Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iranian Alert -- August 20, 2003 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST
The Iranian Student Movement Up To The Minute Reports ^ | 8.20.2003 | DoctorZin

Posted on 08/20/2003 12:01:40 AM PDT by 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


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iran; iranianalert; protests; studentmovement
To find all the links to all 72 threads since the protests started, go to:


1 posted on 08/20/2003 12:01:40 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
Join Us at the Iranian Alert -- August 20, 2003 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST

Live Thread Ping List | 8.20.2003 | DoctorZin

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

2 posted on 08/20/2003 12:02:30 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn

Satellite file image shows a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz, Iran. It was reported 20 July that UN nuclear inspectors have found traces of enriched uranium at the Iranian nuclear facility south of Tehran, raising renewed concerns over Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program.(AFP/Digital Globe/File)
3 posted on 08/20/2003 12:11:05 AM PDT by Pro-Bush (Circumstances rule destiny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
I met tonight with US Senator Sam Brownback. The senator from Kansas is one of the biggest champions of the Iranian people in the US Senate. He was in southern California to meet with his republican Iranian supporters.

He held a press conference with the media, including Zia Atabay of NITV and Behrooz Suresrafil of Azadi TV. We had a chance to discuss recent events in Iran and US policy.

He opened with a statement on the progress of the Iran Democracy Act. He appeared convinced that the Act will get through congress. He said the Act declares that Iran is “not a democracy.”

To read the full text of the Act, go to:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.RES.82:

He was asked about the reasons for the apparent conflicts between the president and the department of state. He argued that the administration’s policy on Iran is still in formation. He argued that the president is clear and unwavering in his support of the Iranian people, but that people need to understand that we have a “noisy democracy” where all opinions are discussed. He expressed hope that the Iranian people will have one in the future.

Behrooz asked him why the US supported Voice of America and Radio Farda supports the reformist movement in the Iranian regime. The senator said that he was unaware of this and asked that evidence of this be sent to his office.

I asked him about what the US was preparing to do about the jamming of the LA based Iranian broadcasts in Cuba. He said that the Senate is just about to take a further look into this issue. Zia Atabay then stated that his reporter in France had just confirmed that the Cuban government had determined the source of the jamming to be coming from inside the Iranian Embassy in Cuba.

In conclusion he gave an admonition to the Iranian community for them to put aside their differences and unify under the single banner of a referendum in Iran regarding the type of government they want for their future.

DoctorZin
4 posted on 08/20/2003 1:06:57 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Tehran Seeks Additions to Nuclear Protocol

August 19, 2003
The Financial Times
Roula Khalaf and Najmeh Bozorgmehr

Iran is seeking to win some concessions before signing the additional protocol to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which would allow for enhanced inspections of nuclear facilities as demanded by the international community.

Officials say any additions are aimed at easing opposition within Iran to the signing of the protocol, which is intended to address fears over Iran's nuclear capabilities. But foreign diplomats say the attempt to negotiate on the standard protocol is designed to buy time and split the international community.

Tehran says its nuclear programme is for peaceful energy use but the US suspects the country could be close to having the capacity to develop a nuclear bomb.

Although Europe has joined the US in calling on Iran to sign the protocol, Tehran thinks the next report of the International Atomic Energy Agency, due early next month, will not be tough enough to increase the international pressure.

According to Hossein Afarideh, head of parliament's energy commission, Tehran wants to "add pages" to the protocol in which the IAEA would pledge to do its best to convince countries to transfer technology to Iran for peaceful use.

Although this would be an apparent softening of Iran's earlier stance that it would only sign the additional protocol if the west agreed to a transfer of technology, it is unlikely to find support at the IAEA.

According to another source in the Iranian regime, Tehran is also looking for an attachment to the additional protocol, setting terms of inspections and ensuring for example that inspectors would not enter religious shrines or top officials' houses.

"Iranians have bad memories of what happened in Iraq," said the source. "There's a feeling that the Americans would use the protocol to create a crisis, by demanding that the inspectors go to the leader's house."

In June the IAEA called on Iran to sign the additional protocol promptly and unconditionally. Its position has long been that the protocol, which allows for short notice inspections, is an agreement common to all countries and not subject to negotiations with individual states.

Diplomats say that although there could be some legal room for additions to the protocol, Iranian demands are unlikely to be heeded. "No one is in the mood to bargain with Iran," said a western diplomat.

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1059479157454&p=1012571727172
5 posted on 08/20/2003 1:09:06 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Another article by one of my favorite Middle-East journalists. -- DoctorZin

"International Flap Over Islamist Headgear Is Political, Not Religious"

August 19, 2003
Chron Watch
Amir Taheri

France's Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin has just appointed a committee to draft a law to ban the Islamist hijab (headgear) in state-owned establishments, including schools and hospitals. The decision has drawn fire from the French ''church'' of Islam, an organization created by Raffarin's government last spring.

Germany is facing its hijab problem with a number of Islamist organizations suing federal and state authorities for ''religious discrimination'' because of bans imposed on the controversial headgear.

In the United States several Muslim women are suing airport security firms for having violated their first amendment rights by asking them to take off their hijab during routine searches of passengers.

All these and other cases are based on the claim that the controversial headgear is an essential part of the Muslim faith and that attempts at banning it constitute an attack on Islam.

That claim is totally false. The headgear in question has nothing to do with Islam as a religion. It is not sanctioned anywhere in the Koran, the fundamental text of Islam, or the hadith (traditions) attributed to the Prophet. This headgear was invented in the early 1970s by Mussa Sadr, an Iranian mullah who had won the leadership of the Lebanese Shiite community.

In an interview in 1975 in Beirut, Sadr told this writer that the hijab he had invented was inspired by the headgear of Lebanese Catholic nuns, itself inspired by that of Christian women in classical Western paintings. (A casual visit to the National Gallery in London, the Metropolitan Museum in New York, or the Louvres in Paris, would reveal the original of the neo-Islamist hijab in numerous paintings depicting Virgin Mary and other female figures from the Old and New Testament.)

Sadr's idea was that, by wearing the headgear, Shiite women would be clearly marked out, and thus spared sexual harassment, and rape, by Yasser Arafat's Palestinian gunmen who at the time controlled southern Lebanon. Sadr's neo-hijab made its first appearance in Iran in 1977 as a symbol of Islamist-Marxist opposition to the Shah's regime. When the mullahs seized power in Tehran in 1979, the number of women wearing the hijab exploded into tens of thousands.

In 1981, Abol-Hassan Bani-Sadr, the first president of the Islamic Republic, announced that ''scientific research had shown that women's hair emitted rays that drove men insane'' (sic). To protect the public, the new Islamist regime passed a law in 1982 making the hijab mandatory for females aged above six, regardless of religious faith. Violating the hijab code was made punishable by 100 lashes of the cane and six months imprisonment.

By the mid-1980s a form of hijab never seen in Islam before the 1970s had become standard gear for millions of women all over the world, including Europe and America.

Some younger Muslims women, especially Western converts, were duped into believing that the neo-hijab was an essential part of the faith. (Katherine Bullock, a Canadian, so loved the idea of covering her hair that she converted to Islam while studying the hijab.)

The garb is designed to promote gender Apartheid. It covers the woman's ears so that she does not hear things properly. Styled like a hood, it prevents the woman from having full vision of her surroundings. It also underlines the concept of woman as object, all wrapped up and marked out.

Muslim women, like women in all societies, had covered their head with a variety of gears over the centuries. These had such names as lachak, chador, rusari, rubandeh, chaqchur, maqne'a, and picheh among others. All had tribal, ethnic, and generally folkloric origins and were never associated with religion. (In Senegal, Muslim women wear a colourful headgear against the sun, while working in the fields, but go topless.)

Muslim women could easily check the fraudulent nature of the neo-Islamist hijab by leafing through their family albums. They will not find the picture of a single female ancestor of theirs who wore the cursed headgear now marketed as an absolute ''must'' of Islam.

This fake Islamic hijab is nothing but a political prop, a weapon of visual terrorism. It is the symbol of a totalitarian ideology inspired more by Nazism and Communism than by Islam. It is as symbolic of Islam as the Mao uniform was of Chinese civilization. It is used as a means of exerting pressure on Muslim women who do not wear it because they do not share the sick ideology behind it. It is a sign of support for extremists who wish to impose their creed, first on Muslims, and then on the entire world through psychological pressure, violence, terror, and, ultimately, war. The tragedy is that many of those who wear it are not aware of its implications. They do so because they have been brainwashed into believing that a woman cannot be a ''good Muslim'' without covering her head with the Sadr-designed hijab.

Even today, less than one per cent of Muslim women wear the hijab that has bewitched some Western liberals as a symbol of multicultural diversity. The hijab debate in Europe and the U.S. comes at a time that the controversial headgear is seriously questioned in Iran, the only country to impose it by law. Last year the Islamist regime authorized a number of girl colleges in Tehran to allow students to discard the hijab while inside school buildings. The experiment was launched after a government study identified the hijab as the cause of ''widespread depression and falling academic standards'' and even suicide among teen-age girls.

The Ministry of Education in Tehran has just announced that the experiment will be extended to other girls schools next month when the new academic year begins. Schools where the hijab was discarded have shown ''real improvements'' in academic standards reflected in a 30 per cent rise in the number of students obtaining the highest grades.

Meanwhile, several woman members of the Iranian Islamic Majlis (parliament) are preparing a draft to raise the legal age for wearing the hijab from six to 12, thus sparing millions of children the trauma of having their heads covered. Another sign that the Islamic Republic may be softening its position on hijab is a recent decision to allow the employees of state-owned companies outside Iran to discard the hijab. (The new rule has enabled hundreds of women, working for Iran-owned companies in Paris, London, and other European capitals, for example, to go to work without the cursed hijab.)

The delicious irony of militant Islamists asking ''Zionist-Crusader'' courts in France, Germany, and the United States to decide what is ''Islamic'' and what is not, will not be missed. The judges and the juries who will be asked to decide the cases should know that they are dealing not with Islam, which is a religious faith, but with Islamism, which is a political doctrine. The hijab-wearing militants have a right to promote their political ideology. But they have no right to speak in the name of Islam.

Amir Taheri is an Iranian author of 10 books on the Middle East and Islam. Mr. Taheri is reachable through www.benadorassociates.com.

http://www.chronwatch.com/featured/contentDisplay.asp?aid=3927
6 posted on 08/20/2003 1:13:13 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
Another article by one of my favorite Middle-East journalists. -- DoctorZin

"International Flap Over Islamist Headgear Is Political, Not Religious"

August 19, 2003
Chron Watch
Amir Taheri

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

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/967077/posts?page=6#6
7 posted on 08/20/2003 1:14:06 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Cuba says Iran was jamming US satellite broadcasts: State Department

August 20, 2003

Cuba has told the United States that an Iranian diplomatic facility in or near Havana was the source of the jamming that disrupted US Farsi-language satellite broadcasts to Iran last month, the State Department said.

And, in an unusual display of cooperation between the Cold War enemies, Havana appears to have actually acted on pledges to halt the interference which had prompted a formal protest from Washington, it said.

"It has ceased," said Jo-Anne Prokopowicz, a department spokeswoman.

After denying that it was responsible for the jamming but pledging to investigate the US complaints in mid-July, Cuba told the United States that it had found the source and had acted to stop it, she said.

"Cuba informed us on August 3 that they had located the source of the interference and had taken action to stop it," Prokopowicz said.

"The government of Cuba informed us that the interference was coming from an Iranian diplomatic facility," she said, adding: "We will be following this up with Iran."

On July 15, the US government-affiliated Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) accused Cuba of jamming its programming, as well as that of private US-based Iranian opposition satellite television stations, to Iran.

The jamming, which affected all Farsi-language broadcasts carried by the Loral Skynet satellite, became pronounced amid growing protests in Iran against the Tehran government.

Iran said at the time that the US broadcasts into the country were interference in its internal affairs and accused the US-based Iranian opposition of inflaming the protests.

Shortly after the BBG complaint, which was accompanied by request for a formal diplomatic protest about the jamming, the State Department said the interference appeared to be emanating from Cuba, but could not say exactly who was behind it....

To read the rest of the post, go to:

http://www.terra.net.lb/wp/Articles/DesktopArticle.aspx?ArticleID=101846&ChannelId=4

8 posted on 08/20/2003 2:16:26 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: All
Iranians hopeful on reporters' release

Relatives of two Iranian journalists held by US troops in Iraq have gathered outside the British Embassy in Tehran, asking the British Government to facilitate their immediate release.
After meeting a top UK diplomat, the relatives said the British were convinced that both Soheil Karimi, 31, and Saeed Abutaleb, 34, were genuine reporters and promised to follow up the case.

"We are optimistic... we hope they will be released soon," Mr Karimi's cousin, Iraj Karimi, was quoted as saying by Reuters news agency.

The UK Foreign Office declined to comment on the case.

US forces arrested Mr Karimi and Mr Abutaleb on 1 July for "security violations", saying the pair were acting suspiciously.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3161103.stm
9 posted on 08/20/2003 6:23:29 AM PDT by F14 Pilot (What Goes Around, Comes Around...!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; McGavin999; Eala; AdmSmith; dixiechick2000; nuconvert; Valin; Tamsey; ...
Iran will not bow to US

Tehran - Iran's supreme leader has said his country will never give up its nuclear technology under pressure from the US and others, who are urging Tehran to agree to more stringent inspections of its programmes.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told a gathering of Iranian ambassadors late on Monday that "the position of the United States and certain Western countries, which require Iran to give up nuclear technology is unsuitable, unjust and oppressive, and the Islamic Republic of Iran will never accept these requests".

"The conditions in which the United States deals with the rest of the world as a creditor, always asking for more, make any weakness and surrender the greatest strategic error," the state news agency IRNA reported him as saying.

"Iranian nuclear science is indigenous and peaceful, and the Islamic Republic of Iran, based on religious principles, will never use weapons of mass destruction," Khamenei added.

On Monday Tehran said it was still discussing with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) whether to allow snap UN inspections of its nuclear sites.

"We are still discussing the additional protocol" to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), foreign ministry spokesperson Hamid-Reza Asefi said.

Tehran is under strong international pressure to prove it is not secretly developing atomic weapons by signing the extra NPT clause, which would allow UN inspectors to descend on suspect sites without warning.

The IAEA's board of governors will review the Iranian case on September 8, with the threat that it might be forwarded to the UN Security Council.

Asefi told reporters "to wait and see what will happen during the (September 8) meeting".

"Any decision will depend on the explanations given by the agency, on the ambiguities that exist (over the additional protocol), our responsibilities and those of the international community with regard to Iran," he added.

Oil-rich Iran said on Thursday it was going ahead with the second phase of a nuclear power plant to satisfy its growing demand for power and prevent long-term energy shortages, denying US allegations that it is covertly developing nuclear weapons.

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1404344,00.html
10 posted on 08/20/2003 6:33:38 AM PDT by F14 Pilot (What Goes Around, Comes Around...!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; McGavin999; Eala; AdmSmith; dixiechick2000; nuconvert; Valin
12,000 protest letters decried by Iran human rights body

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=17545&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs
11 posted on 08/20/2003 6:37:55 AM PDT by F14 Pilot (What Goes Around, Comes Around...!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/967229/posts

copy of the post:
Cuba has told the United States that an Iranian diplomatic facility in or near Havana was the source of the jamming that disrupted US Farsi-language satellite broadcasts to Iran last month, the State Department said.

And, in an unusual display of cooperation between the Cold War enemies, Havana appears to have actually acted on pledges to halt the interference which had prompted a formal protest from Washington, it said.

"It has ceased," said Jo-Anne Prokopowicz, a department spokeswoman.

After denying that it was responsible for the jamming but pledging to investigate the US complaints in mid-July, Cuba told the United States that it had found the source and had acted to stop it, she said. "Cuba informed us on August 3 that they had located the source of the interference and had taken action to stop it," Prokopowicz said.

"The government of Cuba informed us that the interference was coming from an Iranian diplomatic facility," she said, adding: "We will be following this up with Iran."

On July 15, the US government-affiliated Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) accused Cuba of jamming its programming, as well as that of private US-based Iranian opposition satellite television stations, to Iran.

The jamming, which affected all Farsi-language broadcasts carried by the Loral Skynet satellite, became pronounced amid growing protests in Iran against the Tehran government.

Iran said at the time that the US broadcasts into the country were interference in its internal affairs and accused the US-based Iranian opposition of inflaming the protests.

Shortly after the BBG complaint, which was accompanied by request for a formal diplomatic protest about the jamming, the State Department said the interference appeared to be emanating from Cuba, but could not say exactly who was behind it.
12 posted on 08/20/2003 7:47:16 AM PDT by AdmSmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
US - EU Citizens Among al-Qa’ida Arrested in Iran

August 20, 2003
Middle East Media Research Institute
MEMRI News Ticker

The Saudi daily OKAZ said that according to Iranian governmental sources, European and American citizens are among the al-Qa'ida members arrested in Iran.
(OKAZ, Saudi Arabia, 8/18/03)

Iran's expediency council chairman Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said Iran is too strong to be defeated. 'God punishes tyrants with tyrants; enemies of Iran were punished with each other, but Iran is now firm and stable, being concerned about the condition of Muslim Iraqi people.'
(Kayhan, Iran, 8/18/03)

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said a ruling issued by an argentine court against Iranians is null and void, as it is politically motivated and not based on judicial procedures. He said Tehran was following through diplomatic channels the ruling that had been dictated by the Zionist regime.
(Jumhour-e Eslami, Iran, 8/19/03)

Commenting on a recent news story which said Iran's 3-million-dollar financial aid to the Islamic jihad has been confiscated, Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said, 'this is only a rumor and Iran dismisses such information.'
(Yas-e no, Iran, 8/19/03)

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said that diplomats had no right to comment on the highly technical and expert-level issue of enriched uranium without knowing the details.
(Jumhour-e Eslami, Iran, 8/19/03)

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said a foreign presence would not guarantee the security of the Caspian Sea region and of the littoral states, but would only further complicate the situation. 'We believe that regional security and interests can be guaranteed by increased understanding, conference and collaboration.'
(Aftab-e Yazd, Iran, 8/19/03)

http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2003&m=08&d=20&a=7
13 posted on 08/20/2003 8:19:25 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
US - EU Citizens Among al-Qa’ida Arrested in Iran

August 20, 2003
Middle East Media Research Institute
MEMRI News Ticker

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/967077/posts?page=13#13

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”
14 posted on 08/20/2003 8:20:20 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Chaos as an Anti-U.S. Strategy

August 20, 2003
The New York Times
Thom Shanker

WASHINGTON -- The bombing of the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad provided grisly evidence of a new strategy by anti-American forces to depict the United States as unable to guarantee public order, as well as to frighten away relief organizations rebuilding Iraq.

Military officers and experts on terrorism said the bombing fit a pattern of recent strikes on water and oil pipelines and the Jordanian Embassy, although they emphasized that it was too early to uncover any connections among the attacks.

In recent weeks terrorists have conducted almost daily attacks on the American military. But after the bombing [Tuesday] there is a growing belief that anti-American fighters, whatever their origin and inspiration, have adopted a coherent strategy not only to kill members of allied forces when possible, but also to spread fear by destroying public offices and utilities.

President Bush was defiant. He said: "Every sign of progress in Iraq adds to the desperation of the terrorists and the remnants of Saddam's brutal regime. The civilized world will not be intimidated, and these killers will not determine the future of Iraq."

Speaking at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, he added that the assailants were "the enemies of every nation that seeks to help the Iraqi people."

But the problem now posed for American forces in Iraq is an acute one. Put simply, if Iraqis are afraid and unconvinced that their situation is improving, their hostility to the United States may grow.

The attacks on foreign embassies and the headquarters of international organizations, as well as water and oil pipelines, appear specifically devised to halt improvements in the quality of life for average Iraqis.

"The goal is to deny the American occupation force the ability to pacify Iraq, to prevent the Americans from winning the hearts and minds of the people," said Loren Thompson, a military affairs analyst with the Lexington Institute. "If Iraq is in constant chaos, the United States can never move on to the next stage."

It is unclear whether the fighters are remnants of the former government or foreign Islamic zealots who have crossed into Iraq to kill Americans.

No one claimed responsibility for the attack. But it seems clear that any improvement in the standard of living of Iraqis is viewed by opponents of the occupation as a victory for the United States and its efforts to create a stable, democratic Iraq.

Across the government today, officials said the tactics and procedures used by the bombers were highly proficient but so standard as to offer no technical "fingerprint" to immediately identify those behind the attack.

Car and truck bombings are a signature tactic of religious-based Middle Eastern terrorism. The technique was used by Hezbollah in its fight against Israel and spread around the world over the last two decades, including the attacks against two American embassies in East Africa that intelligence agencies attribute to al Qaeda.

But one Pentagon official said that Saddam Hussein's secret service had trained in those methods, and that the Baghdad government was accused of planning a car-bomb attack to assassinate former President George Bush in Kuwait in 1993.

"You can't arbitrarily eliminate regime elements as involved in this attack," one official said. "They're well versed in these techniques."

Military officers and American administrators in Iraq have warned that fighters from Ansar al-Islam, a murky organization whose bases in northeastern Iraq were destroyed during the war, escaped to Iran but were returning.

Ansar is a small fundamentalist group accused of having links to al Qaeda, and it acts as an underground network for handfuls of disaffected Iraqis and many foreigners who want to take part in missions against the American military and its interests in Iraq.

About 150 fighters with ties to Ansar are now believed to be inside Iraq, and American intelligence had warned they were preparing to attack allied military forces or the administrative offices of those involved in reconstruction.

Ansar fighters may have carried out the bombing of the Jordanian Embassy in Baghdad on August 7 that killed at least 17 people, Pentagon and military officials say, but there is still no final determination.

American officials said today that their military and intelligence agencies had gathered no specific information about an attack being planned on the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad.

Last spring, even before the war began, the Central Intelligence Agency warned that terrorists operating in Iraq would carry out attacks against American and allied forces there after any invasion, government counterterrorism officials said.

"Inherent in a terrorist's strategy, through the ages, is to embarrass the ruling power and depict the ruling power as inept and incompetent and unable to maintain even a modicum of authority," said Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism specialist at the Rand Corporation.

One military affairs expert said the attack could backfire on those who had planned it.

"The attacks on the oil pipelines and the water are in some ways stupid, because if the United States plays it right, the government can run that back against these elements pretty effectively as hurting the average person," said Richard H. Shultz, director of the international security studies program at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy of Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts.

He said the bombing might also quiet some critics of American policy.

"In hitting the United Nations, it could put into a rather tough position those in the U.N. who might have opposed what the United States is doing in Iraq, and even opposed our entry into the war to begin with," Mr. Shultz said.

In other words, by attacking the United Nations the bombers may have made it easier for President Bush to convince European and Arab nations that they have a stake in a peaceful, stable Iraq.

"This will be a loud call to them to get involved," said Rachel Bronson, director of Middle East Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/08/20/nyt.shanker/
15 posted on 08/20/2003 8:22:30 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
Chaos as an Anti-U.S. Strategy

August 20, 2003
The New York Times
Thom Shanker

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/967077/posts?page=15#15

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”
16 posted on 08/20/2003 8:24:02 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Judiciary Chief Orders Probe of Semirom Unrest

AFP
Politics Section
Aug 20, 2003

Tehran -- Judiciary Chief Ayatollah Mahmoud Shahroudi here on Tuesday ordered setting up a committee to probe the recent unrest in Semirom that left eight killed and tens wounded.

Shahroudi, speaking at a meeting with Judiciary ranking officials, voiced regret over the Semirom developments, and called on the State Inspection Organization and the State Prosecutor's Office to form a special committee and prepare a report on the unrest, IRNA reported.

He said the people must be encouraged to raise their demands through constitutional means to prevent tensions in the society.

The unrest started on Saturday night after a decision by the Isfahan Governor General's Office to incorporate Vardasht district in Semirom within the municipality of Dehaqan provoked the ire of the people of Vardasht.

The people staged a demonstration to protest against the decision but the protests later turned violent. Eight people were reportedly killed in the violence, including two police officers, and some 150 were injured.

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1836.shtml

DoctorZin Note: Who are they trying to fool?
17 posted on 08/20/2003 8:32:45 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
"Only 4 or 5 university students still in jail "

Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - ©2003 IranMania.com

Tehran, Aug 20, IRNA -- Member of the committee appointed by Majlis Speaker to follow up the case of detained university students said that only 4 or 5 students are still in jail.

Mohammad Hassan Abu Torabi said here Tuesday that upon the order of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to the effect that the detained students should be released, the judiciary chief Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi has stressed the speeding up of the process.

He explained that these students are still in jail because their indictments are being considered in the Revolutionary Court while those released had no such files in court, he added.

The parliament member also remarked that in a letter to the Supreme Leader, while depicting the overall situation in universities, it was suggested that those who have done no damage to the life and properties of people and were not involved in the unrests should be treated in a different manner.

“This was immediately approved by the Supreme Leader," he noted, "because the ayatollah is of the opinion that the students who have committed offenses should be dealt with within the universities rather than referring them to the courts."

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=17549&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs

DoctorZin Note: More dis-information from the regime.
18 posted on 08/20/2003 8:35:17 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
4 or 5, Right.

How about asking anxious parents who had sons attending university, if their sons are still missing or believed to be in prison? I think the number will be much higher.
19 posted on 08/20/2003 11:02:23 AM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
Is this the US response to the jamming of the LA based Iranian broadcasts from within Cuba? -- DoctorZin

TV Marti May go Satellite

August 20, 2003
The Miami Herald
Nancy San Martin

The Bush administration will likely begin using satellite transmissions of TV Martí to make the U.S.-funded broadcasts more readily available for Cuban viewers and less susceptible to Cuban government interference, a U.S. official said Wednesday.

''It's possible that this is going to be happening soon,'' the U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told the Herald.

Cuba now easily jams regular TV Marti signals, broadcast from a balloon in the Florida Keys. Satellite broadcasts would be available via as many as 15,000 satellite dishes across the island.

U.S. broadcasters are meanwhile skeptical about the Cuban government's assertion that it had nothing to do with the interference with U.S. satellite television broadcasts to Iran, which jammed both U.S.-government and Los Angeles-based private programs for nearly a month.

The jamming of the Iranian signals ceased Aug. 3 after Cuban officials told the State Department the interference was coming out of an Iranian diplomatic facility in or near Havana. The Cuban government has denied any role in the disruptions of the Farsi-language satellite broadcasts to Iran, often critical of Tehran's Muslim theocratic government.

But broadcasters affected say the disruptions would be difficult to do without the government's knowledge.

''That equipment for jamming is not available at the market,'' Fariborz Abbassi, owner of one of the affected private Los Angeles stations, said in a telephone interview. ``I don't believe what the Cuban government is saying.''

The interruptions affected U.S.-funded Voice of America programs out of Washington and private broadcasts from Los Angeles.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6577509.htm
20 posted on 08/20/2003 4:08:17 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith
Thank you for the post. Always interested in the latest "spin" on this story.


"The government of Cuba informed us that the interference was coming from an Iranian diplomatic facility,"

I think we've heard this "story" before. Interesting that the dept. spokeswoman said it stopped.

Any validity to this, Dr? Are the U.S./Iranian stations able to broadcast again?


21 posted on 08/20/2003 4:09:19 PM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
You must have read my mind......
22 posted on 08/20/2003 4:12:07 PM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
Well here is another interesting story on the Cuban jamming, just to complicate things... DoctorZin
23 posted on 08/20/2003 5:50:01 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
U.S. skeptical about Cuban claim on Satellite jamming
AP - World News
Aug 20, 2003

The Bush administration will likely begin using satellite transmissions of TV Martí to make the U.S.-funded broadcasts more readily available for Cuban viewers and less susceptible to Cuban government interference, a U.S. official said Wednesday.

''It's possible that this is going to be happening soon,'' the U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told the Herald.

Cuba now easily jams regular TV Marti signals, broadcast from a balloon in the Florida Keys. Satellite broadcasts would be available via as many as 15,000 satellite dishes across the island.

U.S. broadcasters are meanwhile skeptical about the Cuban government's assertion that it had nothing to do with the interference with U.S. satellite television broadcasts to Iran, which jammed both U.S.-government and Los Angeles-based private programs for nearly a month.

The jamming of the Iranian signals ceased Aug. 3 after Cuban officials told the State Department the interference was coming out of an Iranian diplomatic facility in or near Havana. The Cuban government has denied any role in the disruptions of the Farsi-language satellite broadcasts to Iran, often critical of Tehran's Muslim theocratic government.

But broadcasters affected say the disruptions would be difficult to do without the government's knowledge.

''That equipment for jamming is not available at the market,'' Fariborz Abbassi, owner of one of the affected private Los Angeles stations, said in a telephone interview. ``I don't believe what the Cuban government is saying.''

The interruptions affected U.S.-funded Voice of America programs out of Washington and private broadcasts from Los Angeles.

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1849.shtml
24 posted on 08/20/2003 5:50:44 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iran's Khatami says UN bombing to give "excuse to occupiers"

Reuters - World News
Aug 20, 2003

TEHRAN - Iranian President Mohammad Khatami condemned on Wednesday the bombing of the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad as an "evil act" that would only give occupying forces an excuse to stay longer in Iraq.

Khatami said Tuesday's truck bomb attack, which killed at least 20 people, including top U.N. envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello, was "an evil act which has sown the seeds of further violence".

"Such terrorist acts will give the occupiers an excuse to stay longer in Iraq," Khatami said in a speech broadcast on state television.

Iran, while officially neutral in the U.S.-led war to oust Saddam Hussein, welcomed the fall of the Iraqi leader, hated for ordering his forces to use chemical weapons against Iranian troops during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.

But the Islamic Republic, branded a member of the "axis of evil" by Washington, has denounced the occupation of Iraq by the U.S.-led forces as an attack on Islam.

"The West should be held accountable for...the losses inflicted on the Iraqi people," Khatami said....

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1843.shtml
25 posted on 08/20/2003 5:52:41 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
Funeral of some of the killed Semirom demonstrators lead to more unrest

SMCCDI (Information Service)
Aug 20, 2003

The funeral ceremonies of 4 of the killed Semirom demonstrators lead, today, to more unrest and clashes in this city.

Thousands of residents came into the streets to pay a mass tribute to some of theirs who have been killed by the Islamic republic regime forces.

Slogans shouted against the regime and its leaders lead again to sporadic clashes and chase and run which took place between young freedom fighters and the regime special forces and plainclothes men.

It's to note that the bodies of more than 22 other demonstrators are still kept by the regime and the official number of injured, anounced first as 60 and then as 150, is in constant rise. This number has been anounced, today, at over 250 by some of the circles affiliated to the so-called "reformists".

The official figure of deaths was anounced firstly as 6, then as 8 and now as 5, while the real number of deaths is more than 28 including at least 2 militiamen.

The situation in the city is very tense and is under military watch. But despite this unprecedented deployment of militiamen, sporadic shootings are heard during late nights and many Semiromis are using the darkness of nights in order to write, on the walls, or shout slogans against the regime....

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1848.shtml

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


26 posted on 08/20/2003 5:54:47 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Who bombed the UN?

By Roger Hardy
Aug 20, 2003

Experts are debating whether the attack on the UN building in Baghdad was the work of remnants of the former regime of Saddam Hussein or Islamic militants linked to al-Qaeda - or even an unholy alliance of the two.

Post-war Iraq has certainly become a magnet for Islamists looking for a new arena in which to wage a jihad, or holy war, against America.

It is relatively easy for militants to enter the country.

They have reportedly included Saudi Islamists escaping the crackdown in their own country following suicide bombings in the capital, Riyadh, in May.

Only last week, Kurdish officials in northern Iraq reported the capture of 50 Islamists returning to the area from neighbouring Iran.

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1846.shtml

They were members of Ansar al-Islam, a group thought to have links to al-Qaeda.

US officials regard Ansar al-Islam as a possible suspect in the bomb attack against the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad two weeks ago.

Sanctions anger

Radical Islamists are fiercely hostile to the UN, which they see as giving a false legitimacy to US foreign policy.

But some Iraqi nationalists may have a similar view of the world body.

Iraqis deeply resented the stringent UN sanctions they suffered throughout the 1990s.

Many also saw the work of UN weapons inspectors as an infringement of their country's sovereignty.

So the attack could have had a nationalist or an Islamist motivation.

Although the immediate target was the UN, the attack's stark message was directed principally at the United States.

Whoever the perpetrator, the aim was to show that the country is ungovernable, and that the Americans are unable to protect themselves or anyone working with them.

27 posted on 08/20/2003 5:55:54 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
In Iran, it pays to be a religious leader

By Nicholas Birch
Aug 20, 2003

TEHRAN — Two years ago, Hossein Yazdi was looking forward to a quiet retirement. Now he's back at work as one of Tehran's countless unofficial taxi drivers, trying to supplement a monthly pension of $65.

"Two pounds of meat costs $5 these days; most weeks my wife and I go without," he says. "If things carry on like this, people like us will soon be dying of starvation."

Daily conversation here turns with alarming speed to the daily struggle to make ends meet. Yet most economists consider the country to be relatively well managed.

"Iran has huge resources of oil and gas, and the rise in oil prices since 1999 from $10 a barrel to over $26 today has given the economy an immense boost," says Yves Cadilhon, head of the French economic mission in Tehran.

So what are many Iranians complaining about? A powerful group of clerics and merchants who, critics say, have a stranglehold on the economy.

Among the main bastions of clerical control are the bonyad, immense foundations built up after 1979 from wealth confiscated from Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Iran's last shah. Ostensibly "charitable" organizations, they frequently use their wealth — up to 35 percent of the economy, according to analysts — for questionable purposes. In 1997, for instance, one senior cleric and bonyad boss announced his institution was offering $2.5 million for the assassination of novelist Salman Rushdie.

Another bonyad based in the holy city of Mashhad, in northeastern Iran, has used donations from as many as 8 million pilgrims a year to buy up 90 percent of the arable land in the surrounding region. Controlled since 1979 by arch-conservative Ayatollah Abbas Vaez-Tabazi, the foundation also owns universities and a Coca-Cola factory.

Backed by President Mohammed Khatami, Iran's reform-minded parliament recently scrapped laws exempting the foundations from paying tax. Most observers doubt anything will change. Bonyad bosses, they say, can always fall back on privileged relations with Iran's banks, almost all state owned.

"Credit is rationed," explains Jahangir Amuzegar, who was Iran's finance minister in the 1970s, "and it's rarely private business that gets it."

For now, cash-starved businessmen like Ataollah Khazali, owner of a small smelting works outside Tehran, are obliged to turn for credit to members of the country's bazaari class, strongly pro-regime merchants who double as money lenders.

"Iran lacks liquidity; we do our best to remedy that," one bazaari says. One method, he explains, is the systematic backdating of checks.

The current head of the influential pro-bazaari Coalition of Islamic Associations, Habibollah Asgar-Ouladi, was commerce minister in the 1980s, a position he used to procure lucrative foreign-trade contracts for his brother. The family is now estimated to be worth $400 million.

"These bazaari are like a mafia, obeying no laws," says one clothes manufacturer, who buys all his fabric from them. "If one of them decides to boycott a company, they all do."

With Iran's chronic unemployment — officially 12.5 percent but probably closer to 20 percent — exacerbated by the arrival on the job market of 1980s baby boomers, analysts insist only a radical reworking of Iran's crony capitalism can stave off a crisis.

"The regime knows it has no choice but to liberalize," argues Saeed Laylaz, an assistant manager at Iran's largest car manufacturer.

But Amuzegar is more pessimistic. "It's not Islamic ideology that's holding the system up; it's the clerics' and bazaaris' hold on the economy," he says. "As long as they survive, so will the system." ....

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1850.shtml

28 posted on 08/20/2003 5:57:26 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seamole
ping
29 posted on 08/20/2003 6:51:15 PM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: DoctorZIn
"Iraqis deeply resented the stringent UN sanctions they suffered throughout the 1990s."

And the warehouses discovered full of food not delivered to the people, who's fault was that?
Maybe the U.S. should make a documentary for the Iraqi's, using taped footage of their own people, to demonstrate that we're not the bad guys; we opened the wharehouses, revealed their torturous prisons, helped dig up mass graves, etc. Maybe a little seeing would help the believing?
31 posted on 08/20/2003 7:33:40 PM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; F14 Pilot
Thanks for your posts! Good to see you both!

Appreciate the report on your meeting with Brownback last night, Dr.Z.

Forget the hijab...it doesn't appear to be kosher.

Cuba needs to take care of that little jamming problem ASAP.

"Iran's supreme leader has said his country will never give up its nuclear technology under pressure..."

Okie dokie! Don't gripe when we come calling!

"... by attacking the United Nations the bombers may have made it easier for President Bush to convince European and Arab nations that they have a stake in a peaceful, stable Iraq."

That's good, as long as they are under our leadership, and France and Germany aren't involved.

F14, I couldn't pull up the link you posted.

32 posted on 08/20/2003 9:11:42 PM PDT by dixiechick2000 (All power corrupts. Absolute power is kinda neat though.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
Bump!

There were, also, warehouses full of medicine...enough to supply all of the hospitals in Baghdad.

Vermin!
33 posted on 08/20/2003 9:13:18 PM PDT by dixiechick2000 (All power corrupts. Absolute power is kinda neat though.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: All
Western Press Review: The Bombing Of UN Headquarters In Baghdad And 50 Years After Iran's Coup

http://www.iranian.ws/news/publish/article_307.shtml
34 posted on 08/20/2003 9:44:50 PM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: All
WHY NUCLEAR WEAPONS MAY BE IN IRAN'S NATIONAL INTERESTS
By EurasiaNet
Aug 21, 2003, 06:07

Erich Marquardt
A EurasiaNet Partner Post from PINR

For more than two decades, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been at odds with the foreign policy of the United States. The most significant clash between the two countries began shortly after the election of Premier Mohammed Mossadeq, who took power in Tehran in 1951. Mossadeq, a nationalist, nationalized the oil industry and formed the National Iranian Oil Company. Due to this action, the United States and Great Britain engineered a coup in August of 1953, overthrowing the democratically elected leader and replacing Mossadeq with Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, referred to as the Shah, who ruled for twenty-five years. Shortly after taking power, the Shah allowed an international consortium of American, British, French and Dutch oil companies to operate its oil facilities and reap fifty percent of the profits. Despite the Shah’s close, friendly relationship with Washington and other Western governments, his brutal autocratic methods of violently quelling domestic dissent with his dreaded security apparatus, the SAVAK, sparked a revolution in Iranian society led by conservative religious leaders. By overthrowing the U.S. supported government, therefore threatening U.S. interests in the region, the new Iranian leaders quickly became enemies of successive American administrations.

Moreover, on top of earning the disregard of the world’s only superpower, Iran also has found itself in a geographically volatile region. During the 1980s, Iraq, under the leadership of Saddam Hussein and the Ba’ath Party, invaded Iran in an attempt to conquer valuable territory such as the disputed Shatt al Arab waterway. The war was devastating to both the Iraqis and the Iranians. Since the end of that conflict in 1988, Iran and Iraq have had terse relations. In addition to Iraq, Iran is also threatened by the region’s most powerful state, Israel, which has a carefully defended nuclear monopoly in the Middle East. In 1981, Israel launched a surprise air attack on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in an attempt to dash Baghdad’s goal of developing nuclear arms; Israel’s aim was to preserve its nuclear monopoly in the Middle East. It is clear that Israel would seriously consider similar action in Iran, should Tehran come closer to developing nuclear arms.

To add to its security woes, Iran has been facing a rapidly changing balance of power directly on its borders. In 2001, the United States overthrew the Taliban leadership in Afghanistan. While the Taliban was still in power, Iran had little to fear from its eastern border; it faced an unorganized state constantly in the throes of civil war. Yet with the removal of the Taliban from power, Iran now faces a border area littered with U.S. troops hostile to Tehran. In addition to Afghanistan, Iran also faces threats along its western flank with Iraq. While Tehran certainly did not bemoan the fall of the Ba’ath Party, it is justifiably concerned about its replacement: A U.S. occupational force situated on its western border. Furthermore, if U.S. objectives are realized in Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran’s current leadership will face a perilous future of being enveloped by unfriendly states, beholden to U.S. interests.

It is for these security concerns that the Iranian state would want to develop and acquire nuclear weapons. Already Iran has greatly improved its missile delivery capabilities, with the potential of launching missiles into Afghanistan, Iraq and Israel. If Tehran were to become nuclear-armed, it would end Israel’s nuclear monopoly in the Middle East and also give Iran the capability of launching nuclear strikes on surrounding states. However, even with such a nuclear arsenal, Iran, like all nuclear-armed states, would most likely use its nuclear capability as a deterrent and not as an offensive weapon. Becoming nuclear-armed would increase Iran’s foreign policy leverage in dealing with U.S. forces on its eastern and western borders, the state of Israel, and whatever new governments may form in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

In addition to being concerned about U.S. troops on its eastern and western borders, Tehran is worried about covert activities by U.S. intelligence agencies in their quest to seek the Bush administration’s much touted "regime change" policy in Iran, which was classified by the White House as being part of an "axis of evil." Such rhetoric began with the election of the Bush administration in 2000, in which a group of administration officials took office that had been abnormally antagonistic to the Iranian government and uncharacteristically friendly with the current hard-line Likud government in Israel. These officials, often categorized as neo-conservatives, openly seek to remove the leadership in Tehran in an attempt to foster a U.S.-friendly government in the oil rich state, along with removing a potential threat to Israel, a firm American ally in the region. Tehran is concerned that U.S. and British support will bolster the power of Iranian rebels operating from Iraq. In fact, in 1997 Iran executed a series of air attacks in Iraqi territory in order to weaken these rebel groups; such an overt policy would be impossible now due to the U.S. and British occupation.

Finally, with the unilateral invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq -- with the latter invasion taking place in direct opposition to the United Nations and the global population -- Tehran remains in the dark about the Bush administration’s next move. Learning from these examples, Iran, like North Korea, another state that is part of the Bush administration’s "axis of evil," knows that should it acquire nuclear weapons, it would be much more difficult for Washington to attack it. Any assault by Iran’s current adversaries -- the United States and Israel -- would have to take into account the possible repercussions that come with attacking a nuclear-armed state capable of causing extensive damage to its opponents either with conventional or nuclear weapons.

While Iran’s adversaries could attempt to launch a massive strike that would destroy its nuclear arsenal or its delivery systems, such a strike would have to have a 100 percent success ratio in order to be certain that a devastating retaliatory blow would not occur. Failure to eliminate a nuclear-armed state’s second strike capability could lead to unacceptable consequences on the side of the attacking state. If an offshore power like the United States were to launch an attack, Iran could not initiate a conventional or nuclear attack on the U.S. mainland, but it could easily strike U.S. troops in either Afghanistan or Iraq.

Therefore, it is clear that developing nuclear weapons is in the national interests of Tehran. While Tehran cannot openly develop nuclear weapons -- due to the international outcry it would warrant -- it can continue its research into peaceful nuclear energy all the while preparing for a possible day when it could quickly develop its first nuclear weapons and become a nuclear-armed state. Such status would shield Iran from a variety of outside threats -- including ones emanating from its traditional rivals, the United States and Israel -- but also from the newly formed governments in Kabul and Baghdad.

It will be important to monitor the reactions of the United States and Israel to Iran’s pursuit of nuclear technology. How will these two states seek to preserve their balance of power in the region? Does the Bush administration still retain the political leverage within the U.S. domestic population to transform its current rhetoric into a tangible policy of removing Tehran’s leadership? And will the state of Israel risk the potentially disastrous political and military consequences of attempting to preserve its nuclear monopoly in the region? It is these questions that will grow increasingly important in the coming months.


© Iranian.ws

http://www.iranian.ws/news/publish/article_311.shtml
35 posted on 08/20/2003 9:45:20 PM PDT by F14 Pilot (What Goes Around, Comes Around...!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; McGavin999; Eala; AdmSmith; dixiechick2000; nuconvert; Valin; Tamsey; ...
Is U.S. openness costly?

August 20, 2003

Which country is the biggest potential threat to America? Russia? North Korea? Iran? You know the answer, but you'd rather not think about it. It's the People's Republic of China, a communist country of 1.3 billion people, with the capability of fielding 206,000,000 soldiers, most certainly the largest military force in history.
Why is it so hard to even think about a war with China? China is our trading partner. But things could change. We're not going to win a swift victory in a war with China with "shock and awe" bombing or with special operations forces who ride horseback and camelback into such a conflict. We're talking about the big-time, real heavyweight load in the world of potential enemies. Should we worry about it? Maybe....

We have a lot of high tech weaponry on our side. We have a well-trained military force -- the best in the world -- so why should we worry? Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld does not seem openly concerned, but if the truth were known, the only way to defeat China in a war is with massive use of nuclear weapons, under the venerable, but still viable, strategy of Mutually Assured Destruction.

If we do have a strategy to defeat a huge enemy without nuclear weapons, I hope that we keep it secret. I am still reeling with anxiety over our openness in military-to-military exercises, real world coalition operations, and in high-technology transfers to communist countries. By embedding reporters during operations in Iraq, we won the battle for public opinion, but at what cost? Are potential enemies learning anything from our "openness"? Why are we turning our backs on the marketing of our industrial secrets overseas? A Northwest Indiana corporation, Magnequench, for example, is closing its doors and moving its operations to China. The company makes high-tech magnets for U.S. smart bomb guidance systems! How about a drum roll and a cymbal clash? Hello! Is anyone awake in our U.S. Trade Representative's office?

In the recently released The Annual Report on the Military Power of the People's Republic of China, Chinese military doctrine now stresses elements such as "surprise, deception and preemption" to insure military victory. That is scary information. The Chinese have always stressed surprise and deception, but "preemption" is brand new in their doctrinal arsenal. Ironically, the Chinese might use their version of the U.S. military strategy of preemption, if military force is needed in its struggle to annex Taiwan, while sitting in peace talks with the U.S. and North Korea in Beijing.

This new and overlooked report cites high-level Chinese Generals who advocate the new strategy of preemption. It further states "China now believes preemptive strikes are its best advantage against a technologically superior force." It looks like our strategy in the successful Operation Iraqi Freedom has been copied by the biggest nation on earth.

My second biggest fear now is a preemptive strike by North Korea on South Korea. China, with its new strategy of preemption, is my number one threat. "The (preemptive) genie is out of the bottle," and there doesn't seem to be an effective way to put it back in. We will now have to live with the fear that others will use our own military strategy of preemption against their enemies, or perhaps against our friends, or even us. What will we do when it happens? Complain that they used our strategy without our permission? Put a lid on "openness" before it's too late.

Colonel Shaver is a retired U.S. Army officer who writes about military subjects, issues and national security strategy.

http://www.daily-journal.com/content/?id=32614
36 posted on 08/20/2003 9:47:21 PM PDT by F14 Pilot (What Goes Around, Comes Around...!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: All
Re#36
This can be the same for Iran as well.
A preemptive attack on Iranian Nuclear Facilities by Israel or America.
37 posted on 08/20/2003 9:50:38 PM PDT by F14 Pilot (What Goes Around, Comes Around...!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
The spectre of Operation Ajax

Britain and the US crushed Iran's first democratic government. They didn't learn from that mistake

Dan De Luce, Tehran
Wednesday August 20, 2003
The Guardian

Ignoring international law, Britain and the US opted for the high-risk strategy of regime change in order to pre-empt a volatile enemy in the Middle East. It was not Iraq, however, that was in the firing line but Iran, and the aftershocks are still being felt.
Fifty years ago this week, the CIA and the British SIS orchestrated a coup d'etat that toppled the democratically elected government of Mohammad Mossadegh. The prime minister and his nationalist supporters in parliament roused Britain's ire when they nationalised the oil industry in 1951, which had previously been exclusively controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Mossadegh argued that Iran should begin profiting from its vast oil reserves.

Britain accused him of violating the company's legal rights and orchestrated a worldwide boycott of Iran's oil that plunged the country into financial crisis. The British government tried to enlist the Americans in planning a coup, an idea originally rebuffed by President Truman. But when Dwight Eisenhower took over the White House, cold war ideologues - determined to prevent the possibility of a Soviet takeover - ordered the CIA to embark on its first covert operation against a foreign government.

A new book about the coup, All the Shah's Men, which is based on recently released CIA documents, describes how the CIA - with British assistance - undermined Mossadegh's government by bribing influential figures, planting false reports in newspapers and provoking street violence. Led by an agent named Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt, the CIA leaned on a young, insecure Shah to issue a decree dismissing Mossadegh as prime minister. By the end of Operation Ajax, some 300 people had died in firefights in the streets of Tehran.

The crushing of Iran's first democratic government ushered in more than two decades of dictatorship under the Shah, who relied heavily on US aid and arms. The anti-American backlash that toppled the Shah in 1979 shook the whole region and helped spread Islamic militancy, with Iran's new hardline theocracy declaring undying hostility to the US.

The author of All the Shah's Men, New York Times reporter Stephen Kinzer, argues that the coup planted the seeds of resentment against the US in the Middle East, ultimately leading to the events of September 11.

While it may be reaching too far to link Mossadegh's overthrow with al-Qaida's terrorism, it certainly helped unleash a wave of Islamic extremism and assisted to power the anti-American clerical leadership that still rules Iran. It is difficult to imagine a worse outcome to an expedient action.

The coup and the culture of covert interference it created forever changed how the world viewed the US, especially in poor, oppressive countries. For many Iranians, the coup was a tragedy from which their country has never recovered. Perhaps because Mossadegh represents a future denied, his memory has approached myth.

On yesterday's anniversary, there was no official government ceremony honouring Mossadegh's legacy. Deemed too secular for the Islamic Republic, the conservative clergy never mention him. But at a time when the Bush administration expresses impatience with diplomacy and promotes "regime change" as a means of reshaping the Middle East, the anniversary recalls some unwelcome parallels.

The mindset that produced the coup is not so different from the premises that underpin the current doctrine of "pre-emption" or the belief that the war on terror can justify ignoring the Geneva convention, diplomacy and the sentiments of a country's population.

Veterans of the cold war in President Bush's administration are cultivating relations with Iranian monarchists in exile while Congressmen are calling for a campaign to undermine Iran's clerical leadership. Washington's tough rhetoric and flirtation with the Shah's son are a kind of nightmarish deja vu for the embattled reformists and students struggling to push for democratic change in Iran.

"Now it seems that the Americans are pushing towards the same direction again," says Ibrahim Yazdi, who served briefly as foreign minister after the Shah fell. "That shows they have not learned anything from history."

The reformists allied with President Khatami believe their country now faces another choice between despotism and democracy, and they worry that the combination of outside interference and internal squabbling within their own ranks could once again defer their dream. The more neo-conservatives attempt to pile pressure on Iran, the more ammunition they provide for the most hardline elements of the regime.

Beyond Iran, America remains deeply resented for siding with authoritarian rule in the region. It would be comforting to think "reshaping the Middle East" means promoting democratic rule. But if it merely allows for the ends to justify the means, then the spectre of Operation Ajax will continue to haunt the region.

· Dan De Luce is the Guardian's correspondent in Tehran

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,12858,1022065,00.html
38 posted on 08/20/2003 9:57:31 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
The spectre of Operation Ajax

Britain and the US crushed Iran's first democratic government. They didn't learn from that mistake

Dan De Luce, Tehran
Wednesday August 20, 2003
The Guardian

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/967077/posts?page=38#38

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”
39 posted on 08/20/2003 9:58:39 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
bttt
40 posted on 08/20/2003 10:54:11 PM PDT by lainde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: lainde; DoctorZIn; nuconvert; seamole; onyx; RaceBannon; Valin; McGavin999; AdmSmith
Iran and the politics of regime change
By Dr. Chandra Muzaffar
Aug 21, 2003, 02:30

The rhetoric on Iran in Washington is getting shriller by the day. There is a pattern to the rhetoric which seems to suggest that it has a certain purpose. As with Iraq the goal appears to be regime change.

Since the beginning of May, Washington has been levelling a series of accusations at the present government of Iran which it will be remembered was categorised by United States President, George Bush, as a member of the 'Axis of Evil' in his State of the Union Address in January 2002. Iran, it is alleged, is developing a clandestine nuclear weapons programme; it is harbouring Al-Qaeda terrorists; it is providing material support to the Lebanese Hizbollah and certain militant Palestinian groups; and it was responsible (this is a new allegation) for the 1983 bombing of a US marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 troops. On top of all this the conservative religious elites in the Iranian government have been accused .................>>>

http://nation.ittefaq.com/artman/publish/article_4205.shtml
41 posted on 08/21/2003 12:08:26 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: All
Kharrazi expresses sorrow over de Mello's death Tehran,

Aug02 ,

IRNA -- Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi expressed here Wednesday his sorrow over the death of the United Nations envoy to Iraq and special representative of its Secretary-General Kofi Annan, Sergio Vieira de Mello . In a message to Annan, Kharrazi said that de Mello had made great efforts to carry out his duty . " De Mello did his best to enable the United Nations to play its role in Iraq in order to help the Iraqi people rule over their own fate .This is a correct path which should be followed so as to leave the country's affairs to its own people in the earliest time, " Kharrazi said . At least 71 people were killed and more than 001 others wounded in a truck bombing that devastated the UN headquarters in Baghdad . The UN top envoy to Iraq, Sergio Vieira de Mello, a Brazilian is among the dead .He had been trapped under the rubble, UN spokesman Fred Eckhard said in New York.

http://www.irna.ir/en/
42 posted on 08/21/2003 12:11:05 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999; Eala; piasa; Valin; nuconvert; Texas_Dawg; kattracks; RaceBannon; seamole; AdmSmith; ...
Some Books about Iran.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0671027557/netnative/103-7099738-2871010

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0618048448/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/103-7099738-2871010

43 posted on 08/21/2003 12:16:51 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
This thread is now closed.

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread

Live Thread Ping List | DoctorZin

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


44 posted on 08/21/2003 12:40:38 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
Thanks
45 posted on 08/21/2003 6:14:47 AM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

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

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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