Poll: Bush Hive Mind Supports Iran Attack
Kurt Nimmo | 28.03.2007 12:24 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Terror War | World
Of course, with an appropriate black flag terrorist event pinned on Iran, this fence sitting 18% and no doubt a large chunk those “somewhat” opposed to attacking Iran, or 19%, will team up to make a majority.
In yet another brain-dead poll conducted by Harris Interactive, nearly 60 percent of Americans believe “Iran is helping the Shiites in Iraq by providing weapons to them.”
No indication if the people polled understand that 53 percent of Iranians are Shi’ites, or that Iran providing weapons to fellow Shi’ites makes more sense than the United States providing weapons to Israeli Jews, as there approximately 5 million Jews in the United States, or around 3 percent of the population.
In fact, if we are to base nation-states along religious lines, as is the case with Israel, a large chunk of Iraq would rightfully be considered part of Iran, or at least the Shi’a part of Iran, that is to say most of the country. In order to get an idea of what I’m talking about, check out this map.
Further data breaks down along the same old tired, fanatical, irrational, and generally brain-dead lines: 14% in favor of bombing Iran, with an additional 18% “somewhat” favoring mass murdering Iranians in the name of Israel, although most Americans remain steadfastly unaware, as admitted by the Bush crime family intimate Philip Zelikow, that attacking Iraq and soon Iran serves the state of Israel, not the United States, as downtown Tehran is exactly 6352.5 miles from the Washington Monument and Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, no matter what Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did or did not say, will not invade on a fortnight, even if the neocons insist that’s how long it will take for Iran to patch together a crude nuke.
Of course, with an appropriate black flag terrorist event pinned on Iran, this fence sitting 18% and no doubt a large chunk those “somewhat” opposed to attacking Iran, or 19%, will team up to make a majority. As well, the “not sure” column, wishy-washy and easily swayed with the right degree of propaganda catapulted in their namby-pamby direction by the likes of Fox News, CNN, and the rest of the corporate media, will likely be onboard, plastic flags made in China in hand. In other words, given the correct degree of engineered violence and resultant media-hyped fear on the part of a know-nothing public, wired into Fox News like Borg drones assimilated to the collective mind, a majority of the population will either support the attack on Iran or be ambivalent enough not to give a hoot one way or the other, in short they will be accomplices.
Angus Reid, however, does not see it that way. “Americans Reject Attacking Iran Over Iraq Bombs,” the global monitor corporation announces. Indeed, a Bushzarro flip-flop, indeed an avalanche, hangs by a tenuous thread, a sword of Damocles, and will be easily snapped by a “dirty bomb” event or even a suicide bomber at the mall, conducted by a crazed Muslim patsy or mental patient with a Persian surname.
No indication if the people polled understand that 53 percent of Iranians are Shi’ites, or that Iran providing weapons to fellow Shi’ites makes more sense than the United States providing weapons to Israeli Jews, as there approximately 5 million Jews in the United States, or around 3 percent of the population.
In fact, if we are to base nation-states along religious lines, as is the case with Israel, a large chunk of Iraq would rightfully be considered part of Iran, or at least the Shi’a part of Iran, that is to say most of the country. In order to get an idea of what I’m talking about, check out this map.
Further data breaks down along the same old tired, fanatical, irrational, and generally brain-dead lines: 14% in favor of bombing Iran, with an additional 18% “somewhat” favoring mass murdering Iranians in the name of Israel, although most Americans remain steadfastly unaware, as admitted by the Bush crime family intimate Philip Zelikow, that attacking Iraq and soon Iran serves the state of Israel, not the United States, as downtown Tehran is exactly 6352.5 miles from the Washington Monument and Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, no matter what Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did or did not say, will not invade on a fortnight, even if the neocons insist that’s how long it will take for Iran to patch together a crude nuke.
Of course, with an appropriate black flag terrorist event pinned on Iran, this fence sitting 18% and no doubt a large chunk those “somewhat” opposed to attacking Iran, or 19%, will team up to make a majority. As well, the “not sure” column, wishy-washy and easily swayed with the right degree of propaganda catapulted in their namby-pamby direction by the likes of Fox News, CNN, and the rest of the corporate media, will likely be onboard, plastic flags made in China in hand. In other words, given the correct degree of engineered violence and resultant media-hyped fear on the part of a know-nothing public, wired into Fox News like Borg drones assimilated to the collective mind, a majority of the population will either support the attack on Iran or be ambivalent enough not to give a hoot one way or the other, in short they will be accomplices.
Angus Reid, however, does not see it that way. “Americans Reject Attacking Iran Over Iraq Bombs,” the global monitor corporation announces. Indeed, a Bushzarro flip-flop, indeed an avalanche, hangs by a tenuous thread, a sword of Damocles, and will be easily snapped by a “dirty bomb” event or even a suicide bomber at the mall, conducted by a crazed Muslim patsy or mental patient with a Persian surname.
Kurt Nimmo
Homepage:
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=815
Comments
Hide 8 hidden comments or hide all comments
Kurt Nimmo, sigh!
28.03.2007 15:33
Tenuous logic once again from Nimmo. More accurately, the usual cherry-picking of "facts" inherent to conspiracy nutters.
Iran and Iraq are on the whole pretty much comfortable with their respective ethnicities. Iraq is largely Arab and Iran has a whole different cultural heritage that is chiefly Persian and Farsi-speaking (with a miniscule Arab minority). Both have cultures that are of massive historical importance to the field of Humanities from sociology to linguistics and in the sciences too.
Let's we forget the horrific Western-backed war that isn't exactly going to unite the two countries in embraces of fraternal love any time soon.
Promoting the idea that the Iranian would arm and train the Shia of the world, or have a national interest in the Shia of Iraq, on a purely religous motivation is a pretty dangerous postulation at this moment in time.
Furthermore, there is has been little more than rumour or speculation put forward regarding Iran supplying weapons and training to Iraqis. It would hardly be a surprise if it were true that some small factions were involved, but let's not forget there has been no credible proof of Iranian state sponsorship.
So Qadaffi dabbled in supporting the PIRA because he was secretly Roman Catholic? Is Nimmo suggesting that all Muslim sects are somehow united in a common cause? Why doesn't Saudi or the Emirates align with Palestine then?
But hey, anything to crowbar the subject of Jews into the conversation.
But what do you expect from a holocaust denier (John Irving supporter) and an associate of Jeff Rense (an active Zuendel supporter; yeah yeah, I know Chomsky wrote a foreword for a book on the basis of "free speech for all", but never endorsed the contents.)
I think people should be very careful in perpetuating any backhanded anti-Iranian propaganda at this stage- especially when it comes from from a blog with a notorious right-wing agenda)
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/iz.html
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/iz.html
(I know shit source full of errors, but the demographics are roughly correct)
Paddy Qadaffi
how profound
28.03.2007 15:52
To say the Iranians are not arming groups in Iraq is pretty redundant. They're the only capable power of supplying the weaponry. A lot of the road side bombs have been shown to originate from Iran.
This is where you jump in and say "this is a conspiracy like 9/11", George W Bush must be supplying the insurgents! Nice one limp dicks.
In this regard, go read my article on 9/11 conspiracy theories, before you decide to make some new ones.
Maddox
Homepage: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons
link
28.03.2007 15:53
Maddox
Maddox
28.03.2007 18:50
Bozzo
Why the hell was this hidden???
29.03.2007 06:39
Tenuous logic once again from Nimmo. More accurately, the usual cherry-picking of "facts" inherent to conspiracy nutters.
Iran and Iraq are on the whole pretty much comfortable with their respective ethnicities. Iraq is largely Arab and Iran has a whole different cultural heritage that is chiefly Persian and Farsi-speaking (with a miniscule Arab minority). Both have cultures that are of massive historical importance to the field of Humanities from sociology to linguistics and in the sciences too.
Let's we forget the horrific Western-backed war that isn't exactly going to unite the two countries in embraces of fraternal love any time soon.
Promoting the idea that the Iranian would arm and train the Shia of the world, or have a national interest in the Shia of Iraq, on a purely religous motivation is a pretty dangerous postulation at this moment in time.
Furthermore, there is has been little more than rumour or speculation put forward regarding Iran supplying weapons and training to Iraqis. It would hardly be a surprise if it were true that some small factions were involved, but let's not forget there has been no credible proof of Iranian state sponsorship.
So Qadaffi dabbled in supporting the PIRA because he was secretly Roman Catholic? Is Nimmo suggesting that all Muslim sects are somehow united in a common cause? Why doesn't Saudi or the Emirates align with Palestine then?
But hey, anything to crowbar the subject of Jews into the conversation.
But what do you expect from a holocaust denier (John Irving supporter) and an associate of Jeff Rense (an active Zuendel supporter; yeah yeah, I know Chomsky wrote a foreword for a book on the basis of "free speech for all", but never endorsed the contents.)
I think people should be very careful in perpetuating any backhanded anti-Iranian propaganda at this stage- especially when it comes from from a blog with a notorious right-wing agenda)
Paddy Qadaffi
...
29.03.2007 08:00
Tenuous logic once again from Nimmo. More accurately, the usual cherry-picking of "facts" inherent to conspiracy nutters.
Iran and Iraq are on the whole pretty much comfortable with their respective ethnicities. Iraq is largely Arab and Iran has a whole different cultural heritage that is chiefly Persian and Farsi-speaking (with a miniscule Arab minority). Both have cultures that are of massive historical importance to the field of Humanities from sociology to linguistics and in the sciences too.
Let's we forget the horrific Western-backed war that isn't exactly going to unite the two countries in embraces of fraternal love any time soon.
Promoting the idea that the Iranian would arm and train the Shia of the world, or have a national interest in the Shia of Iraq, on a purely religous motivation is a pretty dangerous postulation at this moment in time.
Furthermore, there is has been little more than rumour or speculation put forward regarding Iran supplying weapons and training to Iraqis. It would hardly be a surprise if it were true that some small factions were involved, but let's not forget there has been no credible proof of Iranian state sponsorship.
So Qadaffi dabbled in supporting the PIRA because he was secretly Roman Catholic? Is Nimmo suggesting that all Muslim sects are somehow united in a common cause? Why doesn't Saudi or the Emirates align with Palestine then?
But hey, anything to crowbar the subject of Jews into the conversation.
But what do you expect from a holocaust denier (John Irving supporter) and an associate of Jeff Rense (an active Zuendel supporter; yeah yeah, I know Chomsky wrote a foreword for a book on the basis of "free speech for all", but never endorsed the contents.)
I think people should be very careful in perpetuating any backhanded anti-Iranian propaganda at this stage- especially when it comes from from a blog with a notorious right-wing agenda)
Paddy Qadaffi
...
29.03.2007 08:34
Tenuous logic once again from Nimmo. More accurately, the usual cherry-picking of "facts" inherent to conspiracy nutters.
Iran and Iraq are on the whole pretty much comfortable with their respective ethnicities. Iraq is largely Arab and Iran has a whole different cultural heritage that is chiefly Persian and Farsi-speaking (with a miniscule Arab minority). Both have cultures that are of massive historical importance to the field of Humanities from sociology to linguistics and in the sciences too.
Let's we forget the horrific Western-backed war that isn't exactly going to unite the two countries in embraces of fraternal love any time soon.
Promoting the idea that the Iranian would arm and train the Shia of the world, or have a national interest in the Shia of Iraq, on a purely religous motivation is a pretty dangerous postulation at this moment in time.
Furthermore, there is has been little more than rumour or speculation put forward regarding Iran supplying weapons and training to Iraqis. It would hardly be a surprise if it were true that some small factions were involved, but let's not forget there has been no credible proof of Iranian state sponsorship.
So Qadaffi dabbled in supporting the PIRA because he was secretly Roman Catholic? Is Nimmo suggesting that all Muslim sects are somehow united in a common cause? Why doesn't Saudi or the Emirates align with Palestine then?
But hey, anything to crowbar the subject of Jews into the conversation.
But what do you expect from a holocaust denier (John Irving supporter) and an associate of Jeff Rense (an active Zuendel supporter; yeah yeah, I know Chomsky wrote a foreword for a book on the basis of "free speech for all", but never endorsed the contents.)
I think people should be very careful in perpetuating any backhanded anti-Iranian propaganda at this stage- especially when it comes from from a blog with a notorious right-wing agenda)
pq
...
29.03.2007 13:08
Tenuous logic once again from Nimmo. More accurately, the usual cherry-picking of "facts" inherent to conspiracy nutters.
Iran and Iraq are on the whole pretty much comfortable with their respective ethnicities. Iraq is largely Arab and Iran has a whole different cultural heritage that is chiefly Persian and Farsi-speaking (with a miniscule Arab minority). Both have cultures that are of massive historical importance to the field of Humanities from sociology to linguistics and in the sciences too.
Let's we forget the horrific Western-backed war that isn't exactly going to unite the two countries in embraces of fraternal love any time soon.
Promoting the idea that the Iranian would arm and train the Shia of the world, or have a national interest in the Shia of Iraq, on a purely religous motivation is a pretty dangerous postulation at this moment in time.
Furthermore, there is has been little more than rumour or speculation put forward regarding Iran supplying weapons and training to Iraqis. It would hardly be a surprise if it were true that some small factions were involved, but let's not forget there has been no credible proof of Iranian state sponsorship.
So Qadaffi dabbled in supporting the PIRA because he was secretly Roman Catholic? Is Nimmo suggesting that all Muslim sects are somehow united in a common cause? Why doesn't Saudi or the Emirates align with Palestine then?
But hey, anything to crowbar the subject of Jews into the conversation.
But what do you expect from a holocaust denier (John Irving supporter) and an associate of Jeff Rense (an active Zuendel supporter; yeah yeah, I know Chomsky wrote a foreword for a book on the basis of "free speech for all", but never endorsed the contents.)
I think people should be very careful in perpetuating any backhanded anti-Iranian propaganda at this stage- especially when it comes from from a blog with a notorious right-wing agenda)
...
Hide 8 hidden comments or hide all comments