![[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index](http://www.activistchat.com/images/ActivistChatStandsLogo.jpg) |
[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Views expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Liberator
![](images/avatars/gallery/Fantasy RPG/baldursgate_kivan.gif)
Joined: 29 Aug 2003 Posts: 1086
|
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:47 pm Post subject: Straw Rejects Call to Support Iranian Opposition Groups |
|
|
Jack Straw:
"Regime change in Iran is not part of the policy of Her Majesty's government, nor do I think it would be wise,"
**********************************************************
Straw Rejects Call to Support Iranian Opposition Groups
November 01, 2005
Islamic Republic News Agency
IRNA News
http://www.iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2005&m=11&d=01&a=8
London -- Foreign Secretary Jack Straw Tuesday rejected a call from a supporter of the MKO terrorist group to start talks with Iranian opposition groups to overthrow the country's government.
"Regime change in Iran is not part of the policy of Her Majesty's government, nor do I think it would be wise," Straw told MPs.
The foreign secretary was urged in parliament by Conservative MP Brian Binley, who was paid by the so-called National Council of Resistance to travel to the UN General Assembly in New York in September to rally support for the MKO's front group.
The rejection came after Foreign Office Minister Kim Howells dismissed a call from Binley to back his campaign to deproscribe the MKO as a terrorist group.
"The Mujahideen-e Khalq Organization (MKO) is proscribed in the UK under the Terrorism Act 2000. It has a long history of involvement in terrorism in Iran and elsewhere and is, by its own admission, responsible for violent attacks that have resulted in many deaths," Howells said. _________________ JAVID IRAN!
www.anjomane-padeshahi.org
http://aryamehr11.blogspot.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Liberator
![](images/avatars/gallery/Fantasy RPG/baldursgate_kivan.gif)
Joined: 29 Aug 2003 Posts: 1086
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Oppenheimer
Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 1166 Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/02.htm#hddr_6
Iran
12. Mr. Brian Binley (Northampton, South) (Con): If he will make a statement on Iran’s nuclear programme. [23252]
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Jack Straw): The International Atomic Energy Agency’s board of governors, in its resolution of 24 September, declared Iran non-compliant with its safeguard obligations under the non-proliferation treaty. While in New York yesterday and Sunday, I took part in informal discussions with Security Council partners and others to consider how the international community could take the issue further forward.
The House will also be aware that the UN Security Council issued a statement at the end of last week condemning the comments made on 26 October by Iranian President Ahmadinejad that Israel must be wiped off the map. These disgraceful comments further underline international concerns about Iran’s nuclear programme.
Mr. Binley: Given the concern that the Foreign Secretary refers to, especially about recent statements, do the Government still rule out discussions with groups opposed to the Iranian regime, even though internal regime change remains an option that could considerably reduce the implied threat?
Mr. Straw: Regime change in Iran is not part of the policy of Her Majesty’s Government; nor do I think it would be wise.
Dr. Liam Fox (Woodspring) (Con): In relation to Iran, the Prime Minister said at the end of the European summit:
“People are going to ask, ‘When are you going to do something about this?’”
What do the Government intend to do, rather than simply say, and what is their time scale?
Mr. Straw: The Government are working with our European partners and now, increasingly, with the United States and the Russian Federation to ensure that the Iranian Government become fully compliant with their obligations under the non-proliferation treaty. There are significant questions about the purpose and capability of Iran’s nuclear programme. As yet, there is no conclusive proof that it is to be used as a nuclear weapons programme, just significant questions, and we need to be careful about what is made public and about the basis on which we make those judgments.
Over the past two and half years there has been much frustration in the E3 process. At the same time we have, by dint of negotiation and strong pressure from the international community, managed to secure a situation in which the enrichment of uranium by the Iranians remains suspended. We intend to continue with that as well as, in conformity with the Paris agreement, putting before Iran provisions by which it may be offered guarantees for its nuclear power programme while the international community receives objective guarantees that no part of the programme can be used for nuclear weapons purposes.
Dr. Fox: In any potential Security Council action China will be a major player, but China has just signed a $100 billion deal over 25 years for Iranian oil and gas. Clearly that could not be used as a reason for China to block any UN action.
The House would expect a commitment that the Prime Minister will raise that specific issue with the Chinese President during the state visit next week. Will the Foreign Secretary give the House that commitment?
Mr. Straw: I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is indeed intending to raise the matter with the President of China, as I have done repeatedly with my opposite number, Foreign Minister Li. The Government of China do have commercial relations with Iran, as do many other countries. A close relationship between India and Iran, however, did not stop India voting with the E3/US consensus on the board of governors declaring Iran non-compliant. I commend the approach taken by the Government of China. In all the discussions that I have had with them they have sometimes taken a different view, but at every stage they have acted responsibly, and no permanent member of the Security Council wishes to see a nuclear-armed Iran. If anyone had any doubt about that, those doubts have been completely allayed by the extraordinary and disgraceful statement by President Ahmadinejad on 26 October. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Oppenheimer
Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 1166 Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Press conference at EU informal summit Hampton Court27 October 2005
www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page8393.asp
(excerpt)
Tony Blair:
"In respect of Iran, well what you say is indeed what people will say, and we will have discussions with our main allies over the next few days. And this of course is the position that Iran has had, it is just that it has been expressed again and maybe people are just noticing this. I have got to say I am sure there are people in Iran in their leadership who believe that the world is sufficiently distracted with everything else, that we can't really afford the time to focus on this issue. And I think they would be making a very big mistake if they do that. These sentiments are completely and totally unacceptable. I have never come across a situation of the President of a country saying they want to wipe out, not that they have got a problem with, or an issue with, but want to wipe out another country. This is unacceptable.
And their attitude towards Israel, their attitude towards terrorism, their attitude on the nuclear weapons issue, it isn't acceptable. Now if they continue down this path then people are going to believe that they are a real threat to our world security and stability. And as I say, they may believe that with everything else, the eyes of the world will be elsewhere, but I felt a real sense of revulsion at those remarks, and to anybody in Europe, knowing our history, when we hear statements like that made about Israel, it makes us feel very angry. It is just completely wrong, this, and it indicates and underlines I am afraid how much some of those places need reform themselves. Because how are we going to build a more secure world with that type of attitude? It is a disgrace I am afraid. And I am aware, I haven't said in precise terms what we can do, but this is a discussion that we will be having with our allies. And you know there has been a long time in which I have been answering questions on Iran, with everyone saying to me: "Tell us you are not going to do anything about Iran." If they carry on like this, the question people are going to be asking us is: When are you going to do something about this? Because you imagine a state like that, with an attitude like that, having a nuclear weapon?"
---------------
Comment: Let us examine in comparitive analysis these two statements (in red)
Mr. Binley: Given the concern that the Foreign Secretary refers to, especially about recent statements, do the Government still rule out discussions with groups opposed to the Iranian regime, even though internal regime change remains an option that could considerably reduce the implied threat?
Mr. Straw: Regime change in Iran is not part of the policy of Her Majesty’s Government; nor do I think it would be wise.
Mr. Tony Blair:
"It is just completely wrong, this, and it indicates and underlines I am afraid how much some of those places need reform themselves. Because how are we going to build a more secure world with that type of attitude?"
Now with respect to Mr. Binly's question, and his support for the MEK, the original INRA artice incorrectly links these in today's Parlimentary debate, as Mr. Binley was speaking in general about a dialoge with "opposition groups" -plural. And is a general reference, not specific to the MeK.
So this aside let us then determine what Mr. Straw defined as UK foreign policy when he ruled out "regime change"
Mr. Blair has obviously stated the need for this regime to reform, and by inference..."change" therefore "regime change" is indeed UK policy, but not in the sense of "regime replacement" as I believe the vast majority of Iranian opposition groups have now come to the conclusion that any so-called "reform" of the IRI is impossible, and consider their definition of "regime change" to be in effect "regime replacement" with a democratic and secular government structure that abides by international norms, and the UN charter.
Mr. Straw's statement that "nor do I think it would be wise." May have been in reference to "regime replacement" as I believe he was defining "regime change", and thus did not specificly address the issue of having a dialoge with opposition groups.
It may be that he thinks it would not be wise to have a diologue with such groups as the MEK, and for good reason...as they are on a proscribed terrorist list, and do not have credibility with the Iranian people.
However, it is my belief that it is time to have this conversation with other respectable opposition groups and free nation's representitives in order to avail the international community of greater options placed on the table in addressing the threat of the IRI toward the world, by allowing Iranian options to be considered, as voiced by the Iranian opposition community. To do so, in having a dialoge, does not neccesitate having "regime replacement" as policy prior to having a constructive and useful conversation.
As such, and because the statements by both the Prime minister and his Foreign Secretary are not definitive one way or another toward having a dialogue with the Iranian opposition, I believe it should be made clear by the UK government, exactly where they stand in terms of promoting Democracy, and with specific regard to having a dialogue with those that seek it. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Morning Light
Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Posts: 54
|
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Monkey of the year=Ahmedenejad
Appeaser of the Year=Jack Straw
2004 Monkey of the Year=Bashir Al Assad
2004 Apeaser of the year=Vladimir Putin
Now who will be the 2006 Monkey of the Year, and who will be the appeaser of the year? |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Liberty Now !
![](images/avatars/gallery/Fantasy RPG/wingedbeauty.gif)
Joined: 04 Apr 2004 Posts: 521
|
Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:23 am Post subject: departure gift to you all: |
|
|
"her majesty" and the "majesties" before her, owe much of their wealth to despots like ayatollahs and thousands of such terrorists in different countries and continents.
but Humanity has the power to end all fascism, and the supporting majestries, together.
Imagine the world healed from the horrible effects of wars as well as the wounds of british colonialism:
IMAGINE A DIFFERENT WORLD
by: SIAVASH GHOMEISHI
http://www.peiknet.com/1384/hafteh/05aban/49/pouya/tas.htm _________________ Paayande Iran |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Oppenheimer
Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 1166 Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 1:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Prime Minister was asked—2 November 2005
(excerpt)
Mr. Purchase: I echo and sympathise with the views expressed by my right hon. Friend. Will he accept that he speaks for all when he condemns the appalling, dreadful and truly disgraceful statement of the Iranian President, who expressed his wish that Israel be wiped off the map? Will my right hon. Friend also accept that his further remarks at Hampton court over the weekend carried an implicit threat of military action against Iran? Does he share my view that the people of this country are in no mood for a military adventure in Iran, and if he does, will he explain his remarks at Hampton court?
The Prime Minister: I am very happy to say that, first, I did not talk either explicitly or implicitly about a military threat to Iran, but what I did say was this. Iran has to realise that the international community cannot tolerate continuing conduct that, frankly, is supporting terrorism around the world; that is supporting terrorism not just in the middle east, but elsewhere; and that is in breach of its nuclear weapons responsibilities and obligations under the International Atomic Energy Agency. I did want to make it clear, and I do so again now, that the statements by the Iranian President in respect of Israel are completely and totally unacceptable. Obviously, as I made clear at the press conference, we want to discuss this with other allies and with other members of the Security Council. Nobody is talking about military threats, invasion of Iran or any of the rest of it. What we are saying, however, is that the Iranian Government have got to understand that the international community simply will not put up with their continued breach of the proper and normal standards of behaviour that we expect from a member of the United Nations. The most important thing at the moment is that that is a unified message, and that it goes out not just from this House and this country, but right across the world. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Oppenheimer
Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 1166 Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=4279
EU parliamentarians emphasise support for Iran opposition Thu. 3 Nov 2005
Iran Focus
Brussels, Nov. 03 – Parliamentarians from 22 European nations have called for the immediate referral of Iran’s nuclear file to the United Nations Security Council and the removal of Iran’s main opposition group Mojahedin-e Khalq (MeK) from the EU’s terror list, according to a press release by the European Parliamentary group Friends of a Free Iran received by fax.
A statement signed by the 260 members of the European Parliament and several parliaments in European countries also expressed support for a demonstration by Iranian exiles planned for November 7 in Brussels.
“Were it not for the revelations by the National Council of Resistance of Iran about Tehran's secret nuclear program, especially the uncovering of the Natanz and Arak projects in August 2002, the mullahs would have most probably obtained the bomb by now”, the parliamentarians said.
The statement added that any further delay in referring Tehran’s suspected nuclear weapons dossier to the Security Council would “allow the world's sole terror sponsor regime to get closer to getting the bomb and undermining international peace and security”.
They criticised the EU for failing thus far to adopt a “decisive policy” in the face of Iranian threats. “Indeed, the EU-3 [Britain, France, and Germany] foreign ministers and the Union's foreign policy chief themselves acknowledged earlier that Tehran should have been referred to the Security Council three years ago”.
They called on the EU to “annul the pledges” it had made to Tehran in the course of the nuclear negotiations which have now broken down. These included keeping the MeK on the EU’s list of terrorist organisations. "Victimising those who informed the world of the danger of a religious dictatorship arming itself with nuclear arms, in a deal with the very same regime, has constituted the biggest incentive to the mullahs to continue their nuclear programs. Removal of the PMOI (a.k.a. MeK) from the terrorism list can be the most influential factor in compelling the Iranian regime to comply with international law”, the lawmakers emphasised.
"In this respect, we fully support the November 7 rally outside the EU headquarters in Brussels in which the participants will call for the immediate referral of Iran's nuclear file to the U.N. Security Council”, the European lawmakers said.
They cited the “dramatic rise” in the number of executions, particularly of minors, and the widespread arrests of young people as examples of the deteriorating state of human rights in Iran under the presidency of hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, while urging the EU to adopt a firm position against the theocratic regime and “stand with the Iranian people in their struggle for freedom”. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|