Posted on 10/15/2004 10:15:32 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
The US media still largely ignores news regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran. As Tony Snow of the Fox News Network has put it, “this is probably the most under-reported news story of the year.” As a result, most American’s are unaware that the Islamic Republic of Iran is NOT supported by the masses of Iranians today. Modern Iranians are among the most pro-American in the Middle East. In fact they were one of the first countries to have spontaneous candlelight vigils after the 911 tragedy (see photo).
There is a popular revolt against the Iranian regime brewing in Iran today. I began these daily threads June 10th 2003. On that date Iranians once again began taking to the streets to express their desire for a regime change. Today in Iran, most want to replace the regime with a secular democracy.
The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movement in Iran from being reported. Unfortunately, the regime has successfully prohibited western news reporters from covering the demonstrations. The voices of discontent within Iran are sometime murdered, more often imprisoned. Still the people continue to take to the streets to demonstrate against the regime.
In support of this revolt, Iranians in America have been broadcasting news stories by satellite into Iran. This 21st century news link has greatly encouraged these protests. The regime has been attempting to jam the signals, and locate the satellite dishes. Still the people violate the law and listen to these broadcasts. Iranians also use the Internet and the regime attempts to block their access to news against the regime. In spite of this, many Iranians inside of Iran read these posts daily to keep informed of the events in their own country.
This daily thread contains nearly all of the English news reports on Iran. It is thorough. If you follow this thread you will witness, I believe, the transformation of a nation. This daily thread provides a central place where those interested in the events in Iran can find the best news and commentary. The news stories and commentary will from time to time include material from the regime itself. But if you read the post you will discover for yourself, the real story of what is occurring in Iran and its effects on the war on terror.
I am not of Iranian heritage. I am an American committed to supporting the efforts of those in Iran seeking to replace their government with a secular democracy. I am in contact with leaders of the Iranian community here in the United States and in Iran itself.
If you read the daily posts you will gain a better understanding of the US war on terrorism, the Middle East and why we need to support a change of regime in Iran. Feel free to ask your questions and post news stories you discover in the weeks to come.
If all goes well Iran will be free soon and I am convinced become a major ally in the war on terrorism. The regime will fall. Iran will be free. It is just a matter of time.
DoctorZin
ASHINGTON, Oct. 15 - The Bush administration on Friday acquiesced in a plan by three European nations to offer Iran a discussion on political ties and future economic and other benefits in return for an immediate suspension of its nuclear-fuel-enrichment efforts, European and American officials said.
The officials said an understanding to proceed with the offer to Iran next week had come at an unusual and occasionally frosty meeting of top envoys of eight leading industrial nations and the European Union that had been hastily scheduled to head off growing dissatisfaction among American allies over what they see as the administration's nonconciliatory approach on Iran.
Administration officials said they were extremely skeptical that another offer to Iran would persuade it to stop its enrichment activities, which are suspected to be a cover for making nuclear weapons. The United States instead favors taking up Iran's program at the United Nations Security Council for possible consideration of sanctions.
"We've been a broken record on this since the beginning of the process," said an administration official. "It's safe to say that American expectations are fairly low, based on Iran's miserable track record, including its almost instantaneous breaking of the last agreement we had with them."
The official was referring to Iran's agreement to halt its uranium enrichment program last year, only to change its mind this year, citing what it said was a Western refusal to let it have a peaceful nuclear program.
The meeting on Friday occurred at the State Department with envoys from Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, Japan, Canada and the European Union. According to officials familiar with the session, a four-page plan for Iran drafted by Britain, France and Germany was circulated and discussed but not formally adopted.
The plan, various officials said, called for the British, French and Germans to tell Iran next week that if it suspended its uranium enrichment in November, and if this were verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency, a discussion would begin aimed at improving relations over the long term.
Among the items that the Europeans would be willing to discuss with Iran, the document proposed, are a supply of nuclear fuel for civilian reactors, improved trade and commercial ties, and Iran's possible role in efforts to settle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Europeans would also want to discuss human rights in Iran and the problem of terrorism in the region.
According to people familiar with the session, the main American representative at the talks, John R. Bolton, under secretary of state for arms control and international security, was highly skeptical that any such approach would work or was worth trying. Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage opened the meeting but left after it began.
A European envoy said Mr. Bolton had been unable to disguise his apparent disdain for the European proposal and spoke with "the minimum courtesy imaginable" in a way that "bordered on the unacceptable." But he said Mr. Bolton nonetheless agreed tacitly to let the Europeans go ahead with their initiative. Mr. Bolton would not comment.
"They didn't jump on the train physically," a European official said, describing the American attitude. "But there was nobody who told us, don't go ahead."
An administration official, amplifying the American attitude, said: "They didn't ask for our approval, and we didn't offer it. But everyone came out of the meeting understanding that we're not objecting to it or blocking it either. They said they really wanted to do it. We said, it sounds like you're going to do it anyway, so go ahead."
As a result, a meeting is expected as early as next Thursday, perhaps in Vienna, the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency. A spokesman for the Iranian mission at the United Nations in New York, Morteza Ramandi, said a meeting would probably occur next week.
Officials familiar with the paper discussed on Friday also said it called for a "two-track approach" of engagement, coupling rewards with a threat of confrontation if Iran did not go along. The path of confrontation would be pursued by getting the International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors to refer the matter to the United Nations.
The international agency has criticized Iran for noncompliance with disclosure demands on its nuclear program but has not labeled its efforts as clearly aimed at producing a bomb. The agency's 35 board members are divided over whether to send the matter to a body that would immediately discuss sanctions.
Not only are China and Russia opposed to sanctions, but a group of so-called nonaligned countries including Brazil, South Africa and Malaysia also oppose anything that might suggest that countries cannot have peaceful nuclear energy programs.
Iran maintains that its enrichment efforts are part of a civilian program permitted by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which it signed. The treaty grants access to imported nuclear technology if countries agree to international inspections.
Iran has two forms of nuclear energy programs. In one program, it is enriching uranium, and the International Atomic Energy Agency recently found that it possessed 37 metric tons of "yellow cake," a uranium substance that can be enriched for reactors or for bombs. Some experts say 37 metric tons is more than enough needed for civilian purposes and raises suspicions that Iran wants the material for arms.
The second Iranian program is a heavy water reactor dependent on importing fuel from Russia, which has said it would ship the fuel to Iran next year and then re-import it when it is used and becomes available for a nuclear weapon.
European officials said Friday that as part of the discussions at the State Department, Russia in effect agreed to join with the other nations in urging Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment, and that Russia would not ship any fuel to Iran unless it cooperated. But other experts say Russian attitudes are not exactly clear.
Any suspension of uranium enrichment by Iran would have to be "sustained," a European official said - in effect, permanent, although the word "permanent" is avoided because a lasting arrangement for Iran to drop its nuclear weapons ambitions needed to be worked out over the long term.
A long-term agreement would have to be able to verify that Iran had fully abandoned any nuclear weapons program, European officials said, though they acknowledged that verification was technically difficult as long as Iran insists its programs are for civilian purposes.
In addition, European officials say any solution would have to acknowledge Iran's right to have a civilian nuclear energy program. Iran, they say, will never accept a forced abandonment of what it regards as its rights under international agreements.
Check out post #13 if you think our and the EU unemployment numbers are bad.
Iran says it will reject any proposal to end its work on uranium enrichment, a process that could be used to make nuclear weapons.
Hossein Mousavian, a senior Iranian official involved in the nuclear negotiations, has told state television his country will not accept any plan that requires it to drop what he calls "its legitimate right" to enrich uranium to make fuel.
European Union diplomats have said they are seeking U.S. and Russian support for a deal that would ask Iran to give up uranium enrichment in return for technical and economic assistance.
Iran has denied U.S. allegations it has military nuclear ambitions, saying its atomic program is solely dedicated to meeting high demand for electricity.
Uranium, enriched to a low level, can be used to fuel nuclear power stations such as one Iran is building at the southern port of Bushehr. However, if enriched further, it can be used in nuclear warheads.
| 10/13/2004 | Clip No. 288 |
 |
|
| Palestinian Islamic Jihad Leader Khaled Al-Batsh: The Taba Attack Was Justified | |
|
|
|
The following are excerpts from an interview with Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Khaled Al-Batsh: Al-Batsh: What happened in Taba is directly related to our situation in Gaza. We cannot separate what happened in Taba from the crimes in the Gaza Strip, especially in Jabalya and the Jabalya refugee camp. What happened in Taba is that a group of Arab mujahideen or Arab resistance fighters from either the Islamic or the national movement were not prepared to watch these monstrous acts against the Palestinian people, while they couldn't see any Arab army protecting the Palestinian people. They have not seen a single Arab regime intervening and threatening to stop the massacre in Gaza "or else…" So they made the decision to avenge and to strike blows… We welcome these striking hands despite all our suffering at the hands of the Arab nation. Nevertheless, we say that this is a justified operation in the framework of the response to the occupation's crimes. I believe that since the occupation began exporting the crisis abroad, beyond the borders of Palestine, there were people who stood up and said, "We, as the Arab and Islamic resistance in Egypt, are prepared..." and they dealt a blow in Taba to this aggression. Therefore, the Taba operation was justified, and it should make the occupation feel there will be no security to whoever kills Palestinians. Whoever kills Palestinians must not be safe in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, or Lebanon. Whoever kills a Palestinian must understand that he will not be safe wherever he sets foot. This is a theory that the Zionists must understand. They must understand that as long as Palestinians are being killed, no settler will feel safe anywhere in the world. |
|
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
/312_G.jpg)