1953 Iran Coup - CIA Finally Admits Role

[Mad Scientist]

From CNN:
In declassified document, CIA acknowledges role in 1953 Iran coup - CNN.com

Sixty years after the overthrow of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, a declassified CIA document acknowledges that the agency was involved in the 1953 coup.

The independent National Security Archive research institute, which published the document Monday, says the declassification is believed to mark the CIA's first formal acknowledgment of its involvement.

The documents, declassified in 2011 and given to George Washington University research group under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), come from the CIA's internal history of Iran from the mid-1970s and paint a detailed picture of how the CIA worked to oust Mossadegh.

You can be rest assured though that the CIA has not done that since, like in Egypt or Libya. And if they have, it's Classified and none of your business anyway.

In a key line pointed out by Malcom Byrne, the editor who worked through the documents, the CIA spells out its involvement in the coup. "The military coup that overthrew Mossadeq and his National Front cabinet was carried out under CIA direction as an act of U.S. foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government,

And those of you who understand how the US Government ACTUALLY WORKS, not just what the Constitution says, know that could mean CIA, U.N. or International Bankers.

Thanks Veterans! USA! USA! USA!

 

[P F Tinmore]

Good post.

This has been common knowledge for decades. A lot of people did not know though.

 

[Soulless65]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgfsgiPMqRc]1953 Iran Coup - CIA Finally Admits Role - YouTube[/ame]

Well I wonder what the Statists have to say about this

 

[Connery]

Moved to proper forum

 

[francoHFW]

And the takeover of the US embassy in 1979 was a direct reaction. Politics is history is politics.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Interesting... the year Obama was born...

What are all you socialists gonna say to defend this one???

 

[Londoner]

What is more interesting is that most Republican voters didn't know this information.

The wildly popular & democratically elected leader of Iran sought to wrestle control of his nation's energy resources from the west.

So we replaced him with a brutal dictator - the Shaw - who was more open to western energy needs.

This inspired the growth of terrorist networks which became more powerful refuge of populist opposition to western intervention.

This is the kind of stuff that causes blowback.

Republicans understand none of this. They've been told that the globe is run by rational, mutually beneficial market arrangement. [They don't know how the world works. Homo Economicus is a textbook model which completely undervalues the irrational side of human behavior, and leaves no room for the fact that a high incidence of parties to any given transaction have wildly incomplete information, and have been terribly manipulated by their political party to misjudge their interests]

But ... let's get back to the military side of capitalism, which is a sad paradox, especially when you consider the coercion behind many "free" global markets. MEANING:when a country which has resources that we need decides to close those resources to foreign investment, we create a national security context to invade that country and pry its resources open by force. This is commonly done by the installation of dictator like the Shaw or Hussein. These maneuvers often backfire > SEE the law of unintended consequences. (Don't try explaining this to Republicans. They won't listen listen. They've been trained to trust Washington completely when it comes to military intervention, especially where their party controls the White House. A more loyal group of government controlled drones you will not find. Bush was lucky to have such an uncritical group of voters.)

Why is it that republicans only know the Big Government/Washington side of every military intervention? How ironic that they are such dupes of concentrated power and that they parakeet so many of the official narratives which Washington tells to obscure its highly interventionist foreign policies.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

1953 Iran Coup - CIA Finally Admits Role

Which is about as ‘earthshaking’ as acknowledging Area 51.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What is more interesting is that most Republican voters didn't know this information.

The wildly popular & democratically elected leader of Iran sought to wrestle control of his nation's energy resources from the west.

So we replaced him with a brutal dictator - the Shaw - who was more open to western energy needs.

This inspired the growth of terrorist networks which became more powerful refuge of populist opposition to western intervention.

This is the kind of stuff that causes blowback.

Republicans understand none of this. They've been told that the globe is run by rational, mutually beneficial market arrangement. [They don't know how the world works. Homo Economicus is a textbook model which completely undervalues the irrational side of human behavior, and leaves no room for the fact that a high incidence of parties to any given transaction have wildly incomplete information, and have been terribly manipulated by their political party to misjudge their interests]

But ... let's get back to the military side of capitalism, which is a sad paradox, especially when you consider the bloodshed beneath many "free" global markets. MEANING:when a country which has resources that we need decides to close those resources to foreign investment, we create a national security context to invade that country and pry its resources open by force. This is commonly done by the installation of brutal dictator like the Shaw. Why is it that republicans only have the Big Government/Washington side of every story? How ironic that they are such dupes of concentrated power and that they parakeet so many of the official narratives which Washington tells to cover-up its highly interventionist foreign policies.

And neo-cons continue to refuse to learn from history, to the continued detriment of the American people, where the same wrong-headed rationale was used to justify the illegal and failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Political Junky]

Yep, the worst kept secret of them all.

 

[eots]

I thought this was common knowledge already

 

[Billo_Really]

Interesting... the year Obama was born...

What are all you socialists gonna say to defend this one???

How can anyone defend the birth of the Obama demon seed?

Immediately going to work as shown in his diary logs...

Day 1 - still tired from the move.
Day 2 - overthrow democratically elected government of Iran
Day 3...​

I always thought the Shah of Iran was a Barack Obama puppet leader and now my thoughts have been vindicated.

 

[Billo_Really]

I thought this was common knowledge already

Next they'll admit they were the ones behind changing Coke to Pepsi.

 

[Indofred]

BBC News - CIA documents acknowledge its role in Iran's 1953 coup

The CIA has released documents which for the first time formally acknowledge its key role in the 1953 coup which ousted Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadeq.

However, this, although the CIA have only just admitted it, is old hat but..........

The documents show how the CIA prepared for the coup by placing anti-Mossadeq stories in both the Iranian and US media.

Basically, they admit placing false stories in the media to prepare public opinion for their illegal actions.

Now, fast forward to today and look again at anti Iranian stories with the knowledge the CIA are quite willing to lie to you.

Are you really stupid enough to believe the boy who cried, "wolf"?

 

[Saigon]

Interesting stuff....it makes me wonder how many other examples there may be out there...

 

[longknife]

One of the stupidist things the CIA ever did!

I will never understand some of the things that were initiated under the Eisenhower administration.

Installing the Shah was actually a good move, an attempt to lift a nation ut of 7th Century Islam into the modern world. Sadly, when the time came, the Peanut Farmer turned his back on those efforts and let Khomeini take over - the direct cause of the current Islamic fanatics and their jihad.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Interesting stuff....it makes me wonder how many other examples there may be out there...

None.

The CIA isn't involved in Libya or Syria.

Now go watch some TV.

 

[Sallow]

One of the stupidist things the CIA ever did!

I will never understand some of the things that were initiated under the Eisenhower administration.

Installing the Shah was actually a good move, an attempt to lift a nation ut of 7th Century Islam into the modern world. Sadly, when the time came, the Peanut Farmer turned his back on those efforts and let Khomeini take over - the direct cause of the current Islamic fanatics and their jihad.

Funnah.

And that's not what happened.

It was the ol ' "What's all of our oil doing under their sand" meme.

Iran was pretty modern.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Wow! What a shocking revelation!

This has been known for decades.

 

[Sunni Man]

Interesting stuff....it makes me wonder how many other examples there may be out there...

None.

The CIA isn't involved in Libya or Syria..

Of course the CIA/Mossad were involved in both in the recent events in Syria and Libya.

To think otherwise is very naive. ..