Posted on 10/24/2004 9:03:00 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 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. 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.
DoctorZin
TEHRAN -- Many people in the West believe that the deadlock in Iran's domestic politics blocks any hope for societal reform. But from my viewpoint here in Iran, there is hope. Let me tell you why.
Society itself, not the government, creates change. And there are deep transformations occurring in Iran. Out of sight of much of the world, Iran is inching its way toward democracy.
The length of higher education in the country has been extended, absorbing the flow of job-seeking youths. This has hastened the transformation of thought and expectation in every corner of the country.
In military colleges, talk of human rights was, until very recently, totally unacceptable. Now courses on human rights have become part of the curriculum.
A 20 percent increase in the divorce rate is regrettable and worrisome, but it is also a sign that traditional marriage is changing as women gain equality. Other figures confirm this. Approximately 60 percent of university students are women, 12 percent of publishing house directors are women and 22 percent of the members of the Professional Association of Journalists are women.
In recent years some 8,000 nongovernmental organizations have been established throughout the country. These NGOs undercut the power of the state and fundamentalist ideas. Strengthening NGOs and civil institutions is one of the principal and most practical strategies to achieve social transformation.
In Baluchistan, one of the most deprived regions in the country, I was astonished to find several nongovernmental organizations led by women. "These women are so confident in what they are doing that they challenge high officials and insist on their demands," a local official told me.
In a village 80 miles east of Tehran, the people have established their own local council. According to a prominent Iranian urban sociologist, "In terms of its democratic structure this council could be regarded as exemplary. Every decision is made through democratic procedures; NGOs are created to support and inform the council on local affairs."
Not long ago traditional religion held that only believers were entitled to certain civil rights. Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, one of the most prominent Shiite leaders, says that all people, regardless of their faith, are equally deserving of civil rights.
These are signs of a movement that will be impossible to stop. The state is facing powerful, irreversible social pressure for reform. ...
The writer, a leading journalist and democracy advocate in Iran, was prevented by authorities in Tehran from traveling to the United States this month to accept the 2004 Civil Courage Prize. The State Department condemned the action.
2004/10/25
|
 |
So this is it. It's crunch time for the undecideds. Time to settle on what issues really matter at that lonely and pregnant moment in the voting booth. Everyone has their own do-or-die issue. Here is one: whether Iran will be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons.
Your quick reaction to this is probably either a) there is no stopping Iran from obtaining nukes or b) there is no real difference between the candidates on this, or c) it sounds bad, but we'll muddle along if this happens.
Let's work backwards. Deep down, it is hard for us to imagine terrorists, let alone a government, using nukes. We have lived under the nuclear sword of Damocles for more than half a century, and they have never been used since Nagasaki. Even the fears of rapid proliferation have not panned out: John F. Kennedy predicted there would be more than 20 nuclear states by this time; there are only eight (nine, if you count North Korea).
But the world has changed. Perhaps al-Qaida would not have used a nuke if it had one, but it would certainly be foolish to bet on that. Nor is it rational to rely on the good sense of the roguest of the world's rogue regimes, Iran.
If Iran had nukes it could, as it has threatened, lob one at Tel Aviv. But if this is too farfetched for you, it is no stretch to imagine a simple extension of Iran's current policy of relying on terrorist groups to do its dirty work. If a nuke goes off in Washington, New York or Tel Aviv, it will not be easy to prove it was donated by Teheran, when it will in any case be too late.
An Iranian nuke is the terror network's great hope to turn the tables in the global war. No more knocking off rogue regimes; suddenly, they would have their very own nuclear umbrella. North Korea already benefits from a form of nuclear immunity. Imagine what the Islamists' flagship regime would do if it felt invincible.
Stopping Iran from going nuclear is not just about one country, but a pivot in the global war. But can Iran be stopped? Some doubt that even George W. Bush can do it.
"Because Iran's nuclear weapons program is so damnably hard to delay without preemptive American or Israeli airstrikes, and the Bush administration remains understandably loath to contemplate military action against another Middle Eastern state, the realists within the administration and without could lock the White House into exploring some kind of dialogue with Rafsanjani and Khamenei," wrote former CIA Iran expert Reuel Marc Gerecht in the Weekly Standard in August.
Though the consensus that Iran must not get nukes may seem wall to wall, Bush is facing an uphill bureaucratic battle about as steep as before his "axis of evil" speech, when his own administration was openly divided over whether Saddam Hussein must be removed.
The White House has still not contradicted Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's statements to Congress that Iran is a "democracy" and that regime change there is not a US policy goal. Though Europe insists it is determined to prevent Iran from obtaining nukes, it is doubtful that Europe will be tougher than the "realists" in the US State Department who think that Iran should be engaged and managed rather than stopped.
Will Bush prevail over his own bureaucracy in a second term? If this is an open question, and it is, then another is not: whether John Kerry will charge up the hill and overturn the "realist" consensus.
Though Kerry has attacked Bush for not being tough enough on Iran, and has called a nuclear Iran "an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States," he also, in March, called for a "non-confrontational" approach to Teheran. In a debate with Bush, Kerry said Iran should be "tested" with a Western offer to supply nuclear fuel in exchange for scrapping its own enrichment capabilities. Iran has already rejected this offer, which in any case mirrors Bill Clinton's failed deal with North Korea.
AT THIS late stage, it is clear that only a joint US-European threat of draconian UN Security Council sanctions, the fall of the mullahs, or military action could block Iranian nukes - and none of even these scenarios is foolproof. Navigating this minefield will be the first major challenge for Bush, if he is reelected. Even assuming that Bush is determined, there are no guarantees of success.
There is more certainty in the case of a Kerry win, but it is in the wrong direction.
"The realist temptation in the American foreign-policy establishment is always powerful, principally because it is the path of least resistance and least action, and it dovetails nicely with the status-quo reflexes of the State Department, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the military brass at the Pentagon," explains Gerecht. "Senator John Kerry appears to have embraced the realist cause."
Whatever else you think about in that voting booth, consider this: With one vote, there is a chance that the clock can still be turned back on the coming Islamist nuke; with the other, hold on to your hats.
saul@jpost.com
- Editorial Page Editor Saul Singer is author of the book, Confronting Jihad: Israel's Struggle & the World After 9/11
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon accused Iran Monday of doing everything it could to obtain nuclear weapons, further ratcheting up the pressure on its arch-foe.
"Iran is making every effort to arm itself with nuclear weapons, with ballistic means of delivery, and it is preparing an enormous terrorist network with Syria and Lebanon," he told parliament, opening debate on his plan to withdraw from Gaza. Iran has denied trying to build an atomic bomb and says its nuclear program is just for peaceful purposes.
Sharon, striving to blunt resistance to his plan from Israel's nationalist right, referred to Iran as he emphasized Israel faced various dangers and this was not time for disunity over his policies.
"We are powerful enough to defend this country and hit our enemy hard," he said amid heckling from rightist deputies.
Israel, believed to have the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East, has recently increased pressure on Iran by saying it has obtained weapons that could target the Islamic Republic's underground uranium enrichment facilities.
Iran said last week it had test-fired a more accurate version of its Shahab-3 missile, the latest in a series of upgrades to the weapon thought capable of hitting Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf.
Iran does not recognize Israel's right to exist, but insists its missiles are for defensive purposes and would be used only to counter an Israeli or U.S attack on its nuclear facilities.
European Union diplomats are trying to strike a deal with Iran to encourage it to give up uranium enrichment to defuse a dispute over whether Tehran is seeking nuclear arms.
Washington wants to haul Iran before the U.N. Security Council in November for possible sanctions after a meeting of the U.N. nuclear watchdog.
|
||
 |
||
| A Bush pre-election strike on Iran 'imminent' White House insider report "October Surprise" imminent By Wayne Madsen According to White House and Washington Beltway insiders, the Bush administration, worried that it could lose the presidential election to Senator John F. Kerry, has initiated plans to launch a military strike on Iran's top Islamic leadership, its nuclear reactor at Bushehr on the Persian Gulf, and key nuclear targets throughout the country, including the main underground research site at Natanz in central Iran and another in Isfahan. Targets of the planned U.S. attack reportedly include mosques in Tehran, Qom, and Isfahan known by the U.S. to headquarter Iran's top mullahs. The Iran attack plan was reportedly drawn up after internal polling indicated that if the Bush administration launched a so-called anti-terrorist attack on Iran some two weeks before the election, Bush would be assured of a landslide win against Kerry. Reports of a pre-emptive strike on Iran come amid concerns by a number of political observers that the Bush administration would concoct an "October Surprise" to influence the outcome of the presidential election. According to White House sources, the USS John F. Kennedy was deployed to the Arabian Sea to coordinate the attack on Iran. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld discussed the Kennedy's role in the planned attack on Iran when he visited the ship in the Arabian Sea on October 9. Rumsfeld and defense ministers of U.S. coalition partners, including those of Albania, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Iraq, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mongolia, Poland, Qatar, Romania, and Ukraine briefly discussed a very "top level" view of potential dual-track military operations in Iran and Iraq in a special "war room" set up on board the aircraft carrier. America's primary ally in Iraq, the United Kingdom, did not attend the planning session because it reportedly disagrees with a military strike on Iran. London also suspects the U.S. wants to move British troops from Basra in southern Iraq to the Baghdad area to help put down an expected surge in Sh'ia violence in Sadr City and other Sh'ia areas in central Iraq when the U.S. attacks Iran as well as clear the way for a U.S. military strike across the Iraqi-Iranian border aimed at securing the huge Iranian oil installations in Abadan. U.S. allies South Korea, Australia, Kuwait, Jordan, Italy, Netherlands, and Japan were also left out of the USS John F. Kennedy planning discussions because of their reported opposition to any strike on Iran. In addition, Israel has been supplied by the United States with 500 "bunker buster" bombs. According to White House sources, the Israeli Air Force will attack Iran's nuclear facility at Bushehr with the U.S. bunker busters.The joint U.S.-Israeli pre-emptive military move against Iran reportedly was crafted by the same neo-conservative grouping in the Pentagon and Vice President Dick Cheney's office that engineered the invasion of Iraq. Morale aboard the USS John F. Kennedy is at an all-time low, something that must be attributable to the knowledge that the ship will be involved in an extension of U.S. military actions in the Persian Gulf region. The Commanding Officer of an F-14 Tomcat squadron was relieved of command for a reported shore leave "indiscretion" in Dubai and two months ago the Kennedy's commanding officer was relieved for cause. The White House leak about the planned attack on Iran was hastened by concerns that Russian technicians present at Bushehr could be killed in an attack, thus resulting in a wider nuclear confrontation between Washington and Moscow. International Atomic Energy Agency representatives are also present at the Bushehr facility. In addition, an immediate Iranian Shahab ballistic missile attack against Israel would also further destabilize the Middle East. The White House leaks about the pre-emptive strike may have been prompted by warnings from the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency that an attack on Iran will escalate out of control. Intelligence circles report that both intelligence agencies are in open revolt against the Bush White House. White House sources also claimed they are "terrified" that Bush wants to start a dangerous war with Iran prior to the election and fear that such a move will trigger dire consequences for the entire world. Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and columnist. He served in the National Security Council (NSA) during the Reagan Administration and wrote the introduction to Forbidden Truth. He is the co-author, with john Stanton of "America's Nightmare: The Presidency of George Bush II." His forthcoming book is titled: "jaded Tasks: Big Oil, Black Ops, and Brass Plates." Madsen can be reached at Wmadsen777@aol.com |
Iran warns Europeans not to cross its red lines25 Oct 2004 09:17:39 GMT Source: Reuters |
The EU's biggest three powers Britain, France and Germany have offered Iran a deal whereby it would scrap activities related to producing its own nuclear fuel in return for help with civilian nuclear technology and a resumption of trade talks.
But Hassan Rohani, secretary-general of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said Iran had the same rights to develop nuclear technology as any other signatory of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
"Our red lines are clear and if anyone wants to cross them we will not allow it," the official IRNA news agency quoted him as telling parliament's National Security and Foreign Affairs Commission.
"The Europeans should say that Iran has every legal right that is mentioned in the NPT and it should not discriminate against Iran regarding these rights," he said.
"In other words, Iran has as much rights as a European country has under the NPT."
Iranian officials on Sunday dismissed as unacceptable the EU trio's nuclear proposal but said they wanted further talks to reach a deal. Fresh talks are due to take place in Vienna on Wednesday when Iran is due to present a counter-proposal.
The United Nation's nuclear watchdog has given Tehran until late November to suspend all uranium enrichment activities or face being sent to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.
Iran says it will not scrap uranium enrichment -- a process which can be used to make reactor fuel or bomb-grade material -- but is ready to give guarantees that it would never use nuclear technology for military purposes.
"Iran will patiently prove to the world that its nuclear activities are for peaceful purposes," Rohani said.
"We will do everything necessary to prove that because we want to have political, economic and cultural cooperation with the international community and we don't want them to worry about something that is not true."
"I don't think dialogue has been exhausted on this at all but we do need the Iranians to understand the international community does not find it acceptable that they develop nuclear weapons," Blair told a news conference on Monday.
The big three EU powers, Britain, France and Germany, have offered Iran a deal whereby it would scrap activities related to producing nuclear fuel for reactors in return for help with civil nuclear technology and a resumption of trade talks.
The freeze on enrichment -- which can be used to make bomb-grade material -- must happen before the International Atomic Energy Agency's board meets on November 25 or the EU will join the United States in seeking to refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council, a move that could lead to sanctions.
"We can put proper pressure through the international body," Blair said.
"The Iranians have been given certain measures they have to comply with and they have got to comply with it because the one thing we do not want is an Iran with nuclear weapons capability."
Iran's top security official suggested on Monday that Tehran might extend a freeze on uranium enrichment but warned it could not be forced to scrap its nuclear technology for good.
Iranian officials on Sunday rejected the EU proposal as unbalanced but also said they wanted further negotiations.
Oil- and gas-rich Iran says it wants only nuclear power and denies U.S. accusations that it aims to develop atomic weapons.
Iran: US nuclear allegations - ''baseless and sheer lies'' |
||
| 25-10-2004, 13:06 | ||
Talking to reporters after a Majlis session Monday, Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Hassan Rowhani, said that Iran's cooperation with IAEA was not because of Europe but is aimed at proving that all US accusations against the Islamic Republic were "baseless and unfounded." Asked on the western media reports that Iran did not accept the latest proposals of the "EU big trio" (Britain, France and Germany) on its nuclear case and that the case should now be referred to the UN Security Council, Rowhani said that the word "Security Council" was not threatening and that it would not exert any pressure on the Islamic Republic. "All activities of Iran have been transparent and legal," said the official adding "therefore, taking our case to the UN Security Council would be useless for those who are after it." "What the council is going to do now that Iran is to continue its cooperation within the framework of the international regulations," Rowhani asked, according to IRNA. He added that Tehran wanted its nuclear case closed on the basis of legal documents in order to prove to the world that its nuclear programs were only for peaceful purposes. (albawaba.com) |
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.
/312_G.jpg)
