A Daily Briefing on Iran

A Video Round-up of June 20-21 Protests in Iran

2009-06-21T22:43:00.000-07:00

Instapundit found a good round-up of links to videos from Iran, at YouTube and Facebook: Fatima at Mideast Youth put this together.

Following the Revolution inside of Iran

2009-06-20T16:37:00.000-07:00

For many years this site monitored the struggle of the Iranian people for freedom and democracy.

But, today the world is witnessing their struggle.

This site has been off line for some time now and recently our site has been hacked and many of our posts have been deleted.

So we are redirecting you to some of the best sites for more information on the unrest there.

You can of course follow the events using Twitter, here.

You Tube has the most recent videos, here.

Web searchers can now translate Persian/Farsi content, here.

One good Persian news sources is Iran Press News.

A few of the best blogs...

Michael Ledeen's Blog at Pajamas Media (PJM in solidarity with the Iranian democracy movement)

Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi's Facebook page (for Facebook users only)

Gateway Pundit

Michael Totten

Andrew Sullivan

We will be updating this list again very soon....

Bloggers, help spread the word about the Iranian Pledge on Iran. It is a simple was to show our support.

A few photos from today's protests

2009-06-20T15:52:00.000-07:00

via Andrew Sullivan.

via Gateway Pundit.

Iran, Russia Sign Deal to Open Nuclear Plant

2006-09-26T09:37:00.000-07:00

Ladane Nasseri, Bloomberg:

Iran's first nuclear power plant, a Russian-built project, will begin operating by September 2007, according to an agreement between the two countries.

The accord involving the facility near the southern city of Bushehr was announced today on Iranian state-run television after talks in Moscow between the head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization, Qolam-Reza Aqazadeh, his Russian counterpart, Sergei Kiriyenko, and Russian Security Council chief Igor Ivanov. Russia also will provide enriched uranium to fuel the plant before its completion.

``Russia guaranteed that it will complete the plant by September and deliver the nuclear fuel to Iran in March,'' Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of the Iranian agency, said in a television interview. READ MORE

The power station is part of Iran's nuclear program, which the U.S. and its allies accuse of being a cover for the development of weapons. Iran failed to meet the United Nations Security Council's Aug. 31 deadline to suspend uranium enrichment. Russia is among the council's five permanent members. A push for UN sanctions against Iran will begin early next month if the Islamic Republic maintains its stance.

Diplomatic efforts aimed at getting Iran to end production of the nuclear fuel have included a proposal for Iran's uranium to be enriched on Russian soil and then shipped to Iran. Enriched uranium can also be used in a nuclear weapon.

Iranian officials who are involved in talks with European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana won't discuss the possibility of freezing uranium enrichment, an unidentified official from Iran's nuclear agency was cited as saying today by Agence France-Presse after the announcement of the Bushehr deal. The proposal was for a three-month freeze, AFP said.

Iran has so far paid Russia $1 billion to build the plant, capable of generating about 1,000 megawatts of electricity. Iran had urged Russia to complete construction of the nuclear plant following numerous delays. Iran plans to build 20 nuclear power plants with a combined capacity of 20,000 megawatts.

To contact the reporter on this story: Ladane Nasseri in Tehran at lnasseri@bloomberg.net.

Iran Close to Nuclear Suspension

2006-09-26T09:32:00.001-07:00

Bill Gertz, The Washington Times:

Iran is close to an agreement that would include a suspension of uranium enrichment but wants the deal to include a provision that the temporary halt be kept secret, according to Bush administration officials. Javier Solana, the European Union's foreign policy chief, has been working with Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani on the enrichment-suspension deal that could be completed this week.

Disclosure of talks on the secret element of the arrangement comes as Mr. Solana and Mr. Larijani are set to meet today or tomorrow in Europe when the deal could be completed, said officials opposed to the deal, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

According to the officials, the suspension of uranium enrichment by Iran would be for 90 days, so additional talks could be held with several European nations. READ MORE

Many U.S. officials are opposing the agreement as a further concession to Iran, which continues to defy a United Nations' call for a complete halt to uranium enrichment. A Security Council resolution had given Iran until Aug. 31 to stop its enrichment program or face the imposition of international sanctions. Tehran ignored the deadline, but diplomacy has continued.

Some in the State Department are supporting the deal, which they view as a step toward achieving a complete halt to uranium enrichment.

However, other officials said that keeping any suspension secret would be difficult and that it would drag the United States into further negotiations with Iran.

Iran is seeking to continue talks on its nuclear program while attempting to avoid the imposition of sanctions, something the Bush administration favors but that several other key states, including Russia, oppose.

The United States would then be faced with the difficult position of negotiating against the 90-day deadline, a position that favors Iran.

"The Iranians are very good negotiators," said one official close to the issue.

The officials opposed to the deal want any agreement on uranium suspension to be announced publicly.

Also, any suspension of enrichment would require International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections to verify that work has stopped at Iranian facilities. The inspections would likely be disclosed, exposing any secret arrangement with Iran on suspension.

Failing to publicly announce the suspension also would be a face-saving measure for the Iranian government.

Officials said President Bush is not happy with the secrecy demand, although he continues to support the use of diplomacy to solve the problem.

Asked about the pending deal, State Department spokesman Tom Casey said in an e-mail, "The terms laid out by the Security Council are clear: Iran needs to suspend its uranium enrichment activities, and it needs to do so in a verifiable way. If it does, we can start negotiations. If it doesn't, we move to sanctions. It is a clear and unambiguous standard."

In New York yesterday, Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said that talks between European and Iranian officials were on track and that a negotiated settlement is possible.

"I think very soon they will have the next round of discussions," Mr. Mottaki told the Associated Press, noting that "there was good connection between the two sides" after Iran's Aug. 22 response to a package of incentives offered by six nations -- the United States, Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia -- for a halt in enrichment efforts.

A recent report by the IAEA said that as late as Aug. 24, Iran had continued to feed uranium hexafluoride into its 164-centrifuge cascade, which is used to enrich uranium. The report also said that Iran is building additional facilities, including a second 164-centrifuge cascade and that work on a plutonium-based heavy-water reactor is continuing.

The Bush administration is convinced that Iran's nuclear program is intended to develop weapons, contrary to repeated statements from Iranian leaders that the program is aimed at producing electrical power for civilian use.

The Bush administration wants to impose internationally approved economic sanctions on Iran in the next several weeks, based on the IAEA report and Iran's missing the deadline to halt enrichment.

'An Economic Coalition of the Willing'

2006-09-26T09:32:00.000-07:00

Ilan Berman, The Wall Street Journal:

By now, it has become all too clear that when it comes to the Iranian nuclear crisis, the ball is squarely in Washington's court.

Aug. 31 has come and gone, and with it the international deadline for Tehran to halt its uranium enrichment. Iran's ayatollahs, however, have shown no signs of curbing their atomic ambitions. "The Iranian nation will not accept for one moment any bullying, invasion and violation of its rights," Iran's radical president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has defiantly told his supporters. In response, the Bush administration has signaled its commitment to seeking punitive measures against the Islamic Republic, sanctions chief among them. In practice, however, Washington has not yet seriously tackled the economic dimension of the current crisis -- or explored the financial levers by which Iran can be confronted.

This amounts to a critical oversight, because Iran's economy is deeply susceptible to foreign pressure on at least three fronts. All that is necessary is the proper political will to exploit these weaknesses. READ MORE

Iran's first vulnerability is its dependence on foreign investment.

Today, though a bona fide energy superpower that produces some 3.9 million barrels of oil daily, the Islamic Republic still requires sustained international engagement. Studies say that the regime in Tehran currently needs $1 billion a year to maintain current oil output levels, and $1.5 billion to increase them -- and that without it, Iran could quickly become a net energy importer. To be sure, this sum is just a pittance compared to the dozens of billions of dollars that Iran has reaped over the past several years, thanks to the high price of world oil (as much as $50 billion as of March 2006). But, by complicating the flow of foreign investment into Iran, the U.S. and its allies can force the regime to draw down its hard-currency reserves, reducing the resources that it has available to forge ahead with its nuclear program -- or to fund radicalism in the region.

Iran's second weakness stems from its centralized economic hierarchy.

For all of its lip service to fiscal reforms and grass-roots prosperity, the vast majority of the regime's wealth remains concentrated in the hands of a very small number of people. The extended family of former Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, which practically controls copper mining in Iran, the regime's lucrative pistachio trade, and a number of profitable industrial and export-import businesses, is just one example. Another group of key economic players is the Islamic Republic's sprawling charitable foundations, known as bonyads, which control over 30% of Iran's national GDP (and as much as two-thirds of the country's non-oil GDP). By impeding their access to global markets and curtailing their capacity to engage in commerce, the international community can immediately capture the attention of these key decision-makers.

Far and away the biggest chink in Iran's economic armor, however, is its reliance on foreign gasoline. Today, Iran's antiquated, socialist economy -- where a gallon of gas still sells for roughly 40 cents -- has become a major Achilles' heel. Iran now consumes over 64.5 million liters of gasoline a day, with close to 40% coming from foreign sources (among them India, France, Turkey and the Gulf states). This energy habit is expensive; Iran will spend over $3 billion -- and perhaps as much as $8 billion -- on gasoline imports this year alone. And, with just a 45-day domestic supply available, steady supplies from abroad are vital to the continued functioning of the regime. All of which suggests that a comprehensive gas embargo on the Islamic Republic could quickly wreak havoc on Iran's industrial sectors -- and, potentially, galvanize serious social unrest on the Iranian street as well.

But the West's window of opportunity to implement such measures is rapidly closing. Already, Iran has begun to make serious economic countermoves, transferring financial assets from Europe to China and Southeast Asia and initiating a large-scale privatization of governmental funds. Most significant of all, the Iranian regime recently approved a new fiscal budget that calls for a halt to gasoline imports and the institution of gasoline rationing beginning this fall. The aim of these efforts is crystal clear: to proactively limit potential economic leverage over its behavior.

Sadly, international diplomacy so far has played directly into Iran's hands. In the best case, serious U.N. Security Council action will still take weeks or months to materialize, buying Iran's ayatollahs valuable time to forge ahead with their nuclear program. What's more, if and when they do eventually emerge, U.N. sanctions are guaranteed to be limited in scope, so as not to offend two of Iran's chief strategic partners, Russia and China. As such, they are not likely to offend Iran's ayatollahs much either.

By hitching itself to this flawed policy, the Bush administration is courting disaster. Instead of relying on the United Nations, the White House should be thinking creatively about another sort of grouping -- an economic "coalition of the willing" capable of implementing the specific financial levers that are most likely to alter Iranian behavior, and of doing so without further delay.

The stakes could not be any higher. If the U.S. and its international allies fail to promptly use their existing economic leverage to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions, they will soon have just two choices: to acquiesce to the emergence of an atomic Iran, or to use military force to prevent it from happening.

Mr. Berman is vice president for policy at the American Foreign Policy Council, and the author of "Tehran Rising: Iran's Challenge to the United States" (Rowman & Littlefield, 2005).

Tuesday's Daily Briefing on Iran

2006-09-25T23:55:00.000-07:00

DoctorZin reports, 9.26.2oo6

"Islam is not compatible with democracy.” - The next Supreme Leader?

The New York Times reported concern that Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, is trying to expand his already growing power by packing the "assembly of experts" (which has the power to elect the Supreme Leader) with his loyalists. He said: “Democracy means if the people want something that is against God’s will, then they should forget about God and religion.”

BBC radio's pro-Islamic Republic campaign of misinformation.

Ardeshir Dolat reported that the BBC radio 4 in Britain has started a campaign of misinformation on Iran. Its report ‘Uncovering Iran’ appears designed to convince the British public that Iran respects human rights, democratic principles and values. Listen to the report.

But BBC radio fails to "uncover" reports like these, today:

Amnesty International published an Urgent Action report on the imminent execution in Iran of Kobra Rahmanpour.
Amnesty International also published an Urgent Action report on their fear for the safety, medical concern and torture of student activist Ahmad Batebi.
Amnesty International said it is greatly concerned by new arrests and detentions in Iran targeting human rights activists, minority community activists and others peacefully exercising their rights to freedom of expression and association.
International Federation of Journalists reported that it is concerned by news that the Islamic Republic is intimidating journalists in Iran who travel overseas by alleging they are engaged in spying.
Iran Press News reported that Iranians gathered at the Tehran U.N. offices to protest imminent execution of 3 women by the regime where the guards attacked protestors and brutally battered them.
Iran Press News reported that the human-rights-violating Islamic regime has once again issued the death sentences of seven residents of the province of Sistan-Baluchestan.
Iran Press News reported that Keyvan Ansari, former secretary of the Amir Kabir University student association was arrested.
Iran Press News reported that Pourya Nejad-Veysi, a corruption busting journalist and segment producer the Islamic Republic’s own television news reports has been arrested. A revolutionary court sentenced him with the high crime of “taking action against the security of the regime.”
Iran Press News reported that the organization for the defense of human rights in the province of Kurdistan confirmed the prison sentence and flogging for their organization’s member and political activist, Loghmon Mehri.
Iran Focus reported that State Security Forces (SSF) in the western city of Hamedan announced that they would crack down on people eating in public during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, forcing offenders to dig graves.
Iran Press News reported that the Islamic Republic’s general attorney, described the murders of the two young activists and political prisoners Akbar Mohammadi and Valiollah Fayz-Mehdavi, as appropriate, goes on to specify: “Not only is this a warning, it should be absolutely construed as a threat [to all Iranians opposing the Islamic regime]."

Russian increasing its ties with Iran.

The Jerusalem Post reported that the chief of Iran's Atomic Organization said: "Iran will complete the establishment of its nuclear power station at Bushehr in half a year."
Iran Press News reported that Russian media announced that the Islamic Republic intends to purchase yet another five passenger planes from Russia.
MosNews reported that Russia has offered to sell a range of surface-to-air missile systems to protect Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Now Eqypt and Turkey want nuclear programs.

The Times Online reported that Egypt and Turkey are pressing ahead with plans to join the nuclear club, amid fears that Iran’s atomic program could trigger a nuclear race across the Middle East.

Condi: No gas embargo on Iran.

The Washington Post reported that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she did not support a gasoline embargo on Iran as a way of punishing Tehran.

Ledeen: Religion now dominates the world debate and the west doesn't get it.

Michael Ledeen, The National Review Online noted that that religion — not so long ago pronounced irrelevant by most everyone in proper society — now dominates the global debate. Even a Communist like Hugo Chavez used religious terms to denounce W., perhaps because he is now in a tag team with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who speaks for a theocracy. And now the Pope...

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

Paul Gigot, The Wall Street Journal interviewed Reza Pahlavi on the growing showdown with Iran. He said: "The minute [the Islamic Republic] stand back from their aggressive position on the nuclear issue and what have you, they will instantly lose credibility and support within their own militia, which is really the basic foundation and power base of this regime."
Reuters reported that Israel is debating taking the veil off of its nuclear weapons program in order to deter Iran from the use of nuclear weapons against it.
Iran Focus reported that Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sacked his Minister of Welfare and Social Security, marking the first time the radical president has ousted a cabinet member.
IranMania reported that some 800,000 foreigners are working in Iran illegally.
Iran Press News reported that Islamic Republic organizations actively financed the Lebanese Hezbollah.
You Tube featured a video of a demonstration at Fox New LA to save Nazanin & Kobra from execution.

The Reality of Religion

2006-09-25T16:57:00.000-07:00

Michael Ledeen, The National Review Online:

It’s notable, I think, that religion — not so long ago pronounced irrelevant by most everyone in proper society — now dominates the global debate. Even a Communist like Hugo Chavez used religious terms to denounce W., perhaps because he is now in a tag team with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who speaks for a theocracy. But despite the fundamental importance of religion, most of our sages and scribblers are poorly equipped to deal with it, as you can see from the awkward coverage of the pope’s speech at Regensberg. It was, as you’d expect from a pope, a religious text, but the religious content was rarely reported, aside from Benedict’s remarks about Islam — themselves a part of a broader religious message aimed primarily at Europeans. A big part of his message was that Greek philosophical thought is central to Roman Catholicism, and that Catholicism evolved in Europe, in the constant interplay between faith and reason. It’s almost impossible to find that in the discussion. READ MORE

The stuff about Islam was predictably discussed in the usual context of political correctness, according to which it is always wrong to criticize another person’s beliefs, and very wrong to criticize the beliefs of a foreign “culture.” They seemed unable to comprehend that, in ultimate issues, this sort of total tolerance doesn’t work. And the pretense that violently conflicting views of the world can be smoothed over in pleasant conversation only has the effect of intensifying the conflicts. We have arrived at the present unhappy situation not so much because we challenged those with different worldview, but because we ceased to assert our own values and advance our world view. In my graduate-student days, I met a fine New York editor by the name of Howard Fertig. Howard edited the books written by my boss, the great historian George L. Mosse, and from time to time I got to have lunch with him in Manhattan, usually at a long-gone German restaurant, Luchow’s. At one of these lunches Howard shook his head sadly — we’re talking 1963 or 64 — and pronounced the death of America. Why? Because, he said, we had adopted the view that everyone is entitled to one hang-up. Yes, so-and-so was a child molester, but hey, that’s his hang-up. This attitude used to be applied to great artists and writers, like Ezra Pound, whose hang-up was the embrace of fascism.

The combination of this crackpot toleration with a general contempt for religion made it difficult for us to comprehend the nature of the current war.

Everyone from W. on down has been at great pains to assure us and themselves that we have no basic conflict with Islam, that our battle is with some lunatics who say falsely that they speak in the name of Islam. So we feel quite uncomfortable when the pope — quite deliberately — poses a question about Islam itself: Is it capable of responding to reason, or is it, as he put it, completely transcendent, beyond the reach of man, and hence unchallengeable by man under any circumstances?

It’s a big question, not easily reduced to newspeak like “did the pope anticipate the reaction?” Or “did the pope go too far?” That sort of banter is embarrassingly silly. Of course the pope anticipated the reaction, he’s one of the smartest and most learned men in the world, and he’s spent a lot of time studying Islam. He wanted to draw a line. He is not prepared to extend total, blind toleration to people who use violence in the name of faith, and he’s challenging the Muslims to answer the real questions. That quotation he chose — the one that asks, Is there anything positive that has emerged from the expansion of the domain of Islam? — wasn’t generated at random. He picked it quite wittingly. Of course he knows that, for several centuries, Islam conserved the wisdom of the West, the same “Greek” wisdom he invoked as the indispensable partner of Christian faith. He’s defying the Muslims to admit that, because he knows that the jihadis don’t want to hear about it, and that an open debate about it may undermine the sway of so many dogmatic mosques, schools, TV stations, and Internet sites.

And a surprising number of Europeans understood it, and responded positively. Did you notice that the former archbishop of Canterbury weighed in with a statement even tougher than anything the pope said? Lord Carey said that our problem was not with a minority of Muslims but with Islam itself, whereas the pope left the question open, and called for dialogue. Even the famously wimpy Spanish President Zapatero had words of support, an amazing spectacle for a man who has delighted in flaunting his laicism and challenging numerous Catholic doctrines.

But I’m afraid that we’re not engaging this debate, because our leaders are afraid to do so, and poorly equipped to participate. Our educational system has long since banished religion from its texts, and an amazing number of Americans are intellectually unprepared for a discussion in which religion is the central organizing principle. I learned from a teacher at one of the best private high schools in this area that it was virtually impossible for him to teach the Reformation properly, since the major metaphors came from the Book of Daniel, and virtually none of his students was familiar with the text.

Ignorance of things religious is terribly damaging for other reasons as well, not least of all because it prevents us from understanding the nature of our most dangerous enemies.

Michael Rubin wrote a fine piece in the Wall Street Journal the other day, listing some of the lies produced by the Islamic Republic of Iran, and noting that there was actually a provision in sharia that made such lying to infidels completely acceptable and on occasion admirable. Yet the Europeans, who preen themselves on their cultural superiority, continue to be gulled by the Iranians, and W. has now completely swallowed the notion that if the Iranians ignore one ultimatum, we must not act, but simply set a new deadline. Down this path lies ruin. Yet the self-proclaimed “realists” always color themselves “surprised” when the Iranians do it.

In their latest attempt at realistic appeasement, the Council on Foreign Relations hosted President Ahmadinejad, obviously hoping to begin that “dialogue” so dear to their hearts. But, at least according to the New York Times, it didn’t go well at all. “He is a master of counterpunch, deception, circumlocution,’’ Brent Scowcroft said, shaking his head. Robert Blackwill emerged from the conversation wondering how the United States would ever be able to negotiate with this Iranian government...”If this man represents the prevailing government opinion in Tehran, we are heading for a massive confrontation with Iran,” he said.

As usual, the most surprising thing about the likes of Scowcroft and Blackwill is that they are surprised. But then, these are the folks who gave us the debacle of the first Bush presidency — the desperate attempt to prevent the fall of the Soviet empire, the last-minute rescue of Saddam, etc. Let’s hope they don’t convince the second President Bush to follow in their tiny footsteps.

— Michael Ledeen, an NRO contributing editor, is most recently the author of The War Against the Terror Masters. He is resident scholar in the Freedom Chair at the American Enterprise Institute.

Rice says she would not back gas embargo on Iran

2006-09-25T13:56:00.000-07:00

The Washington Post:

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she did not support a gasoline embargo on Iran as a way of punishing Tehran for refusing to give up its uranium enrichment program.

In an interview for publication in The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, Rice said there were "limitations on the oil card" against Iran, which failed to meet an August 31 U.N. deadline to give up uranium enrichment.

"I don't think that it was anything that you have to look at it in the near term and I'm not sure that it (a gasoline embargo) would have the desired effect," she said, according to a transcript of her interview released by the State Department. READ MORE

Such a move would serve merely to reinforce the Iranian leadership's desire to make the local population feel that America was against the Iranian people, she said.

"You want to stay away from things that have a bad effect on the Iranian people to the degree that you can," she said. "That's something we really do have to fight against and some believe a gasoline embargo might play into that."

Political directors from the major powers are discussing what sanctions might be imposed against Iran if it continued to refuse to abandon its enrichment program, which the United States says is aimed at producing a bomb and Tehran says is for peaceful purposes.

U.S. officials say there is still not agreement on what form sanctions might take and France, China and Russia are wary about such measures, believing negotiations between the European Union's chief negotiator Javier Solana and Iran should be allowed to run their course.

Solana and Iranian negotiator Ali Larijani were set to meet in Europe, possibly on Tuesday. Asked earlier by reporters in New York whether she was hopeful about those talks, Rice said: "We'll see."

The Washington Times cited Bush administration officials as saying Iran is close to a deal that would include a temporary suspension of uranium enrichment and clear the way for nuclear talks. It said the deal could be completed either Tuesday or Wednesday.

In an interview with The New York Times, Rice said the United States was willing to give Solana more time to see if he could find a formula by which the Iranians agreed to suspension, thus allowing negotiations to begin.

"I frankly don't know if it will work," she said. "I hope it will work because obviously, the best outcome here would be that the discussions with Solana allow the Iranians to suspend and then we can have comprehensive negotiations on their program and anything else that they'd like to bring up."

But if these talks did not work, Rice told the Journal she was optimistic that China and Russia would support punitive measures against Iran.

Moreover, she said any sanctions would have "collateral effects" on the willingness of private companies and private banks to do business with Iran.

"Iran is not North Korea," Rice said. "It's not isolated and it is pretty integrated into the international financial system. And that actually makes its potential isolation more damaging."

Uncovering Iran

2006-09-25T13:51:00.000-07:00

Ardeshir Dolat:

The BBC radio 4 in Britain has started a campaign of misinformation on Iran. It is called ‘Uncovering Iran’. What is the BBC’s agenda, I wonder? On tonight’s edition broadcast at 8 pm what I heard was akin to what you would here on the regime’s state run media channels inside Iran every hour of every day! This set of misinformation is a kind of propaganda that the regime itself could not have devised any better to illustrate to the British public an image of a good regime that respects human rights, democratic principles and values on the one hand and on the other a regime which has been subjected to the unreasonable aggression of the Bush administration. I am speechless! READ MORE

On tonight’s edition the BBC gave the impression that the US has betrayed the international community by calling the Islamic regime an axis of evil when it had been cooperating with the Americans in fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan. The BBC interviewed a bunch of naive leftist Americans who believe America should not have any preconditions such as the regime’s halting their nuclear activities before they would engage in any direct talks. The BBC tonight very clearly painted a picture that the West has lost a golden opportunity, by America’s default, to engage with the then reformist government headed by Khatami. Had they engaged in direct talks with the regime then, who knows, may be some good would have come out of it! The BBC clearly indicated that Ahmadinejad and the fundamentalists in Iran won the last election because the Americans rejected the reformist government. I am flabbergasted! This is all coming from the BBC Radio 4, the intelligent Radio!

In the earlier editions and so far the BBC has painted the Islamic Republic a nice place to live in. No mention of the regime’s atrocities against the Iranians; no mention of the living conditions of millions of Iranians; no mention of the high number of drug addicts; no mention of the Iranian girls being sold as sex slaves to the neighbouring Arab countries; no mention of the Islamic regime being the second biggest executioner in the world after China; no mention of the hangings of children; no mention of the high level of corruption; no mention of the closure of newspapers and magazines for the slightest criticism of the regime; no mention of the thousands of prisoners of conscience; no mention of countless other breaches of basic human rights; no mention of the regime’s intentions to export their revolution to the third world Muslim countries; no mention of the regime’s military and financial support of the terrorist organisations; no mention of the…

It seems that the BBC either has not got a clue or they just love the Mullahs in Iran for some reason or another. They somehow still believe in the well-exposed and burnt reformist movement.

Well, this bit is for the BBC:

It is a tragic mistake to believe that there are some elements within the regime, who would help to soften things up for the West! It is a tragic mistake to open different accounts for different factions of the Islamic Republic regime. In essence, there are no different factions within the Islamic regime. It is foolish to believe there is! There are no differences, at least as far as the rest of the world should be concerned, between Khamenei, Rafsanjani, Mesbah-Yzdi, Ahmadinejad and any other Mullah for that matter, whether reformist or fundamentalist. Tens of Iranian dissidents were assassinated abroad during the governments of both Rafsanjani and Khatami; hundreds of newspaper and publishers were closed down during their time; countless executions took place during their terms; and many more atrocities against the Iranian people took place during their time. In fact as far as the Iranians are concerned nothing has significantly changed in the last 27 years of the Islamic republic’s tyrannical rule, regardless of which faction has been in charge. The Islamic regime is a monster with several heads: nice head, innocent head, modern head, ugly head, aggressive head, medieval head and lying head. The struggle between these Mullahs at home is only for the rein of power and all the bounties that come with it. It is all a matter of personal friendship and close associations between them: it is a mafia style system where favours must be returned. However, as far as the rest of the world should be concerned, they are all united in their main strategy, which is to establish and maintain the rule of Islam, export their Islamic revolution, and prepare and wage the Jihad on the rest of the infidel world. Therefore, whether it is the fundamentalist or the reformists in charge of the Islamic regime it should be irrelevant to the West and the rest of the world for that matter. Engage in direct talks and negotiations with these people in their own terms at your own peril!

If the International Community were united in dealing with the Mullahs, there would be little or no problem of defeating the Islamic fascism and perhaps produce a half opportunity for the repressed Iranians to get rid of this despotic regime and establish democracy in Iran. The problem seems to be that most of the 5+1 members do not seem to fully comprehend the gravity of the situation with regards to the Islamic regime and their Islamofascist terrorists’ threats to the world. What are the EU members playing at? What are the Chinese and Russians playing at? Why are the Venezuelans and Cubans and other non-Muslim countries siding with the Islamic regime against the West? In the case of the later, it always amazes me how rhetorical these leftist governments/countries are. So long as it is fighting America, that’ll do! The Islamic regime is a sworn enemy of communism. When it came to power in 1979, it executed thousands of Iranian communist supporters and activists. However, what those confused apologists must ask themselves are these questions, before taking the ridiculous decision to side with the Islamic regime: aren’t we infidels in the eyes of the Islamic regime? Don’t we all culturally engage in the same rituals and vices that are forbidden by the Islam? In a private meeting with the families of the staff of the office for the protection of Islamic regime’s interests in Washington, Ahmadinejad said this to his guests: “These people (the Americans) here are all dazed and muddled. Bring them on to the Islamic Republic’s ways. The foreign diplomats here want to make you as their models. Give them that opportunity. In this place 999 cars out of 1000 end up at the bottom of the cliff. Don’t follow them. Here is the last stop for the material world and the last stop for the pleasure and lust seeking hedonistic people.”

Strategically, the Islamic regime and its terrorists need the support of anyone they can get whether infidel or not in their fight against the strong America. These countries and apologists must be reminded that whilst they are bedfellows of the regime at the moment, at some stage in the future, themselves will all be the targets of the regime’s sponsored terrorists as the holy war is to establish the rule of Islam in the whole of the world. The regime is hard at work to develop new home made military equipments from long range missiles, fighter bombers to unmanned aircrafts/drones and announcing their successes almost on a daily basis.

It is a crucial time of our history now. The whole world must unite against the islamofascist phenomenon. It is crucial that the 5+1 explores all the avenues to reach a consensus in dealing decisively with the regime’s nuclear activities. I would even argue that since democracy and freedom has a far better prospect of being achieved in Russia and China than in Iran under the rule of the Mullahs, if any concessions are to be made by the West, these should be made to the Russians and the Chinese, not the Islamic regime – the Islamic regime after all and in essence is and should be seen as the common cultural and ideological enemy. The Russians and Chinese should be further reminded that the short-term economic gains by siding with the Islamic regime would inevitably have far greater tragic consequences not only for themselves but also for the world as a whole. As, if and when the regime obtains the capability to produce nuclear bombs, and passes them on to a few other Muslim countries as they have made it clear time and again that they would, it would be very difficult to ascertain the source of the nuclear suicide bombings that might hit the capitals of the infidel world, be it, in Europe, America or Asia. You may think it would be impossible to go through the securities with a tennis ball sized highly enriched uranium device, capable of killing ten times more people than the 9/11 atrocity and possibly crippling even more. But remember, where there is a will there is a way.

Let us not betray our next generation.

Listen to the report yourself here.

Former secretary of Amir-Kabir University student association arrested

2006-09-25T13:41:00.000-07:00