|« Hunger Strike Aftermath||Never ending Nakba »|
To Iranians, Persian Gulf is not simply a name referring to a geographical region on the world map. To Iranians, the name of Persian Gulf is interwoven with a sense of national dignity and honor which makes them a united and powerful troupe against the relentless attacks of the enemy. The name of Persian Gulf resembles a feeling of pride and decorum for them which cannot be replaced by any other gift or reward. It reminds them of the impressive days when the flag of ancient Persian Empire honorably fluttered and waved in the sky and there was no other competitor to supersede this mighty empire.
Of course Iranians' attachment to Persian Gulf and the cultural heritage which it carries does not emanate from blind nationalistic sentiments. Iranians know well that today, they are the representative of a greater, broader union that is the Islamic Ummah. They know that it's with the blessing of Islam that they can still take pride on being an unrivaled superpower in such a tumultuous and restless region as the Middle East. However, Iranians are extremely sensitive about those vicious, brutal powers who intend to undermine their national honor and solidarity by encroaching on their national belongings, including the Persian Gulf.
Aside from the naughty attempts by some Arab nations in the region for distorting the name of Persian Gulf, the American web giant Google has recently fueled an anti-Iranian campaign by removing the name of Persian Gulf from its online maps and Google Earth plans. No Google official was ready to give comments on this questionable move, and Iranians are still wondering what motives have caused the American company to take such a thoughtless action.
Albeit if we take a look at the documents and evidence which point to the fact that Google is in actuality a CIA subsidiary that takes orders from the White House and operates under the guise of a technology firm while serving the long-run interests of a circle of American policymakers, it will be no surprise that by removing the name of Persian Gulf from its maps, Google intends to contribute to the anti-Iranian agenda of the United States and Israel which are vehemently underway these days.
In a 2006 interview with "Alex Jones show," Robert David Steele, a 20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer and a former clandestine services case officer with CIA said that he had credible information attesting to the fact that Google was assisted and funded by CIA. "Google took money from the CIA when it was poor and it was starting up and unfortunately our system right now floods money into spying and other illegal and largely unethical activities, and it doesn't fund what I call the open source world," said Steele, citing "trusted individuals" as his sources for the claim.
"Let me say very explicitly - their contact at the CIA is named Dr. Rick Steinheiser, he's in the Office of Research and Development," said Steele.
And now that the United States is doing its best to convince Iran's trade partners in Asia, Africa and Europe that they shouldn't buy Iran's crude oil anymore, launch chained covert cyber operations against Iran's state-owned companies, facilitate the assassination of Iran's nuclear scientists and impede the route of diplomacy for finding a solution to Iran's nuclear standoff, asking Google to erase the name of Persian Gulf which is a tremendously strategic waterway in the Middle East and a symbol of Iran's regional domination can be interpreted as a new phase of this complicated anti-Iranian plot.
But such unprofessional actions which are in sharp contrast to all the proclaimed principles and policies of companies like Google, including non-alignment to governments and independence in action, will do no harm to the regional superiority of Iran but give rise to anti-American sentiments among Iranians, discredit and bring into disrepute their fame and strengthen the national solidarity and unity of Iranians.
University professor and author Dr. Kevin Barrett believes that Google's removal of the Persian Gulf name is part of a Zionist-directed plot against Iran: "Google's idiotic removal of the Persian Gulf from its maps is part of a coordinated strategy by Zionist-dominated American policy-makers. Google is a CIA subsidiary. They are trying to foment hatred, strife, and violence between Iranian and Arab Muslims, as part of their imperial divide-and-conquer strategy."
"This is part of what the US military calls its "total war," meaning a genocidal war of extermination, against the world's 1.5 billion Muslims. Their goal is to provoke Muslims to fight and kill each other. That way, the Israelis and Americans won't have to suffer the blowback from committing genocide directly," he added.
"This is only one example of the Zionist West's genocidal efforts to provoke bloodshed between different groups of Muslims. The February, 2006 terrorist attack on the Golden Dome al-Askari mosque in Samarra by the U.S. forces is an example of the numerous false-flag attacks by Zionist-controlled terrorists designed to destroy Islam by fomenting schism and bloodshed (what Muslims call fitna)," wrote Barrett.
American journalist and radio host Stephen Lendman similarly believes that Google's decision in removing the name of Persian Gulf from its maps is dictated from above: "Google is connected to the CIA. The agency provided startup funding. Its "mischievous attack" had to be CIA or political Washington connected. Why else would they do it? It provides Internet searches and other online related products and services. It's a profit making business, not a political instrument unless directed to perform this type service."
Famous British TV journalist and political commentator Yvonne Ridley is also against the seditious action of Google; however, she says that having a black record of mischievous actions by Google in mind, it would be no surprise that the American firm has removed the name of Persian Gulf from its maps: "Google has Jerusalem down as the capital of Israel so I wouldn't get too upset by seeing this. It has its own political agenda and it is obviously under the thumb of the foreign policymakers in the United States."
Ridley believes that Google is establishing a dangerous tradition by removing the name of Persian Gulf from its maps. She recommends Iranians to get united and take action against Google: "it might be worth Iranians mounting a campaign with online petitions, using the social networks and ridiculing Google for its silly attempt to erase the Persian influence in the region. If you stand by and let a search engine like Google erase your country's history and culture it will set a dangerous precedent. Iranians should put up a resistance from the highest echelons of government to the kids in the street."
Tim King, a former U.S. mariner and veteran journalist also believes that Google's action is not justifiable by any standards and nothing but a political game: "In my mind, there is no question that we are watching the Google political, technical arm undermine and attempt to erase ancient history. I believe the U.S. and Israeli governments are absolutely carrying out another campaign against Tehran and this one is more shameful than most, as Americans are painfully unaware of world geography and the real history relating to the US, the UK and Persia. This is a Zionist program without question, we all know that."
King believes that Google questions its already stained reputation with such moves: "I don't see how this type of move will do anything but harm the reputation of Google, a company already known for its pro-Israel bias and its refusal to speak out over Israeli war crimes and apartheid politics. It is sad, I know so many Iranians who continually and expressly wish the war drums would die down."
Persian Gulf's legacy remains Iranian forever. By removing its name from the maps or faking other names for it, its reality cannot be changed. Those who intentionally make such attempts are advised to think twice and take a look at the world map and grasp Iran's reality, and those who don't know they are being tricked should remain alert to avoid plunging into the trap of American-Zionist alliance.
- Kourosh Ziabari is an Iranian freelance journalist. He has interviewed political commentator and linguist Noam Chomsky, member of New Zealand parliament Keith Locke, Australian politician Ian Cohen, member of German Parliament Ruprecht Polenz, former Mexican President Vicente Fox, former U.S. National Security Council advisor Peter D. Feaver, Nobel Prize laureate in Physics Wolfgang Ketterle, Nobel Prize laureate in Chemistry Kurt Wüthrich, Nobel Prize laureate in biology Robin Warren, famous German political prisoner Ernst Zündel, Brazilian cartoonist Carlos Latuff, American author Stephen Kinzer, syndicated journalist Eric Margolis, former aSiddiqiistant of the U.S. Department of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, American-Palestinian journalist Ramzy Baroud, former President of the American Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Sid Ganis, American international relations scholar Stephen Zunes, American singer and songwriter David Rovics, American political scientist and anthropologist William Beeman, British journalist Andy Worthington, Australian author and blogger Antony Loewenstein, Iranian geopolitics expert Pirouz Mojtahedzadeh, American historian and author Michael A. Hoffman II and Israeli musician Gilad Atzmon.
The popular notion that anti-Semitism caused the Zionist movement makes the mistake of post hoc ergo propter hoc - "after the fact, therefore because of the fact."
Sixty-six years ago, on November 29, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 181, which partitioned the land of Palestine into two States: the “birth certificate” for Israel, and the “death certificate” for Palestine.
Native Americans held a special knowledge of the land and its inhabitants, and believed they were only a small part of the whole circle of life, and that each part of creation played a significant role in the contentment and survival of the other.
The assassination of the President of the United States on national television by the “lone” assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald—who according to authorities used an obsolete bolt-action WWI rifle that was not capable of firing bullets fast enough to wound John F. Kennedy—who is then assassinated the next day by another “lone” assassin, is so stupid that whoever is behind the assassination didn’t expect you to believe it.
Would the planet be at serious risk, according to a massive United Nations Environmental Report, due to “the dangers of climate change, water scarcity, dwindling fish stocks and the pressures on the land and the extinction of species,” had John F. Kennedy not been assassinated on Friday, November 22, 1963.
|Your donation helps provide a place for people to speak out. thepeoplesvoice.org P.O. Box 159113 Nashville, TN 37215 Not tax deductible. email@example.com|
|Articles and Writers||Old TPV|
|<< <||> >>|