Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iranian Alert -- February 2, 2004 -- IRAN LIVE THREAD --Americans for Regime Change in Iran
The Iranian Student Movement Up To The Minute Reports ^ | 2.2.2004 | DoctorZin

Posted on 02/02/2004 12:06:43 AM PST by DoctorZIn

The US media almost entirely ignores news regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran. As Tony Snow of the Fox News Network has put it, “this is probably the most under-reported news story of the year.” But most American’s are unaware that the Islamic Republic of Iran is NOT supported by the masses of Iranians today. Modern Iranians are among the most pro-American in the Middle East.

There is a popular revolt against the Iranian regime brewing in Iran today. Starting June 10th of this year, Iranians have begun taking to the streets to express their desire for a regime change. Most want to replace the regime with a secular democracy. Many even want the US to over throw their government.

The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movement in Iran from being reported. Unfortunately, the regime has successfully prohibited western news reporters from covering the demonstrations. The voices of discontent within Iran are sometime murdered, more often imprisoned. Still the people continue to take to the streets to demonstrate against the regime.

In support of this revolt, Iranians in America have been broadcasting news stories by satellite into Iran. This 21st century news link has greatly encouraged these protests. The regime has been attempting to jam the signals, and locate the satellite dishes. Still the people violate the law and listen to these broadcasts. Iranians also use the Internet and the regime attempts to block their access to news against the regime. In spite of this, many Iranians inside of Iran read these posts daily to keep informed of the events in their own country.

This daily thread contains nearly all of the English news reports on Iran. It is thorough. If you follow this thread you will witness, I believe, the transformation of a nation. This daily thread provides a central place where those interested in the events in Iran can find the best news and commentary. The news stories and commentary will from time to time include material from the regime itself. But if you read the post you will discover for yourself, the real story of what is occurring in Iran and its effects on the war on terror.

I am not of Iranian heritage. I am an American committed to supporting the efforts of those in Iran seeking to replace their government with a secular democracy. I am in contact with leaders of the Iranian community here in the United States and in Iran itself.

If you read the daily posts you will gain a better understanding of the US war on terrorism, the Middle East and why we need to support a change of regime in Iran. Feel free to ask your questions and post news stories you discover in the weeks to come.

If all goes well Iran will be free soon and I am convinced become a major ally in the war on terrorism. The regime will fall. Iran will be free. It is just a matter of time.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iaea; iran; iranianalert; iranquake; protests; southasia; studentmovement; studentprotest
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last
Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

1 posted on 02/02/2004 12:06:44 AM PST by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; McGavin999; Hinoki Cypress; ...
Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

2 posted on 02/02/2004 12:10:38 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
If all goes well Iran will be free soon and I am convinced become a major ally in the war on terrorism. The regime will fall. Iran will be free. It is just a matter of time.

Keep the reports coming, Doc.

3 posted on 02/02/2004 12:11:53 AM PST by xJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Claiming Defence Only to Proliferate

February 02, 2004
Bangkok Post News

The world should be shocked into action by the discovery of banned nuclear facilities inside newly neighbourly Libya and suddenly cooperative Iran. A few antagonistic countries insist on the right to develop terrible weapons systems in secret. People may say that international inspections by suspicious nuclear experts violate national sovereignty. The correct reply from now on must be to ask what they have to hide.

The world has a right to an answer to this pertinent question. North Korea has recently invited groups to observe its nuclear weapons programme and seems closer to playing the extortion card than ever. The administration has told private groups it is on the verge of testing nuclear weapons. The regime could be dissuaded from these tests by large and generous amounts of aid, along with promises to leave Pyongyang alone. Diplomats hope negotiations can bring a solution. Others, undiplomatically, properly call the Pyongyang position nuclear blackmail.

The truth is international agreements on proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons have broken down because of a tiny minority of rogues. Almost all countries not only welcome inspections by the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency, they facilitate them. Almost all countries report honestly and properly on their stocks of terrible weapons. Almost all countries report the labs, equipment and personnel they have to build the worst weapons.

No weapons treaty, however, contains enforcement procedures. For some 30 years, Libya flaunted rules on chemical and nuclear weapons. Now, Tripoli has seen the advantages of cooperation, and will reap the rewards of membership in the international community once again. North Korea is the best known country trafficking in illegal weapons. It threatens neighbours, conducts business with the worst types of governments and groups, and greatly harms its own people.

There also are cases like Taiwan and Israel, whose governments maintain terrible weapons secretly in the questionable name of national defence. Superpowers can also contribute. Last week, nuclear power China decided to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which monitors and restricts the proliferation of weapons and the technology to build them.

In recent weeks, the United States, Japan and South Korea have said little about the Pyongyang part of the ``axis of evil''. Washington has properly treated Iraq, Iran and North Korea as separate cases. Clearly, the hope is that China can convince its long-time ally that its best hope is to cooperate with the world. It is likely the dictator Kim Jong-il can survive yet another winter by scraping up income through aid _ including from Washington _ and illegal, covert weapons sales like the recent Scud missiles smuggled to Yemen.

Mr Kim is most worried about his survival. In fact, while his fall and the collapse of his regime would be welcomed in decent circles everywhere, the fallout from a Pyongyang political implosion would be massive. A far more attractive solution would see a change of policy in Pyongyang, where the nuclear programme and illicit weapons sales halt immediately, in return for which the world would help North Korea develop into a responsible and economically improving state.

The time has come to challenge and to rein in the tiny handful of rogue nations using the pretext of national defence to proliferate. The world must face Pyongyang and a number of other uncooperative countries with more determination. North Korea has the right to develop a system of national defence. Every country has the duty to defend its borders and thus its citizens. In these dangerous days, however, no country has the right to challenge peace and stability.
4 posted on 02/02/2004 12:23:01 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Skating on Thin Ice

February 01, 2004
The Hindustan Times
Rajesh Mishra

The unraveling mysteries from North Korea to Iran and Libya to Saudi Arabia, hint at suspected Pakistani involvement in State-sponsored foreign collaborations.

The Pakistani argument that key nuclear scientists have acted upon unauthorised ‘personal ambition and greed’ seems an attempt to divert international attention. In any case, the danger of WMD spreading out of Pakistan remain alarmingly high.

Last year, a sales brochure from the Khan Research Laboratory offering equipment and assistance in enrichment of uranium was obtained from outside Pakistan. It raised proliferation concerns and also questions on whether such offers were being clandestinely sold to other countries. The international community, including the US, seemed to show a lack of sensitivity in such matters till recently. Now, however, Islamabad’s nuclear history is under sharp western media focus.

In August 2000, The Guardian published a notice for the export of 11 radioactive substances, including depleted and enriched uranium, plutonium and tritium and 17 types of equipment, including nuclear power reactors, nuclear research reactors and reactor control systems.

A former army chief, General Mirza Aslam Beg, was quoted as saying in the news daily: “We have enough material to maintain our low-level nuclear deterrence and so much in surplus that we can sell it in the open market. It is a respectable way of earning money.” The realities now disclosed project a larger picture of unlawful deals.

Undermining international no-rms, Islamabad has received extensive technology and systems support from Beijing to create its nuclear arsenal. Pakistan-China collaboration in nuclear matters, in turn, propelled an arms race in South Asia. During the course of developing a nuclear weapons infrastructure in the country, a new corpus of nuclear experts was raised under the leadership of its ace scientist, A.Q. Khan, in Pakistan. Khan himself was dismissed as advisor to the president this past week. The scientific capabilities Pakistan received from China and other nations are now widely believed to be spreading to different parts of the world, including Iran.

The Washington Post of December 21, 2003 reported that Iran’s nuclear programme was tied to Pakistan. It revealed that a probe of Iran’s secret nuclear programme pointed to Pakistan as the source of crucial technology. Islamabad refuted the allegation.

A few weeks earlier, a story in The Times of November 13, 2003 had Iran admitting that Pakistan gave it key nuclear help. The Pakistan foreign ministry called the report ‘totally baseless’ and ‘anti-Islamic’. However, literature on defence and strategic matters suggest that nuclear cooperation between Iran and Pakistan started in 1986. Pakistan has also refuted reports that Khan made secret visits to Iran.

The two senior scientists arrested in early December last year, Yasin Chauhan, Director-General of Khan Research Laboratories (KRL), and Mohammad Farooq, laboratory director at KRL, had worked under Khan. Pakistan has critical uranium enrichment and missile development facilities at KRL. In March 2003, the Americans had imposed sanctions on KRL for missile related transfers from North Korea.

A Japanese newspaper has also reported that North Korea had sent three scientists to Pakistan in 1999 to study uranium enrichment technology. According to media and intelligence sources, Pakistan-North Korea relations for arms transfer are now some three decades old, beginning with North Korea’s supply of artillery, ammunition and military equipment to Islamabad. The initial trade relation was based on North Korea’s need for hard currency and Pakistan’s demand for army equipment. The watershed of State-level authorisation for carrying covert projects can be said to have rigorously started since Benazir Bhutto came to power for the first time in December 1988 and subsequently sent a few officials to North Korea for a feasibility study of new opportunities. It is widely believed that Bhutto herself travelled to Pyongyang in 1993.

One of the reasons speculated behind the removal of Khan from KRL was his links with North Korea. Still, as late as in July 2002, US spy satellites detected the shipment of missile parts from North Korea. Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf refuses to accept the charges. “We work on solid fuel and they operate on liquid fuel. We do not need to exchange anything with them,” he said in a recent interview.

However, in early November 2003, during his visit to South Korea, Musharraf also said a reported visit to North Korea by Khan was connected with the purchase of conventional short-range missiles, not sales of nuclear technology.

The denial and then acceptance in parts stands to prove that Pakistan’s refutation of intelligence and media disclosures cannot be taken at face value. Discoveries that some members of Pakistan’s scientific community are under the influence of extreme ideologies further raise the fear of sensitive information, technology or material falling into rogue hands. Khan himself once said: “All western countries, including Israel, are not only the enemies of Pakistan but, in fact, of Islam.” Other scientists like Bashir-uddin Mahmood also have strong ideological affiliations based on religious faith.

Mahmood, along with a few others, was arrested for his alleged links with al-Qaeda. Two other scientists, Mohammad Ali Mukhtar and Suleiman Asad, were slipped out of Pakistan on the pretext of ‘research’ in Myanmar.

It was reported that Mahmood, who was arrested on October 23, 2001, had several meetings in August 2001 with Osama bin Laden, one of his top lieutenants, Al Zawahiri, and two other al-Qaeda officials in Kabul. Mahmood also had meetings with Mohammad Omar, head of the ousted Taliban government, during his visit to Kandahar in 2001.

‘Dirty’, or radiological dispersal bombs, may be a disastrous fallout of the association of nuclear scientists with terrorist outfits. Indications of such a possibility became stronger with the arrests of Abu Zubaydah in April 2002 and, two months later, Abdulla al Muhajir alias Jose Padilla. Western intelligence sources believe that Padilla and an associate researched the manufacture and detonation of dirty bombs in Lahore.

In January 2003, an agency news report stated through official documents from the Chashma nuclear power plant that, between 1997 and 2002, at least nine senior nuclear scientists had absconded from Pakistan; the latest defection was as recently as in July 2002. Though the reasons given were poor working conditions and low salary structures, the reality is yet to surface.

At a time when its nuclear history is under scrutiny, Pakistan has been trying to shift responsibility to the so-called ‘unauthorised ambitious’ scientists for their illicit relations with foreign actors. When a State itself is suspected of unlawful nuclear and missile collaborations with other countries, the scientists alone cannot be blamed.

Is it possible that the scientists involved in State-managed clandestine deals overreached the arrangement of cooperation? If so, was it a planned move to overlook this extended relationship? Or was the Pakistan government unable to question the illegitimate affairs within secret arrangements that involved a scientist like Khan? Is it plausible that the scientists would act independently in a situation where the military-ISI nexus works closely with them? The safety of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons complex is at stake. By the time Bush gets an assurance from his ‘stand-up guy’, Musharraf, the damage would already have been done.

The writer is a defence analyst based in New Delhi
5 posted on 02/02/2004 12:24:21 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Assefi Says Iran and Russia Discrepant on Atomic Fuel Disposal

February 01, 2004
Petroenergy Information Network
K. Soltani

TEHRAN -- Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid Reza Assefi stated that there was disagreement between Iran and Russia as to how the spent nuclear fuel at Bushehr atomic power plant should be disposed of.

Asked whether the dispatches about the upcoming visit by Russian minister of atomic energy to Tehran were accurate, Assefi said that he was not sure about such a trip and it was not clear whether the Russian minister would make the visit or not.

He said the main reason for continued delay of Rumyantsev’s expected visit was technical differences between Tehran and Russia with regard to disposal of the spent fuel at the power plant.

“We have differences about the executive methods for returning the spent fuel to Russia,” he noted.

The spokesman, however, pointed out that the two countries were in full agreement over completion of the Bushehr plant and making it operational.
6 posted on 02/02/2004 12:25:49 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Assefi Says Iran and Russia Discrepant on Atomic Fuel Disposal

February 01, 2004
Petroenergy Information Network
K. Soltani

TEHRAN -- Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid Reza Assefi stated that there was disagreement between Iran and Russia as to how the spent nuclear fuel at Bushehr atomic power plant should be disposed of.

Asked whether the dispatches about the upcoming visit by Russian minister of atomic energy to Tehran were accurate, Assefi said that he was not sure about such a trip and it was not clear whether the Russian minister would make the visit or not.

He said the main reason for continued delay of Rumyantsev’s expected visit was technical differences between Tehran and Russia with regard to disposal of the spent fuel at the power plant.

“We have differences about the executive methods for returning the spent fuel to Russia,” he noted.

The spokesman, however, pointed out that the two countries were in full agreement over completion of the Bushehr plant and making it operational.
7 posted on 02/02/2004 12:29:16 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
More Cheating by Tehran

February 01, 2004
The Washington Times

Tehran doesn't seem to have learned the central lesson from the demise of Saddam Hussein: The rules have changed, and it has become dangerous to lie and play games with the international community when it comes to weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Just a few weeks ago, Tehran acknowledged that it is continuing to build uranium-enrichment centrifuges, which are needed to make nuclear weapons. This contradicts the announcement made last fall by Britain, France and Germany that Iran had agreed to halt such activity. In short, the European trio appears to have been hoodwinked.

In September, the U.N.-affiliated International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) called on Iran to suspend its uranium-processing and enrichment activities and sign a protocol permitting more intrusive inspections of its nuclear facilities. Iran agreed to sign the protocol and suspend the activities. In return, Iran gained a promise that it could have more access to high technology from Europe. Then, in December, Iran signed the protocol, much to the relief of politicians and diplomats in Europe and Washington.

Unfortunately, they were jolted back to reality when Iran announced several weeks ago that it is building the centrifuges. Tehran now brazenly claims that the deal does not require it to halt all "enrichment-related" activities and that it has the right to continue to amass centrifuges. France, Britain and Germany disagree with Tehran's very narrow interpretation of the agreement. But Germany wants to use gentle persuasion to get Iran to change its behavior, while Britain, France and IAEA Director-General Mohammed ElBaradei may be inclined to ratchet up the pressure if Iran's defiance continues.

"Iran is just the opposite of Libya," one frustrated diplomat told Reuters last month, referring to Moammar Gadhafi's renunciation of WMD and opening facilities up to international inspectors.

Of course, Tehran's cheating is nothing new. It merely continues behavior that has gone on for several decades. In November, the IAEA issued a 30-page report documenting Iranian deception about its nuclear weapons programs dating back to the mid-1980s. At the time, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton warned that if Iran "is continuing to conceal its nuclear program and has again lied to the IAEA, the international community must be prepared to declare Iran in noncompliance with its IAEA safeguards agreements."

Iran's continued cheating could have dire consequences. Henry Sokolski of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (who has been notably prescient in warning about the Iranian threat) writes in National Review Online that, if Iran fed those centrifuges with the enriched uranium that Russia plans to send it for the light-water Bushehr reactor, Tehran could produce enough material for a bomb "in a matter of weeks."

This week, a who's who of international terrorists — including Hezbollah and al Qaeda offshoots — are meeting in Tehran to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Ayatollah Khomeini's seizure of power. This event, known as the "Ten Days of Dawn," serves to remind us all why it would be intolerable to permit the Iranian regime to obtain nuclear weapons and why preventing this should be a top priority for American policy-makers.
8 posted on 02/02/2004 12:31:19 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Pakistani Nuclear Scientist Confesses to Sharing Secrets

February 02, 2004
The Christian Science Monitor
Owais Tohid

KARACHI, PAKISTAN -- Pakistan's chief nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, has confessed to sharing nuclear technology with Iran, Libya, and North Korea in a 12-page document presented to President Pervez Musharraf, according to a briefing given by government officials in Islamabad.

News of the confession followed a decision to dismiss Mr. Khan from his government post on Saturday by the nuclear command authority, a grouping of top military and political officials supervising the probe.

The confession will bolster the government's hand should it decide in the coming days to prosecute Khan - a popular figure who combines the brilliance of Albert Einstein with the nationalist fervor of John Wayne.

"During investigations, Khan said we wanted some other Muslim countries to develop nuclear technology, so pressure on Pakistan could be lessened," says an official close to the investigation. When it was pointed out that North Korea is not a Muslim country, Khan "could not give a specific answer," says the source.

The fate of Khan and other suspects in the probe lies with the nuclear command authority. The options are said to include a military court, a special tribunal, or administrative action. Putting a national hero on trial would be a risky move for Mr. Musharraf, and one that could have far-reaching political implications in a nation that is already sensitive about protecting its sovereignty.

Official sources say the bank accounts of Khan and other suspected individuals have been closely monitored; all suspects are barred from traveling abroad.

Pakistan's covert nuclear program generated controversy last November when the International Atomic Energy Agency probing Iran's nuclear program found evidence that some Pakistani scientists might have aided the neighboring country in its developing nuclear program.

Western intelligence sources say Pakistani scientists also traded uranium enrichment with North Korea and Libya in separate deals.

Sources say the international nuclear body provided the list of at least five scientists and officials associated with the Kahuta Research Laboratories (KRL), a uranium enrichment plant headed by Khan from 1976 to 2001, located just outside the capital city of Islamabad.

Pakistan's Foreign Office spokesman says the investigation is concluding as "the bulk of the investigation is completed."

Officials say six suspects remain in custody. Among them are three scientists: former director general of the KRL, Mohammad Farooq, and two other close aides of Khan. Others are administrators and security personnel of the KRL, including two former military brigadiers and Khan's Personal Staff Officer. Khan has not been detained but his movement has been restricted and his Islamabad residence is under 24-hour watch.

"If some of those who were called national heroes have done this, the nation has the right to see the true faces of those who have compromised Pakistan's national interest and used its assets for personal gains," says Interior Minister Faisal Saleh Hyat.

Khan is witnessing the end of his golden era spanning almost three decades, during which he was projected as a national asset and his posters adorned the streets. People named their children after him. Cricket clubs and social welfare associations wished to be honored by his participation in generating funds.

Two years ago, Musharraf removed Khan from the active management of the KRL. Khan was given a ceremonial government position - the post stripped from him Saturday.

Opposition parties and a religious alliance of extremist groups coordinated small-scale rallies across the country condemning Musharraf. Ghafoor Ahmed, a senior religious leader, says that religious and political parties should forge an alliance to "protect the country's nuclear program."

The decision to remove Khan, while leaving alone many of his military and government backers, provoked harsh criticism from observers.

"While we say a few scientists were involved, the world will say it couldn't have happened without the knowledge or connivance of the top army brass," the country's leading columnist, Ayaz Amir, wrote in the Dawn newspaper.

It remains to be seen whether the government and military's probe will be widened to include top military officials. Musharraf is expected to discuss the investigation and the dismissal of Khan in a televised address to the nation on Thursday.
9 posted on 02/02/2004 12:32:42 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
This is not about Iranian politics but about her history.

I want to know more about Khorazem dynasty. I looked through Internet information, which is sketchy at best.
Does anybody know a good source written in English on this subject?

Thanks in advance
10 posted on 02/02/2004 2:05:57 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn

Feruary 2, 2004

NICOSIA [MENL] -- Iran plans to host leading Islamic groups regarded by the United States as terrorist in a 10-day conference next week.

Iranian officials said the conference to discuss strategy against the United States and its allies will begin on Sunday and last 10 days. They said Iran, in wake of an intense debate that pitted reformers against conservatives, has invited such organizations as Hamas, Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad and Al Qaida allies such as Ansar Al Islam.

The conference, termed "Ten Days of Dawn," is meant to mark the 25th anniversary of the return to Iran from exile of the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who led the revolution that ousted the Shah of Iran in 1979. Officials said the conference, ordered by Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei, marks Iran's investment in fostering Islamic insurgency groups in the Middle East, Asia and South America.

Hizbullah, sponsored by Iran in 1983, will have the largest presence in the Teheran conference. Hizbullah will be represented by 17 branches around the world.

11 posted on 02/02/2004 3:25:34 AM PST by Arkie2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
12 posted on 02/02/2004 4:33:14 AM PST by AdmSmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
To the person who mentioned the fact that Israel (and Taiwan) have nuclear weapons. Yes, it is known that we (Israel) have such weapons, as does the United States. But you should know that in our hands - as with the U.S. - it is a weapon of (G-d forbid) last resort. In the hands of rogue states it is something to fear. Know, too, that the young people of Iran are supporters of both the U.S. and Israel. After the earthquake at Bam, when it was heard that the U.S. and Israel wanted to help, sounds of "Love live Israel, long live The U.S." were heard in the streets until the people yelling this were arrested.
13 posted on 02/02/2004 5:04:25 AM PST by unienglish26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2
Yes. It's an annual event. Sick.

Thanks for the post.

14 posted on 02/02/2004 7:59:24 AM PST by nuconvert ("Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; All
"...if Iran fed those centrifuges with the enriched uranium that Russia plans to send it for the light-water Bushehr reactor, Tehran could produce enough material for a bomb in a matter of weeks."

This is why the administration can't wait until November.
Something must be done SOON.
15 posted on 02/02/2004 8:04:59 AM PST by nuconvert ("Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iran Reformists Push for Election Delay

February 02, 2004
Amir Paivar and Paul Hughes

TEHRAN -- Iran's reformists are pushing for a postponement of this month's parliamentary elections in a showdown with hardliners which has plunged the Islamic Republic into its worst political crisis in years.

After a day of high drama in parliament, where more than 120 reformist lawmakers handed in their resignations on Sunday over the vote row, there was a sense of tense anticipation on Monday.

Reformists are objecting to the decision by the Guardian Council -- an unelected constitutional oversight body run by religious hardliners -- to declare more than 2,000 would-be lawmakers unfit to stand in the February 20 election.

The council's move has led to international concern about the vote's legitimacy and overshadowed celebrations to mark the 25th anniversary of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's return from exile to create an Islamic state.

More than 80 current deputies in the reformist-dominated 290-seat parliament are among those barred from the election.

In a statement issued late on Sunday, reformist lawmakers, dozens of whom have held a sit-in protest at parliament for the last three weeks, said that even if the Guardian Council now relented, the vote must be postponed.

"Even if all disqualified candidates are reinstated in the coming days, the election must be postponed so that all candidates have the time and opportunity to take part in a sound and fair competition," they said.

President Mohammad Khatami's reformist government has in recent days twice asked the Guardian Council -- a 12 member body of clerics and Islamic jurists -- to postpone the election.

Should the council reject the delay request, Khatami's government could refuse to organise the vote. Khatami could also allow provincial governors, who play a key role in administering elections, to carry out their threat to resign over the vote row.

Concerned about such tactics, hardliners have threatened to prosecute any official who hampers the vote by resigning.

A first request for a vote delay by the interior ministry was immediately rejected by the Guardian Council last week. But a second, lodged on Saturday, has not yet been answered.


Despite the heightened political tension, public interest in the dispute has so far been muted. Disillusioned by years of broken promises of reform, most Iranians have grown apathetic to the ongoing reformist-hardline power struggle.

An official at the Tehran governor's office told the ISNA students news agency a package containing some wiring, but no explosive, was found at parliament's entrance on Sunday after the assembly received an anonymous bomb threat by telephone.

At a cabinet meeting on Sunday, ministers endorsed a pledge made by Khatami on Saturday that his government would "hold only free and competitive elections," the IRNA news agency said.

With talks between appointed hardliners and elected reformers deadlocked, hopes for a solution are pinned on Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who succeeded Khomeini in 1989.

Analysts say Khamenei, who has the last word on all state matters, may order many of the candidate bans overturned to avert a legitimacy crisis and heightened international criticism.

"It's the leader's time to step in now. Although he often leaves things until the very last moment," said one political analyst who declined to be identified.

Given the proximity of the election and the lengthy case-by-case process needed to confirm the resignations, analysts said the lawmakers' walkout was largely a tactical ploy.
16 posted on 02/02/2004 8:38:12 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iranian FM Pursues Prison Exchange with Israel

February 02, 2004
The Media Line

Iran’s Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi traveled to Lebanon on Sunday in search of information on four Iranian diplomats who went missing during Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon, according to news reports.

While Israel is believed to be involved in their disappearance, it maintains that the four were in the custody of Christian militia.

Kharazi said that a committee would be established to research the matter.

The second phase of the Israel-Hizbullah prisoner exchange stipulates that Israel must provide information on the Iranians in exchange for concrete information on missing Israeli pilot Ron Arad. [More details on prisoner exchange.]

Israeli sources believe Arad is in Iranian custody, although he was captured in Lebanon. Iran denies the claim.
17 posted on 02/02/2004 8:42:57 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
MP's Office Attacked in Northwest Iran

February 02, 2004
BBC Monitoring
BBC Monitoring Newsfile

Text of report by Iranian Labour News Agency (ILNA) web site

Tehran -- The former secretary of the Islamic Students Union of the Azad Islamic University of Tabriz was beaten by unidentified people last night at the office of the city's [Majlis] deputy.

Speaking on the telephone to the reporter of the Iranian Labour News Agency, ILNA, Babak Mohammadzadeh, secretary of the Islamic Students Union of the Azad Islamic University of Tabriz, added: At 2300 [local time] last night, two unidentified people, with their faces covered, furtively entered the office of Mr [Akbar] A'lami, deputy for Tabriz, and severely beat Aydin Mowlazadeh, the former secretary of the Islamic Students Union of the Azad Islamic University of Tabriz.

He made the claim that they even intended to strangle Mowlazadeh with a handkerchief and said: They wrote some threatening messages against the Tabriz deputy on the office walls, including "A'lami, either resignation or death".

Mohammadzadeh said: The Law Enforcement Force is now at the office and is investigating the matter.

Mohammadzadeh said these actions marked the start of a new project against the student movement and reformist deputies, and expressed the opinion: The only aim behind these actions is to threaten people, to intimidate them and to sow fear.

Source: Iranian Labour News Agency (ILNA), Tehran, in Persian 1050 gmt 2 Feb
18 posted on 02/02/2004 8:44:04 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iranian Conservative Says MPs and Governors Who Quit May be Prosecuted

February 02, 2004
Agence France Presse

An Iranian conservative official involved in rejecting more than 3,000 would-be candidates for elections due this month warned in remarks reported Monday that poll officials and MPs who had resigned in protest could be prosecuted.

"Election officials within the executive, particularly provincial governors, prefects, sub-prefects, must know that, in the present situation, any resignation is viewed as a hindrance to the electoral process and may bring about prosecution," said Hojatoleslam Ahmad Azimizadeh, quoted by the Iranian news agency IRNA.

Azizimizadeh is head of the electoral control commission for greater Tehran.

The electoral commissions are responsible to the hardline conservative Guardians Council, which on their advice barred 3,605 of 8,000 would-be candidates for the February 20 elections, most of them reformists.

The move sparked probably the worst political crisis in the history of the Islamic republic, which is marking its 25th anniversary this week.

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ordered the Guardians Council to review the files on the barred candidates but it reinstated only 1,160, leaving some 2,500 out of the running, including around 80 sitting MPs.

The provincial governors, charged by the interior ministry with organising the election, resigned afterwards. They were followed on Sunday by around 120 MPs, a move that could paralyse parliament.

"This sort of action against a legal procedure can be viewed as a lack of loyalty towards the Islamic Republic," said Azimizadeh, adding that this was open to prosecution.

He added: "These (MPs') resignations, the tone of the statement which accompanied their action, and the statements of some of the barred candidates, show the Guardians Council carried out its work well, within respect of the law."

His commission was determined to work with the executive so that the elections take place as scheduled, he said, amid reformist demands for the polls to be postponed.
19 posted on 02/02/2004 8:45:03 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Rafsanjani Says People will "Blind the Mesmerized Enemy" in Elections

February 02, 2004
BBC Monitoring
BBC Monitoring Newsfile

Excerpt from report by Iranian TV on 2 February

[Announcer] Speaking at the Id al-Adha sermons in Tehran, Hojjat ol-Eslam val Moslemin [Akbar] Hashemi-Rafsanjani pointed out that the anniversary of the victory of Islamic revolution was approaching and stressed: On that day, the world will be jealous of scenes of Iranian people showing their love for the revolution.

The head of the Expediency Council said that the people's presence in various arenas was an indication of their vigilance, adding; This year, the enemy has escalated its attacks on the revolution and we should maintain a powerful presence in the ceremony to mark the anniversary of the victory of the revolution. In this way, we should blind the mesmerized enemy, which is trying to create a rift between the people and officials.

The head of the Expediency Council also expressed the hope that the people's participation in the elections for the seventh Islamic Consultative Assembly will dash the enemies' hopes even more than before.

[Rafsanjani - recording] The first issue we have to deal with are the elections and we are rapidly approaching the date of the elections. Unfortunately, political altercations have occurred between various political groups and factions. This has, to some extent, caused alarm internally. They have also led to attacks abroad. We hope that the adroitness of our officials and wise men and the vigilance of our people will foil this sedition. After the elections, we will, once again, see that our enemies will become despondent and miserable. However, our people will be happy and they will rejoice and they will have a good Majlis. [People say amen]

This can only happen through the vigilance of you people. Allow those who have a different mentality to do whatever they like. However, you people constitute the very fabric of our society. The country belongs to you. The revolution belongs to you. Your massive participation led to the victory of the revolution. Every year, your effective and constant presence in various arenas led to the survival of the revolution. Your support will contribute to the evolution of the revolution as well. Today, you are facing another test. You can rest assured that, at this point in time, Almighty God will support Iran's Islamic revolution.

[Announcer] In another part of the sermons, the Id al-Adha prayer leader referred to the current situation in Iraq, adding that dozens of people had been killed or wounded in the attacks over the last few days in that country. He said: America and Britain have unfairly intervened in Iraq and they are the ones who are responsible for the events in that country.

[Passage omitted: On religious issues]

Source: Vision of the Islamic Republic of Iran Network 1, Tehran, in Persian 1030 gmt 2 Feb 04
20 posted on 02/02/2004 8:46:04 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iranian Reformers to Boycott Elections

February 02, 2004
The Associated Press
FOX News

TEHRAN, Iran -- The leader of Iran's largest pro-reform party said Monday it will boycott Feb. 20 parliamentary elections, saying they would not be free and fair and raising the stakes in the country's growing political crisis.

Mohammad Reza Khatami, leader of the Islamic Iran Participation Front and brother of Iran's president, said the party would not field any candidates because thousands of liberal candidates have been disqualified from the polls by hard-line clerics of the Guardian Council.

Many of the disqualified candidates are sitting lawmakers, including Khatami, who also is deputy parliament speaker.

"We have no hope for the possibility of free and fair elections. All legal opportunities have been killed," Khatami said.

Earlier, the government spokesman said Iranian Cabinet ministers backed calls to postpone the vote and vowed during an emergency meeting not to hold a sham election. The decision came after Interior Minister Abdolvahed Mousavi Lari presented a report saying conditions for free elections did not exist.

"The Cabinet also agreed not to hold elections that are not competitive, fair and free," spokesman Abdollah Ramezanzadeh said.

Reformist President Mohammad Khatami did not attend the Cabinet meeting because he is resting at home with severe back pain.

The five ministers assigned last week to reach a compromise with the council said their efforts had failed "despite showing flexibility," Ramezanzadeh said.

The powerful council ultimately decides when an election is held, but the government's position strengthens the hand of reformists demanding a boycott.

Without the participation of the Islamic Iran Participation Front, enough hard-line candidates will run uncontested to retake control of parliament from the reformists. Reformists won the parliament in 2000 for the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and used it as a platform to press for social and political reforms.

The controversy began last month when the Guardian Council, whose 12 members are appointed by Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, disqualified more than 3,600 of the 8,200 people filing papers to run in the polls.

After protests and an opinion from Khamenei, the council Friday restored 1,160 low-profile candidates to the list — still keeping more than 2,400 candidates out.

Reformists say the council disqualified liberal candidates to fix the election in favor of conservatives. The hard-liners repeatedly have thwarted President Khatami's efforts toward greater democracy and a relaxation of the Islamic social code.

The council denies political motives and argues that the disqualified candidates lacked the criteria to stand for election, even though more than 80 of them were elected in 2000.

Some 124 lawmakers in the 290-seat Majlis, or parliament, resigned Sunday in a dramatic gesture intended to force the clerical hierarchy to reinstate the candidates.

Hard-liners may have to resort to extraordinary measures — perhaps even relying on the elite revolutionary guards and other armed forces — simply to hold the elections in two weeks as scheduled.,2933,110129,00.html
21 posted on 02/02/2004 8:46:40 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
The Road Not Taken

February 02, 2004
Iran va Jahan
Cyrus Kadivar

Four years before the fall of the Iranian monarchy, Paul E. Erdman published a novel entitled, The Crash of '79. Those who have read it will recall that the villain of the piece was Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, described as a "megalomaniac" who dreams of controlling the Middle East by exploding six nuclear bombs over Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Of course, like all bestsellers the book caused a sensation.

Certainly, the Shah's Iran was awash with the most sophisticated weapons purchased with billions of dollars from the United States and Europe. The Nixon Doctrine had turned Iran into the Policeman of the Persian Gulf and one of the West's most reliable allies in the oil-rich region. It was no secret then that Iranian scientists were engaged in developing their country's atomic energy for peaceful purposes.

In another long forgotten book published in 1977 and entitled The Mind of A Monarch, the Shah revealed his vision for his country with a sense of responsibility for the future that the current Islamic leaders of Iran have squandered. "I have proposed a military nuclear-free zone in the Middle East," the Shah told the author, R.K. Karanjia, an internationally famous Indian journalist.

Far from being the madman in Erdman's thriller, the Iranian monarch stressed that while he had no intention in building atomic weapons his country would pursue atomic energy or nuclear technology for industrial and developmental purposes.

"According to my thinking," he said, "the whole world should collaborate, on the one hand, against nuclear weapons and, on the other, in promoting nuclear energy for peaceful purposes."

Fast forward. The Shah's Iran is now part of history. An irresponsible gang of pseudo-clerical despots have ruled the country since the 1979 revolution that brought them to power. In 2003 the international community woke up to the possibility that Iran would possess an atomic bomb in three or five years' time, if not sooner. Worse yet, the Russians have reached the warm waters of the Persian Gulf by building Iran's first nuclear reactor in Bushehr and planning a few more in the near future.

The passage of almost a quarter of a century has given historians enough time to draw comparisons between Iran yesterday and that of today. The Shah's vision before his unforeseen and tragic downfall may have seemed exaggerated at the time it was expressed. Yet, revisiting it again one finds that it contains the key elements of a progressive and rational mindset that has eluded the heirs to Khomeini.

What was the golden road Iran would have taken had there been no Islamic revolution? While still on the Peacock Throne the Shah had envisaged a "Great Civilization" often mocked by his leftist critics as "unattainable."

Perhaps the rapid modernisation was to blame for the rising gap between what was being promised and what was achievable. The sudden liberalisation of the political system had unleashed uncontrollable expectations that the government was unable to influence.

But this vision given what followed in Iran after Khomeini's followers "hijacked" the revolution was a logical aspiration articulated by a leader obsessed by Persia's grandeur. Even in exile, Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi went to his grave convinced that Iran's future lay in the next 25 years when it would rank among the globe's five great non-atomic powers in a single generation. That generation was destroyed in 1979.

The current Iranian generation aged between 16-30 appear to be demanding from their masters a volatile mixture of political, economic, social and cultural reforms that would allow it to compete in the highly technological world facing them. The Shah and his technocratic advisors had spoken of developing all Iran's resources to cope with the rising population that was estimated to reach 65 million people.

"Every citizen will have an equal opportunity to show his ability, his skills, his attainments," the Shah had said in 1977. "Within the next two decades, our standard of living will be such that nobody will go hungry and all will be able to eat as much as they can ... We shall have big steel, aluminium and copper industries, and go for atomic and solar energy in a big way…We shall be building more roads, harbours and airports ... We have no aggressive intentions or ambitions."

The revolution changed all that overnight. Iran, once called an "Island of Stability" by US President Carter is now viewed as part of the "Axis of Evil" by President Bush.

Iran's diplomatic successes under the Shah's regime had meant that the country enjoyed international support from the USA, Europe, Japan, Russia, China and many Arab and African states. The revolution overturned any goodwill that existed. A radical regime committed to spreading its violent message unleashed a wave of trouble.

The capture of American embassy staff in Tehran for 444 days, a bloody 8 year war with Iraq that left millions dead, the state sponsorship of terrorism, the development of long-range missiles capable of hitting Tel Aviv and London and an ambitious nuclear bomb programme (despite continued denials) has justly raised many diplomatic eyebrows. The "Punch and Judy show" played in Iran by the hardliners and the so-called reformists within the clerical regime is not very comforting.

All this can hardly be conducive to attracting foreign investment, halting the brain drain or reassuring the West that the Iranian regime can become a trusted partner contributing to peace and stability in the Middle East.

Despite recent attempts by the foreign ministers of France, Germany and Britain to quell a mounting crisis over Iran's nuclear program, the US is determined to prove that Iran has "lied" for the past 18 years by, among other things, producing plutonium and enriched uranium in ways that would be useful only for the manufacturing of an "Islamic bomb."

In the late 1970s a seminar was held in Tehran on the Third World in the 21st Century. In a speech given at the time the late Shah warned the participants that the duty of the developed world was "to speed up the development of backward countries" in order to "ensure a new policy of peace and co-operation, as against the old one of the Cold War and co-destruction." Only in this civil manner, he predicted, would mankind be united in an international, harmonious, working partnership.

Such lofty ideals were replaced with several symposiums in recent years inviting the leading heads of various terrorist organisations to unite in combating US influence. The most disturbing allegations that senior members of the notorious Al-Qaeda were hiding in Iran has strengthened the hawkish advocates of a military strike.

The most reassuring development has come from an unexpected quarter: the Iranian society. The struggle between the people and the Islamic state has come at a time when the country is witnessing an erosion in moral values (Iran has one of the Islamic world's largest drug, suicide and prostitution statistics), a widening gap between rich and poor, high unemployment, corruption and greater repression.

In 2004 apathy, bitterness and despair has reached epidemic proportions in a nation that once enjoyed the thrill and excitement of a swiftly developing society which invested young people with a patriotic commitment to nation-building over 25 years ago.

It is time for the Iranian people to build a new road to lead them to freedom and progress or continue on a senseless path to nowhere.
22 posted on 02/02/2004 8:47:50 AM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
"MPs and Governors Who Quit May be Prosecuted "

This is what I've been wondering. House arrest? Imprisonment? Or will that get too much attention from the outside world?
23 posted on 02/02/2004 9:21:52 AM PST by nuconvert ("Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
"Should the council reject the delay request, Khatami's government could refuse to organise the vote. Khatami could also allow provincial governors, who play a key role in administering elections, to carry out their threat to resign over the vote row."

Khatami can't do anything with Khamenei's blessing.

24 posted on 02/02/2004 9:31:44 AM PST by nuconvert ("Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

"withOUT Khamenei's blessing"
25 posted on 02/02/2004 9:33:44 AM PST by nuconvert ("Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Showdown or Backdown?

February 02, 2004
The Economist
The Economist Global Agenda

The battle between reformists and religious hardliners in Iran has intensified, with the main reformist group announcing a boycott of this month’s elections. But have the pro-democracy campaigners the will to defeat the conservatives?

TWENTY-FIVE years ago this week, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned to Iran from exile to lead the Islamic revolution that threw out the country’s pro-American monarchy and created the modern world’s first theocratic state. Iran’s celebrations of the anniversary have been overshadowed by a power struggle between religious conservatives and pro-democracy reformers. This struggle could lead to Iran’s elected but largely impotent president and parliament finally wresting themselves from the clerics’ iron grip. Or it could end in the religious conservatives sweeping aside Iran’s pretence at democracy and reasserting full control over the state.

On Monday February 2nd, Iran’s largest pro-reform party, the Participation Front, said it would boycott parliamentary elections, due on February 20th. This is in protest at the disbarring of thousands of reformist candidates by the Council of Guardians—a hardline group of clerics and Islamic jurists which has the power to overrule the parliament. The boycott was announced a day after around a third of the reformist-dominated parliament resigned. In a stormy session, parliamentarians—many of whom have been staging a sit-in for the past three weeks—denounced the theocracy’s attempt to nobble the elections. “They want to cover the ugly body of dictatorship with the beautiful dress of democracy,” said one.

Khomeini’s successor as supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, had asked the Guardians to reconsider the bans, but on Friday they announced that only a third of the disqualified candidates would have their bans lifted. This leaves more than 2,000 reformist candidates still disallowed, including 87 serving parliamentarians—among them the brother of Iran’s pro-reform president, Mohammad Khatami. On Saturday, the president’s officials called again for the elections to be postponed, despite the Guardians’ rejection of an earlier request for a delay. President Khatami and his ministers have threatened to resign over the bans, though it is not clear whether they are prepared to carry this out: around 18 months ago, the president threatened to resign in a dispute with the Guardians but failed to do so when they refused to back down.

The power struggle has raged on since President Khatami was first elected in 1997. Though virtually all his efforts at liberalisation were thwarted, he was re-elected in 2001. Fellow reformers swept to victory in other polls, but they suffered similar rebuffs at the hands of the clerics. The parliament has passed some remarkably enlightened laws in recent years: to liberalise the press; to sign United Nations conventions outlawing torture and sex discrimination; to expand trial by jury; and to stop the police from storming the universities, which are a main base for pro-reform movements. But the Council of Guardians has spiked every one.

Nevertheless, it would be unfair to say that the liberalisers have achieved nothing. Since Mr Khatami’s election, Tehran has become a more humane, even permissive, place. Seven years ago, anyone taking a drive with a member of the opposite sex, or wearing make-up, was punished by jail or a lashing. These activities are still crimes, but the authorities turn a blind eye. On Mr Khatami's watch, Iran's human-rights record has become a bit less appalling.

The last time Iranians had a chance to vote, in local-council elections a year ago, they expressed their frustration at the continuing impasse by largely staying at home. But the low turnouts (only 10-15% in some cities) favoured the religious conservatives. Voter apathy would probably have handed them victory again in this month’s parliamentary elections, but it seems that the Guardians did not want to risk failure. Next year, when President Khatami’s mandate ends, the conservatives hope to replace him with one of their own. The Council of Guardians is expected to try to ensure this by, once again, banning reformist candidates.

In the meantime, having hitherto stymied the Khatami government’s attempts at a reconciliation with America, the conservatives now seem interested in striking a deal with the “Great Satan”. It was Hassan Rohani—a leading hardliner close to Ayatollah Khamenei—who led Iran’s recent negotiations with the International Atomic Energy Agency over confessing to its nuclear dabblings and accepting tougher inspections by the agency. Since concluding a deal last October, Mr Rohani has been respectfully received in Brussels and Moscow. His globetrotting at the supreme leader’s behest is making Mr Khatami’s government look ever more irrelevant. Indeed, Mr Rohani is beginning to look like the foreign minister-in-waiting of a future government of pragmatic conservatives.

How will the conflict end? Ordinary Iranians are exasperated at both the theocracy, for failing to increase prosperity and personal freedom, and at the reformists, for failing to deliver on their grand promises of change. Much will depend on the mood among students—a powerful force in a country where two-thirds of the population is under 30 and the minimum voting age is 15. So far, campus protests have been muted. But students at Tehran University are reported to be planning a protest on Wednesday.

Several outcomes are possible in the short term: the reformists’ quiet capitulation to the conservatives’ relentless pressure; or a student-led counter-revolution, which is either repressed harshly by the hardliners, or which succeeds in overthrowing the theocracy; or, indeed, Ayatollah Khamenei may, at the last minute, defuse the crisis by ordering the Council of Guardians to overturn the bans on reformist candidates. But whatever happens now, it will not banish altogether the prospect of Iran’s next revolution. The pressure for change should, sooner or later, prove irresistible.
26 posted on 02/02/2004 3:53:56 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iranian Arrested in Baghdad

February 02, 2004
RIA Novosti
Focus News

Two Foreigners were arrested in Baghdad in attempt to plant explosive near an oil refinery close to the Iraqi capital, RIA Novosti said.

The US general Martin Dempsey reported the arrest and explained that the two men arrested were Iranian and Afghan.
27 posted on 02/02/2004 3:54:50 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Nigeria Holds Iran Diplomat as Spy

February 02, 2004
ABC News

JERUSALEM -- An Iranian diplomat is in Nigerian police custody on suspicion of spying on the Israeli embassy and other sensitive compounds in the capital Abuja, Israeli security sources said Monday.

They said the Iranian was arrested on Jan. 23 when staff reported him "staking out" the embassy. Although he carried no credentials, police discovered he was a diplomat, they said.

"A digital camera was found in his possession, with surveillance pictures of the embassy and several other international and local official buildings in the capital," a senior Israeli security source said.

A Nigerian police spokesman said last Thursday an Iranian was being questioned after taking photographs of strategic buildings, but did not say the man was a diplomat.

Officials at the Iranian embassy said then that they were not aware of the arrest.

Monday, officials in Nigeria, where it was a public holiday, and in Iran could not immediately be reached for comment.

The independent Nigerian Guardian newspaper said the buildings the suspect had photographed included the Nigerian National Petroleum Corp towers, the British Council, the Defense Ministry and army headquarters. It did not mention the Israeli embassy.

Israeli diplomatic missions are heavily guarded for fear of terrorist attacks. Israel accused Iran of backing bombers who killed 29 people at its embassy in Buenos Aires in 1992. Iran, which does not recognize the Jewish state, denied involvement.
28 posted on 02/02/2004 3:55:29 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
29 posted on 02/02/2004 3:56:09 PM PST by windchime (Podesta about Bush: "He's got four years to try to undo all the stuff we've done." (TIME-1/22/01))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Nightline Iran: "Inside Iran," 25 Years After the Revolution
[A Transcript of last week's broadcast.]

January 29, 2004
ABC News
Nightline English


Twenty-five years after this.


Deep down inside, not a lot has changed.


Most Americans tend to think of this.


If you speak you go to jail.


But not this.


We have rave parties. We have ecstasy parties, coke parties.


But as Iran moves toward elections, are all the changes merely cosmetic?


The younger generation wants more than the older ones can give them.


Or a move toward real reform?


We will have a gap between the society and government if this election is not fair.

graphics: inside Iran


Tonight, "Inside Iran," 25 years after the revolution.

graphics: ABC NEWS: Nightline


>From ABC News, this is "Nightline." Reporting from Washington, Ted Koppel.


(OC) If you'd like to catch a glimpse of the image of Iraq that's keeping US foreign policy makers awake at night, you have only to look next door at Iran. That's not entirely easy to do these days. American journalists, especially television journalists, haven't had a great deal of access to Iran lately. But, ABC News correspondent Jim Sciutto and producer Nick Watt just emerged after several days of traveling through Iran. What they found is an often confusing picture. Iran is a country where with a demographic that would make an American television network executive drool. Millions upon millions of very young people, thirsting for Western music, movies and a hip lifestyle. To a very limited but still surprising extent, they're living that lifestyle. But that, reports Jim Sciutto, conceals a political system that is still under rigid Islamic control. You can forget the parliament, real power in Iran rests in the hands of 12 appointed clerics and jurists, conservatives all, known as the Guardian Council. There's supposed to be a parliamentary election in Iran next month. 8200 candidates were running for office. The Guardian Council simply disqualified most of the reformers among them, almost 4,000 strong. Among those, 80 members of the Iranian parliament who are simply being refused the right to run again. This is what scares American policy makers in Iraq, where there is also a Shiite majority. If there were to be a direct election in Iraq, one man/one vote, would it lead to the sort of political structure that now rules in Iran? Whatever the answer to that question may be, here's Jim Sciutto with a rare look inside Iran.


(VO) There is Iran outsiders expect to see. Women covered from head to toe. Men crowding vast public mosques. The genders separated in many public spaces. Those images are easy to find here but do not tell the full story. Since pro-reform politicians won the presidency here in 1997, and a parliamentary majority in 2000, Iran has changed in ways that until recently were considered unacceptable and un- Islamic. Today, some girls wear make-up and tighter clothes. They push their veils farther and farther back on their heads, showing their hair, which conservative Muslims consider risqu.. Young unmarried couples hold hands in public. Teenagers listen openly to Western pop music. For Had, whose English nickname is Freddy, is lead singer of the Tehran heavy rock band Moha, "the priests." Bands like this were forbidden into the late 1990s. Now they can practice and sometimes play concerts. Some bands even sell CDs, though only with the approval with an official Islamic committee.


(VO) "Nobody bothers us," he said, "even though right across from us there's a guy from the revolutionary guards. They're used to it by now." Behind closed doors young Iranians constantly told us, they are pushing the limits of Iran's conservative Muslim society even further.


The nightlife is really amazing.


(OC) Is it? The nightlife in Tehran is amazing?




(OC) What's it like?


In the suburbs, in the suburbs around Tehran, you can see everything. You can never imagine to see it in Las Vegas, I think. Wild parties.


And we have rave parties, we have ecstasy parties, which is -I mean, the fashion recently, cocaine parties, coke parties. I don't know.


(OC) Do people have sex before marriage?


Yes, they do.


Yes, mostly.


(OC) Mostly? Most people, really?




Nowadays, it is changing. I mean, the newer generations even -I mean, I'm 30 years old. When I see behind myself and see the -new generation after me, how they behave and what they do and what they believe and attitude, I'm like just, oh God.


(VO) For changes like this to happen, there must have been some official approval, but there were no public pronouncements. Iran's pro-reform politicians criticized by many here for delivering change too slowly, claim credit for helping at least to create a more permissive environment. Small steps towards their vision of a more open, more equitable Iran. This doctor is the Iranian President's spokesman and a Reform Party activist. What greater freedoms do women have?


So many things, you know. Now just 64 percent of our students are the girls.


(OC) Seven years ago, what would it have been?


It was less than 40 percent.


(VO) But young Iranians, 70 percent of the population is under 35, say the government's small concessions have come with no new political freedoms. For them, the changes are purely cosmetic.


You see more women coming up with, let's say, better designed clothes and more fashionable. But deep down inside, not a lot has changed. Politically, socially, not a lot has changed.


(OC) How about political freedom here?


I think you know, there's no freedom of -no political. If you speak, you go to jail.


(VO) Many here believe Iran's conservatives are using token gestures, looser veils, tighter clothes, more Western music, to draw attention away from efforts to stifle even reverse political reform. But signs of a continuing crackdown, they say, are distressing. Since 1999, 200 pro-reform newspapers have been shut down. Nearly 4,000 mostly reformist candidates were barred from next month's parliamentary elections. Thousands of political prisoners are in Iranian jails. 30-year-old student leader Ali Afshari finished a three-year prison sentence just last month. An outspoken critic of Iran's religious leaders, he was charged with threatening security.


(VO) "I spent 350 straight days in solitary confinement," he said. "They didn't let me sleep and sometimes they beat me. Only my hopes for the future kept me alive." While Ali was being held in Tehran's notorious prison, an Iranian-Canadian journalist named Zahra, investigating suspected torture of detainees, was arrested outside while attempting to take photographs. She later died in police custody, allegedly beaten to death. Inside and outside Iran, her case sparked outrage. "For now the Reform movement has been defeated. It is like what has happened in China," he said. "Politically the government puts people under limitations but gives them a bit more social freedom. What we really want are political rights."


(VO) Such views are not confined to Iran's university campuses. It is a measure of the internal tensions here that some of the religious leaders who helped lead Iran's Islamic revolution believe the current government has lost its way. Even in Kohm, Iran's most conservative Muslim city, there is public dissent.


(OC) It is full of landmarks to Iran's 1979 revolution. This is the seminary where Ayatollah Khamenei studied. But the city's more moderate clerics say Iran's current religious rulers are violating many of the principles the revolution was intended to achieve.


(VO) This is a professor at one of this city's most prestigious and conservative religious seminars. "The first slogans of the revolution was independence, freedom and the Islamic republic. But all those slogans are now forgotten and wasted," he said. "We should give the right of choice to people. We should allow people to think about any religion, to follow any school of thought. We are not guardians of the people. People should be free." Those are dangerous opinions, even for a respected mullah. He has been barred from appearing on Iranian television. For many Iranians, the December earthquake in the southwestern City of Bam put the government's failures in the sharpest light. Ancient buildings collapsed into dust, domestic relief efforts were slow. More than 40,000 people were killed.


As you see in Bam, it shows the real face of Islam Republic of Iran, the regime. They cannot do everything. It's a real crisis. It can cut the process. It can control everything and limits your freedom, but they cannot help you.


(VO) Increasingly, Iranians, especially young people, place equal blame for such failures on the conservatives and the reformers they once had such high hopes in.


The expectations of the younger generation are very high. They have the right to say that they haven't reached what they wanted. But we have the right to say, as reformers, to say to them that we did not promise them to solve everything.


(VO) Still, for many here, the few solutions that have come have been purely superficial. A veil hiding deep divisions over Iran's future.


(OC) Next month's parliamentary elections give the appearance of democracy in Iran. But reality is far more complicated. That part of the story when we come back.

graphics: Nightline


This is ABC News "Nightline." Brought to you by ...

commercial break


(OC) It's actually damning with faint praise, but Iran has one of the more democratic governments in the Middle East. Nevertheless, it is still a fledgling one where real political freedom often remains elusive. Once again, here's Jim Sciutto.


(VO) For nearly three weeks, Iran's pro-reform lawmakers have staged a 24-hour vigil inside parliament. At least 40 members remain here all day and all night, striking in shifts so they can occasionally see their families. We were the only American reporters allowed inside. One of the strikers is the brother of pro-reform President Said Mohammed Khatami.



The last election was much more free than this election. And we do not want to go back, we must go forward, to proceed.


(VO) The lawmakers are protesting the disqualification of thousands of candidates from next month's parliamentary elections. Nearly all of them reformists. Iran's ruling council of religious clerics claim they were insufficiently loyal to Islam, but few here doubt their motives were purely political. "For the time being, people are just watchers, not participants," said this disqualified candidate, a newspaper editor. "If they get the impression that their representatives are serious in what they're doing, they will join us."


(VO) But the reformers' fight has not energized the Iranian public. The overwhelming verdict of people we talked to is that the strike is more about political drama than substance. "I think the decisions are already made and the scene has already been set," this young businessman told us. "I just try to mind my own business, study, play sports and things." The lack of support from young Iranians, more than 2-3rds of the population is under 35, is a politically ominous sign for the reformers. It was young voters who swept President Khatami to a surprise victory in 1997. Today, political polls show that fewer than a third of Iranians even plan to vote in next month's elections. Voter apathy is strongest among young people.


(OC) Will you be voting in the election next month?


No, never?


(OC) Why not? "Because it's not going to make any difference. It will be the way it is and it will continue to be so whether we vote or not."


(OC) This is a neighborhood of Tehran University, site of many public demonstrations in the past, including large pro-democracy protests last summer. But here it has been quiet. The reform candidates' disqualification has not mobilized the students.


(VO) The students' restraint is in stark contrast to last June. When they took to the streets by the thousands, calling for the resignation of ruling cleric Ayatollah Khamenei and freedom for all political prisoners. Thousands of students were arrested and many remain in jail. Today, some of Iran's most well known student leaders say they have given up on the Reform legislators. "The development of democracy and our country are not possible within the framework of laws we have now," he said. "Reform from the inside, let's call it parliamentary reform, was not able to give the people what they wanted and solve our problems." Ali is now hoping for a spontaneous popular rebellion like the ones that toppled governments in Georgia last fall and Yugoslavia in 2000. But student leaders admit they're not sure how to bring that about or even what they plan to do next.


As students, we must concentrate on the problem inside the universities.


(OC) It sounds like your ambitions have gotten smaller?


Yes. It got smaller because we are not the ability of being the leadership of the big social movement.


(VO) A loss for reform lawmakers next month would have repercussions inside and outside Iran. Reformers say that if they keep their majority, they will work for closer ties with the US.


I think it will be time next year to solve many problems that we have in our foreign policy, including in the region and in the world, with the United States and other countries.


(VO) For now, the government of President Khatami, elected seven years ago with so much hope, is cautiously managing expectations. They say the candidates' disqualification is just one step on the path to democracy.


Going toward democracy needs time and needs error and a trial, in fact. So, we try to come out from it as the people want.


(VO) But Iranians consistently told us what they want is real political freedom, something many here do not believe the lawmakers sit-in can deliver. This is Jim Sciutto for "Nightline" in Tehran.


(OC) So what should we in the US make of Iran's struggles? That conversation when we come back.

commercial break


(OC) My guest tonight, Jonathan Lyons, was the Reuters bureau chief in Iran from 1998 to 2001. For much of that time he was the only American journalist living in Iran. He and his wife, also a journalist, co-authored "Answering Only to God, Faith and Freedom in the 21st Century Iran." Jonathan, which Iran should we focus on to intelligently understand what's going on over there, the Guardian Council or the tight jeans and the underground parties?


Well, actually the tight jeans and the underground parties are more fun, perhaps. But I think we really need to look at the Guardian Council. Because, ultimately this really is a religious question that Iran and Iranian society have to try to resolve.


(OC) And when you say we have to focus on that, have they determined, have they deliberately permitted the sort of social reform to take place without at the same time having any kind of legal reform?


Well, I think these are safety valves, as we see in some other societies. But, interestingly, when I lived there, I used to notice that the liberalization of dress and of special behavior often accompanied a period of time when the conservatives or the clerical establishment felt that they were more in control. So, sometimes these things are -actually mirror images of each other.


(OC) In terms of where Iran stands with regard to the United States and US interests, can you place it for us? I mean, should we regard them as essentially hostile to US interests, waiting for the chance for an opening, something in between?


Well, I think when you talk about Iran, it's -almost always something in between. And as you know, Ted, it's very complicated. But in essence, all sides of the major political fault lines in Iran would like to have a better relationship and ultimately diplomatic relations and certainly economic relations with the United States. But they need to do this in a way that doesn't disadvantage their own group and give extra advantage to the other side. And so, I think we will eventually see that, but only when both the so-called reformers and the conservatives are ready to move together. And the United States needs to help create some of those conditions, if it can, for that sort of joint movement.


(OC) There are clearly people in the Bush Administration who believe that given the right kind of encouragement -I don't want to use the word revolution or counterrevolution, but that there could be some sort of an uprising. How realistic do you think that is?


Well, I think history shows, and I mean very recent history going back to my own experience covering the student riots -a couple years ago, that the police powers and the powers of repression are really very, very strong. And so, I'm not sure that -you didn't use the word revolution, but some sort of rebellion is really in the cards. But I think we're gonna see a slow and steady march with setbacks, with victories. It could take several generations to see the sort of fundamental change that many people inside and outside Iran are wishing for that country.


(OC) Conventional wisdom has it that the Shiites in Iraq and the Shiites in Iran really were not all that close to one another. But as we look at the Ayatollah Sistani in neighboring Iraq, now calling for a direct vote. Being able more or less at the drop of a hat to be able to put 100,000 people on the streets in demonstrations. Should the United States be concerned about the relationship between the Shiites in Iran and Iraq?


I don't think they need to be overly concerned. I think we have to go back a step and look at what underlies some of those assumptions. Many people in Iran, including many, many clerics, are looking for an alternative or a reform or a way out of this dead end that they feel that they're in. And so, one has to ask, what exactly would they be exporting? I mean, Iran has a lot of economic and political problems. And I don't think too many people in Iraq are looking wistfully over the border to say, well, we wish we could sort of work things out in that way. I think, and you eluded to earlier of course, the differences between Iraqi Shi'a and the Iranian Shi'a. And there really are quite distinct differences. So, I think recent history, experience, ethnic divisions, linguistic divisions. I think that these are all really significant. And we have to put some face value on demands for a more democratic Iraq coming from some of the Shi'a leaders.


(OC) All right. Jonathan Lyons, thanks very much, good to have you with us.


You're welcome, Ted.


(OC) Ill be back in a moment.

graphics: Nightline:


To receive a daily e-mail announcement about each evening's "Nightline" and a preview of special broadcasts, log on to the "Nightline" page at

commercial break


(OC) And that's our report for tonight. I'm Ted Koppel in Washington. For all of us here at ABC News, good night.
30 posted on 02/02/2004 3:57:24 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Ayatollah Montazeri: 'The Guardian Council Manipulates the Laws

February 02, 2004
Middle East Media Research Institute

Grand Ayatollah Montazeri Interview: 'The Guardian Council Manipulates the Laws; It is a Betrayal of the Revolution'

Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, the highest ranking Iranian cleric, who led the Islamic Revolution along with Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini 25 years ago, gave a recent interview to the Italian daily Il Corriere della Sera. In the interview, he expressed his views on the conflict between reformists and conservatives in Iran, between the Majlis (Iranian parliament) and the Guardian Council, which recently rejected 3,600 of the 8,157 candidates for the coming election on February 20th.

Ayatollah Montazeri, a founding father of the first Constitution of Iran after the revolution, was designated by Khomeini as his successor. But he was marginalized and held under house arrest from 1997 to 2003, accused of having criticized the current Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. He is now free and lives in the holy Shi'ite city of Qum. "Outside his gate," writes Paolo Conti, the interviewer, "many worshipers line up to obtain Qur'anic interpretations from him. But many of his aids warn foreign visitors: 'Montazeri free? To tell you the truth, around here many apartments are occupied by people from the secret services that follow his every move.'" The following are excerpts from the interview:(1)

Question: "What do you think of the current conflict between the political and religious institutions in Iran?"

Ayatollah Montazeri: "At the beginning of the Islamic Revolution, we said regarding the elections: the Minister of the Interior and the Shah used to pick candidates to be voted, [but] now the election must be really free. We thought of a Council of Guardians to oversee the Ministry of the Interior, to make sure it did its work correctly, not to select the candidates... Then there was a revision of the Constitution, and I opposed it. They have manipulated it and put things upside down ... all against our original intentions. Thus today, instead of free elections, we have a selection made by one faction of the electoral contest. All of this is illegal and anti-constitutional."

Question: "So the spirit of the Islamic Revolution has been betrayed?"

Montazeri: "[Acting] this way wounds the image of Iran, creating international qualms - and all this as a result of the illegal actions of a few. It is local experts from the cities that should evaluate the candidates; they are better informed of personalities and situations."

Question: "You have contested the various special tribunals that proliferate and suffocate the Iranian justice system."

Montazeri: "They do not exist in the Constitution, which delegates judicial affairs to the Ministry of Justice. All of this disappoints the people, who become disgusted with the system. Khomeini wanted the special tribunals for a short time. They were supposed to disappear. After his death, they were re-instituted. The sentences of these tribunals are illegal. Such abuses happened before the Revolution, which in fact took place in order to prevent their occurrence. Instead, the same things are going on. And the people are not free."

Question: "What do you think of the constant closure of reformist newspapers?"

Montazeri: "Today in Iran, there is no freedom of the press. They have closed more than a hundred publications; honest and knowledgeable people have been deprived of their jobs. They have reduced newspapers to self-censorship. For instance, they are forbidden to write about me. If they do, they [the editors] are immediately summoned. There is repression, as before the Revolution..."

Question: "You said: If this leadership does not change, the Islamic state itself is in danger. Do you think that the system may fall apart?"

Montazeri: "The peoples' consensus is the basis for everything. The Islamic Republic means popular government. If the people are disappointed, they will stop believing in the Revolution or in Islam. There is a lot of aggressiveness from the system. Yet, the Qur'an speaks continuously of a God of love, clemency, and mercy. If there is rage and violence there will be rejection..."

Question: "You do not have a good opinion of Khatami. Why?"

Montazeri: "He talks a lot, but in practice he does little. Let's take [for example] the sit-in of the MP's to protest against the Guardian Council members' rejection of candidacies. Khatami should already have organized it three years ago, when the Guardians themselves rejected the electoral law. Khatami has adopted a tactic of quietism; he has avoided angering 'others.' But in fact what were these reforms? They were the implementation of the promises made at the beginning of the Revolution. Nothing special."

Question: "You have also questioned Ali Khamenei's role..."

Montazeri: "The [Supreme] Leader [Khamenei] should only give directions; basically guide. Instead, he puts himself above the law that is no longer in the hands of the Majlis. The new Article 110 of the Constitution gives him all the power, which is followed by the word 'absolute,' including control over the police and army, without being accountable to anyone. I opposed it... This is also why they ousted me. On the other hand, the President has all of the responsibilities but no power. That is the problem."

Question: "How do you judge the repression of the student protests?"

Montazeri: "They attacked these youths. They threw them to the ground and beat them... They should not have done it! Regarding young people our religion tells us: 'We must be like fathers, good [and] merciful.' In prayer we say: 'Oh, Prophet, you are sweet and good to everyone, if you were cruel and aggressive everyone would abandon you.' It is a lesson for those who govern. However ... the Guardians have rejected three times a Majlis law to abolish censorship. If they have rejected it, this means they prefer torture."

Question: "Recently you have also spoken against forbidding men and women to shake hands."

Montazeri: "It is not forbidden [by Islam]. I have written everything in an opinion paper requested by Muslims living in Europe. Islam insists on respecting the interlocutor. If the woman does not find the gesture contrary to her self-respect, then it is allowed. It should be done mainly with non-Muslim women that would interpret the lack of this gesture as impolite. As for Muslim [women], if it implies misconduct, then no, it is not allowed."

(1) Il Corriere della Sera (Italy), January 30, 2004.
31 posted on 02/02/2004 4:19:01 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
US Renews Call for Free Elections in Iran

February 02, 2004
VOA News
David Gollust

The United States Monday renewed its call on authorities in Tehran to respect the Iranian people's wish for free and fair elections, though the State Department is taking a cautious approach in its public comments on the political crisis there.

U.S. officials are closely following the situation in Iran. But they are refraining from specific comments about developments in the struggle between reform politicians and the conservative Guardian Council out of concern it might be seen as American interference.

At a news briefing, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher limited his remarks to a general expression of support for a free electoral process in Iran.

"We've always been supporters of free and fair elections," he said. "We've always been supporters of the idea that the Iranian people should have a right to decide their government and their government's policies. We urge the Iranian government to respect the Iranian people's wish for a genuine voice through free and fair elections."

Mr. Boucher also said the United States has made clear its concerns about the status of political freedom and human rights in Iran and is watching the events unfolding in Tehran in that context.
32 posted on 02/02/2004 4:19:34 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn

PARIS, 2 Feb. (IPS)

The Islamic Republic was mute on Monday about reports by Pakistani press that Dr Abdol Qadir Khan, known as "the Father" of Pakistan’s atomic bomb and for that considered as a national hero had sold nuclear information to Iran.

According to Pakistani journalists who were briefed by the officials on the issue, Professor Khan told investigators he had provided nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and the Communist North Korea in order to also make them become nuclear powers and help decreasing international pressures over Pakistan.

"Dr. Khan transferred to ageing technology for enriching uranium for personal greed, without the authorisation from Islamabad, but certainly with the help of some colleagues", Reza Khan, a Pakistani journalist told the Persian service of Radio France International.

Though Iranian independent agencies like the Iranian Labour News Agency ILNA reported the news, but it failed to mention the name of Iran, saying that Khan "had sold nuclear information to Libya, North Korea and some other countries".

Actually, it was Iran that informed the Vienna-based United Nations nuclear watchdog that it bought from Pakistan the technology and some components for enriching uranium.

"That technology, Professor Khan got it in Holland during the seventies, right after India carried out its first nuclear tests", Reza Khan said, adding that nuclear inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency had found that the uranium enriching techniques and materials used by both Iran and Libya were similar to what Pakistan used to possess in its highly secret arsenal.

Because of the Muslims holiday of Sacrifice, no officials could be reached in Tehran or Islamabad, but Pakistani sources said President General Parviz Mosharraf would address the nation on the issue on Tuesday.

Informed Iranian sources said the Tehran-Islamabad cooperation in nuclear field dates back to the former Iranian regime, with the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi providing some of the badly needed financial funds to Pakistan to continue nuclear researches and sharing the information with Iran.

"That cooperation, kept highly secret, continued after the revolution and was even increased as Iran had also became an Islamic Republic like Pakistan in the one hand and the new regime, traumatised by the eight years of devastating War with Iraq, had decided to build its own nuclear bomb as a deterrent and dissuasive power", one Iranian source told Iran Press Service on condition of anonymity.

"Khan made a lot of money, with which he bought a lot of properties outside Pakistan, including a luxury hotel in an African nation named under his wife and daughter, who is now outside the country", the journalist said, confirming Islamabad’s official version of the scandal.

"The real danger for Mosharraf is the Pandora Box that the scandal might open", the French news agency AFP quoted Mr. Riff’at Hussain, a political analyst and head of the Strategic Studies at the Qa’ed-e-A’zam University of Islamabad as having commented.

"Cornered, Abdol Qadir Khan might as well tell interrogators everything, including that he sold the information with the knowledge of the Government", he added, referring to Islamabad’s categorical statements that Khan and other colleagues at the KRL (Khan Research Laboratory, after the name of Dr. Khan himself) transferred the know how without the knowledge and authorisation of the authorities.

Pakistani newspapers said the "nuclear leaking" from KRL to Iran, Libya and North Korea continued until the end of the last century and "even more as Iran and Libya are concerned".


33 posted on 02/02/2004 4:20:33 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Potemkin WMDs?

Michael Ledeen
February 02, 2004, 8:33 a.m.

So now comes David Kay, a good man, a person I like a lot, with a lot to say. He set out to find large stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction and didn't. He says there's evidence that some stuff may have gone to Syria, but nothing like the quantities he expected to find. He has no doubt that Saddam had — or rather had ordered, and was told he had — a full-blown WMD program. But there's no sign of it, at least so far as David Kay and his CIA minions could find.

So what happened?

David now thinks that it was a Potemkin program. Count Potemkin was the lover of Tsarina Catherine the Great of Russia, and he was told to build new towns and cities for the grandeur of the regime. He couldn't manage it, but he couldn't tell his mistress the terrible truth. So he lied to her. And when she asked to see the new places, he created the eighteenth-century equivalent of movie sets. She sailed down the river, the movie sets were set up on the banks, and happy people waved at her. When the royal ship was out of sight, the villagers packed up the set, and raced downstream to the next site. From this, the expression "Potemkin village."

Thus, David tells us, Saddam's WMD program. He ordered his loyal servants to make him atomic bombs, chemical and biological weapons, and effective delivery systems. They couldn't manage it, but they couldn't tell Saddam because he would have killed them. So they faked it, producing a vast documentation for a program that did not really exist. The CIA (and the Brits, the French, the Germans, the Israelis, the Russians, etc. etc.) got some of this, and got some of the same false reports as Saddam received, and they went for it, just as Saddam did.

It's a great theory. It's imaginative and entertaining. It explains our failure to find what we expected to find, and it explains what we did find: considerable documentation about WMD programs. It also explains how Saddam could have ordered the deployment of WMDs, and nothing happened. Nothing could happen, because there was nothing there.

It's also devastating to the CIA and the other intelligence services, because one of its central conclusions is that the intelligence world didn't really have a clue about what was really going on — or rather, what wasn't going on. It suggests that the intelligence world never really challenged its own conclusions, even though there was no physical evidence to support them. If David Kay is right, then every datum in the analysis was fictional.

What a scandal! CIA's supposed to create such fictions, not be gulled by them.

As I say, it's a terrific theory. But I'm skeptical, and I've got a real reason for my skepticism, which David can easily confirm. Last August I called him in Baghdad to tell him that I had a person — a good person, like himself, a person I trust — who was prepared to take him to an underground laboratory from which a quantity of enriched uranium had been taken a few years ago, and smuggled to Iran. Wow, he said, let's go look. Have the guy call me, we'll check it out.

The guy could never get David on the phone because the CIA decided not to investigate after all. The CIA never went to look, and I don't know if that stuff was real or fictional. But this case was totally different from the Potemkin WMDs of David's elegant theory. Because my guy was in contact with the people who said they had moved the stuff from Iraq to Iran. They were now sick, and wanted to tell their story before they got much worse. But, as I say, the CIA never went to look. They pretended they wanted to, they finally met with my guy, but they told him they didn't believe his story (although there was really no reason to either believe it or not, it was a matter of either looking or not, and if you didn't look you couldn't know anything one way or the other). He said the people who had done the smuggling had a full description of the material on a CD Rom, which they were willing to provide. CIA wasn't interested. And that's the end of it, so far as I know.

So there's one instance where the CIA wasn't curious enough to take a ride and look at a lab. And I ask myself whether there were other such cases. I know of other examples, not involving WMDs, but involving Saddam's money, where CIA refused to look, and the stories they were told — and decided not to believe — turned out to be true.

And then I read the words of Peter Hain, the leader of the House of Commons in London. He says "I saw evidence that was categorical on Saddam possessing chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction." And we know, from the recent Hutton Report, that Tony Blair's claim that Saddam could be prepared to launch WMD attacks against Coalition forces "within 45 minutes," had come directly from MI6. Were the Brits fooled too? Hain insists they were not.

And then there's the story from the Syrian journalist in Paris who claims to have maps from high-ranking military intelligence officials in Damascus, identifying the sites where, he says, some of Saddam's stockpiles were moved. Have we checked that story?

I love the theory. But I have my doubts. Maybe time will tell.
34 posted on 02/02/2004 4:22:27 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn

February 2, 2004

AT a radio phone-in program the other day, some listeners took me to task for Iraq's "slide into chaos."
"You campaigned for the liberation of Iraq, and now look what has happened." This was followed by a "what has happened" list of events that included Shi'ites demonstrating, Kurds asking for autonomy, Sunnis sulking and various political parties and groups tearing each other apart in the Iraqi media over the shape of the future constitution.

The view that Iraq is plunging into chaos, and even civil war, is echoed by many who did all they could to prolong the Ba'athist rule in Baghdad. French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, for one, is going around lamenting what he labels as "uncertainties" that face Iraq.

The truth is that, far from sliding into chaos or heading towards civil war, Iraq is beginning to become a normal society. And all normal societies, as de Villepin might acknowledge, face uncertainties, just as do all normal human beings.

One should welcome the gradual emergence of a normal political life in Iraq after nearly half a century of brutal despotism, including 35 years of exceptionally murderous Ba'athist rule.

The central aim of the war in Iraq, as far as I am concerned, was to create conditions in which Shi'ites can demonstrate without being machine-gunned in the streets of Baghdad and Basra, while the Kurds are able to call for autonomy without being gassed by the thousands.

It is good that Grand Ayatollah Ali-Muhammad Sistani can issue fatwas, as he never could have under Saddam. It is even better that those who disagree with the grand ayatollah can say so without being murdered by zealots.

Why shouldn't the Sunnis sulk if they feel that they may not get a fair deal in the new Iraq? What is wrong with Kurds telling the world that they are a distinct people with their own languages, culture and even religious faiths, and must be allowed to develop within the parameters of their identity?

If anything, the Iraqi political fight is taking place with an unusual degree of courtesy, which is not the case even in some mature democracies. (Consider what Howard Dean has to say about George W. Bush.)

The new Iraq, as it is emerging, will be full of uncertainties. But that is precisely why the liberation war was justified. Under Saddam, the Iraqis faced only the certainty of concentration camps and mass graves.

The Iraqis are now free to debate all aspects of their individual and national life. Like other normal societies, Iraq is home to different, often conflicting, views on many issues. The fact that these views are now expressed without fear is a positive achievement of the liberation.

Democracy includes the freedom to demonstrate, especially against those in charge, and to "tear each other apart" in the media and town-hall debates. It includes the difficulty of reaching consensus on major issues. It is only in a despotic regime that complex issues can be settled with a nod from the tyrant.

Those who follow Iraqi politics would know that Iraq today is the only Arab country where all shades of opinion are now free to express themselves and to compete for influence and power in a free market of ideas. (Even the Ba'athists, whose party was formally banned after the liberation, are beginning to group in a number of local clubs.)

Here are some of the key issues of political debate in Iraq today:

* The Arab Sunnis want Iraq described as "part of the Arab nation," based on the principle of Arabitude (uruba). This is opposed by the Kurds, who say the constitution must describe Iraq as a "bi-national: Arab and Kurdish" state. The Shi'ites, some 60 percent of the population, reject both the Arab and the "bi-national" formulae. Instead, they wish to emphasize the concept of Iraqitude (Uruka). Various minorities, including Christians, share that view.

* The Kurds want Iraq to become a federal state so that they can enjoy autonomy in their provinces. This is opposed by Arab Sunnis and Shi'ites, who argue that a federation is made up of pre-existing states that come together. Iraq, however, was created as a unitary state in 1921 and could not develop federal structures out of nothing. Also, a centralized state is needed to control the oil revenue and organize the use of water resources.

* Some parties, both Sunni and Shi'ite, want Islam acknowledged as the religion of the state in the new constitution. Other parties, including some on the left, oppose this; they want a secular system.

* Some parties want Iraq to withdraw from OPEC, the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and, instead, seek some form of association with the European Union. Others insist that the new constitution should preserve Iraq's traditional foreign relations.

* Several parties and personalities want a clause for peace and cooperation with all nations to be included in the constitution. They see this as a step towards an eventual recognition of Israel. Others, however, insist that Iraq should not recognize Israel until there is a solution to the Palestinian problem.

* There are deep divisions on economic philosophy. The Kurds, and some Arab Sunnis, seek a welfare state in which the public sector provides the basic services free of charge. Many Shi'ites want a free-enterprise market economy to prepare Iraq for joining the World Trade Organization.

* There are divisions on the electoral system. The Kurds and Sunni Arabs want proportional representations, with measures that could prevent Shi'ites from using simple majority rules to impose their will. The Shi'ites want a first past-the-post system that could give them up to 70 percent of the seats in any future parliament.

Most of these debates have haunted Iraq since it was carved out of the Ottoman Empire and formed into a nation-state some seven decades ago. Successive Iraqi despots tried to keep a lid on these issues either by denying their existence or by stifling debate.

This is what most Arab regimes, which share many of Iraq's problems, have done for decades - and still do. If Iraq is to become a model for all Arabs, it should take a different path right from the start.

The U.S.-led Coalition could revert to that despotic tradition by imposing an artificial consensus. The fact that the Coalition has chosen not to do so is to its credit.

Real consensus is bound to be harder to achieve, and Iraq is certain to experience a lively political debate, including mass demonstrations and a war of leaflets, until a compromise is reached on how to form a provisional government and how to handle the task of writing a new constitution.

Most Iraqi political figures, acting out of habit, constantly turn to the Coalition authorities with the demand that their own view be adopted and imposed by fiat. The Coalition should resist the temptation to dictate terms. It should also refrain from making any partial alliances. Today, the entire Iraqi nation, in all its many different components, could be regarded, at least potentially, as a friend of the United States and its allies.

The Coalition should accept that the road ahead will be bumpy. But that is not necessarily bad news. For democracy is nothing but a journey on constantly bumpy roads.

35 posted on 02/02/2004 4:24:33 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iranian Terrorist a Guest of US Congress

SMCCDI (Public Statement)
Feb 2, 2004

On January 29, 2004, Washington Post published an article by Ms. Robin Wright under the title of “Iranian Envoy a Guest of Congress.”

Naturally, both the message and the messenger of the aforementioned article outraged, baffled, and disappointed us!

We believe, the fundamental and essential obligation of any credible and reputable journalist, especially one parading as an authority on Iran, ought to be: To represent the facts, to be honest and truthful, and, above all, to inform without bias and self-promotion!

Ms. Wright is considered to be not only a journalist; she is a self-proclaimed expert on Islamic Republic and its players as well. Unfortunately, in the United States, others seem to believe this! Many defer to her knowledge and understanding of the theocratic regime in Iran; of course, we find this ludicrous and nothing more than self-promotion; but that is beside the point! For someone who claims to know every minute detail of the regime we find it repulsive how she, continuously and constantly, hides the truth and the reality about the grotesque nature of the terrorist Islamic Republic, its actors, and its agents.

At the outset, the title she has chosen for the article is misleading. The correct title is:

Iranian Terrorist a Guest of Congress!

Moreover, in the article it was reported that Mr. Mohammed Javad Zarif, the representative of the terrorist regime of the Islamic Republic that is occupying Iran, “had visited Washington yesterday to meet with a bipartisan congressional group, the latest in a string of recent overtures by both nations.”

According to Ms. Wright, “the visit comes a week after Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi met with Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.”

She further elaborates that Mr. Zarif had a private meeting and an interview before the congressional dinner; in addition, elucidating: “Rep. Robert W. Ney (R-Ohio) and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) hosted the private dinner, attended by about half a dozen members of the House and Senate.”

It is ironic that Ms. Wright describes Mr.Zarif’s itinerary in detail: Private talks, meetings, interviews and private dinner, hosted by the members of Congress, yet, she omits to inform the public about Messrs. Zarif’s and Kharrazi's background. She forgets to mention a small item that they are both terrorists themselves and that their claim to fame, their ascend in the echelon of the Islamic Republic, is due to the fact that they were among the Islamist student leaders who had captured the Americans at the Embassy in Tehran, Iran.

The truth remains that Messrs. Zarif and Kharrazi were directly involved and responsible for the capture, internment, and torture of the American hostages who were held in their brutal grip for over a year! Try as they might, they cannot cover or hide; their identity and past are well known.

We wonder, how is it possible that the representative of a terrorist regime--listed as such by the United States government--the very terrorist who is directly responsible for the captivity of American diplomats could be invited as a special guest in the hallowed chambers of the United States Congress?

How is it that Ms. Wright, a self-proclaimed specialist of the Islamic Republic, an often guest of the regime, one who visited Iran on numerous occasions, can deny the American public this vital information? After all, the fact that Messrs. Kharrazi and Zarif were the original captors of the American hostages is widespread and well-publicized information! This is their badge of honor they have been wearing with pride for over two decades!

We ask: Ms. Wright, don’t you think you owed the truth, at least, to those members of Congress before they began coddling and praising Mr. Zarif or prior to Senator Specter appearing on CNN and publicly admiring this terrorist? Indeed, one wonders how you and others would be able to look those American hostages in the eye and explain this fiasco and embarrassment to them?

The American public and even those who, out of naiveté or sheer ignorance, believe in the sham of “reformers” and advocate “engagement “ with this terrorist regime would be outraged once they learn the truth.

To her we say: Madam, honesty and integrity should be the foundation and the moral compass of a trustworthy journalist and a so-called expert of your stature--but alas.

As for the honorable members of Congress, we find it bewildering, extremely regrettable and inconceivable that such distinguished members of the United Stated Congress, namely: Senator Biden, Senator Specter, Representative Ney and others, knowing the human rights record, the atrocities of the Islamic Republic, and, above all, the deep hatred and resentment of the Iranian masses for the occupying regime of the Mullahs, could turn their backs on the Iranian people and their aspirations for freedom. More puzzling is that, recognizing the regime for what it is, they cuddle not only the terrorist regime but also the actual terrorists themselves; the very ones who have harmed American citizens!

Though there are doubts about their true motives and rationale for supporting the regime, to those members of Congress who fall for the charade of a divided government, the false labels of “Hard-liners” and Reformers,” and subsequently advocate “Engagement” with the regime we say:

The totality of the terrorist theocratic regime in Iran is economically, socially, and morally bankrupt and on the verge of disintegration. To survive, the regime is in desperate need of foreign investment; of course, to be looted by the corrupt Mullahs and their brood. To be able to continue their atrocities unimpeded they need the support of the United States. Such attempts by the members of United States Congress, no matter how well intended, will only sustain the barbaric regime and prolong the suffering of the Iranian people. Simply put:

For us, for the Iranian people: You are either with us or with the regime!!

And, we repeat: You are either with us or with the regime!!

As students and the immediate victims of this regime, and on behalf of the entire population of Iran, we call upon all the decent and caring American people who believe in human rights, liberty, freedom and justice to contact their representatives in Congress and put a stop to this travesty.

The "Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran" (SMCCDI)
36 posted on 02/02/2004 5:16:44 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; McGavin999; Hinoki Cypress; ...
Iranian Terrorist a Guest of US Congress

SMCCDI (Public Statement)
Feb 2, 2004
37 posted on 02/02/2004 5:17:49 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
I hope SMCCDI sent a copy of this to each of the senators and congressmen. In fact they ought to send a copy to EVERY senator and congressman.
38 posted on 02/02/2004 5:37:17 PM PST by nuconvert ("Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Hugh Hewitt just linked our thread on his blog...

"February 2, 2004
Posted at 5:45 PM, Pacific

Great thread on all developments coming out of Iran over at FreeRepublic. Bookmark it."

It appears Iran is getting more of his attention as of late...

Thank him for the link.
39 posted on 02/02/2004 6:02:22 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; McGavin999; Hinoki Cypress; ...
Hugh Hewitt just linked our thread on his blog...
40 posted on 02/02/2004 6:07:01 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn

Congratulations, Doctor!

41 posted on 02/02/2004 6:38:45 PM PST by nuconvert ("Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Attention Hugh Hewitt listeners!

If you are new to the Free Republic and would like to join in the conversations, go to:

You can sign up for a free account!

42 posted on 02/02/2004 6:39:38 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
US Sure Iran Develops Nuclear Program

February 02, 2004

MOSCOW -- A senior US official said that Washington is certain that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program, Russia's daily newspaper Vremya Novostei reported on Monday.

US Undersecretary of State John Bolton was quoted as saying in an interview with the paper that Tehran is pursuing a secret program, of which the International Atomic Energy Agency has never been aware.

He said that there is enough evidence that Iran has the technical potential for creating nuclear weapons and urged Russia not to supply nuclear fuel to Iran as long as the problem persists.

Washington has accused Iran of using its Bushehr nuclear power plant, which is under construction with assistance from Russia, asa cover to develop nuclear weapons and urged Russia to freeze the project.

Despite the criticism from the United States, Russia has vowed to continue to fulfill the contract with Iran. However, it has said it would not ship any fuel for the Bushehr power plant until Iran signs a deal promising the return of spent fuel.

Russia has also urged Iran to sign the additional protocol to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which Iran fulfilled last December to meet the international community's expectations.

Bolton urged Russia to make sure that Iran is not seeking to acquire nuclear weapons before launching a nuclear reactor in Bushehr.

He asked Russia to take its time while the US is trying to discover Iran's true intentions.

Bolton also talked about the search of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, claiming that Saddam Hussein's regime could have moved them to Iraq's neighboring countries, including Syria. He noted that US intelligence services had been informed about such information.

The United States has made an official inquiry to the Syrian authorities, but has not received clear information on this account, he said.
43 posted on 02/02/2004 6:41:28 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; F14 Pilot; freedom44; nuconvert; Grampa Dave
Not surprising Biden fetes Zarif.

After all, it was Biden who made the historic remark to then-sane Scott Ritter, "I don't want to sound flip, but isn't that above your pay grade?"

It was indeed Senator Smarmy Combover who smoothed the way for Saddam to boot inspectors and flip off the New World Order.

Continuing in a tradition of Democrats embracing tyrants, Carter with Castro, Harkin and Kerry with Ortega, Albright with Kim Jong Il.

As for Specter, he sees the kidnapping as the act of Lee Harvey Oswald, not Zarif.

Memo to Specter, lay off the Magic Bullets until Happy Hour, your embrace of scum does a disservice to the Republic.

It is, after all, a War On Terror, not a contest to vacuum up the Islamist vote for November.

44 posted on 02/02/2004 6:46:04 PM PST by PhilDragoo (Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
45 posted on 02/02/2004 6:49:14 PM PST by windchime (Podesta about Bush: "He's got four years to try to undo all the stuff we've done." (TIME-1/22/01))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn

46 posted on 02/02/2004 6:49:33 PM PST by PhilDragoo (Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
"US Undersecretary of State John Bolton was quoted as saying in an interview with the paper that Tehran is pursuing a secret program, of which the International Atomic Energy Agency has never been aware.

He said that there is enough evidence that Iran has the technical potential for creating nuclear weapons and urged Russia not to supply nuclear fuel to Iran as long as the problem persists."

Guess the IAEA is aware now.

"As long as the problem persists" .. Hmmmm.................
47 posted on 02/02/2004 6:55:43 PM PST by nuconvert ("Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; All
The Seventh Level
Americans appeasing evil.

Michael Ledeen / NRO
February 02, 2004

Sorry to say, I haven't reread Dante's "Inferno" for some years, but I still remember his description of a very low and extremely unpleasant level of hell that houses traitors. Surely abject appeasers of evil qualify for the same treatment, and we must note grimly that three prime candidates have recently come forward to swell the ranks of that overheated realm: Senator Joe Biden of Delaware (D.), Senator Arlen Specter (R.), of Pennsylvania, and Congressman Bob Ney of Ohio (R.).

All have undertaken to "improve relations" between the United States and the theocratic fascist regime of Iran. Specter announced over the weekend that congressional staffers would soon go to Tehran in the first stage of the appeasement program. After supping in Washington with the Iranian ambassador to the U.N. at a dinner helpfully facilitated by the State Department, Specter proclaimed that Iran had "helped us in the fight against al Qaeda and in the Afghanistan situation. I don't think we have given them sufficient credit. They deserve credit." And since "They are showing some signs of wanting to improve relations. Now is a good time."

One must wonder what elixir was served at the dinner, or if these remarks are the result of a more durable mental disorder. The recent wave of terror attacks against our Coalition in Afghanistan famously include the Iranian-supported forces of Gulbadin Hekhmatiar, and the whole world now takes it for granted that top al Qaeda figures, including Osama and his number-one son, along with the likes of Zawahiri and Zarkawi, have been operating out of Iran for some time.

Senator Specter has long labored for better American relations with Middle Eastern tyrannical regimes, three times traveling to Damascus for meetings with Syrian dictators: kicking off a short-lived love-fest with Syria's Hafez al Assad in January, 1990 with a sortie to Damascus; again in December, 1998, when he witnessed a mob storm the U.S. embassy following Clinton's missile attack on Baghdad; and then in January, 2003, when he met with Bashar Assad as part of a holiday junket to Europe and the Middle East. On that occasion, Specter warned of massive Arab uprisings against the United States if we attempted a military liberation of Iraq, and reiterated his insistence that we ask for further U.N. resolutions before moving forward.

Ney and Biden have reportedly received campaign contributions from pro-Tehran Iranian-American groups, and Biden has been outspokenly critical of President Bush's repeated criticism of the mullahcracy. He vigorously rejected the inclusion of Iran in the Axis of Evil — even though Iran is always number one on the State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism — and recently met with the Iranian foreign minister at the big party in Davos, Switzerland.

Ney, who lived in Iran 30 years ago, has been the most cautious of the three, endorsing the Iran-trip idea by warning that "I don't think it is set in stone." Ney's first-hand experiences may have made him more perspicacious than Specter, because, within hours of the "announcement" of the trip, an Iranian foreign-ministry spokesman said that he knew of no such plans.

This is part of a longstanding pattern, part of the Iranians' policy of deception, aimed simultaneously at us and at their own people. It is not unusual for conflicting statements to emerge from different offices and different leaders. Over and over again for the past several months, some of our most celebrated officials, from Secretary of State Colin Powell and his loyal deputy Richard Armitage, to State Department spokesmen, have enthusiastically gushed over vague hints that the Iranians were prepared to hand over al Qaeda terrorists who, it was said, were "being held in Iran. The Iranians officially announced their desire to cooperate with the United States, then quickly attacked America as a satanic force. The same has happened with regard to "better relations;" some leaders speak as if they welcome it, others declare it out of the question. The same, again, happens with regard to Iran's "promise" to "suspend uranium enrichment;" one day, one leader says it's a whole new policy, and the next day another leader says it's only temporary, it depends on what "suspend" means, and it's going to be resumed right away.

This is baffling to our diplomats, who love to parse language and to believe that words have the same significance to our enemies as to us. But with the mullahs, it's important to reason from first principles. No terrorist of any importance was, or will be, released, for the simple reason that Iran is a major supporter of al Qaeda, and could no more enable us to strike a major blow at Osama and his henchmen than they could provide us with Imad Mughniyah, the top killer of Hezbollah, or any of the others who receive all manner of support from the Islamic regime.

Did Specter, Ney, and Biden — and the deep thinkers at State who sponsored the appeasement — happen to notice that, at the very moment they were kissing up to the mullahs, the leaders of some 30-plus terrorist organizations were converging on Tehran for their annual powwow? Is this the sort of helpfulness of which Senator Specter oozed enthusiastic?

If the Specter/Ney/Biden efforts to "improve relations" were simply acts of folly by men who don't know better, one might laugh them off. But they have serious consequences, as our diplomats — who actively encouraged the representatives' acts of appeasement — must realize. The Iranian people overwhelmingly hate the regime, and look to Washington for encouragement and support to carry out a democratic revolution, and therefore the mullahs try to create opportunities to convince the people that the Bush administration in fact approves of the regime itself. Any warm statement from a famous American is a body blow to the democratic opposition, and a balm to the mullahs, just as every critical word from President Bush has encouraged the people, and weakened the tyrants.

Appeasers are sent deep into the Inferno, because their acts are truly wicked, shoring up our would-be killers and discouraging our would-be allies inside the country. And they are doing it at a potentially explosive moment, as can be learned by listening to the instructions given to Iranian interpreters, assigned to the foreign journalists flying in for the 25th-anniversary celebrations starting this week (of which the terror jamboree is a part). The words came from Mohammad-Hossein Khoshvaght, head of Iran's international press bureau. He reminded them that lying or mistranslating Iranians' words is mandatory, if the truth would give a bad image of the country. "If a woman starts saying that her lipstick is a sign of revolution, just don't translate it. Say it's nonsense."

If any foreign journalist tries to cover politically sensitive matters (like student protests) or if they ask to work on their own, the interpreters should immediately report them to the regime. Furthermore, foreign journalists are not to enter Iranians' homes, and the interpreters should remember that the journalists' phone calls will be monitored by security officers.

"These days are very tough days," he told the translators. "The security of the regime is threatened. You shouldn't do anything that threatens the security of the system."

And almost anything can be judged to threaten the mullahcracy nowadays. Ask poor Ali Akabar Najafi, a 27-year-old taxi driver who was arrested in south Tehran for an imaginative bumper sticker: "The era of arrogant rulers is over." He was held blindfolded, in solitary confinement, for 53 days, and now, according to Reuters, "faces a possible lengthy prison term or even the death penalty."

But Specter, Ney, and Biden, and their State Department facilitators, think this is a good time to improve relations.

Someone should tell them about the January 24 executions of several commanders and senior officers of the Revolutionary Guards, the elite security force of the regime. The most distinguished of the men was Brigadier General Mohammed-Mehdi Dozdoozani, one of the founders of the RG and a hero in the Iran-Iraq War. His crime was to have exposed government corruption, especially the massive trafficking in young Iranian girls, sold for prostitution to Arab countries. Dozdoozani and his comrades had written an open letter, entitled "We the Warriors," threatening rebellion against these evils.

If they want to know more, they can read "Sex Slave Jihad" by Donna M. Hughes (read her on NRO today, too, here), which speaks of a 635-percent increase in teenage prostitution, and trafficking of girls as young as 8 and 10 years old. There are 25,000 street children in Tehran alone, and the trafficking network feeds on them, often in cahoots with authorities, including judges and Justice Department officials. As Hughes concludes, "only the end of the Iranian regime will free women and girls from all the forms of slavery they suffer.

But Specter, Ney, and Biden, and their State Department facilitators, think this is a good time for "improved relations."

It would be nice to think that they will be held accountable for their acts of appeasement — Ney and Specter are up for reelection — but the odds are that justice will be delayed until their final judgment.

Faster, please.
48 posted on 02/02/2004 7:24:59 PM PST by nuconvert ("Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
Great Post!
49 posted on 02/02/2004 7:54:01 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; McGavin999; Hinoki Cypress; ...
The Seventh Level
Americans appeasing evil.

Michael Ledeen / NRO
February 02, 2004

DoctorZin Note: This is an must read article!
50 posted on 02/02/2004 8:01:42 PM PST by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson