Skip to comments.Iranian Alert - October 18, 2004 [EST]- IRAN LIVE THREAD - "Americans for Regime Change in Iran"
Posted on 10/17/2004 9:17:33 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
The US media still largely 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. As a result, most Americans 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. In fact they were one of the first countries to have spontaneous candlelight vigils after the 911 tragedy (see photo).
There is a popular revolt against the Iranian regime brewing in Iran today. I began these daily threads June 10th 2003. On that date Iranians once again began taking to the streets to express their desire for a regime change. Today in Iran, most want to replace the regime with a secular democracy.
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.
No political talks between Iran and IAEA delegates: IAEO deputy director
Tehran Times Political Desk
TEHRAN (MNA) -- The deputy director of Irans Atomic Energy Organization (IAEO), Dr. Ismail Khalilipur said here on Sunday that discussions between Iranian officials and delegates from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) were not political rather focused on technical affairs.
Significant progress has been made in Irans nuclear dossier during the recent trip of high-ranking officials from the IAEA to Iran, Khalilipur announced in a joint press conference with Pierre Goldschmidt, deputy director general and head of the Department of Safeguards at the IAEA.
During a week stay in Tehran IAEA delegates discussed on Irans remaining nuclear issues and held talks with vice-president and IAEO chairman Reza Aghazadeh, he added.
Khalilipur expressed optimism over the recent trip to Iran, adding that the group was aimed to help resolve the minor technical issues remaining in Irans nuclear dossier. For that matter they obtained relevant information and held discussions with selected Iranian officials, he added.
He further said that the IAEA officials were provided technical information on the issue of contaminated nuclear parts but since the source of contamination is from outside the country the cooperation of third countries is needed.
Chinese diplomat underlines Iran's right to use nuclear energy
TEHRAN (IRNA) -- Chinese Ambassador to Tehran Lio G Tan said on Sunday that Iran is entitled to peaceful use of nuclear energy, referring to the attempts Iran has made to use nuclear energy for peaceful objectives.
In a meeting with Majlis Deputy Mohammad Hassan Abutorabi, Tan added that no country can deprive Iran of its right to use peaceful nuclear energy, reported the Cultural Department and Public Relations of Majlis.
The Chinese diplomat expressed satisfaction over growing bilateral relations, saying that the volume of trade exchanges has increased in recent years.
He referred to projects such as metro, telecommunications, power plants, railway lines and refineries as good areas for mutual cooperation. Abutorabi, for his part, appreciated China's support for Iran's peaceful use of nuclear energy, saying, "The clear stance of China reflects its independent foreign policy. Besides, it has shown that the independent states have safeguarded the very right of decision-making."
He expressed hope that Tehran-Beijing relations, in light of further efforts of the two countries officials, would be developed and strengthened in all areas.
Irans interests and nuclear rights should be observed in any European plan
That kind of plan is accepted by us that first of all respects our interests since our policy is based on interests with an observation of principles, and secondly recognizes our legitimate right for a peaceful use of nuclear technology, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi told a weekly press briefing.
Asefi said Iran has not yet received any proposal by the European side and therefore it cannot make any judgment in this regard.
He said what is quite certain is that Tehran will not budge on its rights.
He added that Iran is prepared to preserve its rights through dialogue and has no preconditions for such a dialogue.
After a meeting of the Group of Eight industrial powers in Washington on Friday the EU trio Germany, France and Britain -- presented a package of "carrots and sticks" aimed at pressing Iran to halt uranium enrichment. The trio told the United States they will offer Iran incentives in the coming days.
Hossein Musavian, the chairman of the foreign policy committee at Irans Supreme National Security Council, told AFP Saturday that Iran will reject any European proposal for a complete cessation of its work on the nuclear fuel cycle, but might be willing to consider further "confidence-building" measures and extend its suspension of uranium enrichment.
"We would be willing to consider any package that recognizes the full right of Iran to enjoy peaceful nuclear technology within the framework of the NPT," Musavian said. However he added that Iran is not prepared for cessation and any package including a cessation of fuel cycle work would be rejected by Iran.
INDIA:National Security Advisor leaves for Iran
|Indo-Asian News Service
New Delhi, October 17
India and Iran will hold talks on regional and international security issues during a three-day visit to Tehran by National Security Adviser JN Dixit.
Dixit, who left for Tehran on Sunday, will hold talks with his Iranian counterpart Hassan Rowhani.
The talks are part of a security dialogue the two countries initiated during former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's visit to Iran in 2001.
A joint declaration issued at that time, agreed to cooperate towards maintaining peace and stability in the region.
The Iranian national security adviser had visited India in February for talks.
India and Iran share similar views on most regional and international security issues, including Afghanistan and Iraq, and New Delhi has refused to join the western condemnation of Tehran for its nuclear programme.
The two countries were together in their opposition to the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and had assisted the anti-Taliban forces.
Iran to launch first spy satellite by spring
|By Amnon Barzilai|
Iran will launch its first spy satellite in March or April 2005, Uzi Rubin, head of the Defense Ministry department responsible for ballistic missile defense, predicted over the weekend.
The launcher will be based on Russian ballistic missiles adapted by expatriate Russian experts, Rubin said. These experts have significantly advanced Iran's ballistic capabilities, he said, among other things, by significantly improving the accuracy of its Shihab-3 missile.
Monday, October 18, 2004. Page 7.
The head of Russia's nuclear watchdog said on Friday that a unit of gas monopoly Gazprom has extended its reach into the atomic sector by buying a majority stake in Russia's key nuclear company.
The Kremlin wants to tighten control over the strategic energy sector via Gazprom despite criticism by Russia's liberals that the move contradicted market-economy principles.
"I can confirm that Gazprombank has bought a stake in Atomstroieksport. The total stake acquired was more than 50 percent," Andrei Malyshev, head of the federal nuclear supervision service, said in an interview.
The move also means Gazprom would have a say in Atomstroieksport's key project -- construction of the controversial $1 billion Bushehr nuclear plant in Iran. The United States accuses Iran of seeking weapons of mass destruction and says Tehran can use Russian know-how to make nuclear arms.
Industry sources said earlier this month Gazprom, the world's No. 1 gas company, had bought a stake in Atomstroieksport, with an order book of $3 billion, from firms linked to machinery maker OMZ. But none of the parties involved would confirm the transaction.
Malyshev said the government welcomed Gazprom's expansion.
"We have to keep an eye on how that relationship is going to develop, but we think that Gazprom is a very stable company ... partly because it's state-backed," Malyshev said.
"Therefore participation of such partners in the Russian nuclear industry is very positive."
Malyshev also said Russia will build more nuclear reactors for Iran when a diplomatic standoff over its atomic program subsides.
"The Iranian side has told us they want more nuclear reactors, and if the political aspect does not harm that, Russia will build more reactors there," he said.
"Our experts are currently discussing the construction of a second reactor. It's a very serious project," Malyshev said.
For Russia, Iran is a key market in the Middle East as it seeks a bigger share of the global nuclear industry. But it wants Iran to be more forthright about its work in the industry.
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Sunday urged Iran to make stronger efforts to assuage international concerns and ratify a protocol it signed last year envisaging additional inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran must also abandon uranium enrichment, he added.
Gazprom, currently on a state-backed expansion spree, is soon due to take over state oil firm Rosneft in a deal that would raise the state's stake in Gazprom to a majority from the current 39 percent.
It has also built strategic stakes in national power group UES and in Moscow's regional utility in its bid to become a fully integrated energy group.
But analysts questioned Gazprom's foray into the nuclear sector, saying they could not see how the politically sensitive move could enhance its long-term expansion strategy.
"I'm not sure that Gazprom's future lies in the Russian nuclear industry," said Jonathan Stern, an energy expert at Britain's Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
"I don't see how this fits in Gazprom's business."
The remainder of Atomstroieksport belongs to state companies controlled by the Federal Atomic Energy Agency, or RosAtom. The company is the successor of a nuclear export company set up in Soviet times to assist Moscow's allies in building nuclear reactors. Apart from Iran, it is also building two nuclear reactors in China and one in India.
The Mideast - Dr. Lewis Beres, Chairman of the Daniel Projet
I always read but rarely reply/post. Thanks DoctorZin for all your hard work in keeping this situition in front postition for anyone who is interested to read. I pray for strength for these good people to get free of the monsters & terrorists there
Iran will be free soon!
Over the last week, something enormously important has happened something deserving of much more than the routine news-cycle coverage. To put it bluntly, the presidential election in Afghanistan is a seminal event, and those who don't understand how or why are sleepwalking through history.
Next to September 11 which began the sequence of events that made this election possible the vote in Afghanistan is the most far-reaching occurrence of the young 21st century, holding profound implications for future generations. Mercifully, the one person who understands the ramifications as well as if not better than anyone is the so-called dummy in the White House.
The one area of the world painfully immune to this contagion of freedom is the Middle East: the least democratic region on the planet. A survey by Freedom House at the end of the 20th century found that while 63 percent of nations are technically democracies, an astonishing zero of the 16 Arab countries in the Middle East were democratic. George W. Bush's vision is to change that condition not just for the betterment of the Middle East but to the benefit of the world, and he hopes that the transformation has just begun in Afghanistan.
In the academic field of international relations, one of the few useful debates is the "democratic peace" argument. It postulates a crucial reality: Democracies tend not to fight one another. Consequently, to the extent that the hostile Middle East becomes more democratic, it may become more peaceful. George W. Bush subscribes to this hope.
The president's most far-reaching address was his November 6, 2003, speech to the National Endowment for Democracy, which ought to be required reading for every poli-sci class. The president that day reminded the crowd that in the early 1970s there were only 40 democracies. As the 20th century ended, there were 120. "[A]nd I can assure you," he said to applause, "more are on the way." Bush said the world had just witnessed, in just over a generation, the quickest advance of freedom in democracy's history. Historians will search for explanations for this shift; yet, said Bush, we already know some of the reasons they will cite. Among them, he said, tellingly, "It is no accident that the rise of so many democracies took place in a time when the world's most influential nation [America] was itself a democracy." After World War II, reported Bush, the United States made military and moral commitments in Europe and Asia that protected free nations from aggression and created conditions for new democracies to flourish. Now, in the Middle East, under his administration, America seeks to do so again.
In many nations of the Middle East countries of great strategic importance democracy has not yet taken root. And the questions arise: Are the peoples of the Middle East somehow beyond the reach of liberty? Are millions of men and women and children condemned by history or culture to live in despotism? ... I, for one, do not believe it. I believe every person has the ability and the right to be free.
Some skeptics of democracy assert that the traditions of Islam are inhospitable to representative government. This "cultural condescension," as Ronald Reagan termed it, has a long history. After the Japanese surrender in 1945, a so-called Japan expert asserted that democracy in that former empire would "never work." Another observer declared the prospects for democracy in post-Hitler Germany are, and I quote, "most uncertain at best." ... Seventy-four years ago, The Sunday London Times declared nine-tenths of the population of India to be "illiterates not caring a fig for politics." ... Time after time, observers have questioned whether this country, or that people, or this group, are "ready" for democracy as if freedom were a prize you win for meeting our own Western standards of progress.
Seeing the Islamic nations of the Middle East as no exception, Bush contended that "in every region of the world, the advance of freedom leads to peace." The "freedom deficit" in the Middle East had to be changed.
Bush conceded that while democracy is not perfect and not the path to utopia, it is "the only path to national success and dignity." Importantly, he added that democratic governments in the Middle East "will not, and should not, look like us." They should reflect their own cultures; they could be constitutional monarchies, federal republics, or parliamentary systems. Equally significant, Bush urged that "working democracies always need time to develop as did American democracy." America must be "patient" with those nations at different stages of the journey.
In the most controversial part of the address, Bush claimed: "It should be clear to all that Islam...is consistent with democratic rule." Actually, it is not clear at all. Nonetheless, for doubters, he singled out examples of democratic progress in predominantly Muslim countries: Turkey, Indonesia, Senegal, Albania, Niger, and Sierra Leone. He said that Muslim men and women were good citizens of India and South Africa, the nations of Western Europe, and the United States. According to Bush, over half of all Muslims live under "democratically constituted governments," and they succeed in democratic societies, "not in spite of their faith, but because of it." He identified signs of democratic progress in Morocco, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Yemen, Kuwait, and Jordan.
If such countries become 21st-century democracies, historians will struggle to explain how impossible democracy's prospects once seemed in these nations, and thus how boundless and rare was Bush's optimism. His assessment may have been more farfetched than Ronald Reagan's predictions on the end of Communism in the early 1980s, which Bush referred to in this speech. Speaking specifically of Reagan's June 1982 Westminister Address, as well as Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points and Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Four Freedoms, Bush concluded: "The advance of freedom is the calling of our time; it is the calling of our country.... We [Americans] believe that liberty is the design of nature; we believe that liberty is the direction of history.... [T]his is, above all, the age of liberty."
He finished by stamping his blessing on the work of all cheerleaders for liberty at the National Endowment for Democracy: "May God bless your work." That parting reference to God should not be dismissed as a throwaway line: Indeed, George W. Bush believes that God has implanted the desire for freedom deep within the hearts of all human beings, regardless of religion or ethnicity, Muslim Arabs included.
George W. Bush assigned himself the role of catalyst. A year after September 11, and over a year before the National Endowment for Democracy speech and the invasion of Iraq, his administration released its sweeping National Security Strategy, which promoted the spread of democracy to nations held hostage to despots. This objective, Bush wished, could bring long-term peace to regions like the Middle East. In a parallel not lost upon Bush, historian John Lewis Gaddis noted that by seeking to spread democracy everywhere, Bush aimed to finish the job Woodrow Wilson started a century earlier. "The world," writes Gaddis, "quite literally, must be made safe for democracy, even those parts of it, like the Middle East, that have so far resisted that tendency." (This was the kind of thing that liberals once championed, before blind rage at Bush precluded their better angels.) In July 2001, in his Proclamation 7455 marking Captive Nations Week, Bush had declared: "The 21st century must become the 'Century of Democracy.'"
Against incredible odds, George W. Bush may have laid the ground for Middle East democracy in the two most unlikely places, the Taliban's Afghanistan and Saddam's Iraq. Nowhere were women more repressed than in Afghanistan under the Taliban. Nowhere were humans generally more repressed than in Iraq under Saddam. Between the two, Saddam was the biggest destabilizer in the world's most unstable neighborhood.
How will George W. Bush have achieved this? In both cases, by force military force issued in reaction to September 11. September 11 handed him the opportunity. We can be certain that on that awful morning, as Osama ghoulishly smiled from a cave in Afghanistan, a rout of radical Islamic terror, defeat of dictatorship in Afghanistan and Iraq, and a potential wave of democratic freedom in the Middle East was not what Mr. bin Laden had in mind. But neither did he have in mind the response of George W. Bush.
To the extent that the Middle East becomes democratic, and peaceful a very big "if" that remains to be seen President Bush will have sowed the seeds in Afghanistan and Iraq. One man will have changed the course of history, making the 21st century rosy instead of bleak. And if such a monumental transformation happens, George W. Bush will be the toast of history, quite a change from today, where he is the focus of dripping hatred from millions in America and around the world. If only the haters could briefly put aside their passions and pause to see the remarkable stage of history possibly unfolding before their eyes. And if only our media could put aside partisanship and superficiality to ponder and relay the big picture.
President Bush's mid-east doctrine will be the same as President Regean's liberation doctrine in communist controlled east europe.
Thank you, DoctorZin!
Satellite technology in Iran, Russia and China recklessly trading nuclear secrets/materials with known terrorists/supporters. Powers of darkness in high places, indeed.
Prayers for the persecuted in Iran, and Israel.
The war in Iraq has developed into what can be viewed as a battle between the free world and Islamic fundamentalism. The mullahs in Iran wish to destroy the hopes of the Iraqi people for freedom and democracy by provoking instability in Iraq and eventually to bring an Islamic fundamentalist government to power. Iraq is the arena where international terrorism demonstrates its real face -- Islamic fundamentalism -- and its actual sponsor, the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Let's review some information about Tehran's rulers:
The mullahs' leaders have kept up their overt rhetoric to fuel insurgency in Iraq, while covertly they provide logistical support as well as manpower. Millions of dollars in material support and thousands of intelligence agents, revolutionary guards and mercenaries have found their way into Iraq across the long porous borders between the two countries.
In mid-June a group from Teheran called "the Committee Commemorating the Martyrs of Islam's Global Movement" claimed that they registered about 15,000 Iranians, including members of the mullahs' intelligence agencies, for suicide bombing operations in Iraq, as well as in other lands of the region.
On June 25, Pakistani border police arrested some 18 men trying to sneak into Pakistan on false Bangladeshi passports, three of them being Iranian agents. About the same time, Iraqi authorities rounded up eight Iranian intelligence officers in Najaf, and one other, a high-ranking officer in the Revolutionary Guards, was caught while attempting to sabotage an oil pipeline.
Iran's mullahs have plenty to gain from the unrest, instability, political turmoil, and economic failures of Iraq and Afghanistan among other countries in the region. The exportation of Iran's Islamic revolution serves to cover-up the mullahs' own instability and fragile position in Iran and is the flip side of the coin of their ongoing policy of domestic suppression.
Peace and stability in Iraq and throughout the entire region is only possible through an all out confrontation of Iran's regime. The mullahs' hope is that in this election year the United States will not take the lead in any initiations beyond Iraq and Afghanistan. Banking on this, the Iranian regime is pushing its luck on both fronts: extending suppression inside Iran and exporting fundamentalism and terrorism outside Iran, particularly into Iraq. ...
There is now a pragmatic solution, centered on the Iranian opposition, to uproot Islamic fundamentalism once and for all. The Western countries should support this international movement and the efforts of Iranian people for a regime change.
Nasser Rashidi is a human rights activist with the National Coalition of Pro-Democracy Advocates in Washington, D.C.
Iranian officials reacted cautiously to plans by Britain, France and Germany for a new incentive package to win Tehran's agreement to complete suspension of its nuclear programme before a meeting on November 25 of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Hossein Mousavian, foreign policy chief of the Supreme National Security Council, and Hamid Reza Asefi, foreign ministry spokesman, expressed Iran's willingness to negotiate while stressing Tehran would not give up its right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. The officials said Iran had not received the new European proposals, which were discussed by the Group of Eight industrialised nations on Friday and are expected to be passed to Iran this week.
Diplomats in Washington said Tehran would be offered a "last chance" to avoid referral to the United Nations Security Council only if it agreed to an IAEA resolution requiring it suspend all activities related to uranium enrichment.
At the G8 meeting, the US defended its wish to refer Iran to the Security Council as a first step towards sanctions. To avoid a schism in the G8, John Bolton, US undersecretary for arms control, indicated the US would not endorse the European proposal but would not stand in its way. Canada's position was close to the US.
If Iran agrees to suspend its enrichment activities - and diplomats were sceptical - then the European Union proposes a second stage of discussions over the supply of nuclear fuel for Iran's Bushehr plant under Russian construction. This proposal, which would deny Iran control of enrichment, would be unpalatable in Tehran but would be sweetened by the EU renewing talks on a trade and co-operation deal and supplying advanced technology.
The timetable is complicated by the US elections, with Iranian officials unwilling to boost President George W. Bush's re-election campaign by an early agreement. John Kerry, the Democratic presidential challenger, has said Washington should join Europe in offering concessions.
A further complication is that Iranian negotiators face considerable domestic opposition to further concessions. The Tehran Times newspaper yesterday mocked the idea of importing enriched uranium and Brigadier-General Mohammad Firouz-Abadi, chairman of the joint military staffs command, argued imported fuel would cost at least 10 times as much as fuel produced from Iran's own uranium ore.
Self-Proclaimed 'Liberators' Use Satellite TV to Woo Masses
A combination of light entertainment, talk shows and politics beamed into Iran by a dozen or so satellite stations set up by Iranian exiles in the United States is proving to be explosive in the Islamic country.
TEHRAN, Oct 18 (IPS) - A combination of light entertainment, talk shows and politics beamed into Iran by a dozen or so satellite stations set up by Iranian exiles in the United States is proving to be explosive in the Islamic country.
Iranian hardliners have denounced foreign satellite broadcasts for trampling on Islamic values and say they are used increasingly by exiled opposition groups, especially those based in Los Angeles, California, to stir anti-government unrest.
According to official estimates about three million households have access to satellite television, while security forces have in recent years only managed to seize 70,000 sets.
A couple of these TV stations are also the mouthpieces of new self-styled 'prophets'. The latest is a man called Mostafa Makkei in his early sixties who claims ''I am the reincarnation of Mohammed, the holy prophet of Islam.''
He not only brings up a new concept of reincarnation into Islam but also says: '' My finger print is the same as the holy prophet's.'' His proclamation has amused many Iranians and psychologists in the country claim he suffers from schizophrenia.
While Iranians are tickled by the antics of these self-proclaimed prophets, when it comes to politics they are so desperate for change that they are willing to believe anything that is transmitted by these dissident stations.
A case in point is the recent broadcasts of Ahoura Pirouz Khaleghi Yazdi, who for the past two months has been addressing Iranians inside the country through the Los Angeles- based Rangarang (Multicolur) satellite TV station.
These broadcasts, however, received scant attention overseas.
Khaleghi promised the ''liberation'' of Iran from the grip of the ayatollahs on Oct 1. He also said he will charter 50 planes to bring over 2,000 exiles home to see Islamic rule end.
''The Persian people have the ability to take back their country and it will happen in a short period of time,'' he says in an interview published on his web site (www.ahura.info), which features a clock counting down to his return.
He urged Iranians to come out on Sunday Sep 26 for peaceful demonstrations.
Local reports indicate several thousand people milled around streets in downtown Tehran, many of them driving cars up and down major avenues, honking their horns and flashing victory signs - in a rare display of defiance. Hundreds of militiamen arrived on the scene, but there were no violent clashes.
Of course, on Oct 1 the promised 'liberator' never arrived.
Khaleghi's satellite TV broadcasts have become hot gossip in Iran and officials have heaped scorn on him.
''This person (Khaleghi) has serious psychological problems and is trying to brainwash Iranian youth,'' the 'Etemad' newspaper quoted Tehran police chief Morteza Talai as saying.
''He has five wives and is not even able to manage his own personal life,'' added Talai.
Those who have heard Khaleghi speak say he seems to be a bit illiterate, his Farsi is weak and he lacks charisma.
''Now, you can call it schizophrenic disillusion, humor, or even extreme patriotism, but I call it insanity. This unfortunately is nothing new for some elderly Iranians living in exile for more than 25 years, striving to see their homeland once again before it's all over,'' wrote an overseas Iranian on-line blogger, only known as Eshan.
''Khaleghi's words defy all the principles of logic, and his arguments do not connect. He is obviously out of touch with reality and out of touch with the majority of Iranian population,'' Eshan wrote in his site.
But how does one explain the presence of so many people on the streets of the capital in a country where expressions of dissent can be met with brutal force?
''That so many people come out on the invitation of a man who was the centre of jokes and laughter for the last two to three months tells you about the depth of hate Iranians have for the ruling ayatollahs. It also shows that society -- frustrated, humiliated, oppressed and insulted by the clerics, has reached the explosion point,'' an Iranian journalist told the Persian service of 'Radio France International'.
Abdullah Ahmad, a psychologist in Esfehan south of Tehran, told IPS that people had enough and were willing to carry out civil disobedience.
Many have also pointed out that people were still waiting for a 'messiah' to liberate them from this regime and for this reason they are willing to accept any sign.
''He (Khaleghi) himself said he has liberated the spirits of the Iranians,'' said Fershteh Miladi (not his real name), a 34-year-old executive in an international service company.
But Potkin Azarmehr, an Iranian dissident in exile in London, was more cynical.
''It wouldn't be the first time in Iranian history when extreme conditions of despair have helped the emergence of a new prophet,'' he said in an e-mail interview.
''After all, Iran has probably produced more poets and prophets than any other country and perhaps the two go hand in hand. How I wish we had more inventors and worthwhile statesmen instead of poets and prophets,'' he added.
In the meantime, radio stations like KSRI, also Los Angeles-based, are circulating petitions calling for the Iranian regime to be replaced by a democratic and secular one.
On October 14, the immigration department deported MK, an Iranian Christian, from the Baxter detention centre in South Australia. Australia is the only country that deports asylum seekers to Iran.
Immigration minister [Amanda] Vanstone has removed the gloves and is brandishing the whip, Pamela Curr from Melbournes Asylum Seeker Resource Centre said on October 15. Curr pointed out that prior to the election eight Iranian Christians were given visas on the basis that they were at risk of persecution, but just days after the Coalitions election victory it has begun to deport them.
The secret manner of MKs deportation is of great concern to refugee supporters. While MK was at a church service in Baxter detention camp, his belongings were packed, Curr explained. After prayers he was taken to the office and from there to a waiting police car and driven to Whyalla airfield. There he was placed on a private chartered jet and flown direct to Perth airport. Here he was driven across the tarmac to the waiting Emirates flight to Dubai and then presumably to Iran.
Curr added that the coup de grace is media silence. The ABC will not report on refugee issues unless the immigration department provides a comment or confirmation. Just imagine when every government department uses this technique to stifle information about their activities. Voila the secret state! As of October 16, the only media to report on the deportation was the Melbourne Age.
The forced deportation was only the second involuntary deportation of a Christian to Iran. However, Curr explained: The pilot who flew MK from Whyalla confirmed that he was expecting two passengers. This means that the immigration department is already planning another deportation.
Converting to Christianity is an offence in Iran. On September 9, Hamid Pourmand, a lay pastor in the Assemblies of God Church in Iran, was arrested along with 85 other evangelical church leaders. Most were released later that day, but Pourmand remains in detention. Iranian authorities have refused to give any reason for the arrest and prolonged detention.
He said groups of "international terrorists" in Iraq were aiming to prevent Mr Bush's re-election.
If they succeeded they would celebrate victory over the US, he went on.
Mr Putin said Russia would respect the choice of the US people, but his remarks will be interpreted as a signal that he would prefer a Bush victory.
The Bush administration's criticism of the Russian military's behaviour in Chechnya, for example, has been more restrained since Russia became a key partner in the coalition against terror.
But the Russian president has also probably been angered by criticism of Russia that has come from influential figures close to Mr Bush's rival, Democratic Senator John Kerry.
Last month, a group of more than 100 US and European foreign policy experts signed a letter to Western leaders that accused President Putin of undermining democracy in Russia and turning the country back towards authoritarian rule.
Senator Joseph Biden - one of the Democrats' principal foreign policy experts - was among those who signed.
And earlier this month, Richard Holbrooke, widely tipped as a possible Secretary of State if Mr Kerry wins the presidential race, wrote in the Financial Times newspaper of Mr Bush's "tepid reaction to the disturbing trends under Mr Putin's leadership" which, he said, "had reinforced the Russian president's worst instincts".
But if elected, how different would a Kerry administration's policy really be towards Moscow? It is hard to say. But Mr Putin, for one, does not appear eager to find out.
LAST month we observed the third anniversary of the day that awakened the US to a new world, when extremists killed thousands of innocent people on American soil.
This month marked the third anniversary of the start of Operation Enduring Freedom, the day the US resolved to take the battle to the extremists themselves and we attacked al-Qa'ida and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Three years into the global war on terror, some ask whether the US is safer, and if the world is better off. These are fair questions.
But, first, some historical perspective. It has been said this global war against extremism will be the task of a generation, much like the Cold War, which lasted for decades.
We look back now at the Cold War as a great victory for freedom. But nothing was certain or preordained.
The 50-year span of the epic battle between the free world and the Soviet empire was filled with division, uncertainty, self-doubt, setbacks and failures.
Even with our closest allies, there were disputes over diplomatic policy, weapons deployment and military strategies. In the 1960s, France pulled out of NATO's military organisation altogether.
In the US, columnists and editorialists questioned and doubted US policies. There were even instances where US citizens saw their own government challenged as being warmongers or aggressors.
But the US under leaders of both political parties and our allies showed perseverance and resolve, year after year. The strategies varied, from coexistence to containment to detente to confrontation. Our leaders continued to stand up to what many thought an unbeatable foe, and eventually the Soviet regime collapsed.
That lesson has had to be relearned throughout the ages: the lesson that weakness is provocative, that a refusal to confront gathering dangers can increase, not reduce, future peril and that victory ultimately comes only to those who are purposeful and steadfast.
From the outset of this conflict, it was clear that our coalition had to go on the offensive against an enemy without country or conscience.
A little over three years ago, al-Qa'ida was already a growing danger. Its leader, Osama bin Laden, was safe and sheltered in Afghanistan. His network was dispersed throughout the world and had been attacking US interests for years.
Three years later, more than three-quarters of al-Qa'ida's key members and associates have been detained or killed, bin Laden is on the run, many of his key associates are behind bars or dead and his financial lines of support have been reduced.
Afghanistan, once controlled by extremists, today is led by Hamid Karzai, who is at the forefront of the world's efforts in support of moderates versus extremists. Soccer stadiums once used for public executions under the Taliban are today used, once again, for soccer.
Libya has gone from being a nation that sponsored terrorists, and secretly sought nuclear capability, to one that renounced its illegal weapons programs, and now says it is ready to re-enter the community of civilised nations.
Pakistani scientist AQ Khan's nuclear-proliferation network which provided lethal assistance to nations such as Libya and North Korea has been exposed and dismantled. Indeed, Pakistan, once sympathetic to al-Qa'ida and the Taliban, has under President Pervez Musharraf cast its lot with the civilised world and is a stalwart ally against terrorism.
NATO is now leading the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan and is helping to train Iraqi security forces. The United Nations is helping set up free elections in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Over 60 countries are working together to halt the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Three years ago, in Iraq, Saddam Hussein and his sons brutally ruled a nation in the heart of the Middle East. Saddam was attempting regularly to kill US and British air crews enforcing the no-fly zones. He ignored 17 UN Security Council resolutions.
Three years later, Saddam is a prisoner, awaiting trial. His sons are dead. Most of his associates are in custody.
Iraq has an interim constitution that includes a bill of rights and an independent judiciary. There are municipal councils in nearly every major city and in most towns and villages. Iraqis now are among those allowed to say, write, watch, and listen to whatever they want, whenever they want.
Have there been setbacks in Afghanistan and Iraq? Of course. But the enemy cannot win militarily. Their weapons are terror and chaos. They attack any sort of hope or progress to try to undermine morale. They know that if they can win the battle of perception, we will lose our will and leave.
These are difficult times. From the heart of Manhattan and Washington DC, to Baghdad, Kabul, Madrid, Bali, and The Philippines, a call to arms has been sounded, and the outcome of this struggle will determine the nature of our world for decades to come.
Today, as before, the hard work of history falls to the US, to our coalition, to our people. We can do it knowing that the great sweep of human history is for freedom and that it is on our side.
By Art Moore
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
Under oath, Sen. John Kerry's chief Iranian-American fund-raiser repudiated the presidential candidate's policy of accommodation toward Tehran, declaring the Islamic regime should not be trusted with nuclear materials.
Hassan Nemazee, 54, a New York investment banker and former board member of a pro-Tehran lobby, delivered a one-hour deposition today in New York City in a $10 million defamation lawsuit against Aryo Pirouznia, leader of the Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iraq.
Nemazee charges Pirouznia with defamation of character for accusing him of being an Iranian government agent. In a countersuit, Pirouznia contends that supporters of the cleric-led regime are funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Kerry campaign.
In his deposition today, Nemazee acknowledged he has raised about $500,000 for Kerry.
But he said if the Democratic nominee had asked him his view of the Iranian regime, he would have said it should be trusted with no other intention than to build nuclear weapons.
Jerome Corsi, a consultant to Pirouznia, attended the videotaped deposition and described it as "explosive."
"We should have a transcript and videotape of it soon; it will be very important for the American people to see this," said Corsi, who also is co-author of the best-seller challenging Kerry's Vietnam War record and post-war activism, "Unfit for Command."
Pirouznia will work closely with Corsi on a new book about the Iranian-Kerry connection, "Atomic Islam," to be published by WND Books in 2005.
Despite top Iranian officials openly calling for the development of nuclear weapons within the next four months and overwhelming confirmation from intelligence, Kerry has been insisting as president he would provide Tehran with nuclear fuel as long as it is used only for peaceful purposes.
During the first presidential debate, Kerry said, "I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes."
The same policy of accommodation toward Iran's nuclear aspirations is outlined on Kerry's campaign website.
Today, when questioned about the nature of the Islamic regime, Nemazee admitted it was sympathetic to terrorism and presented a threat to the world and the United States.
Nemazee warned that Kerry should do nothing to lend credibility to the regime and that normalizing relations with Iran would be a mistake.
The Iranian-American banker said he would be delighted to see regime change in Tehran.
He said the half a million dollars raised for Kerry included contributions from people in his building at 770 Park Ave. in New York City and from personal friends.
Nemazee said, however, he could not explain the inconsistency of having been a board member of the American-Iranian Council, which is on record in support of normalizing relations with Tehran.
Nominated as U.S. ambassador to Argentina by President Clinton in 1999, Nemazee eventually withdrew after a former partner raised allegations of business improprieties, WND previously reported.
In addition to nuclear accommodation, Kerry has embraced other key positions held by wealthy Iranian-Americans lobbying for Tehran, including ending the finger printing of Iranian visitors to the U.S; expanding "family reunion" visas to allow more immigration; offering a "dialogue" with the cleric regime; and helping Iran join the World Trade Organization.
Pirouznia, noting "America is incredibly popular with the Iranian masses," says Kerry's policy is "a grave mistake for a short-term benefit."
Kerry Iranian fund-raiser
repudiates him on Tehran
Under oath, warns Islamic regime
can't be trusted with nuke material
Posted: October 18, 2004
1:53 p.m. Eastern
By Art Moore
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
Oct. 18, 2004 17:24 | Updated Oct. 18, 2004 18:49
The Erez military court on Monday sentenced the captain of the Karine A weapons ship to 25 years and two other officers to 17 years each for their involvement in attempting to smuggle large amounts of Iranian supplied weapons destined for the Palestinian Authority in Gaza.
The Karine A captain Omar Mohammed Hassan Akawi,47, of Gaza, and his two accomplices, Riad Salah Mustafa Abdullah,39, of Jordan and Ahmed Mahmud Abed al-Khadi Khiris,39, of Jordan, were among the suspects arrested by naval commandos on January 3,2002. The commandos intercepted the ship in a predawn raid near the tip of the Arabian Peninsual, in an area of the Red Sea surrounded by Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Sudan.
The three suspects sentenced are expected to appeal the court decision.
Charges were reportedly dropped against a forth suspect, who was allegedly released in the prisoners swap with the Hizbullah.
According to the charge sheet, Akawi, Abdullah and Khiris were also involved in the Lebanese San Torini weapons-smuggling ship that was intercepted by naval forces on May 7,2001 outside Israel's territorial waters, off the coast between Haifa and Tel Aviv.
On board the San Torini security forces found a wide array of weapons sent by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which were destined as well for Palestinians in Gaza. Its cargo included SA-7 Strella anti-aircraft missiles, RPG rockets, mortars, mines, numerous rifles and guns. Details appearing on the charge sheet revealed a vast well oiled network that sent the accused to Turkey, Cyprus, Syria, Egypt, Dubai and Sudan to collect finances needed to purchase the ships and fill empty containers with the vast amount of weapons supplied by Iran.
Akawi in 1991 ordered Khiris to take a qualified diving course in Tripoli and three years later Khiris entered the Gaza Strip where he served in the PA naval command forces. Towards the end of 2000, he was asked to supply the names of two Jordanian citizens who were also qualified divers. After doing so he traveled to Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan and Syria where he met with operatives, received instructions and funds. Two months later he was ordered to travel to Tripoli, where he stayed in a farm belonging to a senior commander from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. There he was shown plastic containers that he later filled with weapons that were to be smuggled on the ships.
In March the same year, Abdullah was instructed to inspect a boat in Cyprus that was to be used to smuggle weapons to the PA. Not satisfied with the boat's condition he returned to Alexandria in Egypt where he stayed with Akawi. Akawi was then asked to travel to Egypt and inspect another boat called the Amira Sara which was later purchased for the sum of 114,000 Egyptian lira. Another boat purchased by the network was later confiscated by the Lebanese government authorities.
Later the San Torini vessel was purchased in Syria for the sum of $37,000,000 and was sent to Beirut's port. The San Torini was loaded with weapons and was instructed to sail to a designated spot to receive additional cargo and in order to evade detection sail around Cyprus before heading towards Egypt.
At a designated meeting point at sea, the second ship failed to show and a day later was intercepted.
During 2001,the accused continued searching for fishing vessels needed to smuggle weapons to the Palestinians. Their search led them to Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Dubai, Egypt and Sudan. It was during this period that the Karine A weapons ship was purchased in Lebanon and was then sent to Sudan where the accused together with other crew members boarded it and set sail with a cargo of 20 tons of watermelon and sesame seeds to Yemen.
In November 2001, the three met on board the Karine A, and two weeks later they set sail for Dubai where they remained for a number of days during which some of the accused met with others involved in the weapons deal. They were later informed that at a designated spot in the Red Sea, reportedly near the island of Qeshm in the Perisan Gulf, they would meet up with three weapons-loaded boats including the Amira Sarah, Nasser and a third ship purchased in Syria. There the weapons were loaded onto the Karine A, which later returned to Yemen for repairs. It then set out for the Suez Canal en route to Gaza, when it was intercepted and captured by naval commandos without firing a shot in an operation code named Noah's Ark.
The vessel had been monitored by Naval Intelligence since the PA purchased the vessel and officials noticed its log was not entirely in keeping with a cargo ship and correlated other intelligence to build a picture of an arms shipment in the making. Its cargo included short and long range Katyusha rockets, many Sagger and LAW anti-tank rockets, mortars, mines, explosives, sniper rifles, bullets, and many other weapons and the scope and size of the arsenal was described by officials as 50 times larger than the amount found on the San Torini.
Sounds like he's scared and lying through his teeth.
"the Islamic republic of Iran, the most democratic regime in the world"
LoL. How much opium does someone have to smoke before he believes that.?
DoctorZin will be appearing on the John Batchelor Show on WABC, tonight at approximately 10:50PM EST.
That's awesome. I'll have it on
Great job Gary!
Where'd he get THAT kind of money?
DoctorZin's having some ISP problems and will get the new Thread posted as soon as he can.
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.