Week in Review

DoctorZin provides a review of this past week's [10/23-10/29] major news events regarding Iran. (The reports are listed in chronological order, not by importance)

Ahmadinejad's Threatens the U.S. and Israel.

• Agence France Presse:Iran's hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday openly called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."
• Memri.org published an English translation of the Iranian President's speech at Tehran "World without Zionism" Conference.
• Iran Press News reported that Ahmadinejad mocked the West saying: the West is simply opposed to the nature of Islamic order; therefore when the nuclear issue is resolved, westerners will take issue with our human rights problems and when that's resolved, they will probably pick on us for animal rights abuse.... When the centrifuges are started up again, things will transform.
• Plaut's Complaint, Moonbat Central discussed Iran's goal of a world without the United States or Zionism, which Ahmadinejad said is: attainable and could definitely be realized.
• BBC News reported that Iran leader's words 'sicken' the UK.
• Khaleej Times Online reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said: Moving towards the West would be fatal for Islam.
• BBC News reported that Israel regards Iran as "a clear and present danger."
  
• Ronny Sofer, YNet News reported that Danny Gillerman, Israel’s Ambassador to the U.N., demanded that the U.N. remove Iran from the U.N.
• Maryam Kashani, Rooz Online reported that Ahmadinejad is not cooperating with the conservative Majlis.
• The Associated Press reported that European governments condemned the Iranian president. The report reminded us of nearly identical statements by Khomeni.
  
• Deutrsch Welle reported that the foreign policy spokesman for Germany's new government said: Those who want to wipe out Israel cannot be partners of Germany.
• Reuters reported that Russia warned Tehran that such comments added to pressure for Iran to be referred to the U.N. Security Council over its nuclear program.
• United Nations reported that Koffi Annan said the right of all States in the Middle East to live in peace will now top the agenda of his upcoming visit to Iran.
• ABC News reported that Arab governments remained silent.
• Adnkronos International reported that their spokesman, Seyyed Massoud Jazayeri said: If this cancer (Israel) is not removed from the Islamic world, Muslims will sustain immense harm.
• The Jerusalem Post asked: Was this rhetoric of a political novice or words from a man of action?
• Nema, Iranian Truth (a pro-"reformist" blogger) asked: What did Ahmadinejad mean by saying that Israel "must be wiped off the map"?
• Safa Haeri, Asia Times Online reported on the rest Ahmadinejad's speech say: I say accomplishment of a world without America and Israel is both possible and feasible.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that Israel called for the remove of Iran from the UN.
• Channel 4 UK reported that Tony Blair launched an unprecedented attack on Iran, that he will hold talks with allies on the matter in the next few days. He added: Iran was making a "very big mistake" if it thought the world would ignore the comments.
• Iran Press News reported that the 3 Ambassadors of the Islamic regime to Britain, France & Germany were discharged, under Ahamdinejad's orders.
• Monsters and Critics reported that the government of President Ahmadinejad called on Iranians Thursday 'to riot against Zionists (Israel) and unbelievers' in nationwide demonstrations planned for Friday.
• Philip Webster, The Times UK:Tony Blair gave warning last night that the West might have to take military action against Iran after worldwide condemnation of its President’s call for Israel to be “wiped off the map”.
• 10 Downing Street released a transcript of the press briefing from the Prime Minister's Official Spokesman on Iran.
• Agence France Presse reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Friday dismissed widespread international condemnation of his call for Israel to be "wiped off the map", saying his controversial remark was "right and just".
• BBC News reported that while Iran has defended its president's call for Israel to be "wiped off the map," a senior Palestinian official rejected the Iranian position.
• JTA News reported that both houses of Congress unanimously condemned the Iranian president’s call to annihilate Israel.
• Xinhua News Agency reported that the UN Security Council discussed a British-drafted presidential statement which would decry the Iranian president's radical comments on Israel.
• Agence France Presse then reported that the UN Security Council on Friday condemned Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's comment.
• Eli Lake, The NY Sun reported that the U.N. Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, will go ahead with plans to visit Tehran, even after the Iranian president's call for Israel to be "wiped of the map."
• Khaleej Times Online reported that Arab governments maintained silence yesterday over the call by Iran's new president for Israel to be "wiped off the map," but analysts said Teheran's Arab rivals may quietly be pleased.
• Islamlic Republic News Agency attempted to blame the US State Department for having "directly ordered the US media to raise hues and cries against Iran's head of state."
• Middle East Online reported that Iran was Friday holding its annual anti-Israeli hate fest. The turnout was smaller than past events.
• Ramita Navai, The Times UK was among thousands on the streets of the Iranian capital for annual anti-Israel rallies and reported that it would be a mistake to think that all of Iran is on the streets baying for Israel's blood and that the majority of ordinary Iranians don't really care about Israel- they have enough to worry about at home with a declining economy and high unemployment.
• Dow Jones Newswires reported that Iran hit back Saturday at the U.N. Security Council after the world body condemned President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's call for Israel to be destroyed.
• The Telegraph reported on the return to hard rhetoric dashes the hope of ending the crisis.
• The Voice of America News reported that Iran says it stands by its U.N. commitments not to use violence against another country.
  

Iran's Nuclear Program.

• Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting reported that the Islamic Republic of Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki arrived in Moscow.
• Dow Jones Newswires reported that U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley arrived in Moscow.
• Alexander Reuto, Jommersant reported that Moscow intends to convince Tehran to compromise or Russia will wash its hands of its opposition to referring Iran the UN Security Council.
• Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting reported that Iran may consider holding talks with the United States, if...
• Thomas C. Schelling, The Wall Street Journal wonders, while we have enjoyed 60 years without nuclear weapons exploded in anger can we make it through another half dozen decades?
• Sky News reported that Tony Blair has warned Iran to stop supporting terrorism and abide by the rules over nuclear weapons.
• Scotsman reported that a failure to halt Iran's ambitions to develop a nuclear bomb could lead other countries in the region to acquire nuclear weapons.
• Michael Adler, Agence France Presse reported that the United States and the European Union will hold off taking Iran before the UN Security Council.
• The Financial Times argued that the US/EU3 are now relying on Russia to find a solution with Iran.
• Ali Nourizadeh, Asharq Al-Awsat reported that Washington is examining ways of forcing Iran to drop its Nuclear Program. A must read.
• Iran Press News reported that despite Rafsanjani's new power in Iran, he said: I will not get into the nuclear discussions.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that Russia says Iran not a nuclear threat.
  

Iranian Dissidents.

• Azar Nafisi, SF Chronicle reported that Akbar Ganji has come to represent the democratic movement in Iran because he has revealed the "true face of the system in the Islamic Republic of Iran."
• Reporters Without Borders reiterated its outrage at the treatment of journalist Akbar Ganji and reported disturbing updates on his condition.
• Iran Press News reported that the Islamic Judiciary has summoned the families of the Student political prisoners in order to "complete the investigations and present information on the Ministry of Intelligence and Security's prisoner list."
• Iran Press News reported that there is no news from political prisoner, Behrooz Javid-Tehrani, detained at Rejaiishahr prison.
• Iran Press News reported that while political prisoners of Rejaiishahr prison, visited with their families. The families of these prisoners called it "staged" and a ruse to prevent the two prisoners from taking their deserved furloughs.
• Iran Press News reported that Seyed Ahmad Seyed Seraajee Tabrizi blogger was sentenced to 1 year in prison by the appeals court.
• ReleaseGanji.net published a letter from Akbar Ganji's wife revealing his recent torture.
• Bill Samii, Radio Free Europe reported that Iraqi Kurds want Masud Rajavi, leader of the MKO based in Iraq, to be arrested and tried.
• Amnesty International reported that they are gravely concerned at reports that Iranian journalist Akbar Ganji was tortured and ill-treated by Iranian security officers.
• Iran Press News reported the people of Mahabad protested the execution sentence of a local youth involved in the recent unrest there. He was accused of murder.
• Iran Press News reported on the one-year prison sentence for a Sanandadji youth arrested in the Kurdistan unrest.
• Iran Press News reported that a High Tribunal of the regime sentenced Shahla Jahed to death.
  

The Unrest Inside of Iran.

• Iran Press News reported that several of the employees, professors and students of Azad University of Qazvin were arrested; they were charged with "establishing a network of corruption in a university."
  

Iran's troublemaking.

• Reuters reported that Iran is permitting around 25 high-ranking al Qaeda members to roam free in the country's capital... They are living in houses belonging to Iran's Revolutionary Guards, the report said.
• Amir.irani-tehrani.com reported that since the mid 90s, a group of “Neo-Hezis” have infiltrated the Iranian Diaspora and exile communities.
  

U.S. Policy.

• Reuters reported that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said military action against Iran over its nuclear program is not on the agenda.
• NewsMax reported that six months after announcing a plan to give $3 million to promote democracy in Iran, the U.S. State Department has yet to release the funds.
• Reuters reported that President George W. Bush on Friday called Iran and Syria "outlaw regimes" and once again saying: The United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor them because they are equally guilty of murder.
• The White House released a transcript of President Bush's Speech where he shares his view of the war on terror.
  

The Iranian Military.

• BBC News reported that Iran launched its first satellite into space from Plesetsk in northern Russia on Thursday. Now they have an eye in the sky.
• Iran Press News reported that a delegation has been sent by the regime's authorities to Russia in order to purchase Russian helicopters and Topolov airplanes.
• World Tribune reported that Iran has sent its first satellite into space and have achieved limited space reconnaissance capability over the entire Middle East, including Israel.
  

The Economy.

• Business Week reported that just months after Iran elected Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as President, the conservatives are fighting among themselves and business capital is fleeing the country.
• Iran Press News reported that Ahmadinejad's own site said the escape of capital from Iran has quickened.
  

Human Rights/Freedom of the press inside of Iran.

• Shahram Kholdi, ScanIranic pubished a report of an appeal hearing of Webloggers from the Holy City of Qom, plus an update.
• Mehdi Khalaji, The Washinton Institute discussed what it will take to create effective international pressure for Human Rights in Iran.
• The Guardian UK reported that a committee of Islamic clerics in Iran this week banned foreign films.
• Farhad Motamed, Rooz Online reported on the recent threat of executing 210 journalists inside of Iran.
• Saeed Mirbahrami, Rooz Online reported that a new wave of subpoenas have been issued to journalists requiring them to appear before Tehran’s Prosecutor.
• Shahram Raffizadeh, Rooz Online reported on the extremes to which the regime is blocking internet access inside of Iran.
• Mehrangiz Kar, Rooz Online reported on the regime's betrayal of Human Rights in Iran and the present danger to human rights advocates there.
• FIDH released a Briefing Note on the Human Rights Situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
  

Efforts against the regime outside of Iran.

• Berlin Alliance against the Al-Quds Day is organizing a protest against the radical Iranian Al Quds day event there.
• Sherrie Gossett and Monisha Bansal, CNSNews reported that at a Washington DC news conference conducted by self-described Iranian dissidents descended into chaos as audience members and two journalists accused the speakers of spreading disinformation and being agents of Iranian intelligence.
• Yahoo News reported on a counter-protest in Berlin to the Iran sponsored anti-Israel demonstration. Photos.
  

Iran and the International community.

• James G. Forsyth, Foreign Policy reported that British Prime Minister Tony Blair has decided to play hardball with Iran.
• The Peninsula reported that Iran yesterday rallied behind Syria, its only regional ally, by praising Damascus for cooperating with a UN probe into the killing of former Lebanese premier Rafiq Hariri.
• Golnaz Esfandiari, Radio Free Europe examined Iran's struggle to influence the region.
• Saul Singer, The Jerusalem Post asked how can it be that, four years after 9/11, there has been no attempt to impose international sanctions on Iran and Syria?
  

Insight into the Iranian people.

• ET, A View from Iran provided interesting insight into the Iranian attitude towards the regime's mandated public Ramadan fast. During Ramadan in Iran, you can’t eat or drink in public unless you are a traveler or are sick.
• Iran Press News reported that the nurses in private wards are living under the poverty line.
• Iran Press News reported that 15 million people, equal to 21% of the population in Iran, suffer from some form of mental illness, mainly depression.
  

Can You Believe This?

• Iran Press News reported shiny objects are appearing in the skies of Tabas (Province of Yazd).
  

Must Read reports.

• Memri.org published an English translation of the Iranian President's speech at Tehran "World without Zionism" Conference.
  
• George Melloan, The Wall Street Journal reported on the ramifications of the UN report on the murder of Lebanese leader Rafik Hariri for Syria. PLUS we have found of the UN report.
• Dan Darling, Regnum Crucis reported that a German Publication, known to have published German secrets in the past, claims Al Qaeda leaders operate freely in Iran.
• Ali Nourizadeh, Asharq Al-Awsat reported that Washington is examining ways of forcing Iran to drop its Nuclear Program. A must read.
  

The Experts.

• Amir Taheri, Jerusalem Post encourages the new leaders in Iraq to get their act together soon.
• Michael Ledeen, The National Review reported on our earlier report of Ahmadinejad's cabinet's agreement with the "12th Imam," the Islamic savior who allegedly has been in hiding for centuries in a well in Isfhan. A must read for policy makers.
• Michael Rubin, The Middle East Forum argued that nowhere has engagement failed so starkly as with Europe's dialogue with Iran.
• Amir Taheri, Gulf News discussed the problems facing the United Nations Security Council as it ponders what to do with Syria in the aftermath of the Detlev Mehlis report.
• Amir Taheri, Asharq Alawsat News warned Syria to ignore recent calls by Iran to resist Western pressure for change.
• Amir Taheri, The New York Post reminded us that the new president of the Islamic Republic, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, described Israel as "a stain of shame that has sullied the purity of Islam," and promised that it would be "cleansed very soon."
  

Photos, cartoons and videos.

• Winston, The Spirit of Man published videos of Americans in Iran. Worthwhile viewing.
  
• Another cartoon on Iran's Nuclear Program.
• Cox & Forkum published a cartoon: Ahmadinejad's Final Solution.
• Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi sent a photo showing Ahmadinejad's speech is nothing new.A Photo of Rafsanjani, showing his support of Ahmadinejad's stand on Israel, participating in the anti-Israel, Quds Day, march in Iran.
  

And finally, The Quote of the Week.

The world media has largely ignored his statements against the USA. In his speech he said:

We are in the process of an historical war between the World of Arrogance [i.e. the West] and the Islamic world, and this war has been going on for hundreds of years. ...

The issue of this [World without Zionism] conference is very valuable. In this very grave war, many people are trying to scatter grains of desperation and hopelessness regarding the struggle between the Islamic world and the front of the infidels ...

Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism? But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved..

A visual prop used at the event speaks a thousand words.

Sunday's Daily Briefing on Iran

DoctorZin reports, 10.29.2005:

Why Haven't We Seen This?

If you follow the news you may have seen this picture, of Iran's President Ahmadinejad speaking at the "World Without Zionism" conference where he spoke of wiping "Israel off the map."

But in this photo you can only see a portion of the graphic. The rest of the graphic speaks a thousand words. READ MORE

Here are a few other news items you may have missed.

• Dow Jones Newswires reported that Iran hit back Saturday at the U.N. Security Council after the world body condemned President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's call for Israel to be destroyed.
• The White House released a transcript of President Bush's Speech where he shares his view of the war on terror.
• Saul Singer, The Jerusalem Post asked how can it be that, four years after 9/11, there has been no attempt to impose international sanctions on Iran and Syria?
• The Telegraph reported on the return to hard rhetoric dashes the hope of ending the crisis.
• Yahoo News reported on a counter-protest in Berlin to the Iran sponsored anti-Israel demonstration. Photos.
• And finally, The Voice of America News reported that Iran says it stands by its U.N. commitments not to use violence against another country.

Why Haven't We Seen This?

If you follow the news you may have seen this picture, of Iran's President Ahmadinejad speaking at the "World Without Zionism" conference where he spoke of wiping "Israel off the map."
But in this photo you can only see a portion of the graphic. The rest of the graphic speaks a thousand words.



The Iranian government produced sophisticated visual props for this important speech, designed to send a message to the USA and the English speaking world. Those who produced this graphic were sophisticated enough to know that it would provide a great photo op.

What is the message they are trying to send?


Yes, that is the USA already at the bottom of the hourglass.

But notice that the USA is already broken in the bottom of the hourglass prior to the fall of Israel.



For some reason the world media has largely ignored his statements against the USA. In his speech he said:

We are in the process of an historical war between the World of Arrogance [i.e. the West] and the Islamic world, and this war has been going on for hundreds of years. ...

The issue of this [World without Zionism] conference is very valuable. In this very grave war, many people are trying to scatter grains of desperation and hopelessness regarding the struggle between the Islamic world and the front of the infidels ...

Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism? But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved...

So how would the Iranian regime achieve this?

You only need to listen to Ahmadinejad's chief strategic guru Hassan Abbassi, for the answer. Abbassi is the architect of the so-called "war preparation plan" currently under way in Iran. This is the same Hassan Abbassi who said:

We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization... we must make use of everything we have at hand to strike at this front by means of our suicide operations or by means of our missiles. There are 29 sensitive sites in the U.S. and in the West. We have already spied on these sites and we know how we are going to attack them.

Abbasi believes that when President Bush says that no option is off the table he is only playing chicken. According to respected Iranian analyst, Amir Taheri, Abbassi has said:

The Americans are not ready to send a million men (to defeat the Islamic Republic)," Abbasi said. "Even economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic will fail thanks to opposition from the Western public opinion and the refusal of most countries to implement (them). ...

But it is not only the US that Abbasi wants to take on and humiliate. He has described Britain as "the mother of all evils". In his lecture he claimed that the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, and the Gulf states were all "children of the same mother: the British Empire." As for France and Germany, they are "countries in terminal decline", according to Abbasi.

"Once we have defeated the Anglo-Saxons the rest will run for cover," he told his audience.

So it appears that in the short term, the regime is hoping to start a limited war with the USA that it believes it can survive, since they don't believe that the West has the will nor the means to occupy Iran at this time. This will buy them time for their longer term strategic plans for the world. Why is no taking these threats seriously?

The vast majority of the people of Iran do not share his views and long for real democracy in Iran. How long will we wait to support the people of Iran in their struggle to free themselves from these dangerous mad men?

Update: Some people have alledged that the photos are fake. I found the photos on several news sites.

Here are the original links to these photos.

• The hourglass poster was actually cropped from this photo:
• This is one that I did not use of Ahmadinejad in front of the graphic blown up behind him:
• Yahoo News published this photo of Ahmadinejad standing in front of the hourglass graphic, here. There were other Yahoo News photos but they have expired.

I later provided these photos for use in a U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: Subcommittee Hearings, see here.

Iran Rejects UN Condemnation of President Anti-Israel Remarks

Dow Jones Newswires:

Iran hit back Saturday at the U.N. Security Council after the world body condemned President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's call for Israel to be destroyed. The Security Council issued a statement Friday reminding Iran that, according to the U.N. Charter, member states must refrain from threatening the use of force against each other.

"The statement by the president of the UN Security Council was proposed by the Zionist regime to close the eyes to its crimes and to change the facts, therefore it is not acceptable," Iran's Foreign Ministry said in a statement. READ MORE

"Iran is loyal to its commitments based on the U.N. charter and it has never used or threatened to use force against any country," the statement added.

On Wednesday, Ahmadinejad demanded the Jewish state be "wiped off the map" and defended the call Friday during nationwide protests.

Ahmadinejad's comments drew wide international criticism.

Iran's Foreign Ministry said the international community was treating Iran unfairly, accusing it of not coming to Tehran's defense any time it comes under attack from the U.S. or Israel over claims it is developing nuclear weapons or supporting Islamic militants.

"How many sessions were held by the Security Council over the U.S. and Israeli threats against Iran?" the Foreign Ministry statement read.

Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's supreme national security council, said the intense opposition from the West to Ahmadinejad's comments stem from the campaign against its nuclear program.

"The reactions to Ahmadinejad's comment showed that the diplomatic machines of some Western countries are influenced by the hue and cry of propaganda," state- run Iran radio said in a commentary.

Ahmadinejad became president in August after winning elections two months earlier. He replaced Mohammad Khatami, a reformist who advocated international dialogue and tried to improve relations with the West.

Iran announced earlier this year that it had fully developed solid fuel technology for missiles, a major breakthrough that increases their accuracy. The Shahab-3, with a range of 810 miles to more than 1,200 miles, is capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to Israel and U.S. forces in the Middle East.

President Discusses War on Terror

Office of the Press Secretary, The White House:

The President shares his view of the war on terror. READ MORE
Chrysler Hall

Norfolk, Virginia

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. (Applause.) Thank you all very much. Please be seated. Thanks for the warm welcome. Thanks for the chance to get out of Washington. (Laughter.)

It is great to be here in the Commonwealth of Virginia. (Applause.) You had a lot of history in this part of the world. This part of the country was home to the first English-speaking colony on the continent, birthplace of representative government in America, and the site of George Washington's victory in the Revolutionary War. I call him the first George W. (Laughter and applause.)

In the 21st century, the tradition of patriotism and freedom still runs strong here in the Hampton Roads. I know there's a lot of folks here in our military who live here, and I know there's a lot of veterans live here. So the first thing I want to say is to those who wear the uniform, this country is with you, and the Commander-in-Chief is incredibly proud of you. (Applause.) And to the veterans, thanks for setting such a good example. I'm proud of your service. (Applause.)

Dee, thanks for the introduction, and thanks for the invitation. I want to thank Jack Hornbeck, as well. I appreciate so very much the Senator from the great state, or the Commonwealth of Virginia, is here, George Allen. Thanks for coming, George. (Applause.) And Congresswoman Thelma Drake is with us. Thanks for coming. I appreciate you being here, honored you're here. (Applause.)

Mayor, thanks for coming. I appreciate Mayor Fraim. Here's here from the city of Norfolk. He's a -- the only thing I told him is -- he didn't ask for my advice, but I gave it anyway, I said, fill the potholes. (Laughter and applause.) Thanks for serving. I appreciate you're serving, Mayor. Thanks for greeting me today. I want to thank all the local and state officials who've joined us.

I want to thank the military commanders who are here: Lieutenant General Anthony Jones, and Lieutenant General Mark Curran, Lieutenant General Bob Wagner, Major General Jim Soligan. Thank you all for being here.

John McCarthy, Major General McCarthy of the Marine Corps; Rear Admiral John Acton; Rear Admiral Steve Turcotte -- I'm honored you all took time to come.

I appreciate the foreign officers here. I appreciate you being here. I appreciate the jointness that we're working on, and the transformation they're working on together to make sure that we're able to keep the peace. This is an important mission. I want to thank Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope. He's the Deputy Supreme Allied Commander of Transformation in the United Kingdom's Royal Navy. I appreciate Lieutenant General Michel Maisonneuve*. She's in the Canadian Air Force. She's NATO Headquarters Supreme Allied Commander Transformation Chief of Staff. Thank you all for being here. Thanks for being such strong allies in the cause of peace. (Applause.)

I appreciate the vibrancy of the community in which you live. This is a good place to live. It's a good place to find work. It's a good place to realize your dreams. It's a place where people understand that in order to make sure that our society stays vibrant and people can realize their dreams, we got to face squarely the threats that our nation deals with. People here, I think, understand this fact -- that America is engaged in the first war of the 21st century, and that the stakes could not be higher.

On the morning of September the 11, 2001, we saw the destruction that terrorists intend for this nation. We know they want to strike again. And our nation has made a clear choice: We will confront this mortal danger to all humanity. And we will not tire and we will not rest until the war on terror is won. (Applause.)

In the four years since September the 11th, the evil that reached our shores has reappeared on other days, in other places -- in Mombasa and Casablanca and Riyadh and Jakarta and Istanbul and Madrid, in Beslan and Taba and Netanya and Baghdad, and elsewhere. In the past few months, we have seen a new terror offensive with attacks on London, and Sharm el-Sheikh, and a deadly bombing in Bali once again.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Mr. President, war is terror.

AUDIENCE: Booo!

THE PRESIDENT: All these separate images of destruction and suffering that we see on the news can seem like random and isolated acts of madness. Innocent men, women, and children have died simply because they boarded the wrong train, or worked in the wrong building. They have died because they checked into the wrong hotel. Yet while the killers choose their victims indiscriminately, their attacks serve a clear and focused ideology -- a set of beliefs and goals that are evil, but not insane.

Some call this evil Islamic radicalism; others, militant Jihadism; and still others, Islamo-fascism. Whatever it's called, this ideology is very different from the religion of Islam. This form of radicalism exploits Islam to serve a violent and political vision: the establishment, by terrorism, subversion and insurgency, of a totalitarian empire that denies all political and religious freedom. These extremists distort the idea of jihad into a call for terrorist murder against Christians and Hindus and Jews -- and also against Muslims who do not share their radical vision, whom they regard as heretics.

Many militants are part of a global, borderless terrorist organizations like al Qaeda -- which spreads propaganda and provides financing and technical assistance to local extremists, and conducts dramatic and brutal operations like the attacks of September the 11th. Other militants are found in regional groups, often associated with al Qaeda -- paramilitary insurgencies and separatist movements in places like Somalia, the Philippines and Pakistan and Chechnya and Kashmir and Algeria. Still others spring up in local cells -- inspired by Islamic radicalism, but not centrally controlled or directed. Islamic radicalism is more like a loose network with military branches than an army under a single command. Yet these operatives, fighting on scattered battlefields, share a similar ideology and vision for our world.

We know the vision of the radicals because they have openly stated it -- in videos, in audiotapes and letters and declarations and websites.

First, these extremists want to end American and Western influence in the broader Middle East, because we stand for democracy and peace, and we stand in the way of their ambitions. Al Qaeda's leader, Osama bin Laden, has called on Muslims to dedicate, their "resources, sons and money to driving the infidels out of their lands." The tactics of al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists have been consistent for a quarter-century: They hit us, and they expect us to run. Earlier this month, the world learned of a letter written by al Qaeda's number two leader, a man named Zawahiri. He wrote this letter to his chief deputy in Iraq -- the terrorist Zarqawi. In it, Zawahiri points to the Vietnam War as a model for al Qaeda. Zawahiri writes, "The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam -- and how they ran and left their agents -- is noteworthy." The terrorists witnessed a similar response after the attacks on American troops in Beirut in 1983 and Mogadishu in 1993. They believe that America can be made to run again -- only this time on a larger scale, with greater consequences.

Second, the militant network wants to use the vacuum created by an American retreat to gain control of a country -- a base from which to launch attacks and to conduct their war against non-radical Muslim governments. Over the past few decades, radicals have specifically targeted Egypt and Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and Jordan for potential takeover. They achieved their goal, for a time, in Afghanistan. And now they have set their sights on Iraq. In his recent letter, Zawahiri writes that al Qaeda views Iraq as, "the place for the greatest battle." The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war against humanity. And we must recognize Iraq as the central front in our war against terror.

Third, these militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region, and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia. Zawahiri writes that the terrorists, "must not have their mission end with the expulsion of Americans from Iraq." He goes on to say: "[T]he jihad ... requires several incremental goals. ... Expel the Americans from Iraq. ... Establish an Islamic authority over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq... Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq." With the greater economic, military and political power they seek, the terrorists would be able to advance their stated agenda: to develop weapons of mass destruction, to destroy Israel, to intimidate Europe, to assault the American people, and to blackmail our government into isolation.

Some might be tempted to dismiss these goals as fanatical or extreme. They are fanatical and extreme, but they should not be dismissed. Our enemy is utterly committed. As Zawahiri [sic] has vowed, "We will either achieve victory over the human race or we will pass to the eternal life." And the civilized world knows very well that other fanatics in history, from Hitler to Stalin to Pol Pot, consumed whole nations in war and genocide before leaving the stage of history. Evil men, obsessed with ambition and unburdened by conscience, must be taken very seriously -- and we must stop them before their crimes can multiply. (Applause.)

Defeating the militant network is difficult, because it thrives, like a parasite, on the suffering and frustration of others. The radicals exploit local conflicts to build a culture of victimization, in which someone else is always to blame and violence is always the solution. They exploit resentful and disillusioned young men and women -- recruiting them through radical mosques as pawns of terror. And they exploit modern technology to multiply their destructive power. Instead of attending far-away training camps, recruits can now access online training libraries to learn how to build a roadside bomb or fire a rocket-propelled grenade -- and this further spreads the threat of violence, even within peaceful democratic societies.

The influence of Islamic radicalism is also magnified by helpers and enablers. They have been sheltered by authoritarian regimes -- allies of convenience like Syria and Iran -- that share the goal of hurting America and moderate Muslim governments, and that use terrorist propaganda to blame their own failures on the West, on America, and on the Jews. The radicals depend on front operations, such as corrupted charities, which direct money to terrorist activity. They are strengthened by those who aggressively fund the spread of radical and intolerant versions of Islam in unstable parts of the world. The militants are aided as well by elements of the Arab news media that incite hatred and anti-Semitism, that feed conspiracy theories, and speak of a so-called American "war on Islam" -- with seldom a word about American action to protect Muslims in Afghanistan, and Bosnia, and Somalia, and Kosovo, and Kuwait, and Iraq, and with seldom a word about our generous assistance to Muslims recovering from natural disasters in places like Indonesia and Pakistan.

Some have also argued that extremism has been strengthened by the actions of our Coalition in Iraq -- claiming that our presence in that country has somehow caused or triggered the rage of radicals. I would remind them that we were not in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001 -- and al Qaeda attacked us anyway. (Applause.) The hatred of the radicals existed before Iraq was an issue, and it will exist after Iraq is no longer an excuse. The government of Russia did not support Operation Iraqi Freedom -- and yet the militants killed more than 150 Russian schoolchildren in Beslan. Over the years these extremists have used a litany of excuses for violence -- the Israeli presence on the West Bank, or the U.S. presence in Saudi Arabia, or the defeat of the Taliban, or the Crusades of a thousand years ago.

In fact, we're not facing a set of grievances that can be soothed and addressed. We're facing a radical ideology with inalterable objectives: to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world. No act of ours invited the rage of killers -- and no consequence, bribe, or act of appeasement would change or limit their plans of murder. On the contrary: they target nations whose behavior they believe they can change through violence. Against such an enemy, there is only one effective response: We will never back down, never give in, and never accept anything less than complete victory. (Applause.)

The murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals is the great challenge of our new century. Yet in many ways, this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century.

Like the ideology of communism, Islamic radicalism is elitist -- led by a self-appointed vanguard that presumes to speak for the Muslim masses. Bin Laden says his own role is to tell Muslims, "what is good for them and what is not." And what this man who grew up in wealth and privilege considers good for poor Muslims is that they become killers and suicide bombers. He assures them that this is the road to paradise -- though he never offers to go along for the ride. (Laughter.)

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy teaches that innocent individuals can be sacrificed to serve a political vision. And this explains their cold-blooded contempt for human life. We have seen it in the murders of Daniel Pearl, Nicholas Berg, and Margaret Hassan, and many others. In a courtroom in the Netherlands, the killer of Theo Van Gogh turned to the victim's grieving mother and said, "I don't feel your pain, because I believe you are an infidel." And in spite of this veneer of religious rhetoric, most of the victims claimed by the militants are fellow Muslims. In an al Qaeda attack on two Baghdad hotels this week, the targets were journalists and innocent Iraqis. When unsuspecting hotel guests are blown up in their rooms, or 25 Iraqi children are killed in a bombing, or Iraqi teachers are executed at their schools, or hospital workers are killed caring for the wounded, this is murder, pure and simple -- the total rejection of justice and honor and morality and religion. (Applause.) These militants are not just the enemies of America or the enemies of Iraq, they are the enemies of Islam and the enemies of humanity. And we have seen this kind of shameless cruelty before -- in the heartless zealotry that led to the gulags, the Cultural Revolution, and the killing fields.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy pursues totalitarian aims. Its leaders pretend to be an aggrieved party, representing the powerless against imperial enemies. In truth, they have endless ambitions of imperial domination -- and they wish to make everyone powerless except themselves. Under their rule, they have banned books, and desecrated historical monuments, and brutalized women. They seek to end dissent in every form, to control every aspect of life, and to rule the soul itself. While promising a future of justice and holiness, the terrorists are preparing a future of oppression and misery.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy is dismissive of free peoples -- claiming that men and women who live in liberty are weak and decadent. Zarqawi has said that Americans are, "the most cowardly of God's creatures." But let us be clear. It is cowardice that seeks to kill children and the elderly with car bombs, and cuts the throat of a bound captive, and targets worshipers leaving a mosque. It is courage that liberated more than 50 million people from tyranny. It is courage that keeps an untiring vigil against the enemies of a rising democracy. And it is courage in the cause of freedom that will once again destroy the enemies of freedom. (Applause.)

And Islamic radicalism, like the ideology of communism, contains inherent contradictions that doom it to failure. By fearing freedom -- by distrusting human creativity, and punishing change, and limiting the contributions of half of the population -- this ideology undermines the very qualities that make human progress possible, and human societies successful. The only thing modern about the militants' vision is the weapons they want to use against us. The rest of their grim vision is defined by a warped image of the past -- a declaration of war on the idea of progress itself. And whatever lies ahead in the war against this ideology, the outcome is not in doubt: those who despise freedom and progress have condemned themselves to isolation, decline, and collapse. Because free peoples believe in the future, free peoples will own the future. (Applause.)

We didn't ask for this global struggle, but we are answering history's call with confidence, and a comprehensive strategy. Defeating a broad and adaptive network requires patience and constant pressure and strong partners in Europe, in the Middle East, and North Africa, and Asia and beyond. Working with these partners, we are disrupting militant conspiracies, destroying their ability to make war, and are working to give millions in a troubled region of the world a hopeful alternative to resentment and violence.

First, we're determined to prevent the attacks of terrorist networks before they occur. We are reorganizing the government to give this nation a broad and coordinated homeland defense. We are reforming our intelligence agencies for the incredibly difficult task of tracking enemy activity -- based on information that often comes in small fragments from widely scattered sources, both here and abroad. And we're acting, along with governments from many countries, to destroy the terrorist networks and incapacitate their leaders.

Together with our coalition partners, we have disrupted a number of serious al Qaeda plots since September the 11th -- including several al Qaeda plots to attack inside the United States. Our coalition against terror has killed or captured nearly all those directly responsible for the September the 11th attacks; we've killed or captured most of bin Laden's most senior deputies; al Qaeda's managers and operatives in more than 24 countries; the mastermind of the U.S.S. Cole bombing, who was the chief al Qaeda operations -- chief of al Qaeda operations in the Persian Gulf; we captured the mastermind of the bombings in Jakarta and Bali; a senior Zarqawi terrorist planner, who was planning attacks in Turkey; and many of al Qaeda's senior leaders in Saudi Arabia. Because of this steady progress, the enemy is wounded, but the enemy is still capable of global operations. Our commitment is clear: We will not relent until the organized international terror networks are exposed and broken, and until their leaders are held to account for their murder. (Applause.)

Secondly, we're determined to deny weapons of mass destruction to outlaw regimes, and to their terrorist allies who would use them without hesitation. The United States, working with Great Britain and Pakistan and other nations, has exposed and disrupted a major black-market operation in nuclear technology led by A.Q. Khan. Libya has abandoned its chemical and nuclear weapons programs, as well as its long-range ballistic missiles. And in the last year, America and our partners in the Proliferation Security Initiative have stopped more than a dozen shipments of suspected weapons technology -- including equipment for Iran's ballistic missile program. This progress has reduced the danger to free nations, but it has not removed it. Evil men who want to use horrendous weapons against us are working in deadly earnest to gain them. And we are working urgently to keep weapons of mass murder out of the hands of the fanatics.

Third, we're determined to deny radical groups the support and sanctuary of outlaw regimes. State sponsors like Syria and Iran have a long history of collaboration with terrorists -- and they deserve no patience from the victims of terror. The United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and those who support and harbor them -- because they are equally guilty of murder. (Applause.)

Fourth, we're determined to deny the militants control of any nation, which they would use as a home base and a launching pad for terror. This mission has brought new and urgent responsibilities to our Armed Forces -- and to all of you. American troops are fighting beside Afghan partners with [sic] remnants of the Taliban and their al Qaeda allies. We are working with President Musharraf to oppose and isolate the militants in Pakistan. We're fighting the regime remnants and terrorists in Iraq. The terrorist goal is to overthrow a rising democracy, claim a strategic country as a haven for terror, destabilize the Middle East, and strike America and free nations with ever-increasing violence. That's their goal. Our goal is to defeat the terrorists and their allies at the heart of their power -- so we will defeat the enemy in Iraq. (Applause.)

Our coalition, along with our Iraqi allies, is moving forward with a comprehensive plan. As Secretary Rice explained last week, our strategy is to clear, hold, and build. We are working to clear areas from terrorist control, to hold those areas securely, and to build lasting and democratic Iraqi institutions. In recent weeks, American and Iraqi troops have conducted several major assaults to clear out enemy fighters in Western Iraq, and to help shut down terrorist entry routes from Syria. During one raid, our forces killed a Zarqawi henchman named Abu Abdullah, who was responsible for attacks on American troops and innocent Iraqis. We also killed a terrorist named Abu Dua, who had been helping terrorists enter Iraq from Syria. Thousands of Iraqi forces have been participating in our operations, and many have remained in the cities along with coalition forces to hold onto our gains and prevent the enemy from returning. Iraqi forces are using their local expertise to maintain security, and make tangible improvements in the lives of their fellow Iraqis.

At the same time, Iraqis are making inspiring progress toward building a lasting democracy. Earlier this month, millions of Iraqis turned out to vote on a constitution that guarantees fundamental freedoms and lays the foundation for lasting democracy. And this week the Iraqi elections commission certified passage of that constitution. Many more Sunnis participated in this vote than in January's historic elections, and the level of violence was dramatically lower. With their courageous vote, the Iraqis have once again proved their determination to build a democracy united against extremism and violence. An 85-year-old Iraqi woman cast a ballot in favor of the constitution after her son carried her to the polls on his back. And here's what she said, "I went out to vote for it because I want the future to be safe and peaceful for my sons and my grandchildren."

The work ahead involves great risk for Iraqis and for American and coalition forces. We have lost some of the nation's finest men and women in the war on terror. Each of these men and women left grieving families and left loved ones back home. Each of these patriots left a legacy that will allow generations of their fellow Americans to enjoy the blessings of liberty. Each loss is heartbreaking. And the best way to honor the sacrifices of our fallen troops is to complete the mission and lay the foundation of peace by spreading freedom. (Applause.)

Wars are not won without sacrifice -- and this war will require more sacrifice, more time, and more resolve. The terrorists are as brutal an enemy as we have ever faced -- unconstrained by any notion of common humanity or by the rules of warfare. No one should underestimate the difficulties ahead -- nor should they overlook the advantages we bring to this fight.

Some observers look at the job ahead and adopt a self-defeating pessimism. It is not justified. With every random bombing and with every funeral of a child, it becomes more clear that the extremists are not patriots or resistance fighters -- they are murderers at war with the Iraqi people themselves. In contrast, the elected leaders of Iraq are proving to be strong and steadfast. By any standard or precedent of history, Iraq has made incredible political progress -- from tyranny, to liberation, to national elections, to the ratification of a constitution -- in the space of two-and-a-half years. With our help, the Iraqi military is gaining new capabilities and new confidence with every passing month. At the time of our Fallujah operations nearly a year ago, there were only a few Iraqi army battalions in combat. Today there are nearly 90 Iraqi army battalions fighting the terrorists alongside our forces. General David Petraeus says, "Iraqis are in the fight. They are fighting and dying for their country, and they are fighting increasingly well," he says. The progress isn't easy, but it is steady. And no fair-minded person should ignore or deny or dismiss the achievements of the Iraqi people. (Applause.)

Some observers question the durability of democracy in Iraq. They underestimate the power and appeal of freedom. We've heard it suggested that Iraq's democracy must be on shaky ground, because Iraqis are arguing with each other. (Laughter.) But that's the essence of democracy: you make your case, you debate with those you disagree with, you build a consensus by persuasion, and you answer to the will of the people. (Applause.) We've heard it said that the Shia, the Sunnis, and the Kurds of Iraq are too divided to form a lasting democracy. In fact, democratic federalism is the best hope for unifying a diverse population -- because a federal constitutional system respects the rights and religious traditions of all citizens, while giving all minorities, including the Sunnis, a stake and a voice in the future of their country. (Applause.) It is true that the seeds of freedom have only recently been planted in Iraq, but democracy, when it grows, is not a fragile flower, it's a healthy, sturdy tree. As Americans, we believe that people everywhere prefer freedom to slavery, and that liberty, once chosen, improves the lives of all. And so we're confident: As our coalition and the Iraqi people each do their part, Iraqi democracy will succeed. (Applause.)

Some observers also claim that America would be better off by cutting our losses and leaving Iraq now. This is a dangerous illusion, refuted with a simple question: Would the United States and other free nations be more safe, or less safe, with Zarqawi and bin Laden in control of Iraq, its people, and its resources? Having removed a dictator who hated free peoples, we will not stand by as a new set of killers -- dedicated to the destruction of our country -- seizes control of Iraq by violence. (Applause.) There is always a temptation, in the middle of a long struggle, to seek the quiet life, to escape the duties and problems in the world, and to hope the enemy grows weary of fanaticism and tired of murder. That would be a pleasant world -- but it's not the world we live in. The enemy is never tired, never sated, never content with yesterday's brutality. This enemy considers every retreat of the civilized world as an invitation to greater violence. In Iraq, there is no peace without victory -- and so we will keep our nerve and win that victory. (Applause.)

The fifth element of our strategy in the war on terror is to deny the militants future recruits by replacing hatred and resentment with democracy and hope across the broader Middle East. This is a difficult and long-term project, yet there is no alternative to it. Our future and the future of that region are linked. If the broader Middle East is left to grow in bitterness -- if countries remain in misery, while radicals stir the resentments of millions -- then that part of the world will be a source of endless conflict and mounting danger, in our generation and for the next. If the peoples of that region are permitted to choose their own destiny, and advance by their own energy and participation as free men and women, then the extremists will be marginalized, and the flow of violent radicalism to the rest of the world will slow, and eventually end. By standing for the hope and freedom of others, we make our own freedom more secure. (Applause.)

America is making this stand in practical ways. We are encouraging our friends in the Middle East, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to take the path of reform -- to strengthen their own societies in the fight against terror by respecting the rights and choices of their people. We are standing with dissidents and exiles against oppressive regimes, because we know that the dissidents of today will be the democratic leaders of tomorrow. We are making our case through public diplomacy -- stating clearly and confidently our belief in self-determination, and the rule of law, and religious freedom, and equal rights for women -- beliefs that are right and true in every land, and in every culture.

And as we do our part to confront radicalism, we know that the most vital work will be done within the Islamic world itself. And this work has begun. Many Muslim scholars have publicly condemned terrorism, often citing chapter 5, verse 32 of the Koran, which states that killing an innocent human being is like killing all of humanity, and saving the life of one person is like saving all of humanity. After the attacks in London on July the 7th, an imam in the United Arab Emirates declared, "Whoever does such a thing is not a Muslim, nor a religious person." The time has come for all responsible Islamic leaders to join in denouncing an ideology that exploits Islam for political ends, and defiles a noble faith.

Many people of the Muslim faith are proving their commitment at great personal risk. Everywhere we have engaged the fight against extremism, Muslim allies have stood up and joined the fight, becoming partners in a vital cause. Afghan troops are in combat against Taliban remnants. Iraqi soldiers are sacrificing to defeat al Qaeda in their country. These brave citizens know the stakes -- the survival of their own liberty, the future of their own region, the justice and humanity of their own tradition -- and we are proud to stand beside them. (Applause.)

With the rise of a deadly enemy and the unfolding of a global ideological struggle, our time in history will be remembered for new challenges and unprecedented dangers. And yet the fight we have joined is also the current expression of an ancient struggle -- between those who put their faith in dictators, and those who put their faith in the people. Throughout history, tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that murder is justified to serve their grand vision -- and they end up alienating decent people across the globe. Tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that regimented societies are strong and pure -- until those societies collapse in corruption and decay. And tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that free men and women are weak and decadent --until the day that free men and women defeat them.

We don't know the course of our own struggle, where it will take us, or the sacrifices that might lie ahead. But we do know, however, that the defense of freedom is worth our sacrifice. We do know the love of freedom is the mightiest force of history. And we do know the cause of freedom will once again prevail. (Applause.)

Thank you for having me. May God bless you all.

END 10:52 A.M. EDT

* Correction: Lieutenant-General J.O. Michel Maisonneuve is the Chief of Staff of NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Transformation HQ. He is based in Norfolk, Virginia.

A great speech, but I have one concern. The President makes a distinction between the Islamo terrorists we are at war with and the rogue nations supporting them. He warns about the need to keep these terrorists from having control of one country, because:

With the greater economic, military and political power they seek, the terrorists would be able to advance their stated agenda: to develop weapons of mass destruction, to destroy Israel, to intimidate Europe, to assault the American people, and to blackmail our government into isolation.

Islamo terrorists already have control of one nation, Iran, and they have been advancing the same stated goals. Why the distinction and when will we focus on them?

Interesting Times: Broaden the war

Saul Singer, The Jerusalem Post:

On the face of it, George Bush's foreign policy is extremely controversial, even within the US. Brent Scowcroft, dean of the "realist" school and close adviser to Bush's father, is bitterly opposed to it, as is a good chunk of the American electorate. All this is strange since, structurally speaking, there is a much greater consensus now regarding the war against militant Islam than there was during the Cold War, or even just before World War II.

Throughout the half-century stand-off between the US and the Soviet Union, there were two fundamentally opposed schools of thought about the conflict. One side thought the Soviets could be accommodated and that most, if not all, of the conflict was due to misunderstandings that could be worked out. The other believed in "peace through strength," which meant that Soviet aggression could either be deterred and contained (the "realist" school) or, more radically, that the Soviets could be relegated to the "ash heap of history," as Ronald Reagan put it in his 1982 Westminster speech.

"The West won't contain communism," Reagan said in 1981, eight years before the Berlin Wall fell. "It will transcend communism. It won't bother to... denounce it; it will dismiss it as some bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages are even now being written."

This was considered as absurd and utopian then as Bush's talk of democracy for the Arab world is now. Yet while Bush is widely considered not to be anchored in reality, there is a striking contrast between the debate now and in Reagan's time.

Now the accommodationist school, mainstream during the Cold War, is on the fringe. Few people are seriously suggesting that al-Qaida has grievances that should be addressed. No one is suggesting handing the Islamists territory, as was done to appease Hitler.

A measure of the difference is that many of Bush's liberal opponents actually advocate putting more troops in Iraq. They see the Iraq war as misdirection of effort, rather that arguing that any common ground could have been found with Saddam.

It is only lately, in fact, that the "anti-war" school - misnamed as it was during the Cold War, as if whether to be at war was a choice of the West - has been tilting toward believing that Iraq is unwinnable and Iran should be accommodated. This is a worrisome sign that the Cold War pattern is returning - a mold in which the debate is not over how to win, but whether victory is even an option.

The continued advance of democracy in Iraq, with this week's passage of a new constitution in which Iraqis once again risked their lives to reject terrorism, could begin to turn this debate around. But something else is necessary besides an improved situation on the ground. The war has gotten off track, but not in the manner critics usually imagine. Bush's problem is not too much ambition, but too much concentrated in one place.

While it is true that Bush, in his second inaugural address, spoke of ending tyranny everywhere, in practice his foreign policy is perceived, both by proponents and by the terrorists seeking to defeat it, as being focused on bringing democracy to Iraq. By placing the goal of democracy at the center, Bush has set the bar high, but mainly in one country. Remaining rogue regimes seem to be largely off the hook while the fighting in Iraq rages.

THIS MAY seem like a strange thing to write in a week in which the US is seeking UN Security Council sanctions against Syria in the wake of the Mehlis report implicating that regime in the Hariri assassination. But this is the exception that proves the rule. The US is not systematically seeking a change in the international rules of the game.

Even in the case of Syria, the US-backed draft UN resolution seems to be focused on gaining access to the Syrian officials named by Mehlis, not at punishing Syria for supporting terrorism against Israel and in Iraq.

The Bush administration has removed two terrorist regimes but, oddly enough, has not persistently sought an across-the-board change in approach toward regimes that support terrorism. How can it be that, four years after 9/11, there has been no attempt to impose international sanctions on Iran and Syria, not to mention other implicated countries like Saudi Arabia, for supporting or abetting terrorism?

The presumed refusal of Europe to go along is an explanation, but not an excuse. The Mehlis report demonstrated that even a relatively difficult-to-trace act of aggression - the Hariri assassination - could be pinned on the Syrian regime, given a modicum of international determination.

The US should be seeking a similar report documenting something much easier to prove: that the Iranian and Syrian governments are systematically engaged in illegal international aggression.

If such a report is not being sought, we all know why: because some combination of the US, UK, France and Germany are not ready to hold these regimes accountable for their crimes.

There is no reason why the situation in Iraq should be allowed to distract from such a project. On the contrary, Iranian and Syrian involvement in Iraq would be a central count in the charge sheet against those regimes. Putting these regimes on the defensive - as holding them accountable for aggression would do - is central to winning in Iraq as well.

For all the talk about a "war against terrorism," it is hard to argue that such a war is being fought seriously when some regimes still support terror as obviously as they did before 9/11 and pay no price for it.

This is not a game of evidence, as if the US needs a "smoking gun" to prove to France and Germany what these regimes are up to. It is a matter of persuading those governments that the time has come to use non-military means, at least, to impose high costs on these regimes for what everyone knows they are doing. READ MORE

saul@jpost.com

- Editorial Page Editor Saul Singer is author of the book, Confronting Jihad: Israel's Struggle & the World After 9/11

Return to Hard Rhetoric Dashes Hope of End to Crisis

Tim Butcher, The Telegraph UK:

Iran was on a collision course with the West yesterday as its president defied a diplomatic onslaught led by Washington and London to withdraw his calls for Israel to be "wiped off the map".

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, supported by more than a million of his countrymen attending annual anti-Israel protest rallies in all major cities across Iran, said he stood by his remarks.

The president marched alongside a mob of noisy students in Teheran waving placards carrying the exact words he used at an anti-Zionism rally earlier this week, and mocked Israel's strongest supporter, the United States.

"They become upset when they hear any voice of truth-seeking, " he said. "They think they are the absolute rulers of the world."

By returning so bluntly to the old anti-Israel rhetoric common during Iran's Islamic Revolution of 1979, the president has radically changed Iran's relations with the West. READ MORE

After a decade when most observers believed that the Islamic Republic had become more modern, Mr Ahmadinejad has taken a more hardline position.

With Iran continuing work on its nuclear programme, it is a change of policy with potentially enormous implications.

Next month's deadline for Iran to allow international scrutiny of its nuclear programme will now be the focus of increased diplomatic attention.

So far Iran's belligerence appears to have wrong-footed the West, with no obvious international support for Tony Blair's veiled warning that force could be used against Iran.

While European and western nations have condemned the Iranian president's remarks, the Arab and Muslim world has been largely silent.

Only Turkey, a Muslim but secular state, has called for Mr Ahmadinejad to withdraw his comments.

Yesterday's Jerusalem Day protests across Iran were always going to involve colourful displays of anti-Zionist emotion, but they were made even more important by the president's comments earlier this week.

Speaking to the Iranian national news agency, Mr Ahmadinejad made light of Israel and America's reaction.

"They are free to talk but their words do not have any validity," he said. "It is natural that if a word is right and just it will provoke a reaction.

"They are cheeky humans, and they think that the entire world should obey them. They destroy Palestinian families and expect nobody to object to them."

Earlier there had been some signs of moderation from within the Iranian regime. The Iranian Embassy in Moscow said Mr Ahmadinejad "did not have any intention to speak in sharp terms and engage in a conflict".

The former president Hashemi Rafsanjani also took a more placatory position, suggesting yesterday that the fate of Palestine be decided by a referendum.

"If Muslims and Palestinians agree [to a referendum], it will be a retreat but let's still hold a referendum,'' he said during his weekly sermon.

But Mr Ahmadinejad's appearance at the Teheran rally dashed any hopes of a swift end to the crisis.

Demonstrators chanted "Israel is approaching its death" and many showed that they were willing to give their lives in the fight against Israel by donning white shrouds.

A resolution was read at the end of the rally reiterating "the position declared by the president that the Zionist regime must be wiped out".

The Iranian foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, defended his president's comments, saying they represented Iran's long-held policy of not recognising Israel.

"Unfortunately the Western countries have remained silent on the increasing inhuman activities of Israel," he said.

Turkey, which has a land border with Iran, became the only Muslim country to condemn the president's remarks.

"Turkey believes that regional conflicts can only be solved through dialogue and peaceful methods," Namik Tan, a foreign ministry spokesman, said in a statement.

"Turkey believes that international relations should be developed in a spirit of intercultural harmony and dialogue at a time when our world faces the danger of a clash between civilisations," he added.

"Naturally it is not possible for us to approve of such a statement [by Ahmadinejad)."