-hour protection provided by the US government. Seems doubtful. They'd hand her over to the US marshals who'd place her in a relocation program or leave her face the risk if that's what she prefers. It's what they do with witnesses that actually have testimony that can put some bigwig away, as the state can't afford round-the-clock security for anyone who wants it, no matter how justified, especially not if for a reason such as, "but, I want to keep being an activist." If they really want your testimony and you won't go into WITSEC, they'll lock you up until the trial, then release you to face the risks when done. 

The case that the initial report opens with is that of Hamed Esmaeilion. Oddly, this one doesn't get repeated; the focus in all subsequent segments is on the Iranian-American, Masih Alinejad. Because she's afraid, from over there, I think.

Any hoot, it starts:

Hamed Esmaeilion has to watch his back wherever he goes — unable to escape the oppressive and violent regime that rules his homeland of Iran, even when he’s in Canada.

When he first arrived in 2010 with his wife Parisa and daughter Reera, Esmaeilion thought he had come to the safest country in the world.

“But it’s not,” he says.

His wife and daughter were among 176 people killed, including 55 Canadian citizens, when the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) shot down Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752 on Jan. 8, 2020. That shattered any illusions the Ontario man had that his family would live happily ever after in Canada.

“Where is my wife and my daughter now? They're buried in the cemetery in Richmond Hill, just because of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” says Esmaeilion, who has channelled his profound grief into action, demanding answers and accountability for the loss of his loved ones.

Soon, the watchful eyes of the regime focused on him in Canada. He started to get threats on social media, and even more chilling, multiple phone calls from the same person.

The flight, PS-752, is also reference by PM Trudeau in his reply to Global News, given during a press briefing (further below).

The plane was shot by error. From Iran. Over Iran. A freak affair that was all accident and unplanned, and didn't target his family or anyone else on board.

According to Esmaeilion, as you'll see further down, is it the fact that he didn't know anyone on those other flights that doesn't have him wanting those nations involved labeled as terrorists?

There's been a series of important cases demanding billions from Iran and from which a ruling can have severely adverse effects on Iran given the treatment it's already afforded. All of that indicates that witness intimidation is far more likely, and considering the fact that SM posts and phone calls that went nowhere are all he offers without the proof to lay blame on the entire Iranian regime for the fear he claims to live under—after all, coming to Canada didn't stop a horrible accident happening in Iran—then, what to make of the fact that cigarette and energy companies have been on record, way more menacing to witnesses and aren't on the terrorist list?

The Indian Connection. Maybe

Only a quarter of the way through the article and I couldn’t help but see parallels with India’s false and insulting accusations that Canada is “a safe haven for terrorists, for extremists, and for organized crime,” which its Minister of External Affairs, and it spokesperson, keep claiming in order to deflect attention and avoid dealing with a request for collaboration into an investigation, something a government is usually eager to avoid turning into a row if genuinely for no good reason.

As I'll show in part 3, to say that Canada was a chosen target and Nijjar's assassination served a purpose, it wasn't the goal, isn't all that crazy a theory to offer.

However, Canada could choose to go full terrorist-state and make Terrorism the only allowed religion if it so decides, and make Khalistan our national goal, too; none of that gives Indian authorities the right to eliminate any Canadian citizen on Canadian soil. Outside our borders is another matter altogether that can't be reduced to an absolute, however, as "intent" expressed within Canadian borders about events planned outside our borders may justify such an act or even a "preemptive attack" and not qualify as a crime, either under the rubric of "homicide" or "war".

The 'hushed' facts relating to the civil war in the east of Ukraine actually lean toward a legal justification for Russia's SMO.

On the other hand, nothing can possibly justify the massacre now taking place in Gaza, the number of dead surpassing 12,000, over 5,000 of that said to be children. The Israelis did revise their reported dead, the number now just under 1,200. Is that offered as a form of concession meant to account for all those killed by the IDF through their indiscriminate and unrestrained response on 7-Oct.

The footage from the Apache helicopter attacks blindly 'mowing down' groups and running individuals assumed to be all "Hamas terrorists"... guess they didn't see that or they'd surely be kinder and far more realistic than to silently remove 200 from their tallies?

All those who are pretending to be sensible by calling for the death of Hamas, claiming that they're the ones responsible for all ills in the immediate region, refusing to see the complexity not easily captured by Western forms yet spit such thick, disgusting venom on, and denigrate, as you clump into some xenophobia-generated socially-dysfunctional group responsible for heinous racism, inflation, lack of jobs, and universities, all those not in agreement with yet another moronic black or white view of the world... how do you do it? Manage to be such tribal idiots, I mean? How many more times and tons of proof and dead bodies will it take before tribalists, from any side, consider a world whose reality exists in the grey?

Here's the real funny thing. i.e. quirky (see: batshit nuts), about the so-called Axis of Evil: None of those countries are aggressively seeking to impose their ways on other nations and the world nor have any of them been involved in any wars that weren't instigated by the West, for Western purposes, since WWII. Surely there are one or two conflicts I'm forgetting, but the ones you're probably thinking of aren't those, including Ukraine.

But in terms of Iran being a threat to the world? Check the tab below to compare the number of assassinations attributed to the US versus Iran. Should we count the total number of deaths each government are responsible for?

If we consider actual acts of terrorism, the US beats Iran, with bombs, coups, and sanctions. Shooting down a passenger airliner? The US did that also. Ditto Ukraine, though I suspect they shot two. Other nations did that as well, but when all's the same and judgment passed, who did a booboo and who did an evil establishes that who has more media reach is what makes all the difference. More below. 

"Funding terror across the world"? I'd keep my trap shut if any of the G7 members or NATO. Western corporations have funded more direct terror than Iran, so, please, enough with the bull.

And what to make of what amounts to big-bully, abusive rules that allow one to act like veritable pirates?!

Many of the tensions across the globe are purely manufactured by Washington, for if all are divided, the US remain strong.

The stupidest fear they've sold in recent times is the need to protect the Indo-Asian-Pacific seaways from China to assure that trade routes remain open and free when those who benefit the most from said trade routes remaining open and free are the Chinese.

The sad reality: For India to realize anything close to the growth that Modi is promising (I heard him promise #1 economy if re-elected), China must be held back or hurt, so its losses become India's gain.

So, seeing what they're willing to do, pushing things just a bit further isn't farfetched.

Plus, there's those Indian "spies" recently given a death sentence in Qatar, caught spying, apparently, and India was doing so for Israel, is what the most solid rumour would have us believe, though New Delhi would tell us we're wrong, surely.

And, well... this:

You may have heard about that video, showing make-up being applied and people playing wounded that was shared as "proof" that the Palestinians were "faking", though what this really proved was the amoral, malicious nature of some and the gullible nature of others, basic ignorance or ignorant biases usually being behind the latter.

Like the Indian situation revolving around the Sikhs and the Khalistan movement following the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar (part 3 should be up soon), selling the BJP's stand on such matters is crucial to the narrative that's to favour a nationalist turn... but to be on the "right side" of things occasionally demands a bit of an effort to force the views that match one's version of "right side".

That's why the left side is better?

Good thing Iran isn't doing that kind of thing, is all I can say.

In terms of "oppressive" regime, more people are wrongfully jailed per year in India than in Iran, and more die while in custody. So, there, too, many of the arguments fall apart. There's still the obligatory hijab and the other restrictions imposed on women, and trust the Americans to spin that into terrorism which becoming better chums with leaders of terrorist states. Like Israel and India, perhaps?

In fact, here's a Foreign Policy piece with the title: "Why Does Israel Keep Assassinating Iranian Officials? Because It Works." Not sure, but that sounds like terrorist thinking and acts carried out to satisfy a paranoia, not against legitimate threats.

Also, no doubt, I've just upset a few Indians; I'll provide my arguments in part 3, but I doubt they can refute them in any satisfactory manner other than offer denialisms. 

The Cases. Causes. No Real Effect

That things are totally unruly in Canada and turning into a free-range playground for soon-to-be-listed-as-terrorists terrorists is proven by the claims made by that Brooklyn-based Iranian-American, these being validated by the following:  

Gabriel Noronha served as special advisor on Iran to the U.S. State Department from 2019 to 2021. His assessment of the Islamic Republic’s presence in Canada is blunt.

“What I constantly hear from Iranian-Americans, they say the problem in Canada is far, far worse than you can imagine,” Noronha says.

Again, in the Sunday piece:

The Global News investigation revealed the FBI, who protected Alinejad 24 hours a day, subsequently told her to avoid traveling to Canada. If she was going, it would take months to come up with a plan to ensure her safety. 

Every "cause for panic" claim made is nothing but hearsay. Global couldn't get a confirmation from the FBI? It wasn't important? Really? 

I’m harsh? I’m supposed to accept, unquestionably, whatever a victim forwards, because hating the entirety of Iranians who had any sort of link with their government, blindly assuming that these are evil people, that’s the right thing to do?

Too much is illogical, atypical, or a flat-out lie. Like this one:

In 2021, the FBI indictment against Alinejad’s alleged kidnappers said three individuals were targeted in Canada but they were not identified, and no reference was made to their respective professions. The indictment did, however, identify those targeted as being critical of Iran.

No, it doesn’t; here’s the only reference to Canada in the “FBI” indictment referred to, which is actually from the DOJ, this being the one that the FBI officially redirects one to; what follows is an allegation, not established fact:  

The network that Farahani directs has also targeted victims in other countries, including victims in Canada, the United Kingdom and the United Arab Emirates, and has worked to procure similar surveillance of those victims.
Office of Public Affairs | Iranian Intelligence Officials Indicted on Kidnapping Conspiracy Charges | United States Department of Justice
Press Releases — FBI

I’m not being nitpicky or far too conciliatory, lackadaisical, tolerant, or open and supportive of terrorism. But it's a label that offers far too many issues that all should be concerned over, for it allows the same tactic that's been a nightmare to minority groups—Blacks in the US are all to familiar with this—to be used by the state in order to silence or arrest anyone or group deemed to be a problem, this carrying a force coded to semiotically denote a loose connotation that permits an exploitation of cultural mores through surface forms that facilitate—if not reflexively impose—a reading of complex situations as clear-cut poles in opposition, making, in this case, the evil in the "Axis of Evil" a self-evident conclusion without the lazy branding being applied.

That's why India always offers a picture of the same two or three Sikhs whenever they mention Khalistan, to which they invariably tack-on "terrorist"; I'll provide examples in part 3 on the topic, but you can easily imagine the beady-eyed, bearded, turban-wearing Arab-looking quintessence we've been inculcated to associate with "terrorist" since Bush Jr.: the Islamists.

When I was young, hearing "terrorist" had one asking: Irish or Libyan?

Some would grow up to question the second, become convinced that the CIA allowed some Ghadafi dude to take the blame for Lockerbie, a deal that benefited both parties until one of the two found themselves getting severely screwed for that past, and it wasn't Washington...

But New York did pay a heavy price some years later, all of that being a part of it. Hence why Osama Bin Laden's "Letter to America" matters, but I'll say more about that in another post.

However, at the legal end of things, between serving "justice" and simply locking up a criminal for behaviour deemed to be terrorism, the difference is significant as one concerns itself with intent whereas the other is focused on damage done.

Because their initial report sparked tremendous concern and fear among Canadians, Global News followed up with another, and another, each one rehashing the same accusations, stretching out real little real thin and counting on the well-funded spinners' laboriously built and inculcated biases to do the rest. Every single comment I came across expressed xenophobia or crude bigotry, "go back to your country" being an equally popular opinion in response to this topic, as it is for many National Post op-ed these days.

In a follow-up video segment Global tells us “The news we broke has a lot of people demanding ‘when will Canada designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp a terrorist entity?’”

The image on screen during the narration is the following:

To back that claim, three X posts materialise on screen, one by a citizen, Irwin Carter, and one by Nazanin Afshin-Jam MacKay, the wife of former Defense Minister and ex-Harper-Conservative, Peter McKay, and the current opposition Pierre Poilièvre.

Afshin-Jam MacKay is Iranian, but grew up in Vancouver and lives in luxury; she does modeling (former Miss Canada) and acts as a boutique activist, doing rich-people philanthropy, her pet cause being the same one as Masih Alinejad's. Plus, she's married to an ex-Conservative MP with direct ties to the party and Poilièvre, who seems to have been in on it from the start, not 'awakened' by the reportage.

As such, we can assume the same for Afshin-Jam MacKay. I didn't bother with Irwin Carter, but wouldn't be surprised t find a link there, too.

These are the "concerned Canadians" who reacted 'en masses'? That's it?

At every level, on every point, everything falls real short or comes across as real strange.

But, guess what? They managed to have a sit down with Poilièvre the day after the initial broadcast. The 'news' really "shocked" him, I guess. His comments:

“The solution? Poilièvre has been pushing to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity in Canada.”

Poilièvre: “We have a commonsense plan to ban those terrorists, to expel as many as possible, to smash them with sanctions and to bring in a foreign agent registry so that we can expose every single one of them.”

The Sunday piece reaffirmed that with:

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre was more direct.

“To learn from (Global’s) report that (there is) 700 (regime-connected individuals) was staggering, and it requires immediate action to kick them out,” Poilievre said in an interview last week.

The Conservative leader said he wants to see the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. listed as a terrorist entity in Canada, more sanctions against Iran, and the creation of a foreign agent registry.

While airing that interview, Global stated that they’ve “reached out to the Prime Minister’s office and four federal cabinet minister. None were available for comment, but [they] will keep pushing for answers, if only because the people risking their lives to speak out against the regime deserve them.”

I could be wrong, but the impression I was left with was that PM Trudeau was ambushed into providing a “live” and televised answer, though he seemed to be aware that he’d be hit with the subject soon enough.

His answer:

“We continue to watch and make sure that we’re able to do everything we can that is responsible against the impact of the IRGC,” Trudeau told reporters Tuesday in Maple Ridge, B.C.

“As I have said many, many times, the Iranian regime responsible for shooting down of PS-752, the killing of its own citizens and killing of Canadian citizens, its sponsorship of terror around the world, means that we will continue to do everything necessary both to hold that regime to account … and to protect Canadians.” (Source)

Truly a lame one, in my opinion.

Shooting down that flight is a goto event that the West likes to point to to assert Iran's evil. I did mention that the US did the same, right? See below. It was an Iranian flight to boot.

This is an error. But Iran error is an evil act?

You get why much of the world now thinks that the West is run by major A-holes, no?

Speaking of killing innocent people with flying objects: If the US' drone strikes and indiscriminate killing of civilians—when not due to poor judgment—if that doesn't qualify the US forces a terrorists organisation, then no one should be labeled a terrorist, in my opinion.    

Otherwise, I do agree that Trudeau does seem like he's having a hard time affirming where he really stands on those crucially important issues currently reshaping our world and its functional structures. No matter what he does, though, he's assured intense venom from some group, making one instinctively shift their stand from one leg to another.

However, I truly despise what Poilièvre stands for.

I'd rather have a leader that hesitates to jump into certain decisions that Poilièvre seems to want to rush through, the potential outcome, and how it's achieved, being too Trumpian in many respects for my taste.

Poilièvre, with a GOP-pleasing slogan and a smug smile to obscure the scum, wants to axe all sorts of stuff. Sounds very serial killer-ish, if you ask me.

And all his plans concerning immigration are promises that the bigots are sure to love, though, Iranians, they may regret backing this terrorist-list move, should they do so.

When all's said and done, I still don't have a fix on the exact "reason" behind all this.

Three key players are made clear, but not any entities pushing this from behind them, if any. 

Those are: 

• Masih Alinejad, "a Brooklyn-based journalist and women’s rights activist."
• Global News
• Pierre Poilièvre. Opposition leader, CPC

Seeing that PM Trudeau was excluded from a joint statement made by NATO nations condemning Hamas—a good thing in my opinion—I've really gotta wonder if this wasn't orchestrated by Washington, as they still plan on attacking Iran while in the neighbourhood, no doubt using some Iran-backed pretext to justify their innocent and freedom-loving aggressions? 

Trudeau, they feel, can't be trusted to get the right kind of hate right, so they approached the P2-boy?

It would explain why it's Global News that's pushing this, and why they're so eager and insistent.     

Terror From Below!

There's more, but I included just these ones as they're all that's needed to make my point.

Israel did it: Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114 (1973)

On February 21, 1973, a Libyan Arab Airlines Boeing 727 flying from Tripoli to Cairo went off course, flying over the Sinai peninsula, under Israeli control since 1967's Six-Day War. After giving signals to land and firing warning shots, Israeli jets shot down the plane, killing 108 of the 113 people on board; four passengers and a co-pilot survived the resulting crash.

Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan called it an "error of judgment"; the Israeli government compensated the victims' families. Libya condemned the attack as "a criminal act" while the Soviets called it a "monstrous new crime."

.

Maybe the French did it? Itavia Flight 870 (1980)

No clear responsible party has ben identified for this one, but that it was a plot to shoot down a plane carrying Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi that had been organised by the French, possibly involving NATO, seems like the likely answer. That the West hasn't pressed the issue kind of confirms it.

.

The US did it. To Iran. Iran Air Flight 655 (1988)

In 1988, the US Navy accidentally shot an Iranian plane out of the sky, killing 290 people. The USS Vincennes was in the middle of a skirmish with Iranian gunboats when it saw Iran Air Flight 655 on its radar and confused the Airbus 300 for a fighter jet

On July 3, 1988, as the Iran-Iraq war was winding down, US and Iranian ships were involved in some skirmishes in the Persian Gulf. An Airbus A300 took off from a nearby airport, one which was used for both military and civilian purposes. An American cruiser, the USS Vincennes, mistook the plane for an F-14, an American fighter plane that we had sold to Iran before the 1979 revolution, and launched two missiles, downing the plane and killing everyone on board.

President Reagan called the event a "terrible human tragedy," and stated "we deeply regret any loss of life." Iran's UN ambassador condemned the action as ''criminal act,'' an ''atrocity'' and a ''massacre," while the US insisted it was a misunderstanding. Then-Vice President George H.W. Bush called the idea the US would have shot down the plane deliberately "offensive and absurd," and argued that allowing passenger flights out of an airport as a naval battle was underway was irresponsible of the Iranians. "They allowed a civilian aircraft loaded with passengers to proceed on a path over a warship engaged in battle,'' Bush said. ''That was irresponsible and a tragic error.''

Iran sued the United States in the International Court of Justice, and the American government eventually agreed in 1996 to pay $61.8 million ($93.7 million today) to the families of victims; notably, that amount was 1/30th of the compensation the US secured from Libya for victims of the Lockerbie plane bombing that same year. The US government has never apologized for shooting down the plane, beyond Reagan's initial statement, and Max Fisher has noted the event contributes to Iranian mistrust of American intentions to this day.

.

Ukraine did it: Siberia Airlines Flight 1812 (2001)

On October 4, 2001, 64 Siberia Airlines passengers and 12 crew members onboard a Soviet-made Tupolev Tu-154 en route from Novosibirsk to Tel Aviv were killed when the plane was shot down over the Black Sea by a Ukrainian missile.

Ukraine remained silent, but Russian investigators finally had them admit that the Ukraine military had made a mistake.

The day of the shoot-down, the Ukrainian military was conducting a massive military exercise which involved shooting 23 missiles at drones. "Experts say that the radar-guided S-200, among the farthest-flying and most capable antiaircraft missile in the arsenal of former Soviet nations, simply locked onto the Russian airliner after it raced past the destroyed drone some 20 miles off the Crimean coast," the New York Times' Michael Wines reported.

 Kuchma accepted the resignation of his Minister of Defense, Oleksandr Kuzmuk, following the admission that the military was at fault. From 2003 to 2005, Ukraine paid $15.6 million to families of victims following a deal with the government of Israel.

.

Assassinations - USA versus Iran

.