Iranian Alert -- DAY 26 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST

In just 4 days (July 9th) the people of Iran are planning massive demonstrations events and strikes.

On this date, 4 years ago, the regime brutally attacked peaceful student demonstrators while in their dorms. The result was the loss of life and liberty of hundreds of students, many of which are still unaccounted for.

Once again, the regime has been threatening a major crackdown on the protesters. A major confrontation is just days away.

Iran is a country ready for a regime change. If you follow this thread you will witness, I believe, the transformation of a country. This daily thread provides a central place where those interested in the events in Iran can find the best news and commentary.

Will liberal clerics save Iran?

4 July Daily Star

The mullahs who rule Iran are fending off street protests at home and criticism abroad, but the biggest challenge to nearly a quarter century of Islamic rule comes from within their own ranks.

Dissident Shiite clerics are openly challenging the theological bedrock on which Iran’s Islamic Republic stands that in everything from judicial appointments to declaring war, the final say goes to senior clerics unaccountable to public vote. They’re doing so, moreover, in increasingly visible and outspoken ways, through internet websites, media interviews and even the distribution of cassette tape recordings the very technique the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini used to spread his views before the 1979 Iranian revolution.

In Qom, Iran’s theological heart, the tension was plain this past month at an open, empty grave at Hazrat-e- Masumeh, one of the country’s most revered shrines and a place where eminent clerics have traditionally been buried. The grave was intended for Ayatollah Mohammed Sadeq Karbaschi, a leading liberal cleric who died in late May at the age of 90. Government authorities blocked burial at the shrine when they learned that the main speaker would be a cleric who for most Iranians embodies opposition to clerical rule.

He is Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, one of the dozen highest-ranking Shiite scholars in Iran. For the first decade after the revolution, he was Khomeini’s right-hand man and designated successor, until the two broke up over the issue of clerical rule. Khomeini’s inheritors have sought to muzzle Montazeri, keeping him under house arrest from 1997 to 2002. However, the frail octogenarian remains popular, influential and dangerous to the clerics ruling Iran.

“I believe that Islam and democracy can co-exist because Islam is a faith that supports freedom and human rights,” says Montazeri. “But this will only be possible if true Islam is observed. What the conservative rulers are practicing today is not true Islam, and I oppose it.”

That prominent clerics are willing to speak out openly against the government is testament to the fact that Iran, for all its circumscriptions, is nothing like the totalitarian state that deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein imposed in his neighboring country. That so many of these same clerics have been in and out of jail and house arrest demonstrates how much of the battle for a freer society has yet to be won.

The rhetoric of Iran’s ruling hierarchy is contradictory, with some in the conservative establishment still chanting “death to America” and others touting the possibility of internal reform even of placing limits on the tenure and authority of Iran’s supreme spiritual leader Ali Khamenei, who wields absolute power over Iran’s military and judiciary and indirectly pulls the strings on nearly everything else.

Liberal clerics say the conservatives’ talk of possible constraints on their own power is too little, too late: “Today, our challenge is not limiting the leader’s term,” says reformist cleric Mohsen Kadivar. “The great debate in Iranian society, in the universities and among intellectuals, is whether we need any supreme leader at all.”

Kadivar, still in his 40s, is among the most influential clerics of his generation. A reformist supporter of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, he has spent time during the past three years both in an Iranian jail and at Harvard University as a visiting professor. Now he’s back in Tehran, attempting to spark a transformation from within to restore what he sees as the true interpretation of Islam’s role in society.

“The difference between these interpretations is something like that between Catholicism and Protestantism in Christianity,” he says. “The conservatives focus on the forms of Islam, not on its soul and spirituality. They want to preserve and protect the forms of Islam, as it was 1,400 years ago. Our side says that what is important is the spirituality of the Prophet Mohammed and his message.”

The basis of the dispute is theological. Conservatives say that the supreme leader and the state apparatus he controls represent God’s will on earth. Suggestions that conservatives might accept a limited role are misleading, according to reformists like Kadivar. “The conservatives speak in two ways for foreign consumption and for home,” he says. “For the foreign audience they say: ‘We are democrats.’ But here in this country they say: ‘No, we are appointed by God, and you cannot challenge us.’”

The reformists insist that there is no contradiction between democracy and Islam, properly defined. “The representatives of God include all the people,” Kadivar says, “not just one person.”

A similar argument comes from Grand Ayatollah Youssef Saanei, 79, a longtime aide to Khomeini who served on the first Council of Guardians after the revolution and was later chief prosecutor. Today, he’s a dissident in Qom, reviled by the powers that be, but widely praised for his religious rulings on women’s rights and democracy. “In Islam, it is forbidden to rule without the support of the public,” he says. “If someone tries to do so, this will end in dictatorship, which Islam forbids, because those who have power should never do anything against the will of the people or of God.”

Saanei says he has no objection to clerics in government. What he opposes is its manifestation in Iran, with the clerics’ claim to absolute power. “If elected, they can rule,” he said. “But there isn’t any place for individual rule. No one has the right to exercise dictatorial power, whether clerics or regular people.”

Tehran’s rulers talk a lot about the military threat from the United States. But it is those words the statements of clerics like Saanei, Montazeri and Kadivar that will likely determine Iran’s future fate.

Jon Sawyer, Washington bureau chief for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, recently returned from Iran. He wrote this commentary for THE DAILY STAR

source http://www.iranexpert.com/2003/liberalclerics4july.htm

In Qom, Iran’s theological heart, the tension was plain this past month at an open, empty grave at Hazrat-e- Masumeh.

An empty grave, what a symbol!

June 30, 2003
A Look At Key Factors Behind The Recent Crisis
RN Editor Ali Nourizadeh
In Conversation With Mehrdad Khonsari

MK: The durability of the recent student protests around the country has been successful in capturing world attention. To what extent is this unprecedented movement, which began spontaneously capable of organizing itself for greater challenges? To what extent is the IRI capable of infiltrating, influencing and sidelining this popular movement?

ARN: It is foolish to think that a movement of this magnitude could have been orchestrated without some form of planning or organization behind it. There are strong indications that the regime - in the form of the Ministry of Information - may well have perpetrated the original protests which began on Tuesday afternoon some weeks ago. Their aim was to either hijack the movement being planned for 9 July or altogether stop it. But, the crucial role played by the various Iranian radio and television broadcasts (emanating from Los Angeles), was to prove highly provocative, in creating an unforeseen situation where the regime was ultimately outflanked. As a result, the protests began assuming a life of their own fuelled by a combination of various factors. Soon the messages being chanted by the protestors began to manifest themselves in a new scenario in which the movement had become largely hostile to all persons associated with the regime, including President Khatami. So, while at the start of these demonstrations, there might have been some plausible case to suggest that elements within the regime or its loyal opposition - namely the so-called reformers - were playing a leading role, as we speak, there are no doubts that slogans calling for Khatami to resign or those widespread chants calling for ‘Khamenei’s demise’ have clearly gone beyond any previous ‘red lines’ or thresholds that have been carefully observed in the past.

MK: To what extent has the role played by external powers - in particular the statements made by President Bush and Prime Minister Blair - been helpful in providing momentum to these protests?
ARN: There is no question in my mind that the public statement made by President Bush that was subsequently followed up by a similar well publicized statement from Prime Minister Blair, have both served to validate the justness of the cause which these young people have been protesting against in the past several weeks. In my view, while the US could not have been behind this matter, they are nevertheless, very pleased about its outcome. Moreover, their reaction and messages of support that have come by way of public statements from such senior officials, as Colleen Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice have served to convey to the Iranian people that the most powerful nation on earth is behind them and their stand for freedom and democracy. To summarize, while there may be some reservations, particularly amongst certain intellectuals quarters, regarding the importance of these statements and the efficacy of the more uncompromising line that is being articulated by the US against the Islamic regime particularly in light of what has been previously experienced in Iraq back in 1991, it is my view that this new attitude has been crucial in lifting public spirits and giving heart and encouragement to ordinary people so that they may continue their struggle.

MK: Do you not think that Blair’s comments that served to infuriate the leadership in Teheran was a marked point of departure from positions usually advocated by the British Foreign Office?
ARN: I believe that this statement was particularly important given the fact that it was made on the wake of Jack Straw (British Foreign Secretary)’s visit to Teheran. Moreover, like the war against Iraq, it displayed quite explicitly the differences of approach that exist between the way in which the Prime Minister sees matters in comparison to the much more status quo oriented diplomatic corps at Whitehall. But, this is not without precedent and we Iranians have previously witnessed a similar example back in 1979, when the then Foreign Secretary, David Owen had clearly been the very last person to abandon the previous regime.

MK: Many consider Mohammad Khatami to be a ‘lame duck’ president or a ‘busted flush’, at a time when the legitimacy and the popularity of the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei is believed to be at an all time low. In these circumstances, there are rumors circulating that former President Hashemi Rafsanjani is trying to carve out a new role for himself as the main power broker in Iran. While remaining in the background, he is said to be trying to convey the message that were the West to deal with him by allowing him a free and unfettered hand in dealing with matters at home, then he would move quickly towards removing any existing barriers including resumption of normal ties with the US. To what extent have you noted any evidence that would validate such an assertion?
ARN: I have seen numerous evidence that would suggest to me that Rafsanjani - whom I should add is another equally despised member of the IRI leadership - is trying to position himself as the country’s next ‘strong man’. It is a known fact that a number of key people associated with him have met with US officials in Switzerland and Greece in recent weeks to convey the general picture you have described. It is also unbelievable to hear that he has even tried to engage the Israelis by sending an envoy to meet with their officials in Jerusalem, in the hope that he might persuade the powerful Jewish lobby in Washington not to bloc his various approaches. However, it is equally safe to say that people are a great deal more sober today than they have ever been in the past. In this regard, I am of the view that no one has so far been willing to attach any credence to his proposals. Nevertheless, he is pressing ahead, by saying that only he is capable of adopting a “Chinese’ approach to solving Iran’s economic problems, thus ending rampant inflation, unemployment and the like. But, I am of the view that policy makers in Washington have moved on a great deal and they are no longer interested in supporting such hated people whose continuing role in office runs counter to a trend that is being demanded by the current milieu in the region.

http://www.nourizadeh.com/site/archives/000139.php

POWELL’S SOFT DECLARATION WELCOMED BY IRANIAN HARD LINERS

TEHRAN, 4 July. (IPS) Secretary of State Colin Powell’s backing away from intervention in Iranian politics on Wednesday has baffled Iranian reformists, fearing his conciliatory statement might encourage ruling conservatives increasing pressures against them, Iranian analysts said.

Powell told the Washington radio station WMAL: "The best thing we can do right now is not get in the middle of this family fight too deeply", referring to the ongoing confrontations between the "classical" reformists and the hard liners led respectively by President Mohammad Khatami and Ayatollah Ali Khameneh'i, the leader of the Islamic Republic.

His statement contrasted sharply with President George W. Bush’s open support for Iranian students-led protest movement of the last two weeks calling for more freedom and denouncing both Ayatollah Khameneh'i and Hojjatoleslam Khatami, criticised for his continuous "slide" towards hard liners.
President Bush says Iran is part of an "axis of evil" and administration officials have said Washington reserves the right to use military force against Iran's nuclear programs.

Powell’s remark also echoed a controversial comment by Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who told "The Los Angeles Times" that Iran was different "because it was a democracy".

"Ruling hard liners welcomed Powell’s interview, interpreting it at meaning the danger of a possible American military intervention in Iran was over", one Iranian analyst told Iran Press Service on condition of anonymity.

Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Kamal Kharrazi reacted positively to the Thursday's remarks of US Secretary of State Colin Powell regarding Iran, saying that there could be seen signs of accepting reality in Mr. Powell's statements.

"Of course, the stances adopted by the Americans are not stable and its reason is that they do not have precise knowledge about the Iranian society and are easily influenced by this or that", the Minister said, quoted by the official news agency IRNA.

He said an example of this American behaviour could be witnessed in their hasty support for the recent unrest in Iran, "something they have now realised how unimportant it was", Mr. Kharrazi said, referring to the recent Iranian students-popular demonstrations against the Islamic Republic.

Iranian authorities have tagged the students as "trouble-makers and thugs" acting on orders from Washington and the US-based Iranian mass medias.

"In order to have a fair assessment of US approach towards events in Iran, one has to see whether such attitude would be lasting or not and whether it would lead to any change of approach towards Iran", he stressed.

The internet site "Baaztaab" (Reflexion), close to Mr. Mohsen Reza’i, the Secretary of the influential Assembly for Discerning the Interests of the State (ADIS, or the Expediency Council), said Powell’s statement reflected America’s "backing away from its previous tough policy on the Islamic Republic".

A close aid to Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the ADIS’s powerful Chairman and the regime’s number two man, Mr. Reza’i met recently in Athena with some American scholars, discussing with them the future of Iran-US relations, cut in 1979 after Iranian revolutionary students stormed the American embassy in Tehran, taking as hostages 55 American diplomats and staff.

"That the reformists refrained from any observation on Powell’s statement show their bewilderedness", the analyst said, observing that the reformist internet site "Emrooz" had reported the interview without any comment.

"The reformists are afraid that the conciliatory remarks by Mr. Powell would serve the conservatives in increasing their crackdown on the freedom seekers Iranians, including students and dissidents", he added.

In his radio interview, Mr. Powell also reminded listeners that the Iranian people in free elections elected Mr. Khatami. "Remember that the president of Iran is freely elected. President Khatami was elected by his people, not in an American kind of election but an election that essentially tapped into the desires of the people", he added, suggesting that the Iranian rulers might make concessions to the protest movement.

"I think it's best for us to see if this movement that is under way with people marching and expressing their views is enough to put pressure on the political part of the Iranian government, President Khatami, and then the religious part under (Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali) Khameneh’i to see whether this causes them to realise that they are going down a loser trail", Powell told the radio station.

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2003/Jul-2003/us_iran_4703.htm

Iran is the Root of Islamic Terrorism

July 05, 2003
Capitalism Magazine
Joseph Kellard

Iran is the root of Islamic terrorism, and destroying its theocracy would be a major victory in the war on terrorists. But in this war the Bush administration takes an inverted, appeasing approach. Bush not only fails to declare that the US will us force to topple Iran's regime; he's busy appeasing Palestinian terrorists that are mere heads of the Iranian hydra.

Following an overwhelming military victory in Iraq, the Bush administration has renewed its pursuit of creating a Palestinian terrorist state, instead of focusing on the premier sponsor of anti-American terrorism: Iran.

While the administration once again entangles itself in "peace" talks with Palestinian terrorists, freedom-loving rebels in Iran have stepped up the revolt against their Islamic fundamentalist rulers who enforce religious social decrees, impose strict censorship, and imprison or execute political opponents.

Iran remains the ideological center of the America-hatred pervading the Islamic Middle East. That theocracy began warring with America when its rulers took 52 Americans hostage in 1979. Highlights of Iran's terrorism on Americans include the bombing and murder of 241 Marines in Beirut in 1983 and the killing of 19 US servicemen bombed at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996.

More recently, intelligence sources believe Iran harbors Al Qaeda operatives who orchestrated the bombing of a Western residential compound in Saudi Arabia last month that killed nine Americans. Iran sends Islamic agitators and militants into both US-controlled Iraq and Afghanistan, and sponsors such terrorist groups as Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Lebanon, Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

In January 2002, Israel intercepted a ship from Iran delivering 50 tons of weapons to the terrorist Palestinian Authority. A month before this, former Iranian "President" Hashemi Rafsanjani stated publicly that when the Islamic world has nuclear weapons "the strategy of the West will hit a dead end, since a single atomic bomb has the power to completely destroy Israel." Last month, an Iranian opposition group discovered another secret nuclear facility in Natanz, undoubtedly part of Iran's advanced nuclear weapons program.

Clearly, Iran is the root of Islamic terrorism, and destroying its theocracy would be a major victory in the war on terrorists. But in this war the Bush administration takes an inverted, appeasing approach. Bush not only fails to declare that the US will us force to topple Iran's regime; he's busy appeasing Palestinian terrorists that are mere heads of the Iranian hydra.

Meanwhile, the Iranian rebels fighting to establish a government that separates mosque and state and upholds free speech will stage a nationwide general strike on July 9 that they hope will spell the end for their ruling mullahs and ayatollahs.

Since September 11, 2001, these rebels consisted largely of students who demonstrated monthly in Tehran. But last week Michael Ledeen, author of "The War Against the Terror Masters," told Fox News that the rebels are now comprised of up to 90 percent families taking to the streets daily in various cities. Moreover, whereas they once demanded reforms to the regime, they now call for its overthrow and for the head of supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei. The regime is now "obviously desperate," Ledeen added, and distrusts its own army, since many of its commanders said they would not fire upon the protestors.

Obviously, the time is ripe for the Bush administration to topple this regime. Last week Bush gave his usual brief comment about circumstances in Iran, stating that the protestors need to know "America stands squarely by their side."

"For us, what the President said…the last few days may seem relatively mild," Ledeen said, "but for [the Iranian rebels] it's lifeblood."

Yet, as one rebel aptly stated, "We hope that Mr. Bush doesn't only talk but does more."

But what has his administration been doing?

After Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told students in Germany two weeks ago that US policy was not to deal with either the unelected ruling clerics or the country's president, Mohammad Khatami, Secretary of State Colin Powell the following week said that the administration may possibly renew behind-the-scenes negotiations with Iranian officials that were canceled after the recent bombings in Saudi Arabia.

As another Iranian rebel said, as if directly addressing Bush, "Even though we wish for change without the need for war, we need your support by not negotiating with a dangerous regime."

The administration should never negotiate with terrorist regimes, but all the rebels should be calling for the US to bring its war on terrorists to Iran. Instead, the administration sends out its usual contradictory messages that led to its months-long charade with the UN Security Council before destroying Saddam Hussein's regime.

The situation in Iran, however, is much graver and urgent than it was with Iraq. In this most crucial battle of the war, it's time for Bush to back the rebels by asserting America's readiness to use force to topple the regime. If not, on July 9 Tehran could become another Tiananmen Square.

About the Author: Joseph Kellard is a journalist and freelance editorialist living in New York. He also publishes a cultural-political e-mail newsletter. Visit his website at www.theai.net.

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2888

The Show Down is Just Days Away

DoctorZin 7.5.2003

For the Iranian people, the coming week will be it's most important in the last 25 years. July 9th is set to be the biggest confrontation ever between the people of Iran and the regime. We can expect martial law to be declared. The people appear prepared to demonstrate and strike, in spite of government warnings. The regime is doing everything possible to discourage the people from any protest on this date. We must do everything possible to encourage them

The people of Iran have shown extraordinary courage in the past 26 days. Daily, the people have protested. Daily the forces of the regime have beaten and arrested those who dare to call for its end.

Out president gave the people an incredible moral support when he spoke of our support for the demonstrators.

Unfortunately, our secretary of state Colin Powell stated yesterday that we should stay out of this Iranian "family fight" and that it was his hope that "the United States had learned its lesson not to interfere in Iran's affairs."

These statements have caused shock, despair and anger within the Iranian community, both inside Iran and the US.

Ruling hard liners welcomed Powell’s interview, interpreting it as meaning the danger of a possible American military intervention in Iran was over.

Now the US media has been silent on this struggle. I hope it is just that the media has been waiting for this week to ramp up on the story.

But we need to encourage them to cover the story, in depth. Starting tomorrow in the Sunday morning talk show and throughout next week. The people of Iran hear what out media is saying about the situation there and we need to put pressure on the media to follow the story and interview real experts on Iran like, Michael Ledeen, Amir Taheri, and people like Banafsheh.

I want to strongly encourage you to contact the media sources below and ask others to do the same. Let them know that this is a story of great importance to Americans and the war on terror.

Here is a list of media sources you can email:

E-mail major media:

NY Post
letters@nypost.com

The Times (London)
online.editor@the-times.co.uk
worldnews.editor@the-times.co.uk

USA Today
editor@usatoday.com

U.S. News and World Report
letters@usnews.com

Wall Street Journal
letter.editor@edit.wsj.com

Washington Post
letters@washpost.com
foreign@washpost.com

Wahington Times
editor@washingtontimes.com
letters@washingtontimes.com
general@washingtontimes.com

World News Tonight with Peter Jennings
peterjennings@worldnewstonight.abcnews.com

CNN
eason.jordan@turner.com
tom.johnson@turner.com
rick.davis@turner.com
gerald.levin@twi.com
community@cnn.com

Fox News
Speakout@foxnews.com
Viewerservices@foxnews.com
Comments@foxnews.com
Foxaroundtheworld@foxnews.com
Foxreport@foxnews.com
Hannity@foxnews.com
Colmes@foxnews.com
Oreilly@foxnews.com
Warstories@foxnews.com
Cavuto@foxnews.com

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

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.