US Media Discover Iran Has 'Protests' (Not Terrorism) When It Suits The Narrative
When Iran's Supreme Leader points a finger at Donald Trump for fueling unrest, mainstream outlets like The Hill eagerly publish. What they omit, however, is the documented history of U.S. administrations, irrespective of party, funneling resources into destabilization efforts within Iran. (Remember the CIA's 1953 coup that overthrew democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh? Or the
openly declared policy of 'regime change' that funneled funds to various opposition groups, sometimes indistinguishable from armed insurgents, under both Bush and Obama?). It's always 'protests' when the West wants a government gone, but 'terrorism' when the target is an ally (or anyone who dares resist). One might wonder how many 'protesters' would be tolerated burning police stations and mosques
in, say, Washington D.C., before the label shifted from 'dissident' to 'domestic terrorist'. Funny how context, and millions in covert funding, changes the dictionary entry.