Iranian Alert -- DAY 45 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST

The Iranian Student Movement Up To The Minute Reports ^ | 7.24.2003 | DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movment in Iran from being reported.

From jamming satellite broadcasts, to prohibiting news reporters from covering any demonstrations to shutting down all cell phones and even hiring foreign security to control the population, the regime is doing everything in its power to keep the popular movement from expressing its demand for an end of the regime.

These efforts by the regime, while successful in the short term, do not resolve the fundamental reasons why this regime is crumbling from within.

Iran is a country ready for a regime change. 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.

Please continue to join us here, post your news stories and comments to this thread.

Thanks for all the help.

DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

How Might Cuba be Jamming US Transmissions to Iran?

July 24, 2003
The Guardian
Alok Jha

In theory all they have to do is deafen the US satellite transmitting to Iran. Whether it's happening or not is uncertain. The US is investigating claims that its station, Voice of America, has been blocked since launching a daily Persian-language programme aimed at Iran.

The Cubans deny jamming but the US state department suspects a jamming signal is coming from a monitoring complex outside Havana built by the Soviets during the Cold War to spy on the US.

There are dozens of different types of communication satellites in use today but they generally rely on the same principle. Launched into a geostationary orbit (where the satellite maintains a fixed position relative to the Earth), the satellite receives information from the broadcaster, which it then beams back down to a target area on the ground. Anyone in that target area with an antenna and the appropriate decoder can tune in.

To jam the transmission at a particular frequency, you send a powerful transmission to the satellite at that frequency. If it is strong enough and contains only white noise, the satellite will get confused. "It overloads the satellite and it can't tell the difference between that signal and the [correct] signal," says an expert in radio communications at the British National Space Centre (who asked not to be named). "It's like you're sitting in a pub and somebody is shouting very loudly. You just can't hear the conversation of the person sitting next to you."

Finding the satellite is easy. "All their positions are listed and known internationally," says the BNSC source. "It's on an open database - what does what and where." The aim of the database is for countries to coordinate their transmissions and avoid interference. Of course, anyone planning to block signals can use the information. It's not all simple, though. Sending up a signal strong enough to jam a satellite transmission needs a lot of power and very large ground antennae. During the cold war, western broadcasters regularly changed the frequencies of their transmissions to Russia to get around the Soviet government's jamming.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/thisweek/story/0,12977,1004388,00.html

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

[F14 Pilot]

Questions Arise in Iran Journalist Death

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer

TEHRAN, Iran - A hard-line Tehran prosecutor coerced an official to announce a false cause of death — a stroke — for an Iranian-Canadian journalist who died in police custody, the official said in a letter made public Thursday.

Tehran Prosecutor Saeed Mortazavi has been blamed by Iranian reformers for the death of journalist Zahra Kazemi, who was interrogated for 77 hours by police before being taken to an emergency room where she died weeks later — of a head injury, according to a presidential investigation.

The July 10 death of Kazemi, who was arrested while photographing anti-government protests last month, has raised a bitter dispute among Iran's reformists and hard-liners — and the government's handling of the case prompted Canada to announce the recall of its ambassador Wednesday.

The accusation that Mortazavi pushed the story that Kazemi died of a stroke came in a letter from Mohammad Hussein Khoshvaqt, head of the foreign press department at Iran's Culture Ministry and the official responsible for giving a press card to Kazemi.

Khoshvaqt wrote that the prosecutor accused Kazemi of being a spy and threatened to bring charges against Khoshvaqt for "issuing permission for a spy to work."

Mortazavi "asked me to write what he dictated to me. He raised several issues including ... death due to brain stroke. ... Then he got it typed on a paper with a Culture Ministry emblem. Got me to sign it and sent it" to the official Islamic Republic News Agency, Khoshvaqt's letter said.

Khoshvaqt said he was effectively held hostage at Mortazavi's office and allowed to leave only after IRNA ran the story.

Koshvaqt's letter, addressed to Parliamentary Speaker Mahdi Karroubi, was published Thursday in the reformist paper Yas-e-Nou. Ali Reza Shiravi, an official at the Culture Ministry, confirmed the authenticity of the letter to The Associated Press.

The hard-line Islamic clerics who hold sway in Iran control the judiciary and prosecutors offices. Khoshvaqt's letter came amid accusations that the hard-liners are trying to cover up the circumstances of Kazemi's death.

Mortazavi is widely believed to had pushed for a quiet burial of Kazemi soon after her death, but presidential investigators stepped in to prevent the burial until investigations were complete.

Iran's Vice President Mohammad Ali Abtahi then said Kazemi died of a beating, nearly three weeks after she was arrested.

The presidential committee that investigated the death said Kazemi, 54, had complained of punishment from her guards and eventually died of a "fractured skull, brain hemorrhage and its consequences resulting from a hard object hitting the head or the head hitting a hard object."

On Wednesday, Kazemi was buried in her birthplace, the southern Iranian city of Shiraz, against the wishes of her son, Stephan Hachemi, who lives in Montreal, and the Canadian government.

Iran described Canada's decision to recall its ambassador as "unacceptable," IRNA reported late Wednesday.

"The Islamic Republic of Iran, in accordance with its responsibilities, is resolved to investigate the circumstances of this grave incident. In any case, we hope that Canada will refrain from taking any hasty and irrational measures that could complicate the situation," IRNA quoted Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi as saying.

On Wednesday, Iran's pro-reform president, Mohammad Khatami, called for an open trial of those behind the death. "Any person who is a culprit anywhere should be punished and the issue clarified," Khatami told reporters.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030724/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_canada_journalist_16

[nuconvert]

Police identify shooting victim
WebPosted Jul 15 2003 01:28 PM PDT



VANCOUVER - Port Moody Police say the young man shot and killed by a plain-clothes officer on Monday was an 18-year-old recent immigrant to Canada.


Scene of the shooting

Keyvan Tabesh, who lived in Burnaby, was killed around 2 a.m. Monday.

Police say it appears he came at the officer with a raised machete.

FROM JULY 14, 2003: Fatal police shooting under investigation

Cst. Brian Soles says two friends in the same car are corroborating the police version of events.

"Statements taken from these two individuals support the findings thus far reached by police investigators," he says.
Cst. Brian Soles
"That is, that the deceased got out of his vehicle and ran at the police officer with an upraised machete."

The friends have told police Tabesh was very angry and upset the evening before the shooting.

There is still no indication whether the plain-clothes officer – a long-time police veteran – clearly identified himself as a police officer.

A second person shot by the officer is recovering in hospital.

He is not in police custody.

[DoctorZIn]

EU Expected To Stand Firm On Its Ultimatum To Tehran

July 23, 2003
Radio Free Europe
Ahto Lobjakas

The European Union has given Iran an ultimatum: either Tehran allows UN nuclear weapons inspectors free access to its atomic energy sites, or the bloc will call off trade talks. It was also made clear that a successful conclusion to the trade talks will not be possible without further Iranian cooperation on issues ranging from human rights to the Middle East peace process. Analysts appear convinced the bloc has overcome its divisions on Iraq and will -- if necessary -- make good on the threat.

Prague -- The EU this week indicated it means business when it says the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction is now its foremost global security concern.

The bloc gave Iran until September to sign a UN protocol giving weapons inspectors full access to its nuclear facilities. The ministers said the EU will "review" its willingness to pursue trade liberalization talks with Tehran if International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohammed ElBaradei does not report progress on the issue by the deadline.

EU foreign ministers also reiterated long-standing demands for Iranian cooperation on issues such as terrorism, missile technology, the Middle East peace process, and human rights. The bloc clearly reasserted the link between progress on those issues and the successful conclusion of trade talks.

Steven Everts, a senior analyst with the London-based Centre for European Reform, says providing full access to UN nuclear inspectors is the "absolute minimum" Iran needs to do to stave off EU retribution: "It's my firm expectation that if Mohammed ElBaradei reports back in September and says, 'I'm getting nowhere with Tehran. They're still not addressing these precise questions on the number of nuclear facilities, and they're not willing to accept these tougher inspections,' then I expect the EU to say that [under] these circumstances, the trade talks cannot continue."

Everts says other questions -- such as missile technology, the country's alleged support of Palestinian militants, or its worsening human rights record -- are comparatively less topical.

EU ministers did not take a clear stance, however, as to what precisely will happen should Iran not comply with the demands by September. Italy's foreign minister, Franco Frattini -- representing the current EU presidency -- sidestepped requests for clarification.

His French colleague, Dominique de Villepin, said Iran faces a "strategic choice," but added it would not be in the interests of the international community to isolate Iran.

The tough EU position is not a radical departure from the bloc's earlier policy. Attempts to engage Iran "positively" have for years been accompanied by demands similar to the terms being set out now. EU officials have indicated, however, that the link between trade talks and political concerns had been toned down in the past to avoid harming the reformist movement in Iran.

Iran today rejected the EU ultimatum. State-run radio quotes Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi as saying that "imposing preconditions or using threatening language is totally unacceptable."

Fraser Cameron, director of studies at the Brussels-based European Policy Centre, says he believes Iran, in the end, will realize the EU means business and will act accordingly to avoid international isolation.

"I get the impression from talking to Iranian [officials] that they think that they can comply with the EU conditions. Obviously, there are disputes going on within Iran at the highest level about the future course of Iranian policy, but I think that the EU and, indeed, the U.S. are now working much closer together on this than they were in the past. And I think the prospect of bringing about some changes -- as a result of the combined pressure -- is reasonably good," Cameron said.

Iranian officials have in recent days indicated the country could sign the additional IAEA protocol. Previously, however, they had linked signing with a demand that the international community drop its embargo on civilian nuclear imports to Iran.

The EU says no conditions are acceptable.

Both Cameron and Everts stress that acting on the ultimatum will not mean the EU supports the use of force against Iran.

Everts says the "crunch time" for the EU has yet to come, indicating divisions could re-emerge as matters escalate. But he notes the robust stance adopted by the EU represents an "encouraging" improvement over what has gone on before.

Everts says that by letting Iran off the hook, the EU would undermine the very multilateral regime of conflict prevention and resolution it says it stands for: "If we don't stand up for these agreements, then what is the role of the EU internationally? We have to support the rules, but, at the same time, we have to be prepared to act tough when the rules are broken. And at the moment, Iran's breaking the rules."

Cameron says he is "absolutely" sure the EU will, if forced, carry through with its threat. He says the occasional breakdown in the preferred EU policy of "positive engagement" is unavoidable if the bloc's common foreign policy is to be credible.

"The EU, I think, has always taken the view that you do not condemn outright any country. We don't use this language [of] rogue states and axes of evil, and we think that a policy of constructive engagement should be carried out wherever possible," he says. "Now, it may be that there are limits to this policy if you get no results but, hitherto, we have taken the view that would have gone for Iran that you're more likely to bring about change by engaging with the country -- critical engagement, it's called -- rather than isolating the country."

Cameron notes the debate about the relative merits of engagement compared with isolation and sanctions is likely to remain an "area of dispute" between the EU and the U.S. He points to the example of Cuba, where he says 40 years of U.S. sanctions have brought no results. A shift to EU-style engagement, he says, could prove much more effective.

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/07/23072003165442.asp

[nuconvert]

Fatal police shooting under investigation
WebPosted Jul 14 2003 06:30 PM PDT


Susan Danard reports for CBC News
VANCOUVER - Port Moody Police are investigating the shooting overnight involving a plain clothes officer, that left one man dead and another man in hospital.


Port Moody crime scene

A third man was unhurt and is now in police custody.

Police say the veteran 20-year officer was helping pursue a man who had allegedly attacked two women in a car parked on Port Moody's main street.

They told police a car bumped them from behind, and then a man got out of the car and began to smash at their windows with a machete.


Cst.Brian Soles

Port Moody Police spokesperson, Cst. Brian Soles, says the attack appears to have been random.

"The women maintain that they had never seen this person before, that they had no prior dealings, there was nothing preliminary to this person coming up behind them and basically pushing their car with his."

The man's car was later spotted by the plain clothes constable on a dead-end street.

Police say three men got out of the car and confronted him. The officer opened fire, killing one man, and wounding another.

Cst. Soles says it appears one of the three men had a machete in his hand. "The machete was recovered immediately at the scene and just outside the member's vehicle, nearby where the shooting took place."

The wounded man is expected to recover, while the third suspect is being interviewed by investigators.

Soles also says a statement is being taken from the officer involved.

[F14 Pilot]

Military barrack in east of Tehran still ablaze

Tehran, July 24, IRNA -- A huge fire hazard that had started on
Wednesday afternoon in Tehran's Barrack Number II of Qasr-e-Firouze
has still not been quenched.
The said military barrack's warehouses number 21, 22, and 23,
allocated to storing the auto spare parts, medical drugs, and food
stuff for the soldiers, are still ablaze, according to the IRAN
correspondent in the region.
The said warehouses are totally burned out by the time our
reporter dispatched the news, and the reason for the fire hazard is
already announced as a spark from an electrical wire at one of the
warehouses.

http://www.irna.ir/en/tnews/030724001117.etn09.shtml

A fire in a Military Base?????????? Looks so strange! Doesnt it?

[DoctorZIn]

I just received confirmation from one of our contacts in Iran...

"Doc
Hi
I saw that fire and blazes myself, one day before that, Tehrani people also saw another fire in East of Tehran.
It was a Hospital and its smoke covered the eastern part of the city and visible from everywhere in Tehran.
That Military Baracks and Bases belong to IRGC and Police forces.
East of Tehran is a Military Camp, I have to add.
Other Armed Services have Bases and Camps there like 2 Important Air Force Bases, IRGC HQ, 56 Air Borne Brigade, Anti-Riot Police HQ, Basidj HQ, Army Training Camp and the biggest Military Hospital of the Middle East is still located there.

I will search more on that and will let you know about it.
Thanks

Your Student Friend in Iran "

[DoctorZIn]

Iran Journalists Fear for Colleagues

July 24, 2003
Reuters
The Peninsula

TEHRAN -- An association of Iranian journalists said yesterday it was concerned for the lives of 21 in jail in the country, fearing a repeat of the death in custody this month of a photojournalist.

Zahra Kazemi, 54, a Canadian of Iranian descent, died on July 10, more than two weeks after she was arrested for taking pictures outside a Tehran prison where political dissidents are held.

“We have 21 journalists in jail. Iran is the second largest jail for journalists in the world,” Mohsen Kadivar, an Islamic scholar and member of the board of the Association for the Defence of the Freedom of the Press, told a news conference.

“Is there any guarantee that the same thing that happened to Kazemi will not happen to them?”

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World_News&subsection=Gulf%2C+Middle+East+%26+Africa&month=July2003&file=World_News2003072425141.xml

[DoctorZIn]

Khatami cancels trip to Belgium

Report says Iranian President has cancelled visit to Belgium after EU criticism of Iran's nuclear programe.

TEHRAN - Iranian President Mohammad Khatami has cancelled a visit to Belgium, the government newspaper Iran said Thursday, linking the decision to European pressure on Iran's nuclear programme and human rights.

"It is possible that the cancellation of this visit is not unconnected to the recent attitude of the European Union, which made progress in relations with Iran conditional on its signature of the additional protocol (of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) and respect for human rights," the paper said.

No official confirmation could be obtained Thursday of the cancellation of a visit which has never been announced officially here.

On July 11 Belgium's state radio RTBF said Khatami was to visit Belgium to receive an honorary doctorate from the university of Liege, probably in the autumn.

Iran Tuesday rejected "conditions or threats" attached to its negotiations with the EU, whose foreign ministers Monday expressed "increasing concern" over Iran's nuclear programme and warned the trade bloc would review relations with Tehran unless it cooperates fully with the UN's nuclear watchdog agency.

"More intense economic relations can be achieved only if progress is reached in the four areas of concern, namely human rights, terrorism, non-proliferation and the Middle East peace process," a joint EU statement said.

The ministers said they would "review future steps of the cooperation between the EU and Iran in September," adding that their next moves will depend on a report by the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohamed ElBaradei.

Iran is under strong international pressure to sign the additional NPT protocol to allow surprise inspections by the IAEA of its nuclear sites to show it is not developing atomic weapons.

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=6514

[DoctorZIn]

Getting tough on Tehran

National Post
Thursday, July 24, 2003

Cheers to Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham for showing the government of Iran that it cannot sweep the death of a Canadian journalist under the carpet. But recalling our ambassador from Tehran is only a first step. Ottawa must ratchet up the pressure until we learn the full truth about the apparent murder of Zahra Kazemi.

Iranian police arrested the Montreal-based photojournalist on June 23 as she was taking photos of the Elvin prison in northern Iran. Ms. Kazemi, who carries both Iranian and Canadian passports, was then interrogated for 77 hours and allegedly beaten into a coma. On July 11, she died. Her death has provoked an uproar in Iran's majlis (Parliament), with reformist politicians using the incident as ammunition in their war against the thuggish theocrats who control the police and courts. A presidential committee report released Monday concluded that, contrary to initial claims of a stroke, Ms. Kazemi died of a fractured skill. But it did not identify her killers.

Ottawa must demand two things: (1) an independent judicial inquiry into Ms. Kazemi's death conducted with the participation of Canadian experts; and (2) the return of Ms. Kazemi's remains to Canada for autopsy and permanent burial. (Iranian authorities yesterday buried the body in the city of Shiraz, apparently as a means to head off further scrutiny. But her Canadian son wants the body back in Canada. According to the Canadian government, so too does her Iranian mother.)

Until Iran delivers on these demands, Canada should sever relations and Iran's diplomatic delegation to this country should be expelled. In this way, Ottawa can help discredit Iran's hardliners and thereby strengthen the cause of reform in that country. More importantly, the moves will demonstrate to Ms. Kazemi's family -- and to all Canadians -- that Ottawa will not let this murderous outrage stand.

© Copyright 2003 National Post

http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=02C9FBBE-BC1C-4438-A1C2-63A2FA1757BE

[dixiechick2000]

Morning bump!

Thank you for all of your posts.

I'll be back later!

[cake_crumb]

I could care less what State claims to believe, but Cuba as the source of the jamming has been independantly confirmed.

Thanks for posting this. Sorry I haven't answered any of your pings lately, but haven't had a chance to be online much the past couple of weeks.

[cake_crumb]

"I'm very unhappy that they take a journalist and kill a journalist," the prime minister said after a cabinet meeting.

Took Chrétien long enough to become "unhappy" with the murder of a Canadian citizen, didn't it?

I'd hate to see when he'd do if Canada were attacked the way the US was on 9/11/01...surrender most likely.

By the time Iran allows the body to be exhumed in two or three years, which they will not do unless the skeleton doen't show too many signs of trauma, forensic investigators will be forced to announce they cannot come to a definite conclusion on the cause of death.

[nuconvert]

Little different take on the story than the Iranian gov't is giving.

[Gabrielle Reilly]

>>>>>>Excellent assessment. Unfortunately those that need to read this and understand will do neither. >>>>>>>>>>>>>


That unfortunately is my calling in life... to get beaten over the head consistently for putting the truth in front of people with a different view. Why me????????? :) I could be buffing my finger nails...

This article is targeted to the market you talk of and has been posted in 58 countries, 40 US States, 10 Canadian cities and 5 Aussie cities in the past 48 hours.

http://www.gabriellereillyweekly.com/full/st072103.htm

It is ESSENTIAL we do not play into the Saudi's chess game through ignorance of global affairs.

[firewalk]

Thanks for the pings

[dixiechick2000]

Afternoon bump!

[DoctorZIn]

Iran's Moment, How To Seize It

July 20, 2003
Sunday Times of London
andrewsullivan.com

It's perhaps only natural that the subject of Iran would be so contentious in American politics. It destroyed one presidency - Jimmy Carter's - and it rubbed the gloss off another - Ronald Reagan's. Since the collapse of the Shah in 1979, the country has exerted a pull on American fears and hopes in the Middle East unlike most others. In the war against Islamist terrorism, Iran is also the biggest deal there is. Bigger than Iraq, it is far closer to a nuclear capacity than Saddam was in recent years. Bigger even than Saudi Arabia, because its government is so viscerally hostile to the West. As the first country to have completely succumbed to the new and lethal ideology of Islamo-fascism, it's also the pre-eminent symbol of the status quo the United States needs and wants to change after September 11. Were the mullahs who now act as de facto dictators to fall, the psychological, political and criminal impact would be unprecedented. It would galvanize the transition to democracy in Iraq. It would cut off critical funds to terrorist groups like Hezbollah. And Tehran's wide and deep contacts with Islamist terrorists more generally would be ruptured.

And yet Washington worries. And fidgets. And procrastinates. Several top-level White House meetings on the future of policy toward Iran have been put off. No decisive policy shift toward explicitly favoring regime change in Tehran has been announced. At times, in fact, the White House seems in some kind of suspended animation on the matter. Having denounced Iran as part of an "axis of evil," the Bushies seem reluctant to follow through on the obvious implications. Part of this is simple caution in the face of a complicated and volatile situation, as opposition protests break out all over the country but as reliable news and credible intelligence are extremely hard to get. Part of it is endemic State Department wariness about diplomatic conflict. But part too is a result of the conclusion of a certain internal debate. For a while in the late 1990s and early twenty-first century, foreign policy analysts believed that "moderate" reformers could actually liberalize Iran from within, in a long, fitful process of democratization. Very few analysts now buy that notion - even those in the Blair government who once held out hope for some kind of outreach to moderates. And you can see why the new consensus emerged: the past few years have seen no real emergence of a genuinely powerful or independent moderate bloc in the country or the government. However well reformers have done in elections, they wield no effective power - especially over the critical military and intelligence sectors.

So what to do? Rumsfeldians argue that military force cannot be ruled out in terms of Iran's potential nuclear capacity. An Osirak-like raid on a nuclear power plant has therefore not been ruled out. And president Bush's statement this week that he and other Western leaders will simply not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran was a clear statement of his willingness to use all means possible to avoid this. Again, the logic is impeccable. If you have just waged a war in part to ensure that one hostile dictatorship in the Middle East cannot achieve WMD capacity, how can you sit around and watch a more urgent threat take shape and form?

But this use of force would be entirely targeted on WMD capacity - and only as a very last resort. It is not U.S. policy to promote actual regime change in Iran through military force. As a paid-up member of the neocon cabal in Washington D.C. (we meet in secret every month to plot the American take-over of the entire world), I can assure you that no one is interested in an invasion. And no one wants to add to the military and logistical strain of rescuing the broken country of Iraq next door. So the question essentially comes down to how to achieve regime change without armed invasion.

For the first time in along while, that now seems possible. The inspiring stories from Iran of students and opposition groups braving hired Afghan thugs to demand freedom and democracy have finally woken up Americans to the possibility of a win-win. "When the time is right we will all join," a female student told the BBC last week. "I can smell it in the air. This time is different. I despise Islam and the mullahs even though I am officially a Muslim now. I don't have the right to change my religion in Iran. I despise the regime and so do 90 percent of the Iranians. All the people who elected Khatami despise the regime and they thought he'd bring change. We fight for a referendum conducted by the United Nations. The masses support the students and are waiting for the right time to make the final impact." Of course, these protests have been going on for years; and some of them have been unabashedly pro-American. But the impact of nascent democracy next door and the continued failure of the mullahs to provide anything approximating accountable government seem to have pushed the opposition to new heights. The fact that the Islamist dictators have had to rely on imported vigilantes to maintain order suggests how fragile their regime might now be.

Some sophisticates argue that the U.S. should simply sit back and say nothing. If the opposition is identified as American proxies, U.S. intervention could play into the hands of the mullahs. The trouble with this is that the U.S. government has to say something; and many of the students are looking for American support. President Bush's careful phrases - describing the protests as "the beginnings of people expressing themselves toward a free Iran" and urging the mullahs to treat the dissidents with respect - struck a balance between moral support and avoidance of a direct call to rise up, when such a rising might be prematurely put down by the government.

But the clarity of an American president's support for basic democratic rights is still a critical component for democracy in Iran. Every dissident movement has told us in retrospect that they were grateful for rhetorical support from the West during the dark periods of repression. That is true for those who struggled against tyranny in South Africa and Eastern Europe. Besides, if inflammatory rhetoric from Washington always undermined those it wants to support, the Iranian student movement would be dead by now. Bush's much-derided description of Tehran as part of an axis of evil didn't kill off protest. It helped sustain it.

Perhaps the most effective weapon the West can now wield is grass-roots. The impact of Iranian-exile satellite television on the current situation has been profound. By broadcasting the brutality of the clamp-down, these new stations helped force the government into something of a climbdown last week. The Internet has been a critical tool as well. Denied real access to media, many Iranians, especially students, are online. Websites connect them to the outside world, to exiles, and to each other. The blogosphere is exploding in Iran, helping spread information and providing a virtual model for free speech that the mullahs will never be able to excise from the collective memory. If Western governments can help finance some of this, support it and encourage it, the consequences could be enormous.

Meanwhile, the world is watching closely; Iraq is still in the pangs of the birth of democracy; and the mullahs are accelerating their bid for nuclear blackmail. So far, all the signs are highly encouraging and a vindication of the Bush administration's bold goal of remaking the Middle East. But events could still dictate decisions that the White House doesn't want to take until after election day. It may have to revise its plans.

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/main_article.php?artnum=20030620

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

[DoctorZIn]

...Every dissident movement has told us in retrospect that they were grateful for rhetorical support from the West during the dark periods of repression....

This is why our adminsitration must continue to declare its support for the protest movement in Iran.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Excellent Sullivan piece. Thank you.