Main | November 2004 »

October 30, 2004

It All Started in Tehran (REQUIRED READING)

It All Started in Tehran by Amir Taheri is a must read for anyone interested in another dose of Iran-related history.

Here's a taste...

"...For 22 years the United States, under presidents from both parties, behaved in exactly the way that Khomeini predicted. It took countless successive blows, including the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York, without decisive retaliation. That attitude invited, indeed encouraged, more attacks. The 9/11 tragedy was the denouement of the Nov. 4 attack on the US Embassy in Tehran."

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 09:17 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Persians (Iranians) are NOT Arabs!

Pejman is completely justified in his criticism of Andrew Sullivan and Brian Whitaker's inaccurate labeling of Iran as an Arab country.

Perhaps they should read "Is Iran an Arab Country?" by Chris Suellentrop (Slate)...

"...Alone among the Middle Eastern peoples conquered by the Arabs, the Iranians did not lose their language or their identity. Ethnic Persians make up 60 percent of modern Iran, and modern Persian is the official language. (Persian also has official status in Afghanistan, where Dari, or Afghan Persian, is one of two official languages.) In addition, the majority of Iranians are Shiite Muslims while most Arabs are Sunni Muslims. So Iran fails most of the four-part test of language, ancestry, religion, and culture."

And now some history for the more visual types:

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 12:23 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

October 29, 2004

The Empress of Iran: In the Presence of Royalty

A land that has been home to so much greatness is now controlled by a fanatic terrorist dicatorship that the rest of the world either actively appeases or ensures the status quo of Mullahcracy by pursuing a passive, "turn and look the other way" approach.

via Great Neck Records -

The Last Empress of Iran Greeted Her Compatriots

A large contingent of Great Neck's Iranian population came to see Her Majesty and Great Neck's own very talented pianist/composer Tania Eshaghoff performed a moving musical tribute for the Empress, along with musicians from the Copeland School of Music at Queens College. The audience was warm and welcoming and most supportive of the Empress.

Threaded through her words during the evening was Her Majesty's strong desire to see a free Iran, a country where her people would be free to choose either a constitutional monarchy or some other form of democratic government. And, over and over again, she did emphasize the beauty and value of the Iranian culture, the rich history she and so many others had to leave behind, and the importance of instilling that culture in future generations of Iranians, some of whom have never seen their homeland.

Her Majesty explained that she chose to write her book, and share her memories, so that her children and grandchildren and young Iranians the world over would know the story. Why did she write the book now? "I needed some distance from events, as did my compatriots," she told the audience.

The Empress met the Shah when she was only 8 years old and admired him always. She next met her future husband in Paris, when she was a young architecture student, a rare opportunity for an Iranian young woman of that era. The Shah was impressed with the young woman and they met again and a romance began. "I couldn't imagine life as a queen," Her Majesty said. "I was told there would be many responsibilities toward my country and my compatriots."

Speaking of the Shah, her husband, she told that he was "a civilized man with a sense of justice, patient, always in control, and very kind and respectful to those who worked for him." The Empress said that the man she married was "a loving husband, my guide, and a loving father, very open to his children." The Shah, she said, "loved Iran and the Iranian people."

During her reign as Empress of Iran, Farah Pahlavi headed 35 organizations, traveled extensively and managed "a huge amount of work." She spoke of being very thankful that the Shah let her serve her country and she said that she "achieved many dreams." For the Empress, helping the children was paramount, especially education and health care. Improving the conditions of women in Iran was a project dear to her heart and the Empress truly hopes to see those women once more treated as first class citizens.

The Empress also spoke of her work during her years in Iran as she strove to encourage contemporary artists and create many museums. Not all of these museums were completed during the Shah's reign, but it is the hope of the Empress to one day see all completed.

"It was a very hard day when we left Iran; I felt for His Majesty," the Empress said as she began to discuss exile. "You leave your roots, your family, your friends, your home; but we never lost hope that one day we would return, even today," she said in her soft, yet strong voice, in perfect English. It has been almost 26 years since the Shah and his Empress, along with their four children, had to flee Iran. "We lost everything and now we see what has happened for all Iranians," she added.

The Empress went on to speak of the respect with which Iran was held during her husband's reign. "Iran was respected, a center of peace," she reminded her appreciative audience. "It's hard to bear now," she said, and began to speak of her pride in her compatriots now living all around the world. The Empress spoke of her pride in the young Iranians of today and how well the exiled young ones have been educated. She spoke, too, of her pride in the Iranian women, how they have kept their families intact.

Today the Empress communicates with young Iranians the world over, personally answering emails, often hearing from young Iranians still in Iran, those who never knew her nor the Shah. "I am touched; I receive strength from those young Iranians who write to me," she said.

Her Majesty also spoke of the hurt she felt when they fled Iran and many people changed in their attitudes toward the deposed Shah and his family. She is most grateful to the late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat for his warm reception at the start of their years in exile. "How we were received in Egypt, when no one wanted us, it showed how, even in politics, there are some moral values," Her Majesty said. She is most grateful, too, to her compatriots "who have suffered so and come to me with affection."

The admiration and affection for Farah Pahlavi was palpable in the large concert hall. Asked how she has been able to go on, she simply said "Life is a struggle, but you cannot lose your dignity and your hope for the future; you cannot keep bitterness." The Empress is most grateful for what she has, for the love of her family, her friends and her compatriots, and again, she spoke of her strong desire to see Iran be a democracy. This, she said, is important to her, important for Iran, important for the Middle East and important for all the world.

When asked how history would judge the Shah, her answer was met with great applause, as she said "We don't have to wait for history to judge the King. He is judged now by his compatriots." And she told how people stop her in the streets, with words of blessing for her late husband.

Her message to her compatriots was heartfelt: "Don't give up hope! It will change. Keep hope and fight!" She asked one and all to "think of the Iranian people, invest in the future of Iran" and she said that her son would continue to fight for the freedoms today denied in Iran. And when Iran is free, her son, she said, would serve in any way he could, whether the people chose a constitutional monarchy or some other form of democratic government.

"Do not lose hope," the last Empress of Iran begged her compatriots. To her fellow exiled Iranians she implored "Don't forget about Iran; it is worth fighting for. We have a valuable culture that should not be forgotten. Keep Iran inside of you!"

If only Michael Ledeen were president!

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 04:35 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

October 23, 2004

Weekend Homework Assignment!

For our take-home assignment this weekend, why doesn't everyone read or re-read Michael Ledeen's latest article "Iran, When?" and follow it up with a 1 - 2 paragraph response as to why you think President Bush and Senator Kerry have spoken so little about freedom and human rights in Iran, especially since the regime of Ayatollahs is by far the biggest sponsor of terrorism throughout the world and in Iraq, and by any objective standards, a far greater threat than Saddam Hussein ever was.

This is not to say that it wasn't necessary to remove Saddam's regime, but rather we would like to get your input as to where you think the Mullahs and their repressive regime fit into the puzzle, and possible reasons why this most overt member of the Axis of Evil yet to be addressed by either candidate.

Iran, When?
The war on terror cannot be won without addressing Iran.

"Months before the liberation of Iraq I wrote that we were about to have our great national debate on the war against the terror masters, and it was going to be the wrong debate. Wrong because it was going to focus obsessively on Iraq, thereby making it impossible to raise the fundamental strategic issues. Alas, that forecast was correct, and we're still stuck in the strategic quagmire we created. Up to our throats. So let's try again to get it right.

Like Afghanistan before it, Iraq is only one theater in a regional war. We were attacked by a network of terrorist organizations supported by several countries, of whom the most important were Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. President Bush's original analysis was correct, as was his strategy: We must not distinguish between the terrorists and their national supporters. Hence we need different strategies for different enemies, but we need to defeat all of them.

Afghanistan was the classic example, because the Taliban regime was at once home to, and sponsor of, al Qaeda. Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11, and we responded against the terrorist organization and against the regime that supported it. Once the Taliban had been destroyed, and al Qaeda had been shattered, President Bush launched a political strategy: support the creation of a free Afghanistan, implant the basic institutions of democratic civil society, work toward free elections so that Afghans could freely govern themselves.

Call it democratic revolution.

That was supposed to be the model for the rest of the war, and it was the right strategy. Use military force where necessary, against both the terrorists and the sponsoring regimes, and support democratic revolution. The whole region understood that strategy, and you could see the consequences. There were pro-democracy demonstrations, even in the most unexpected places, such as Damascus and Riyadh, where none had been seen in human memory. In Iran, where the democratic opposition had shown its passion for several years, the tempo increased. And all the terror masters, in Baghdad, Tehran, Damascus, and Riyadh, trembled, fearing that their moment of power and glory was about to pass.

The president clearly understood both the stakes and the opportunity. The "Axis of Evil" was — and is — very real, as the tyrants of Iran, Iraq, and North Korea knew full well. There is now abundant evidence of the close cooperation among them, and with their Libyan, Syrian and Pakistani friends, ranging from nuclear projects to other weapons of mass destruction, and to vital support (sometimes in tandem, sometimes separately) to the terror network.

The terror masters also knew that their greatest threat came from their own people, who were disgusted at the oppressive and corrupt dictatorships, and who saw the United States as the source of their imminent liberation.

Again, the president described the situation well: Time was not on our side, for delay would enable our enemies to regroup and plan for the next challenge. I kept imploring "faster, please," because it was luminously clear that the terror masters were planning for the battle of Iraq. They publicly announced that they would attempt to do in post-liberation Iraq what they had previously accomplished in Lebanon in the 1980s and 1990s: Use a combination of terror, kidnapping, and political/religious agitation to break our will, drive us out, and expand their own power.

The terror masters could not possibly stand by and permit an easy triumph in Iraq, for that would seal their own doom. For them, the battle of Iraq was an existential conflict, the ultimate zero-sum game. If we won, they died. But, blinded by our obsession with Iraq, we did not see it. For once, the president's intuition failed him. This failure to recognize the enormity of the stakes, and hence the intensity of the coming assault, was heartbreaking, for us and the other members of the Coalition, and for the Iraqi people. It was the ultimate intelligence failure, a pure failure of vision.

Had we seen the war for what it was, we would not have started with Iraq, but with Iran, the mother of modern Islamic terrorism, the creator of Hezbollah, the ally of al Qaeda, the sponsor of Zarqawi, the longtime sponsor of Fatah, and the backbone of Hamas. So clear was Iran's major role in the terror universe that the Department of State, along with the CIA one of the most conflict-averse agencies of the American government, branded the Islamic Republic the world's number one terror sponsor. As it still does.

Moreover, the Islamic Republic was uniquely vulnerable to democratic revolution, for, by the mullahs' own accounting, no less than seventy percent of the Iranian people hated the clerical fascist regime in Tehran, and hundreds of thousands of young Iranians had shown a disposition to challenge their oppressors in the streets of the major cities. Had we supported them then and there, in the immediate aftermath of Afghanistan, when the entire region was swept by political tremors of great magnitude, the evil regime might well have fallen, thereby delivering an enormous blow to the jihadis all over the world. I do not think we would have needed a single bomb or a single bullet.

So be it. God created profoundly fallible creatures on this earth, and human history is mostly the story of error and accident. There are many battles ahead, and we may yet engage on the full battlefield. One thing is certain: There will be no peace in Iraq so long as the terror masters rule in Damascus, Riyadh, and Tehran. Those who attended closed discussions with the Iraqi defense minister a week ago heard a long list of evidence and cries of outrage against the murderous mullahcracy next door, and even though the leaders of the West — sadly including some of our own — continue to pretend that diplomacy may yet settle things in the Middle East, they cannot possibly believe it. This is a fight to the finish, still a zero-sum game.

The main problem remains the failure of vision, never more evident than in the first presidential debate. The president dismissed the question about Iran by talking only about the nuclear "issue," while Senator Kerry, incredibly, restated his belief that the same policy that failed to deter North Korea would somehow work with the Iranians. The president knows who the Iranians are, while the senator is an active appeaser. But neither was inclined to deal with the central issue, which is that the Iranians, the Syrians, and the Saudis are killing our men and women in Iraq, and we are playing defense, which is a sucker's game.

In the past week, the Iranian people have again taken to the streets in every major city in the country. The chatterers pay no heed, because there is only one zero-sum game that interests them, which is the election, and the election is about Iraq, or so they say.

Except that it isn't, really. It's about the war. The real war, the regional war, the war they are waging against us even if we refuse to acknowledge it.

Faster, damnit."

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 05:57 AM | Comments (13) | TrackBack

October 21, 2004

Reza Pahlavi's Letter to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. (UPDATED!)

October 20, 2004
RezaPahlavi.org
Reza Pahlavi

"Her Excellency Louise Arbour

High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations
1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland
October 20th, 2004

Your Excellency,

I am writing to you with a profound concern about the fate of Ms. Jilla Izadi, a thirteen-year-old girl who has been condemned to death by stoning in the city of Marivan, Iran.

According to substantiated reports from Iran, Jilla is presently in prison for being impregnated by her fifteen-year-old brother. Since this is not the first time that a woman is to be stoned to death for such charges, I am deeply concerned that the Islamic regime might indeed carry out the sentence in defiance of all civilized norms and protocols.

My compatriots are rightfully alarmed by these reports and are engaged in an international campaign to reflect Jilla's condition in Iran and to save her from further trauma and violence. Apart from the inhumane cruelty of stoning, we are concerned about the future treatment of Jilla and other children who are victims of their life condition and, regardless of their age, are placed in prisons. Children like Jilla and her brother are victims themselves and have no guilt in their sad circumstances. They need counseling and protection and not imprisonment.

The clerical regime in Iran is a signatory to the United Nations' Declaration of the Rights of the Child and as such, is obligated to fully respect the basic rights of the Iranian children. Iranians have the right to due process and fair treatment in accordance with all of the United Nations' declarations and charters on human rights.

I urgently ask your Excellency's good offices to utilize all its available resources to save Jilla from undue and unfortunate conditions that she has been subjected to. The Islamic Regime of Iran must be held accountable for its violations of human rights against the people of Iran and its failure to comply with the UN charter.
With warmest regards,

Reza Pahlavi "

If you are a blogger or member of the media please notify your readers of Jilla's (13 yr old) death sentence and the continuing human rights abuses as well as terrorist activities sponsored by the regime of mullahs!

Meanwhile, hundreds of residents in the city of Hamadan retaliated against regime forces who had begun to brutalize female residents who were not wearing the mandated veil, or following regime-enforced Ramadan rules.

Also, be sure to check out Winds of War: October 21/04!

Mr. VodkaPundit's got a great question for the European appeasers...

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 03:03 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

October 20, 2004

WE HEAR YOU!

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 09:01 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

Business as usual...

The following article written by Samira Mohyeddin is a must read for anyone who is passionate about justice, human rights and the Iranian struggle for freedom.

Does Trade Equal Human Rights or Denote the Presence of a Democratic System?
October 20, 2004
Samira Mohyeddin

"In Toronto, on Monday October 18, 2004, the Iran Canada Business Council (ICBC) held its annual general meeting and seminar entitled, "The Bilateral Relationship and its Impact on Your Business with Iran". Founded in 1992, the goals of the organization are two fold:

· To promote and support trade and investment between Iran and Canada.

· To serve as an advisory body to the Canadian government on matters related to trade and economic relations with Iran.

In Iran, on Monday October 18, 2004, news reports, inside and outside of the country, began to circulate about a thirteen year-old Iranian girl, Zhila Izadi, who has been sentenced to death by stoning, upon discovery that she was carrying the child of her fifteen year-old brother. Izadi is currently in prison, and her brother, also in prison, has received one hundred and fifty lashes as his punishment. Two months ago, on Sunday August 15, 2004, a 16 year-old girl by the name of Atefeh Rajabi, was executed in the town of Neka, located in the province of Mazandaran, for "engaging in acts incompatible with chastity" (Agence France Presse, Amnesty International). The execution was carried out by the order of Neka's "judicial administrator" and was approved by both the Supreme Court of the Islamic Republic and the chief of the nation's judiciary branch, Mahmoud Shahroudi.

The Iran Canada Business Council is quite concerned that strained Iran-Canada relations, due in part to the tragic killing of Canadian photojournalist, Zahra Kazemi, will be bad for business, but they need not worry. When everything in our world is measured by dollars and cents, it has become increasingly difficult to situate the abstract and, at times, ambiguous notion of human rights as the new
bottom line.

Even as the Islamic Republic of Iran continues to accelerate the number of arrests, executions, tortures, amputations, stonings, and other atrocities and injustices, on May 29, 2004, the World Bank awarded it with two loans totaling 369 million dollars. As justification for granting the loans, the World Bank asserted that they were awarded to help the people of Iran: "In many countries we have enfranchised civil societies," the Bank's president, James D. Wolfensohn said at a luncheon, "Should we stop doing that and wait until we had perfect countries before we lend?" Wolfensohn continued by professing: "The easiest thing for me, for the World Bank, would be to say, just wait until these countries are democratic, but that is impractical. The bank is not the United Nations. Its goal is economic development. Sometimes this must go hand in hand with democratic development." This is an argument that is repeatedly invoked; the suggestion being that somehow the personal status laws of women in Iran will shift dramatically because French car manufacturer, Renault,decided to open up a plant in Tehran, or that the barbarous act of stoning will halt because the French oil conglomerate, TOTAL, won a 1.2 billion dollar bid to extract Iranian natural gas in the southern Pars region of the Persian Gulf.

However absurd the argument, organizations, such as the Iran Canada Business Council and UK Trade and Investment, have no need to be concerned and can rest assured that no action will be taken by the international community in this regard. In fact, quite the opposite has been happening. The commonwealth countries, along with the EU, for the past decade, have been heavily pursuing trade with Iran with no checks or balances.

Unfortunately the tragedy of Atefeh Rajabi and Zhila Izadi, are not anomalies in Iran, and however ambiguous or contested the notion of universal human rights has become, there is nothing abstract about a sixteen year-old girl's lifeless body hanging from a crane."

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 08:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Hear this one before? (UPDATED)

via TEHRAN (Reuters) -

"Iran is ready to prove to the world it is not producing atomic weapons if..."

Ahh yes, the big IF! How long have the Mullahs and the BIG 3 been playing this game?

Meanwhile... Iran has said it test fired a more accurate version of its Shahab-3 missile, already believed capable of hitting Israel and US bases in the Gulf.

MUST READ: Reza Torkzadeh raises the roof at WindsOfChange.net with a solid rundown of the current situation in re: to the regime in Iran. If you've got time, check out Reza's blog as well!

The regime continues to execute/publicly hang Iranians who openly speak-out and act against the regime of mullahs:

Five more people executed in northern Iran
via Iran Focus -

"Tehran, Oct. 20 – Four men were hanged in the town of Sari in the northern province of Mazandaran on charges of armed violence. The men, identified only by their first names, Mohammad-Reza, Hamid-Reza, Hassan and Reza, were executed after the Supreme Islamic Court upheld the original judge’s verdict.

The chief prosecutor of Mazandaran province, Mohammad-Reza Foulad-Ameli, said the four men were part of a secret armed group. They were arrested after a year-long surveillance operation by the security forces, he said.

Another man was also hanged in the city of Qazvin. He was accused of murder.

Courts in Mazandaran Province have increased issuing death sentences for those accused of a variety of crimes."

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 08:41 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

October 19, 2004

Clashes in Yazd!

via Iran Focus -

"Tehran, Oct. 19 - Clashes erupted between motorcyclists and Iranian security forces in Yazd (central Iran) following reports of harassment of cyclists by local police.

Police set up patrols in Karkard Square in Yazd yesterday morning and arrested a number of motorcyclists. Ensuing clashes between some 300 cyclists and security forces left a number of people wounded.

Eye-witnesses said that angry cyclists pursued and destroyed several cars belonging to the security forces and also set alight police motorcycle tyres.

At least 15 protesters have been detained. Their fate is presently unknown."

The American public as well as the greater world are beginning to realize that supporting the Iranian people in their struggle is a necessary element in winning the "war on terror". If only the Presidential candidates could realize this as well...

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 08:03 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Stop Them!

Are the Presidential candidates blind to what is going on? Instead of diluting the debate in America with irrelevant subjects such as gay daughters and billionaire wives, would it be too much to ask for our "leaders" to have a meaningful discussion of the real war, the stakes, the Mullahs in Iran, and how America is going to truly defend freedom? "Freedom"-infused rhetoric absent of a sound policy to back it up hardly solves the problems we face!

via Iran va Jahan
by Koroosh Afshar -
...
"The mullahs of the Islamic Republic have, at several times, shown their thirst for carnage in the past 25 years of ruling over Iran . They have a long history of plotting suicide attacks and waging wars internationally and silencing any opposing voice domestically. Having brutalized the Iranian nation all throughout these years, having kept most of the people under the poverty line, one shouldn't be astonished on how these "men of Allah" have had absolutely no problem finding recruits and sending poor souls after the so-called promised paradise through shedding the blood of other humans. If you are an Iranian, it wouldn't be very strange for you to have at least one dear and near lost at the bloody hands of these shopkeepers of religion. The infamousness of the Shiite clerics of Iran is not a new story to be told over again, as they are already known to the world as the "bad guys".

The reason for writing this article is, however, not retelling the same old story, but an untold one, I am sure you haven't heard yet.

Almost a month ago the Supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's appointed judge in the province of "Mazandaran", in the South of the Caspian sea , sentenced "Atefeh Rajabi" a 16-year-old girl to death for committing adultery. The poor girl, deprived of even the very basic motherly love, was hanged in the public before the dismayed eyes of a people who have long forgotten that they were no more living than "Atefeh" was now. Just before she was hanged, "Atefeh" had willed everything she possessed to the poor girls like herself. A short time later, it was revealed that the Islamic judge and a few of his men had raped this little girl before hanging her.

The tragedy of "Atefeh" was still inflicting its heavy and painful burden on the Iranians' conscience that a report came out proclaiming that another girl, 13-year-old "Zheela", was sentenced to "stoning to death" by another Islamic judge in the city of "Marivan", Western Iran. This poor child is sentenced to death because she has been impregnated by her 15-year-old brother.

I am deeply astounded by the level of some of your politicians' credulity speaking of peace and a "better tomorrow" while they see that Islamic fundamentalism is literally marring the fresh minds of future parents of our world. Can't they see what is happening to "Zheela"? Couldn't they see what happened in "Beslan"? Can't they see us? Having been brought up in an "Islamiorated" society where seeing coffins and wild mobs in our streets was an everyday experience I don't really know how many years should pass before we will be able to gain our mental health back.

If the world cannot save little "Zheela" from these brutal Islamic militants, then how could your politicians speak of disarming them from their nuclear weapons?

Saving her is undoubtedly the right thing to do.

Let us not forget that "It may not always be easy, convenient, or politically correct to stand for truth and right, but it is the right thing to do - Always."

- Koorosh Afshar is a pseudonym for a university student in Tehran , his name has been changed for his protection."

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 10:39 AM | Comments (11) | TrackBack

October 18, 2004

Exporter of Terrorism.

via Sun-Sentinel -
...
"Iran's mullahs have plenty to gain from the unrest, instability, political turmoil, and economic failures of Iraq and Afghanistan among other countries in the region. The exportation of Iran's Islamic revolution serves to cover-up the mullahs' own instability and fragile position in Iran and is the flip side of the coin of their ongoing policy of domestic suppression.

Peace and stability in Iraq and throughout the entire region is only possible through an all out confrontation of Iran's regime. The mullahs' hope is that in this election year the United States will not take the lead in any initiations beyond Iraq and Afghanistan. Banking on this, the Iranian regime is pushing its luck on both fronts: extending suppression inside Iran and exporting fundamentalism and terrorism outside Iran, particularly into Iraq.

Europe and the United States must join forces and take a firm stand against the fundamentalist regime of Iran. They must refuse to be intimidated by the mullahs' terrorist acts, and refuse any type of negotiations as long as Iran continues to sponsor terrorism, acquire weapon of mass destruction and violate the rights of its people.

There is now a pragmatic solution, centered on the Iranian opposition, to uproot Islamic fundamentalism once and for all. The Western countries should support this international movement and the efforts of Iranian people for a regime change."

If only the Presidential candidates would address this most important issue of our time.

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 12:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Bloggers Rise UP!

The regime of Mullahs, who the EU is so desperate to appease in an effort to sustain lucrative economic relations, is on the verge of stoning a 13 year old girl to death.

via Iran Press Service -

"According to Iranian and foreign press, Zhila Izadi, a 13 years old girl from the north-western city of Marivan had been condemned to death by stoning after being found that she had been pregnant from her 15 years-old brother."
...
"Human rights activists in Denmark said though Zhila’s sentence had not been confirmed yet, but the fear is that, with the family’s approval, she faces the same faith as that of Ms. Ateqeh Rajabi, the 16 years-old girl hanged in public by the judge, a cleric, who condemned her on charges of prostitution.

“A court in Marivan has condemned Zhila to death by stoning and the family, which is very fundamental, has agreed”, confirmed Ms. Nahid Riazi of a Copenhagen-based human rights group that fights to the rights of women, adding that the young girl had been separated from her new born baby after the birth.

Ms. Rajabi was publicly hanged on a street in the city centre of Neka in the northern province of Mazandaran, on 15 August, for "acts incompatible with chastity".

Faced with domestic and international outcry of dismay, the authorities said the young girl was “mentally incompetent”.

However, informed sources revealed that Ms. Ateqeh was sentenced to death after, during the "trial", she expressed outrage at the misogyny and injustice in the Islamic Republic and its Islam-based judicial system.

“The lower court judge was so incensed by her protestations that he personally put the noose around her neck after his decision had been upheld by the Supreme Court”, the sources reported.

The execution of Ateqeh Rajabi was the tenth execution of a child offender in Islamic Republic recorded by Amnesty International since 1990.

Amnesty International is alarmed that this execution was carried out despite reports that Ateqeh Rajabi was not believed to be mentally competent, and that she reportedly did not have access to a lawyer at any stage.

As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Iran is bound not to execute child offenders. Both treaties provide that capital punishment shall not be imposed for offences committed by persons under 18 year of age at the time of committing the offence.

Though it is possible that the Iranian authorities reject the stoning sentence, but it remains that the accused could very probably be condemned to death, human rights sources said, calling on the international community to put pressure on Iranian authorities to save Zhila from death."

Please contact all mainstream media, international organizations and American presidential candidates... ask them if this concerns them.

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 09:31 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

October 16, 2004

Another "last chance"... (UPDATED)

Update: Iran to Reject EU Three's Nuclear Proposal

Apparently nothing was accomplished at the 3 hour meeting of the G8 nations yesterday in Washington (Suprising isn't it?). The Europeans spoke of the incentives (Nuke fuel and improved trade ops/relationships) contained in a package they plan on presenting to the regime next week.

via Washington Times -

"The administration did not endorse the EU's benefits package. Even though U.S. officials said they told the Europeans to "go ahead" with it, they did not hide their belief that Tehran will not comply."

Meanwhile, from a translation via Peykeiran.com, we learn that a 13 year old Iranian girl is to be stoned to death.

"Having allegedly become pregnant by her 15-year-old brother, a thirteen-year-old Iranian girl by the name of Zhila (her last name has not been released), currently jailed in the city of Marivan, has been sentenced to death by stoning in the Islamic Republic. The date set for her execution is unknown. No other information is available."

The regime kills, tortures and arrests Iranians who speak out against the brutal regime... The regime kills Canadian journalists... The regime funds much of the terrorism in Iraq as well in the Palestinian/Israeli region... The regime executes young girls...

All the Big-three and Co. can think about are trade deals?

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 08:06 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

October 15, 2004

G8 meets today...

via Washington Post -
...
"Iran is definitely the next big issue. It's the number one issue that any administration, be it Kerry or Bush, will have to face immediately because of the intelligence assessment that predicts Iran could have the know-how and capability as early as the summer of 2005," said a senior State Department official, who requested anonymity because of the sensitive diplomacy.

"That's a disputed intelligence claim," the official said. "But any capability in the hands of a rogue nation with a long record of supporting terror and a clear interest in challenging the U.S. and Israel makes that the clearest threat facing U.S. interests in the next administration."

The mullahs have been a major issue long before now, but have been able to successfully remain below radar thanks to intense division within the Bush administration as well as the greater world's appeasement of the regime. If, God forbid, the Mullahs end up with a nuclear weapon, the free world can kiss the spread of liberty goodbye.

Read our Wednesday post regarding today's G8 meeting!

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 08:00 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

October 14, 2004

Iraq Accuses Iranian Embassy of Killing Agents!

via AFP -
...
"Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's government has escalated its rhetoric against Iran in recent days, accusing the neighbouring Islamic republic of running a campaign of sabotage in Iraq.

But Shahwani's claims of huge caches of documents seized in the September raids are the most explicit charges to date against Iran and the first time an Iraqi party has been publicly named as Tehran's proxy.

Shahwani said that during the raids, "Documents were obtained ... (showing) the Iranian regime ... is seeking to embroil some of the SCIRI members in subversive acts to exaccerbate Iraq's wounds and dominate it."

The intelligence director said the documents showed Iran had a 45-million-dollar budget for sowing chaos in Iraq and had recruited members of Badr and a subsidiary party, Hezbollah, to kill Iraqi intelligence agents."

45 million is pocket-change for the Mullahs. They are certainly spending several times that throughout Iraq.

Iraq Accuses Iranian Embassy of Killing Agents

October 14, 2004
Agence France Presse
AFP

Iraq's national intelligence chief Mohammed al-Shahwani has accused Iran's Baghdad embassy of masterminding an assassination campaign that has seen 18 intelligence agents killed since mid-September.

Shahwani told AFP a series of raids on three Iranian "safe houses" in Baghdad on September 29 had uncovered a treasure trove of documents linking Iran to plots to kill members of the intelligence service and using the Badr former militia of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq's (SCIRI) as its tool.

SCIRI has vigourously denied the allegations and counter-charged that the intelligence service is full of veterans of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's military who are now renewing their vendetta against former Shiite resistance groups based out of Iran in the 1980s.

Since mid-September, 18 Iraqi intelligence agents have been killed in Iraq, 10 of them by the Badr organisation on orders from Iran and the rest by Al-Qaeda-linked foreign militant Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, Shahwani charged.

"Badr and Zarqawi have assassinated 18 of my men," Shahwani said from his heavily-guarded villa in central Baghdad.

Shahwani confirmed that two of his intelligence agents were beheaded by Zarqawi's Unity and Holy War group, as seen in a video released by the fighters on Wednesday.

The intelligence chief said he suspected Tehran was funding Zarqawi, but lacked conclusive proof.

Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's government has escalated its rhetoric against Iran in recent days, accusing the neighbouring Islamic republic of running a campaign of sabotage in Iraq.

But Shahwani's claims of huge caches of documents seized in the September raids are the most explicit charges to date against Iran and the first time an Iraqi party has been publicly named as Tehran's proxy.

Shahwani said that during the raids, "Documents were obtained ... (showing) the Iranian regime ... is seeking to embroil some of the SCIRI members in subversive acts to exaccerbate Iraq's wounds and dominate it."

The intelligence director said the documents showed Iran had a 45-million-dollar budget for sowing chaos in Iraq and had recruited members of Badr and a subsidiary party, Hezbollah, to kill Iraqi intelligence agents.

"A document (showed) that Iran allocated a budget to Badr Corps, totalling 45 million dollars.

"Among the objectives of this budget is to back the formation of a security service grouping several directorates to carry out a set of subversive acts including ... physical liquidation."

Shahwani flipped through folders of charts and writing in Farsi that he said his agents were still sifting through.

He claimed his intelligence service had obtained the names and addresses of Badr members working directly for Iran.

Badr, the former paramilitary wing of SCIRI, has formerly renounced violence since the party returned to Iraq in the spring of 2003 after a 20-year exile in Iran.

SCIRI vehemently denies the charges.

"These are false accusations made against the organisation. Badr and SCIRI are the biggest threats to terrorists," said SCIRI spokesman Haitham al-Husseini.

Instead, Husseini charged that Shahwani, a general who fled Saddam's Iraq, was running amuck and taking out his bias against Shiite parties which fought Saddam during the 1980s when Iran was at war with Iraq.

"We criticise the way the new intelligence agency is ... hiring ex-officers of Saddam Hussein's military back to their posts. They have a history of targeting SCIRI and Badr members."

The two groups currently serve in the interim parliament and Allawi government.

Shahwani says that four Iraqis who were arrested following a botched assassination attempt on an Iraqi intelligence officer in September belonged to the Hezbollah of Iraq party and had confessed to being on the payroll of Iran's intelligence service

Hezbollah is part of the SCIRI alliance of Shiite parties.

The intelligence chief took out dossiers and glossy photos of 27 members of Iran's embassy in Iraq and accused them of masterminding Iranian covert operations.

"We will ask them to leave the country," Shahwani said.

Shahwani also claimed that Iranian spies had held meetings at Iraqi politician Ahmed Chalabi's Baghdad home since May when the one-time Pentagon favourite's house was raided by Iraqi police and US forces, saying that Chalabi was suspected by the Americans of leaking intelligence to Iran.

The Iraqi foreign ministry declined to comment on the intelligence chief's allegations against the embassy.

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 01:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Liberty vs. The Mullahs

via New Statesman -
...
"Iran is surrounded, and in some cases threatened, by nuclear countries and forces: the Americans in the Gulf, Nato's arms in Turkey, Israel (with its formidable though absurdly unacknowledged nuclear arsenal), Russia and Pakistan. Having its own bomb would lessen the constraints, allowing Iran more freedom to try to expand its theocratic influence. Whatever the deplorable consequences of a nuclear Iran for world safety - not only the perils of a bomb in the hands of a fundamentalist regime, but also the copycat effect on the region, possibly signalling the death knell of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) - it would provide a safety net for Tehran's own leaders."
...
"Yet with George W Bush and Ayatollah Khamenei in charge of their respective countries, with hard men on both sides, the notion of a new relationship seems a forlorn, if not surreal, hope. The much more likely outcome, if Iran continues to defy the IAEA, is that the US will succeed, at the end of this year, in getting Iran referred to the UN Security Council for breach of the NPT, and will then press the council to punish Iran with some form of sanctions. It is quite unclear what such sanctions might be, beyond a tightening of existing restrictions on dual-use equipment and so forth, or indeed whether Russia and China would allow any sanctions resolution to get through the council.

In its current mood, Iran would probably shrug off minor sanctions. But, for all its bravado, the country is not in a strong position economically. For the moment, it is floating along, buoyed up by the high price of oil, its people lulled into political passivity. But oil and gas apart, Iran has nothing to sustain it. Its other industries are sclerotic, and a strong nationalistic tendency in the new parliament (right-wing, because most reformist candidates were barred from competing in February's general election) is blocking development by insisting on vetting all foreign contracts. While America's unilateral sanctions are painful, barring all US investment and deterring others from investing in Iran's oil and gas, UN oil sanctions would destroy the regime.

None the less, it is unlikely that petroleum consumers will impose oil sanctions, if for no other reason than the precipitous effect this would have on oil prices. Nor, so long as the top people in Iran and America keep their jobs, is there likely to be any sort of grand, solve-all bargain. So we have a stalemate: it looks as if the perilous brinkmanship will continue - until one side or the other steps over the edge."

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 01:35 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Russia Says Finished Building Iran Nuclear Plant.

via MOSCOW (Reuters) -

"Russia's top nuclear authority said on Thursday it had finished construction of an atomic power plant in Iran -- a project the United States fears Tehran could use to make nuclear arms.

"We're done. All we need to do now is work out (with the Iranians) the agreement on sending spent fuel back to Russia," said a spokesman for Russia's Atomic Energy Agency (RosAtom).

To allay U.S. concerns, Russia has promised not to start up the Bushehr plant in southern Iran until Tehran guarantees to return to Russia all spent nuclear fuel, which can be used in making weapons."

Pheeeeew, thank goodness. You see, the west was beginning to question which side Russia was really on, but hey, as long as the Mullahs guarantee to return all spent nuclear fuel, what's there to worry about? Thanks Russia!

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 08:35 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

S.O.S. IRAN introduces “The Pasheez Project” for Removal of the Iranian Regime!

via S.O.S. Iran Press Release -

"An ingenious Project designed to provoke massive civil disobedience, The Pasheez (Persian for coins and low value currency notes) Project, was announced by “S.O.S. Iran” on Sunday, October 10, 2004. This announcement was made on XTV, an organ of S.O.S. Iran, a satellite television station broadcasting worldwide to Iranians living inside and outside Iran from Los Angeles, CA.

The Pasheez Project calls for all Iranians inside Iran to collect and save all small Iranian currency, paper bills as well as coins. By taking these small value currencies out of circulation, the architects of the Pasheez Project intend to cripple Iran’s day-to-day business transactions and accelerate the start of massive civil disobedience and demonstrations and bring the ruling cleric regime of Iran to its knees.

XTV’s phones have been ringing off the hook by thousands of Iranians supporting this Project. Reports from Iran indicate that small stores and shops are already beginning to feel the effect of this nationwide Project as people inside the country are collecting the Pasheez.

S.O.S. Iran, a Not-for-Profit organization, is a group of Iranian technocrats and scientists as well as opposition groups from around the world who advocate a secular democratic system of government for Iran. S.O.S. Iran’s goal is to replace the current regime of Iran by peaceful means and to help rid the world of religious terrorism.

Although Iran’s terrorist government has been desperately attempting to block XTV’s satellite signals inside Iran, S.O.S. Iran’s supporters around the world and most importantly inside Iran, believe S.O.S. Iran is the opposition organization they have been longing for in the past 25 years and unanimously believe this organization’s systematic approach for the removal of the Islamic Republic of Iran will without a doubt succeed.

For additional information, please visit www.sosiran.com or contact Dr. Iman Foroutan, Executive Director of S.O.S. Iran."

It is indeed commendable that groups such as S.O.S Iran / XTV and other satellite stations have accomplished so much purely through viewer donations and volunteer support.

One can only imagine the feats that could be performed if the US Government were to provide the opposition with only 1/10 of the funds currently spent by the mullahs in their effort to influence and manipulate events within Iraq.

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 07:56 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Those ambitious mullahs...

Irfan Husain, a Pakistani political analyst, has some advice for the Mullahs...

"Before 9/11 and its immediate aftermath altered the regional balance of power irrevocably, Iran was well placed to project its influence beyond its borders. It was arming and funding the Shia Hazaras and Ahmed Shah Masood in their resistance against the Sunni Taleban in Afghanistan. Shia Muslims in Central Asia were being given scholarships to study theology in Iran’s seminaries, and Shia armed groups in Pakistan were being helped by Teheran in their fight against Sunni extremists."
...
"the invasion of Iraq brought opportunities as well as dangers for Iran. For the first time since Iraq’s creation after the First World War, the majority Shia population was in a position to gain power. Teheran understood that if it played its cards right, it could wield enormous influence in Baghdad after the Americans left.

Basically, Ayatollah Khamanei seems to have decided to proceed along two tracks. The first track has the firebrand Shia leader Moqtada al-Sadr leading his Mahdi army in an armed insurrection against the American occupiers. The idea is to make Iraq virtually ungovernable, forcing the Americans into an early exit. The second track consists of encouraging Grand Ayatollah Sistani, the hugely respected Iraqi cleric, to consolidate his power among the Shia community."
...
"Should a Shia-dominated Iraq emerge from the embers of the Gulf War, it can be expected to cooperate closely with Iran. While the seniority of its hierarchy of ayatollahs would give it considerable independence, the two countries would consult closely on a wide range of matters from oil prices to diplomacy.

Close ties between the world’s only two Shia countries would make for a formidable alliance. Given their oil and gas reserves, as well as their land mass and literate populations, they would dominate the region, and pose a major threat to American and Israeli interests."
...
"In the post-9/11 world, nuclear proliferation is a tough sell. Iran can ill afford a confrontation with the world’s sole superpower on an issue that isolates it, as none of its neighbours are happy with the thought of militant clerics with a nuclear arsenal. After the American elections, no matter who wins, the pressure on Teheran to roll back its uranium enrichment programme can only mount. The fact is that it is difficult to believe the official claim that Iran’s nuclear programme is entirely peaceful and is aimed at overcoming the country’s power shortage.

The ayatollahs in Teheran should try and put themselves in Bush and Sharon’s place: the former will not accept Iran’s dominance over the world’s biggest oil-producing region, while the latter would never countenance its sworn enemy’s possession of nuclear warheads and the missiles to deliver them.

There are times when it pays to tread softly, specially when you live in a rough neighbourhood."

It's really too bad that the topic of the Atomic Ayatollahs received such little attention during the debates. Perhaps today's press conference at the National Press Club will spark some desperately needed pre-election debate on this very important issue.

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 07:34 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

October 13, 2004

New York Sun - right on target! (Updated)

Via New York Sun Staff Editorial -

"Beyond that, it will be important in considering any proposed deal with Iran to focus on the fact that Iran's nuclear ambitions are not at the heart of America's dispute with Tehran. After all, India, Pakistan, Israel, and France all have nuclear weapons and America has full diplomatic and economic relations with them. There are a host of other issues on the table with Iran: its human rights record that includes executing a Canadian journalist, jailing student dissidents, and persecuting Jews, among others; its financial and logistical support for radical Islamist terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah that engage in suicide bombing attacks in Israel that kill Americans and Israelis; its harboring of Al Qaeda terrorists; and its aid to anti-American forces in Iraq."
...
"Senator Kerry is on record as preferring a negotiated approach to the Persian problem. President Bush himself has been too willing to countenance a European approach. On the campaign trail, Mr. Bush has said of the terrorists, "You can't negotiate with them." This would be an excellent moment for the president and his diplomats to keep that in mind."

Point of disagreement with the article: It's not a "Persian" problem! It's a "Mullahbarbarianterroristrepressivedictatorship" problem. Even if there isn't such a word!

Voice of America has a roundup of recent human rights violations committed by the regime in Iran. [Listen to report]
...
"An Iranian-American human rights group says the Iranian government has stepped up its campaign against pro-democracy dissidents, women and minorities with the staging of some 120 public hangings, and the arrest and imprisonment of more than 40 journalists. Members of the National Coalition of Pro-Democracy Advocates say that in the past year, the Islamic fundamentalist regime has been taking extreme measures to silence reform efforts."

"The non-profit group cites as evidence of the government's tactics an Amnesty International report of the public execution of a 16-year-old girl for "acts incompatible with chastity." Atefeh Rajabi was reportedly hanged in the Northern city center of Neka on August 15."

Never take freedom for granted! NEVER!!

Rewards for Iran?

New York Sun Staff Editorial
October 13, 2004

The press is full of trial balloons with respect to proposals for Europe or America to offer "incentives" for Iran agreeing to stop work on a nuclear weapon. The New York Times reported yesterday that "The package would lift a ban on exports to Iran of certain badly needed civilian aircraft parts, without which its fleet of civilian airliners has been virtually grounded."

One of the lessons of September 11 is that civilian aircraft in the hands of terrorists can do considerable damage. This is a point so obvious that it is painful to have to point it out. On what grounds does an officially designated terrorist regime get help from their target countries in flying civilian airliners? If the Europeans who are negotiating with the Iranians do not grasp this essential point, certainly the people of New York do.

Beyond that, it will be important in considering any proposed deal with Iran to focus on the fact that Iran's nuclear ambitions are not at the heart of America's dispute with Tehran. After all, India, Pakistan, Israel, and France all have nuclear weapons and America has full diplomatic and economic relations with them. There are a host of other issues on the table with Iran: its human rights record that includes executing a Canadian journalist, jailing student dissidents, and persecuting Jews, among others; its financial and logistical support for radical Islamist terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah that engage in suicide bombing attacks in Israel that kill Americans and Israelis; its harboring of Al Qaeda terrorists; and its aid to anti-American forces in Iraq.

Even were a deal reached in which the Iranians promised progress on all those fronts, there is no guarantee that the Iranians would not cheat on such a deal. Iraq cheated on its United Nations-supervised oil-for-food and disarmament arrangement. North Korea cheated on the nuclear disarmament deal that it cut with an overly credulous Clinton administration.

It is true that diplomacy is more likely to be successful when it is backed, as it is in the Bush administration, with a credible threat of the use of force. But count us as skeptical that America or its allies should send nuclear fuel or civilian airplane parts or anything else useful to Iran - other than aid to its democratic opposition - so long as the regime there is aiding and harboring terrorists and oppressing internal opposition.

Senator Kerry is on record as preferring a negotiated approach to the Persian problem. President Bush himself has been too willing to countenance a European approach. On the campaign trail, Mr. Bush has said of the terrorists, "You can't negotiate with them." This would be an excellent moment for the president and his diplomats to keep that in mind.

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 06:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Mullahs arrest more Iranian bloggers.

Via BBC -

"Six online journalists and webloggers have been arrested in Iran recently in a crackdown on dissent on the internet."
...
"We do not know where they are being held. We heard they have been kept in solitary confinement" - Detained journalist's relative

Of course a few days after the arrests, so-called "reformer" President Khatami will condemn these detentions, the bloggers will be released, and then the Mullahs and their friends throughout the world will claim that the regime is quite tolerant and allows dissention.

Pejman agrees it can be dangerous to blog in Iran.

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 02:29 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Carrots, Sticks, and a side of Blue Cheese - Ohh My!! (Updated)

The G8 will rendezvous in Washington on Friday to discuss the grand ideas the EU has conjured up in order to deal with Iran.

CNN reports that European officials have said they plan to offer Tehran "bigger sticks and bigger carrots."

What exactly do they mean by "bigger sticks and bigger carrots"? Can you visualize this? Perhaps Jack Straw and Joschka Fischer will pay their upteenth visit to the Mullahs and say "please ohh please accept our bigger carrots, because if you don't, we will be forced to pull out our bigger sticks!"

Does anyone have a guess as to what the European version of "bigger sticks" entails? Actually, don't waste your time. The stick, carrot, and blue cheese fantasy has been employed over and over again, and every single time we magically end up right where we started, if not in an even worse position.

For all practical purposes, European carrots, regardless of size, equate to improved "trade and cooperation agreement(s) between the European Union and Iran." Sticks for that matter can be thought of in this light: A mother moves a cookie jar that her son, Mikey, has been reaching into when he's not supposed to, to a location Mikey can no longer reach due to his small size. The mother then takes her son to the garage where the ladder is stored, and gives him a brief rundown on how to use this gravity-defying device.

The "carrot and stick" method, with regard to the Mullahs, has always been a method of circles, never failing to deliver us back to where we started. It has been a method of regression, not progress. This method will lead us to failure, unless effectively checked.

On Tuesday, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said "I think we've made very, very clear that Iran needs to take action on the nuclear issue... Our view is that it should be referred to the U.N. Security Council. That's where we think the next steps are."

Is the Bush Administration playing the European hand in an effort to box John Kerry in, as the senator doesn't at this point seem intent upon moving beyond his current position?

Why has the Bush Administration waited until now to address the Mullahs, and if the objectives of both the War on Terror and Bush Doctrine are to defeat terrorism and spread freedom (very noble goals), why has the pro-American Iranian street been left to fend for themselves?

Do terrorists really operate independently of states?

Isn't the government in Iran one of the biggest sponsors of international terrorism and does any part of the Bush Doctrine address this regime?

In the meantime, who brought the beer?

Daniel Drezner also has some thoughts about the Mullah-related foreign policy relationship between the US and EU.

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 10:10 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

October 12, 2004

Global Information System Report!

Global Information System -

A variety of sources have confirmed that the Iranian and Syrian governments, plus major Islamist groups, are continuing to debate whether to proceed with a major new terrorist attack in the West, and specifically the US, before the US elections on November 2, 2004.

Advisable to read the following report in its entirety:

"Intense Debate by Islamist Movements and Sponsoring States on New Terrorist Attacks on the West"

October 12, 2004
Global Information System
Jason Fuchs

A variety of sources have confirmed that the Iranian and Syrian governments, plus major Islamist groups, are continuing to debate whether to proceed with a major new terrorist attack in the West, and specifically the US, before the US elections on November 2, 2004.

GIS sources reported that the Islamist movement was engaged in intense strategic discussions about a new “spectacular” offensive against Western, specifically US targets. Critically, GIS sources added that these discussions involved the Islamist-jihadist movement’s chief state sponsors, including Iran and Syria. On the question of the proposed forthcoming Islamist offensive, GIS sources detailed: “[Government officials in] Damascus and Tehran, and [Islamist leaders in] Islamabad are in on the debate and are having major input.”

This internal debate, although couched in theological terms, was described by GIS sources as “extremely pragmatic”. The debate appeared to be attempting to discern the probable reaction by the US electorate to a pre-election strike, as well as what Washington’s response could be, and the degree to which such a strike would threaten the security of the sponsoring states. It also attempted to discern the anticipated reaction from the Muslim world to the extreme violence and bloodshed being proposed. As a routine, tactical matter, the preparedness and durability of the operational and support cells necessary to facilitate such a strike were also under review, although it appeared as though the debate focused much less on capability — about which many in the Islamist-jihadist community seemed to exude an air of confidence — but the review also considered the strategic ramifications of a new mass-casualty “spectacular”.

On this point, GIS sources stressed that it remained within the power of the sponsoring states to prevent the anticipated strikes. As one source noted: “If the sponsoring states really want to stop the attacks, they can do so on their own in more than one way.” Of particular concern to the Government of Pakistan was the possibility that a “spectacular” attack — which would inevitably involve Islamist networks operating from Pakistan — might push Washington into a position where it would stake US-Pakistani relations on the Pakistani ability to secure Osama bin Laden, as opposed to the current more general counter-terrorism cooperation. The US Bush Administration had repeatedly articulated its perception of Pakistan as a key ally ever since Pres. Pervez Musharraf’s decision to help US military efforts to remove the Taliban administration in Afghanistan following the September 11, 2001, attacks in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania.

Regional reports, notably a leaked Iraqi intelligence report published in the Iraqi daily al-Watan on September 22, 2004, stating that Abu Musab al- Zarqawi was preparing cells for attacks in Western Europe, were somewhat misleading. GIS sources revealed that Zarqawi does not directly control significant assets in Western Europe, but that non-Iraqi or non-resident Islamist fighters who had fought under his command in Iraq, some under the general banner of Jamaat al-Tawhid wa’l-Jihad (Unity and Jihad Group), had been reintegrated into Islamist units upon return to their home countries. These operatives answered to their local commanders in Western Europe and, on major strategic decisions, to the Islamist-jihadist leadership — specifically Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri — and their associated state sponsors. These cadres awaited directions from the above noted high command structure on future strategically significant operations.

Also of concern to the US Bush Administration were the late September 2004 maneuverings of a former “ally”, Iraqi National Congress (INC) President Ahmad Chalabi. GIS sources claimed on October 11, 2004, that Chalabi had assumed the rôle of foreign affairs and national security advisor to Moqtada Sadr. GIS sources explained that this move was, in many ways, a direct result of the resolution of the Najaf crisis and the subsequent US backed negotiations between Baghdad and Sadr’s Jaish al-Mahdi which saw the October 10, 2004, opening of a five-day “grace period” during which fighters in Baghdad’s Sadr City turned in heavy and medium weapons to the interim Government in exchange for promised amnesty arrangements and an accepted political rôle for Moqtada Sadr in the “new Iraq”.

The Najaf resolution had virtually excluded involvement by the Administration of Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and elevated the Qom-based Ayatollah Al- Sayyid Kadhem al-Haeri into a theological position equal to that of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, legitimizing Iranian influence in Iraqi Shi’ite affairs.

Further, the subsequent deal with Moqtada Sadr had convinced many in the region that, as one GIS source put it, “Moqtada — not the US — is so far the winner. Chalabi knows that Iran is winning and he’s using Moqtada as the gateway.”

That argument that Ahmad Chalabi saw Moqtada Sadr as a conduit to legitimacy and relevance emphasized the degree to which Sadr and his sponsors in Tehran had consolidated their victory in Najaf, in spite of devastating US operations against the Jaish al-Mahdi in the Shiite holy city which had seriously degraded the militia’s fighting capability and operational readiness and, tactically, threatened to render the group an irrelevant military force. The political failure which had followed Washington’s measurable military success had paved the way for Chalabi’s alleged “defection”. As well, the aggressive campaign which had been waged against him by Washington through press leaks which accused the INC leader of providing Iran with intelligence on Coalition forces and the August 8, 2004. Arrest warrants were issued against both Ahmad Chalabi and his cousin, Salem, by the Iraqi Central Criminal Court of Zuhair al-Maliky. These actions followed the late April 2004 “options memo” drafted by the US National Security Council (NSC), and presented at the White House, entitled “Marginalizing Chalabi”.1

Washington’s posture toward issues in central Iraq also continued to vary. By early October 2004, it had become increasingly evident not only that US negotiations with Sunni tribal leaders in Iraq had secured few of Washington’s apparent aims, and that the US Bush Administration was now increasingly aware of this fact. The immediate result of this perceived failure appeared to have been the US decision on September 31, 2004, to deploy a force of some 5,000 Coalition forces (3,000 US, 2,000 Iraqi) to “re-take” the Sunni triangle town of Samarra. While some had anticipated the Samarra operation as a precursor to further action in insurgent-controlled Iraqi population centers, particularly Fallujah, there now appeared to be significant hesitancy to conduct such operations until after the November 2004 elections, in spite of the US Bush Administration’s apparent reading of the situation on the ground.

The Bush Administration had long ago abandoned any hope for success from the ex-Ba’athist composed “Fallujah Brigade”, initially organized and deployed in April 2004 to manage the security situation in Fallujah without the need for a US military intervention. The Fallujah Brigade almost immediately began cooperating with the armed insurgents controlling the city, including, in some instances, turning over weapons and divulging the limited intelligence they had been provided by Coalition Forces.

A second US attempt to pacify Fallujah without an “invasion” had been less well publicized, but equally instructive. Following the perceived success in Najaf, the US attempted to impose a similarly organized settlement with the Sunni leadership of Fallujah. To this end, GIS sources reported, Washington sought to open a channel to a prominent Fallujah-based Ikwhani known as Abu Abdullah. Abu Abdullah, Washington appeared to believe, was in control of a number of armed networks operating both inside Fallujah and throughout the so-called Sunni Triangle. Regional reports indicated that Abu Abdullah’s forces were comprised mostly of former Ba’athists, potentially former Saddam Fedayeen. Based on the “good work” which Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani had done in resolving the August 2004 Najaf crisis, the US Bush Administration sought to open at least one channel to Abu Abdullah through Ayatollah Sistani. These talks continued through at least early September 2004.

Yet, the situation in Fallujah remained unchanged and the Abu Abdallah channel gained the Coalition absolutely no ground, largely because the Sunni cleric had been fundamentally misunderstood by his interlocutors. As GIS sources noted in late September 2004, Abu Abdallah — while extremely influential in Fallujah and, to an extent, throughout al-Anbar province — did not control significant military forces, at all, much less forces comprised of former Ba’athists. The latter expectation, that the forces were Ba’athist, appeared to have given Washington and particularly the CIA false hope; that because his forces were not committed “foreign fighters”, they might be swayed. In fact, while Abu Abdullah’s “forces” — if they could be called that — were negligible, his status as an Ikwhani cleric precluded him from reaching a deal with Coalition forces regardless of the terms offered. Abu Abdullah, and the circles he influenced, were committed Islamists who continued to view the Iraqi intifada in terms of it being a single component of a global jihad and not, as the CIA appeared perceive their position, a nationalist struggle. Thus, the talks had been virtually doomed from the start and further evidenced to many Iraqis that Washington continued to fail to understand the complex situation on the ground.

Moreover, the US decision to use Ayatollah Sistani as an intermediary had reinforced a growing sense among Iraqis that Washington would continue to overestimate the influence and centrality of the Grand Ayatollah. The Sunnis of Fallujah and its surrounding environs paid virtually no heed to Ayatollah Sistani and attempts to interpose the senior Shi’ite spiritual authority into perceived Sunni “internal affairs” had been met with what should have been expected resistance.

Iraqi confidence in the US had been further eroded by concern that a potential US Kerry Administration and (in light of comments by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on October 10, 2004, during a surprise visit to Iraq) perhaps even a second Bush Administration might attempt to quickly reduce US troop strength in Iraq following the January 2004 Iraqi elections.

The goal, apparently, continued to be to reduce the “footprint” of the Coalition occupation force.

Yet, as former consultant to the Strategy Unit of UK Prime Minister Tony Blair’s cabinet, Christopher Catherwood, noted to GIS: “It is not the size of the ‘footprint’ that matters. Just look at the small number of US forces that had been present in Saudi Arabia throughout the 1990s. Yet, even largely constrained to a single base, the reaction by many Saudis and Islamists was the same as though a full-scale occupying force had been deployed to Saudi soil.” Catherwood, the author of a new history entitled Churchill’s Folly: How Winston Churchill Created Modern Iraq, based on his research of the Chartwell Papers at Churchill College, Cambridge, added that he saw distinct similarities between Churchill’s to effectively “garrison” British ground forces to reduce the British military footprint — and, more importantly, expenditure — and the current discussion about “drawing down” troop levels to affect Iraqi perception of the Coalition presence. Even the US resort to airpower to combat the Islamist forces of Fallujah further mirrored Churchill’s efforts in the “Mesopotamian rebellion” of 1920 to rely on the Royal Air Force to subdue the insurgent threat.

While Washington had secured significant victories in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Tehran and its Islamist allies appeared cognizant that they had entered a critical period during which they apparently believed they retained the ability to affect the US November 2004 election and, potentially, reshape the strategic playing field of the region by decisively striking out against the US and the West. The question remained as to how the Islamist-jihadist movement would decide to act on this perceived capability and whether the West would confront the state sponsors of the planned offensive before it was too late.

Footnote

1. Inside the Takedown, Brian Bennett & Michael Weisskop;
Time, June 7, 2004.

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 09:27 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Mullahs continue infiltration into Iraq!

Via Washington Times -

"A top Iranian dissident living in Paris says up to 800 clerics and theology students from Iran are in the process of infiltrating cities in neighboring Iraq in time for the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, which begins Friday.
...
The religious leaders, dispatched by the Islamic Propaganda Organization, plan to use the holy month to propagate militant Islamic views, he said, with the goal of strengthening Iraqi political groups whose philosophy and aims coincide with those of Iran's theocratic regime.

The cleric said the religious leaders will take their message into Kut, Nasariyah, Amarra, Najaf, Basra and Baghdad, joining a massive network of other Iranian agents already in Iraq, many in armed underground cells.
...
He said four Iranian institutions — the Revolutionary Guards, the Ministry of Intelligence and Security, the state radio and television and the clergy — are coordinating the activities in Iraq. He also charged that Tehran has spent $70 million sending weapons and manpower, including suicide bombers, into Iraq.

Since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in April 2003, thousands of Iranian clerics have crossed into Iraq, bringing books, compact discs and audiotapes promoting their version of Islam."

Wouldn't it be wonderful if America could fast-forward through the next few weeks and be said and done with the Presidential election, so we could finally address some very serious issues in need of urgent resolution?

It would have been nice if during one of the last two debates, the candidates would have talked more about the threat the Mullahs in Iran constitute. Unfortunately, the candidate's discussion on Iran has extended no further than the assertion that they both continue to have faith in the European approach, which has largely been a very effective one. Effective for those governments who wish to maintain the status quo of economic relations with terrorists, despite the cost and threat such policies pose to the future of freedom and the lives of many!

Perhaps, as some say, America does have a plan to address the regime in Iran, but currently employs the European strategy in an effort to buy time and get past the Presidential election. If this is the case, so be it. The so-called "debate" and political schoolyard brawls will continue to be trumped, in importance, by facts on the ground and mission progress. Whether we wish to acknowledge this never, now, or later - will determine the story's ending.

So choose your own adventure...

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 07:00 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

October 11, 2004

Freedom is on the march!

Via Michael Gonzalez's piece in The Wall Street Journal! -

A foolproof way to know whether a society is on the way up, or down, is to track the movement of its people. Three million refugees have returned to Afghanistan from Pakistan, Iran and India. On my flight in to Kabul from New Delhi, I was able to put those numbers in human context. There they were, these refugees, giddily snapping pictures of each other with antiquated cameras. Others looked out the window with wonderment at the countryside of their ancestors -- a landscape they hardly knew. They were coming home, some for the first time in years, the younger ones to a place they'd never seen.

Very hopeful!

"Not only do I not want international troops to leave, I want them to stay here for many years," said a man I encountered near a thoroughfare, as U.S. tanks crunched by. A 22-year-old called Farhad -- who'd spent almost all his life in exile in Iran, but had moved back -- explained things to me by placing a can of Coke (what else?) on a bench and putting his hands on either side of it. Talking of his erstwhile place of exile, he said: "Iranians see their country and see that on one side Iraq's been liberated, and on the other Afghanistan's been liberated. No one in Iran likes the fundamentalists. They are praying they are next. Bush has brought peace to Afghanistan, and he will do that to Iraq. Will he do that to Iran?"

Very hopeful indeed!

Farhad has asked the million dollar question. Will the United States continue the push towards freedom and ally the land of liberty with the Iranian people who are in need of a good friend in their struggle? If the forces of liberty become misguided, lazy, and choose to be satisfied by a status quo of regional dictatorships and sort-of-democracies, then it's certain the free world has yet to experience its darkest hour. Freedom must prevail!

There's a difference between us. You think the people of this land exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom. And I go to make sure that they have it. - from Braveheart (1995)

Be sure to check out Afghan election coverage at the Command Post, A Small Victory, Blogs of War, Allah, and Serenity's Journal!

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 05:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Russia opposes referral of Iran to UN Security Council

BEIJING, Oct. 11 (Xinhuanet) -

Russia says it opposes a US proffer to refer Iran's nuclear case to the UN Security Council.

Visiting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made the remarks in Tehran at a joint news conference with his Iranian counterpart Kamal Kharazi.

Lavrov said that any unconstructive proposal is premature, and Russia expects the cooperation between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to continue.

Accusing Iran of developing nuclear weapons secretly, Washington is pressing the IAEA to refer Iran's case to the UN Security Council.

The IAEA last month adopted a resolution, urging Iran to suspend all of the activities related to nuclear activities and fully cooperate with the inspectors. The resolution was rejected by Iran, who was angered and termed it as "illegal".

The good Mr. Lavrov is correct. Sending the Mullahs to the security council in an effort to spank them with sanctions would be "unconstructive". Internationally enforced sanctions and heightened world attention on the regime, their terrorist activities in Iraq, and their plethora of crimes against humanity, would be very unconstructive for Russia, China, and the many European governments who continue to do business with the regime and view the dicators as the last remaining cookie that has yet to crumble at the hands of the United States and freedom's will.

The question is: Post-November election, what strategy will the US President pursue in order to spread freedom, ensure regional stability, and improve the overall condition of the world, while some of our so-called "allies" and other world powers don't exactly wish America well in her "Liberty Century" endeavor?

Progress will be tough to come by, but it must be pursued and ultimately achieved!

Before you go, definitely check out this very cool piece of NYC art that Michelle Malkin has uncovered!

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 09:10 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

October 10, 2004

More fighting in Iran!

SMCCDI has released a version much different than the story Al Jazeera and AFP are running with.

(Think about it: if Al Jazeera broadcasted news about Iranian citizens fighting against the evil regime of Mullahs in the struggle between freedom and tyranny, would this really be in the best interest of the other dictators in the region? Of course not, it would inspire their own citizens to do the same. So for whatever reasons, these sorts of news outlets portray freedom fighters as being drunken thugs, rapists, and in this case, as members of some obscure religious sect.)

At the end of the day, differences in reporting are to be expected, what can you do? It just goes to show that when quality news reporting hangs in the balance, what matters is not the size of the media outlet, but rather the journalistic ethics an organization or individual adhere to.

You be the judge!

Posted by ActivistChat.com at 07:02 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

Rafsanjani in 2005?

TEHRAN (Reuters) -

Iranian political heavyweight and former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani has said he is considering standing for the presidency in polls next year, according to a newspaper.

Rafsanjani, a business-minded, mid-ranking cleric would be a strong candidate for president with the likely support of