[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index [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.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Big 3 EU Foreign Policy (England, France, and Germany)
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    [FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index -> Noteworthy Discussion Threads
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
kerravon



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Location: australia

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 2:22 am    Post subject: Big 3 EU Foreign Policy (England, France, and Germany) Reply with quote

abaucero wrote:
In Italy we have a say that explains that you can't have both things, you have to choose one, what do you choose, American involvement or not? Please make up your minds before criticizing.


Abaucero, the saying you want is "You can't have your cake and eat it too".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kerravon



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Location: australia

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 3:18 am    Post subject: Re: President Bush has not used all his options regarding Ir Reply with quote

cyrus wrote:

- President Bush can declare the Islamic Clerical Regime of Iran as illegitimate and unfit to govern and therefore call for a free referendum to be held in Iran now by well-respected international organizations.

- President Bush can ask for freeing all political prisoners in Iran.

- President Bush can provide fund for electing the top 100 true Iranian and Iranian-American reprehensive in U.S. as a formal group to replace the regime during regime transition.

- President Bush can give an ultimatum to the regime, urging it to step down peacefully because they have lost all legitimacy.

- President Bush can provide financial support for general strike in Iran and stop the oil flow to EU and Japan.

- President Bush can ask for all top level regime officials to be investigated and prosecuted by respected International Courts for genocide and many other crimes against humanity.
- The continued legitimization of the Islamic regime in Iran must stop at once.
- President Bush can ask the UN to immediately send a team to observe the situation in Iran.
- President Bush can support the general demand of the Iranian people for a free referendum and elections observed by international organizations.
- ……


Cyrus, some of the things you are suggesting are acts of war. The US cannot say or do these things in case they become "idle threats", and loses credibility.

It needs to be able to back up such words with action.

When it is ready to invade, then you will hear words like this. If the Mullahs acquiesce, no invasion will be required. Sometimes these tinpot dictators listen, sometimes they don't. We have examples of those that do (Libya, Haiti, Liberia), and those that don't (Iraq, Serbia, Afghanistan). Iran is most likely to have believed it's own rhetoric that it isn't like Afghanistan or Iraq, so it needs to be done the hard way.

There are too many problems to deal with at the moment (one of the disadvantages of elimination of colonies is you end up with Venezuelans making stupid choices etc).

The problems at the moment, ie Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, North Korea, Venezuela, Haiti, Syria, Iran, need to be dealt with strategically, preferably one at a time.

Iran is in the pipeline. By the time it comes to war, we can say that we did try to solve it diplomatically, over the space of x years. We didn't rush to war.

Also, I should point out that no-one should be criticizing the US for its pace.

1. If you don't want to be a colony, you're supposed to take care of your own mess.

2. If you want US to help, you're supposed to organize a military treaty.

3. If you want US to help, you should organize the rest of the world to at least agree that it is the right thing to do, if not actually doing the work, or e.g. offering to pay the US for expenses.

What you can do now, while waiting, is figure out what you're going to do to prevent this from ever happening again. What the west doesn't need is another Venezuela, ie the Iranians listening to some tinpot (e.g. the Shah's son) promising the world, and then when he gets to power, becoming a dictator. Or voting for communists. And then when everything fails (as it always does), blaming the US, or anyone except yourselves. Iranians are having too many children, they are going to remain in poverty for as long as that continues. Then they're going to listen to the lies of some "great saviour".

Oh yeah, and I bet I know what the reward for liberation will be - an attempt to jack up the oil prices, strangling the liberator. Just like last time.

So, if you are incapable of doing anything right, as one dictator after another seems to indicate, perhaps you would like to admit this now, and save us from having to do the thankless job of an invasion a couple of years after each election. Why don't you volunteer to become a colony of say Iceland, and save us all a lot of grief. Less Iranians raped and killed etc etc.

Then of course you'll start whinging about the terrible Icelandic jackboot and that you want to be "free" (code for being free to rape & murder your own people).

Everyone will be at fault, Iceland, CIA, whatever, everyone except for yourselves. Tell us what to do THEN. At some point we need to throw in the towel (Venezuela/Haiti) and say these basket-cases are always going to be basket-cases, let's not waste any more money on ungrateful basket-cases. There's other things we'd MUCH rather spend our money on, rather than pouring water into sand.

The fact that you'd even consider shooting "invading" Americans beggars belief.

Please tell us what to do about Haiti and Venezuela, so we know what to do about Iran, and probably Iraq and Afghanistan too.

Or let me guess. Another dictatorship in Iran would be IMPOSSIBLE, right? Iraq had a democracy 50 years ago too. Then it had a military coup. Same old same old. It is depressing to see previously quiet places (like Venezuela) suddenly open a new front, taking away resources that were earmarked for use elsewhere.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kerravon



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Location: australia

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 3:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

redemption wrote:
We need George Bush to take charge and tell the rest of the world what is needed - we shouldn't hesitate to DIFFER with England... We don't need to be on the same page as the Brits all the time - anyhow, our American Ancestors had to fight off the damn Brits to win our freedom.. We should be watchful and wary of their intentions.. -- anyhow, that's a discussion for another day..


Damn Brits? Good grief. I take back what I said about ungrateful Iranians, ungrateful Iraqis, ungrateful Haitians, ungrateful Europeans. Now we've got ungrateful Americans?

Truth be told, half of Australia is ungrateful for the Battle of the Coral Sea too.

What a mess.

I think I need to move to a country-independent neocon board where the concept of gratitude towards allies still exists. There still exists grateful French even, I've seen them on the Iraqi blogs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redemption



Joined: 30 Dec 2003
Posts: 1158
Location: California

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 9:03 am    Post subject: Re: President Bush has not used all his options regarding Ir Reply with quote

kerravon wrote:
cyrus wrote:

- President Bush can declare the Islamic Clerical Regime of Iran as illegitimate and unfit to govern and therefore call for a free referendum to be held in Iran now by well-respected international organizations.

- President Bush can ask for freeing all political prisoners in Iran.

- President Bush can provide fund for electing the top 100 true Iranian and Iranian-American reprehensive in U.S. as a formal group to replace the regime during regime transition.

- President Bush can give an ultimatum to the regime, urging it to step down peacefully because they have lost all legitimacy.

- President Bush can provide financial support for general strike in Iran and stop the oil flow to EU and Japan.

- President Bush can ask for all top level regime officials to be investigated and prosecuted by respected International Courts for genocide and many other crimes against humanity.
- The continued legitimization of the Islamic regime in Iran must stop at once.
- President Bush can ask the UN to immediately send a team to observe the situation in Iran.
- President Bush can support the general demand of the Iranian people for a free referendum and elections observed by international organizations.
- ……


Cyrus, some of the things you are suggesting are acts of war. The US cannot say or do these things in case they become "idle threats", and loses credibility.

It needs to be able to back up such words with action.

When it is ready to invade, then you will hear words like this. If the Mullahs acquiesce, no invasion will be required. Sometimes these tinpot dictators listen, sometimes they don't. We have examples of those that do (Libya, Haiti, Liberia), and those that don't (Iraq, Serbia, Afghanistan). Iran is most likely to have believed it's own rhetoric that it isn't like Afghanistan or Iraq, so it needs to be done the hard way.

There are too many problems to deal with at the moment (one of the disadvantages of elimination of colonies is you end up with Venezuelans making stupid choices etc).

The problems at the moment, ie Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, North Korea, Venezuela, Haiti, Syria, Iran, need to be dealt with strategically, preferably one at a time.

Iran is in the pipeline. By the time it comes to war, we can say that we did try to solve it diplomatically, over the space of x years. We didn't rush to war.

Also, I should point out that no-one should be criticizing the US for its pace.

1. If you don't want to be a colony, you're supposed to take care of your own mess.

2. If you want US to help, you're supposed to organize a military treaty.

3. If you want US to help, you should organize the rest of the world to at least agree that it is the right thing to do, if not actually doing the work, or e.g. offering to pay the US for expenses.

What you can do now, while waiting, is figure out what you're going to do to prevent this from ever happening again. What the west doesn't need is another Venezuela, ie the Iranians listening to some tinpot (e.g. the Shah's son) promising the world, and then when he gets to power, becoming a dictator. Or voting for communists. And then when everything fails (as it always does), blaming the US, or anyone except yourselves. Iranians are having too many children, they are going to remain in poverty for as long as that continues. Then they're going to listen to the lies of some "great saviour".

Oh yeah, and I bet I know what the reward for liberation will be - an attempt to jack up the oil prices, strangling the liberator. Just like last time.

So, if you are incapable of doing anything right, as one dictator after another seems to indicate, perhaps you would like to admit this now, and save us from having to do the thankless job of an invasion a couple of years after each election. Why don't you volunteer to become a colony of say Iceland, and save us all a lot of grief. Less Iranians raped and killed etc etc.

Then of course you'll start whinging about the terrible Icelandic jackboot and that you want to be "free" (code for being free to rape & murder your own people).

Everyone will be at fault, Iceland, CIA, whatever, everyone except for yourselves. Tell us what to do THEN. At some point we need to throw in the towel (Venezuela/Haiti) and say these basket-cases are always going to be basket-cases, let's not waste any more money on ungrateful basket-cases. There's other things we'd MUCH rather spend our money on, rather than pouring water into sand.

The fact that you'd even consider shooting "invading" Americans beggars belief.

Please tell us what to do about Haiti and Venezuela, so we know what to do about Iran, and probably Iraq and Afghanistan too.

Or let me guess. Another dictatorship in Iran would be IMPOSSIBLE, right? Iraq had a democracy 50 years ago too. Then it had a military coup. Same old same old. It is depressing to see previously quiet places (like Venezuela) suddenly open a new front, taking away resources that were earmarked for use elsewhere.


Kerravon - no one is advocating War, I'm definitely not - I think the Mullahs can be dealt with in a way that is not totally bloody - at least I hope.. Listen, if the Mullahs are not dealt with ASAP and we wait until the opportunity presents itself somewhere down the "pipeline" as you suggest, I shutter to think what Afghanistan and Iraq will look like at that time.. You say we are rebuilding Afghanistan a nd IRaq - but do you realize that the end result depends on whether the Mullahs are in power or not.. THe most preferable outcome in Afghanistan and Iraq are secular governments that respect all peoples, religions, race and protect human rights.. Do you think that the neighboring Mullahs support such an outcome.. NO of course not.. So they will put their hands into everything that goes on in Iraq and Afghanistan -... Seriously, as an American I worry that if we don't act immideately on these most serious threats - the world is in for some serious hell..
_________________
IRANIANS UNITE
PERSIA LIVES ON!!
FREE IRAN NOW!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kerravon



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Location: australia

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

American Visitor wrote:
I disagree with kerravon just a little bit. I think the Sha could make a good ruler if he were working in a constitutional monarchy like England has. A king could provide stability and guidance to a country which badly needs help. The Sha has lived in the US and seems to have respect and love for freedom and I wouldn't reject out of hand the positive contribution he could make. In Japan we left the Emperor and it has worked out very well. He has been a force for good.


Well I don't have that much faith in the wannabe Iranian dictators.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Iran/rpahlavi.htm

I would say that in a country like Australia, which technically has a foreign head of state, is that the moment that head of state actually tries to exercise any power (besides calling for fresh elections), she will cease to be head of state.

Actually Australia had a referendum to replace her with an essentially equally-powerless president, but the referendum was rejected because some people wanted a US-style president (due to all the brainwashing people have received about how great the US system is), despite the fact that all political parties roundly rejected that idea.

I wouldn't mind having a NATO appointee as our figurehead. How about the NATO secretary general? That way we don't have to waste time and money electing a pumpkin. The figurehead only actually calls fresh elections when asked to by the elected prime minister, or when there is a parliamentary deadlock affecting supply.

In the case of Venezuela and Haiti, I'd expect the NATO secretary general to call fresh elections too. These countries shouldn't have strong presidents. The US hype has caused a lot of damage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kerravon



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Location: australia

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 4:56 pm    Post subject: Re: I Reply with quote

soleya wrote:

I have no problem with the British people.. The British Gov on the other hand continues to support the Mullahs. I have a big problem with that..


When you say "support the Mullahs", did you actually ask them what they would like to see for Iran? Did you ask them "would you like to see an Iranian system where the mullahs don't rape women and it is instead secular and also that there aren't unelected thugs stopping the people from choosing their representatives"?

The answer you will get is "yes", although in diplo-speak they never say yes/no, they will say something like "we support the right of the Iranian people to have their voice heard".

The British tend to join a club (like the EU) and then influence it from within. I saw a quote that Britain changed the EU more than the EU changed Britain. Smile

It was Britain that "forced" the US to go begging to the UN for yet another resolution. Although I didn't particularly support this, it might have worked in our favour (ie getting more than 4 members of the coalition - good grief!). Not every "gamble" actually works.

So essentially the UK is now positioned "inside the enemy" and can now (most likely) argue that "the hardliners are back in charge, reform is dead, we now need to invade".

Then others can say "The US and the Europeans both agree that Iran needs a regime change". I expect you will see all these things happen closer to D-day. Until then, patience is required.

By the way, I wish people would stop claiming that the EU is propping up the Iranian regime. It is doing no such thing. The EU does not have the power to kill or revive regimes. Try taking some personal responsibility for a change. And as I've said before, oil is sold at world prices, the EU doesn't get a cushy deal.

The Iranian regime is in power because some stupid Iranians replaced one crappy dictator with an evil dictator. Instead of saying that they like what the US stood for and copying that sort of system, they decided to be typical revolutionaries and that they "knew better" than everyone else, and would install their own unique brand of dictator. After all, Iranians are so smart (compared to everyone else in the world).

Anyway, I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who would shoot western liberators. That shows all the hallmarks of yet another basket-case Middle-Eastern country. Even the Iraqis were better than that, with only about 20% opposition to armed intervention. Maybe the Iranians need to suffer a bit more until they finally realise that the joys of liberation are far superior to racist notions of Persian superiority.

Regardless, delay is inevitable. There's a lot more basket-cases than just Iran to worry about. Let's hope by the day of liberation that opposition to armed intervention is down to 20% or less (let's see if you can be smarter than your Iraqi neighbours - go ahead, I dare you!).

As I said, use this delay to figure out how you're going to avoid becoming yet another Venezueala. I didn't hear an answer to that question. No-one even came up a some crappy solution.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kerravon



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Location: australia

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 5:12 pm    Post subject: Re: President Bush has not used all his options regarding Ir Reply with quote

redemption wrote:
Kerravon - no one is advocating War, I'm definitely not - I think the Mullahs can be dealt with in a way that is not totally bloody - at least I hope.. Listen, if the Mullahs are not dealt with ASAP and we wait until the opportunity presents itself somewhere down the "pipeline" as you suggest, I shutter to think what Afghanistan and Iraq will look like at that time.. You say we are rebuilding Afghanistan a nd IRaq - but do you realize that the end result depends on whether the Mullahs are in power or not.. THe most preferable outcome in Afghanistan and Iraq are secular governments that respect all peoples, religions, race and protect human rights.. Do you think that the neighboring Mullahs support such an outcome.. NO of course not.. So they will put their hands into everything that goes on in Iraq and Afghanistan -... Seriously, as an American I worry that if we don't act immideately on these most serious threats - the world is in for some serious hell..


"at least I hope" is exactly correct. I can tell you that I personally was stupid enough to think that the entire Iraqi army would defect as soon as the coalition approached, rather than die for a dictator. I thought that because of this, the whole thing would be over in 3 days, not 3 weeks. However, just because I hope for these things, doesn't mean I don't plan for a full-scale slug-it-out. What ended up being required was something between these two extremes. 80% of the Iraqi army simply went home, leaving the 20% hardcore to slug it out with the coalition. You can't run an army with 80% of your forces missing.

"do you realize that the end result depends on whether the Mullahs are in power or not"

No, you just made this up. The fact is that most of the insurgents are Iraqis, basically dead-enders. However, the end result is now secure. With 200k local security personnel, the guerillas have no chance at all. That is why they spend most of their time blowing up civilians. Blowing up civilians has NO EFFECT. It is identical to people dying in car crashes. There is no military significance in doing that. It doesn't matter how many die, from a military standpoint.

"Seriously, as an American I worry that if we don't act immideately"

You get the best result by taking on one country at a time, rather than opening multiple fronts. The idea is you don't want to create a hostile alliance against you. Dealing with countries one at a time is just like killing chickens. Each chicken says "oh, it was that other chicken he was after - I'm safe, yippee". The tinpots are in a very difficult situation. Even if they know that they MIGHT be on the list, they don't know for sure.

Even with Iran, there is ambiguity. Wow. Is the US going to go in when the UK opposes? There's "no way" that the UK could ever agree to that! Hopefully the mullahs are thinking just like you are. These tinpots always have a surprised look on their face when their fantasy comes up against the reality of western forces. I can remember watching the Taliban pleading with the Americans "come on the ground, come on the ground", and "the real war will start when the Americans land". ROFL! The real war was OVER before the Americans got their boots scuffed!

You can see secrets of this success in comments from people like Rumsfeld saying "even courageous fighters need bullets". War is basically a technical issue. You win by doing the sensible thing. And you let the other guy die for his country.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kerravon



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Location: australia

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stefania wrote:
Sorry , but why should the Iranians show gratitude towards the Brits? What did they do in favor of the Iranians?

Please tell me..


They liberated Iraq and Afghanistan, setting the stage for the liberation of Iran. There are now two enormously long borders that the Iranian military would need to defend, instead of previously where the US didn't have good access.

If you want to go back further in history, we'd all be under Nazi rule if they hadn't decided that it was better to have London raised to the ground than be neutral.

Similarly, USA risked nuclear annihilation in support of ungrateful foreigners.

The Iranians can also show gratitude to the British for not advocating the use of carpet bombing on Iran for the fact that Iran has been anti-western and supporting terrorism for decades. There is no "revenge is sweet" feeling in Britain. Be thankful. Other countries throughout history have been much less forgiving of their enemies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stefania



Joined: 17 Jul 2003
Posts: 4250
Location: Italy

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Execution threat for hunger strikers facing deportation

By Neil Mackay, Home Affairs Editor
07 March 2004


THE three Kurdish refugees who are on hunger strike in Glasgow in protest at their deportation to Iran are being expelled from the UK despite the Labour government’s policy of never deporting anyone to a country where they might face the death penalty.

The men – Faroq Haidari, Fariboz Gravindi and Mokhtar Haydary – are now on their 17th day of hunger strike. The three, who have sewn up their mouths, have all refused medical intervention.

They argue they were dissidents in Iran as they supported democratic reforms and a form of home rule for Kurds. Habib Kharabi, the uncle of hunger-striker Mokhtar Haydary, was executed by the regime for political activities.

The US routinely refers to Iran as part of the “Axis of Evil” and the Foreign Office has highlighted public executions, trials behind closed doors and the suppression of dissent in the country. A recent fundamentalist crackdown in Iran forced the fledgling reformist movement underground.

The Home Office has previously publicly stated that “the policy of this government is that the Home Secretary, David Blunkett, will not allow anyone to be deported who is knowingly going to face torture or the death penalty.”

Yet the Home Office said the men would be deported regardless of their protest.

SNP leader John Swinney said: “ There seems to be a direct danger to these men if they are sent back to their home country and this case is evidence that there are weaknesses in the current asylum system .”

Tom Harris, the Labour MP for Cathcart – the area where the three men are residing – says he is to fight for them to stay in the UK . Harris, who has visited the men, said: “I asked them to stop their hunger strike immediately.” He added: “Their case is not helped by what they are doing, in fact it is positively harming their case.”

Harris said the men had “ strong arguments to stay”, but the Home Office would not be able to take “an objective view” of the case because it would look like the government had been “strong-armed” into reversing its decision.

Harris has already written twice to the Home Office and spoken to ministers. “I’ve said, in my view, that due to the political deterioration in Iran, they should at least give them temporary leave to stay.”

Mike Watson, Labour MSP for Cathcart, said he was fully behind Harris. However, the Scottish Executive has refused to comment claiming immigration is a matter for Westminster .

Glasgow City Council, which is to evict the men, said it was legally bound to throw them out . A spokesman said: “I know this sounds cold and heartless given the situation, but this is our only course of action. We aren’t involved in the decision- making process. ”

The council is in discussion with the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) over what to do with the men – two of whom are barely conscious – when they are evicted.


--------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sundayherald.com/40416

‘SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO RISK DEATH TO LIVE …’
07 March 2004


As a hunger strike by three failed asylum seekers in a Glasgow bedsit nears its tragic end, one of the men tells Home Affairs Editor Neil Mackay why they were driven to it


THERE is an elegant, leafy street on the suburban southside of Glasgow called Cathkin Road. Inside a ground-floor flat in one of the houses that line the street, three men are lying on blood-stained mattresses on the floor of a squalid single room, their lips sown shut by their own hands, slowly and quietly starving themselves to death.

After 17 days of hunger strike, two are almost permanently unconscious. The third is permanently awake, frozen into insomnia, he says, by fear during his self-imposed ordeal. These men – Faroq Haidari, 32, Fariboz Gravindi, 30 and Mokhtar Haydary, 34 – are all Kurds who have fled from Iran, a part of the so-called Axis of Evil. They have all sought asylum in the UK and they have all been refused, and now they are all to be deported. They all believe that if they return to Iran they will be executed. All three are also to be evicted from their home and thrown out on to the street by Glasgow City Council pending their final removal from the UK.

Their hunger strike has a brutal simplicity, says the insomniac Haidari . “We cannot go home. If we go home, we will be killed. Better to die here like men through our own choice, than to be executed in Iran.”

Haidari’s lips, like those of his friends, are strung together with three stitches. His stitches – put in with an ordinary sewing needle – are looser than those of the other two men, allowing him to part his lips half an inch so he can make himself understood. In this flat where the Kurds have chosen to die, a series of friends and wellwishers, mostly campaigners from pro-refugee organisations, come and go, giving their love and support. There are tears as they leave. “We’re watching people live out the last days of their lives,” one says. “Who wouldn’t cry?”

On Thursday afternoon, Haidari finds the strength to talk for about an hour. In the early hours of that morning, Gravindi and Haydary had lost consciousness. Haidari had feared they were dead. An Iranian friend, who is also to be deported and who watches over them day and night, had called an ambulance, which rushed them to the Victoria Infirmary.

While Haidari talked , his friends were put on saline drips. They awoke after an hour and angrily ordered the medics to stop treatment. Everyone – doctors, friends, campaigners – pleaded with them not to refuse hospital help, but they insisted on no medical intervention. The doctors had no option but to agree. Later the men returned home and almost immediately slipped back into unconsciousness.

In those few hours, while his friends were away, Haidari talked about his life and the life of his friends; about what brought three men from thousands of miles away to a dirty bedsit in Glasgow to die. While he talked, he dabbed his mouth with a tissue, wiping away the blood that leaks from his lips as the stitches pull at his flesh; his face a grimace of pain.

Haidari slowly began. “We lived in fear of our government in Iran. When we escaped, we escaped torture, injustice, execution and persecution. That is why I cannot understand why we have been refused asylum in your country. We have no option left but this hunger strike. Believe me when I say we are prepared to die. We are Kurds. The Iran regime persecutes us politically, religiously and ethnically. To live longer in this world, we had to escape. Put yourself in my shoes. If you were in danger, would you run?

“There have been many executions of Kurds since the 1979 Islamic revolution. The UK accepts that Iran is dangerous, that it is not a democracy, that there is no freedom. But still they want to send us home. People – my family – are too scared even in their own houses to talk about the government. It is like Nazi Germany.

“When I stitched my lips, the pain was extraordinary, but I wanted to show the UK government that the human rights they talk about don’t exist. We are saying, ‘We’ve had enough of talk; no-one will listen to us anyway.’

“We are not doing this for benefits from your welfare state. Who would suffer this for such a thing? We are doing it to save our lives; to show politicians that we deserve asylum. There is a big difference between your government and the people. We have so many good friends among Scots people. If I could talk to [Home Secretary] David Blunkett I’d say to him, ‘Put yourself in my position, not for a year, not for a month, but just for a week. If you knew you were in danger, what would you do to change your life?’

“No-one wants to die. I’m young. I’d like to ask the ordinary people of Scotland to make the politicians listen to us. They must understand what we are going through. I just hope that Scottish politicians can put pressure on the UK parliament. I live here in Scotland so they must be able to act for me. It’s scary thinking about what we are doing. But if anything happens to us then your government is responsible.

“We are not doing this because of religion. We are Muslims and respect our religion, but we believe that religion and politics do not mix. We are doing this because we are hopeless, we have no-one to help us and nowhere to go. Sometimes you have to risk death to live.

“Time passes so slowly here. It’s strange, but this is actually boring. I think of death, but I have to be brave. I’m tired. I can’t walk. My mind plays tricks on me. I haven’t slept in 24 hours. I was in hospital for 48 hours last week because I had refused all water for many days, now I am drinking because I need to keep this fight going. I’m also very lonely. Day by day I am forgetting how to eat; how I used to eat.

“We have had no contact with the Home Office since this began more than two weeks ago. They don’t care – that is shameful. I won’t give up. When Kurds say something we stand by it even if it means the loss of our lives. Kurdish people are hard. We stand by our promises. I’m scared that if my parents know what is going on that it will kill them. I love them very much. The first time I was away from my family was when I arrived in Britain. Now I’m living like this.’’

What did take this young man away from the family he loves? All three came from Kermanshah on the border with Iraq. The city is still mined from the Iran-Iraq war. As children they grew up seeing public executions. Hangings, beheadings, women stoned to death. One of the hunger-strikers, Mokhtar Haydary’s uncle, Habib Kharabi, a member of the Kurdish Democratic Party, was executed by the regime. Haidari grew up in a prosperous, well-educated middle-class family. They sold televisions, fridges and CD players for a living. The one thing his family did lack, however, was their own culture. Writing in Kurdish was banned, he says, and he is more proficient at writing in English than Kurdish.

All three were part of the so-called “reformist generation” – young students in the 1990s who wanted to roll back the power of the ayatollahs. They wanted a centrist democratic state and were drawn to the moderate “third way” politics of Western leaders like Tony Blair and Bill Clinton. They also wanted some degree of autonomy for the Kurds. None were separatists, instead they sought a form of devolved home rule.

The three hunger-strikers all belonged to a group that campaigned for democracy which was infiltrated and betrayed by state spies. These men were not revolutionaries – violence wasn’t their way – so, faced with repression, they decided to flee. A number chose to go to Norway, and secured almost immediate asylum. Others, like the three hunger-strikers, opted for Britain, attracted by New Labour and its much-vaunted claims of an “ethical foreign policy”.

One night, three years, ago, Iranian security forces came to arrest Haidari. He ran. When the three fled, they handed themselves – and $5000 each – to a “people smuggler”. It took a month, locked mostly in a closed container, to travel across Europe. They landed in Dover in 2001. “It is not hard to be persecuted by the Iranian government if you’re Kurdish,” Haidari whispers. “If you say anything against them you will be arrested, tortured and jailed. There will be no lawyer, no justice. I left because I was in serious danger. This story belongs to all of us. It is not just about me. All three of us escaped; risked our lives. In fact, this is not a story – this is our reality.”

Since he began his fast, Haidari has lost around three stones and only seen a doctor three times. “I don’t need a doctor,” he says. “I need a solution.”

Margaret Woods, of the Glasgow Campaign to Welcome Refugees, is something of a mother figure to these dying men. “There are 170 refugees now homeless in Glasgow as they’ve been thrown out of their flats because their asylum claims have been turned down. Like these men, they all face deportation – many to places where they could be executed. I am terribly distressed by this. These are human beings reduced to an act as desperate as this in Glasgow, in a grotty bedsit, in a country I was raised in. It is so disillusioning. What is happening goes against all ideas of human rights.

“Imagine being one flight away from torture in a ####-hole of a prison. I don’t advocate what they’re doing, but I understand why they’ve been driven to it. I’ve got to know them and they are utterly determined to die if they are not allowed to stay. Before Fariboz Gravindi lost consciousness, he said to me, ‘I want to make a statement before I die: there is no freedom in this country.’

“It seems to me the only freedom left to them is the freedom to die. That’s an appalling indictment of our society.”

On Friday, Bill Speirs, general secretary of the STUC, arrived to see the hunger strikers. He was visibly shaken. “Here are three young men who, if they were Scots, would be part of New Labour. They’ve been reduced to this state rather than face going home to die in some horrible way; they would rather die horribly here. This is real. It’s vital that the Home Office overturns its decision to expel them. What gets me is that we are sending them back to the Axis of Evil. Think of the double standards.”

Speirs urged the men to take water. He said: “It is a legitimate tactic in a hunger strike. They want to win; they don’t want to die. They want a result; we don’t want martyrs.” He added: “The responsibility for this lies with Blair and Blunkett. If these three men win, they will have secured a victory that will always be remembered; if they die it won’t be on Blunkett’s conscience – he doesn’t think like that.

“I’m very, very shocked by what I’ve seen here, and I’m angry . We are not a country that needs to behave like this towards people who came here believing we would help them. What’s happening in that room is a nightmare. In Glasgow, people are starving themselves to death with sewn-up lips. It is a blot on our country that these men have been forced to this; it’s a stain on us that they are prepared to die because of the way they have been treated by a Labour government. Scotland must look on this with sympathy. I remember when David Blunkett was a liberal campaigner. Why does this brutal policy exist?”

07 March 2004







Now, tell me why should the Iranian show gratitude towards the British Govt ? It wants to deport some refugees to Iran even though it knows that they will face death if they come back Iran.

Yes, Britain liberated Iraq and Afghanistan.. But as Blair said "There is no need for regime change in Iran"..

British govt liberated Iraq and Afghanistan,but it doesn't want to do the same in Iran !!!
_________________
Referendum AFTER Regime Change

"I'm ready to die for you to be able to say your own opinions, even if i strongly disagree with you" (Voltaire)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Prof. Norman Livergood
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 5:34 pm    Post subject: Quick Background Info. Reply with quote

According to Professor Norman D. Livergood with impressive educational background (Ph.D., Yale University, 1961, Philosophy, Ph.D., Union Institute, 1989, Artificial Intelligence, .......) in the following URL
http://www.hermes-press.com/impintro1.htm states:
"In 1979, the Standard Oil-backed Shah of Iran was thrown out by a British-backed coup and the long-time British asset, Ayatollah Khomeni, put into power.
When the new British-controlled regime in Iran came into power"
The above statement by Professor Norman D. Livergood clearly states that the so called Islamic Revolution by vast network of Ayatollahs and Clerics were clearly a complex hidden coup by British intelligence with ordinary Iranian people participation for achieving more political freedom therefore part of British government (Secret Society, Queen husband, Prince Charles .... ) are completely responsible for Khomeni (British Agent) terrorist regime actions, human rights violation, Genocide .... in past 25 years and Iranian people have every rights to go to any International Court against England Secret Society for England and Mullahs crimes against humanity.
The corrupt oil and other contracts between MUllahs and Britain in past 25 years and American Hostage crisis by Khomeni (British Secret agents) are supporting the above facts. England is not true friend of U.S.
Back to top
kerravon



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Location: australia

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 7:49 pm    Post subject: Re: Quick Background Info. Reply with quote

Prof. Norman Livergood wrote:
According to Professor Norman D. Livergood with impressive educational background (Ph.D., Yale University, 1961, Philosophy, Ph.D., Union Institute, 1989, Artificial Intelligence, .......) in the following URL
http://www.hermes-press.com/impintro1.htm states:
"In 1979, the Standard Oil-backed Shah of Iran was thrown out by a British-backed coup and the long-time British asset, Ayatollah Khomeni, put into power.
When the new British-controlled regime in Iran came into power"
The above statement by Professor Norman D. Livergood clearly states that the so called Islamic Revolution by vast network of Ayatollahs and Clerics were clearly a complex hidden coup by British intelligence with ordinary Iranian people participation for achieving more political freedom therefore part of British government (Secret Society, Queen husband, Prince Charles .... ) are completely responsible for Khomeni (British Agent) terrorist regime actions, human rights violation, Genocide .... in past 25 years and Iranian people have every rights to go to any International Court against England Secret Society for England and Mullahs crimes against humanity.
The corrupt oil and other contracts between MUllahs and Britain in past 25 years and American Hostage crisis by Khomeni (British Secret agents) are supporting the above facts. England is not true friend of U.S.


You can add this to:

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/pacepa200402260828.asp

It is more indicative of you, than Britain, that you would rather believe some conspiracy theory, than the inescapable fact that Britain stood up to the Nazis, the Soviets, and liberated Afghanistan and Iraq. It is so much easier to blame the UK than blame the Iranian people for going out en-masse and staging a revolution in favour of a mad-man, isn't it?

I can tell you who is no friend to US, UK, Australia, other western countries, democracy, freedom, and Iran. YOU.

And quite frankly, with the Iranians already blaming everyone except themselves for their predicament, even BEFORE the liberation has even begun, I'm sure the west will have the "pleasure" of seeing yet another bunch of ungrateful foreigners stamping their foot demanding the world.

At some point, we need to throw in the towel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kerravon



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Location: australia

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stefania wrote:
Now, tell me why should the Iranian show gratitude towards the British Govt ? It wants to deport some refugees to Iran even though it knows that they will face death if they come back Iran.

Yes, Britain liberated Iraq and Afghanistan.. But as Blair said "There is no need for regime change in Iran"..

British govt liberated Iraq and Afghanistan,but it doesn't want to do the same in Iran !!!


How about asking some basic questions:

1. What about all the Iranian refugees that the UK DIDN'T expell? As usual, ungrateful foreigners show no thanks for that. Any single thing they don't like about the UK or US is reason enough to condemn them to hell, nevermind the weight of all the sacrifices they made.

2. You expect the UK to care more about the 3 people who failed to meet the conditions for asylum, than about their own troops who will sacrifice their lives cleaning up the self-created Iranian mess?

3. If the refugees are genuine, then I'm quite sure Italy, the US, Australia, Iraq etc etc would be happy to take them in. If they're not genuine, then a return to Iran is the correct course of action. Their lives are no more important than any other Iranian who will potentially killed by the Iranian thugs that the Iranians are responsible for putting in charge.

4. I am curious as to how refugees from Iran managed to make it to the UK. It's a long walk. The correct procedure is you are meant to take refuge in the first country you get to, and then if the UK wishes to take you as a refugee, they will come and get you. Could it be, perhaps, that they were economic refugees all along, looking for a "free ticket"?

5. The UK is a sovereign country. It is well within its rights to take ZERO refugees. You should be thankful, VERY THANKFUL, that it takes ANY. And you should be INCREDIBLY THANKFUL, that the UK will most likely be one of the members of the coalition which will liberate the undeserving and ungrateful Iranians from their self-created pig swill.

6. Why don't you get the message out to all the Iranians *IN IRAN* that the UK is the absolute worst country in the world, and under no circumstances should they attempt to walk to the UK, when there's so many better countries to go to, rather than the UK torture chambers. Tell your friends - STAY OUT OF THE UK AND YOU WON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE STINKING BRITISH.

7. It is curious that people are willing to die in the UK in an attempt to embarass the British government (sapping resources from the host), instead of dying for a more worthwhile cause, e.g. shooting a few mullahs. There was a woman who did a suicide assassination of a Mullah.

When UK fails to show up in Iran, then you have SOME cause to MAYBE berate them. The fact remains that they liberated Iraq, giving the foothold required to get into Iran. The fact will remain that they contributed to Iran's liberation. Only 4 countries provided combat troops for that assault. Instead of berating the UK, you should be getting down on your knees and thanking them for one of only 4 countries that bothered to put their arse on the line to clean up the despots of the world.

Instead, you berate them. Unbelievable. I would have thought that there were 200+ countries you would have berated before saying a bad word about the British.

Ah but alas. The world is full of ungrateful foreigners with no grasp of reality or even able to tell the difference between good and bad. Hopefully after Iran is liberated they can all go there instead. Wouldn't that be nice?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
I Agree With Spenta
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 11:23 pm    Post subject: Do not buy anything made in the U.K. Reply with quote

I agree with Spenta Posts and disagree with kerravon who consider everyone in the planet Earth as foreigners except pure English blood from England.

Quote:
Kerravon: show gratitude to the British ....


For what reasons, Please give us the list of England positive contributions to Iran during past 300 years of relation between two countries: exploitation of Iran resources,
setting different groups against each other,
Terror,
Killing Amir Kabir
Testing Antrax in Iran during second world war,
plotting against Dr. Mossadegh and creating problem between Shah and Mossadegh,
plotting against Freedom in Iran by their British Agent Khomeni and the Network of British Clerics (Master Of Terror) ....
......

http://activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1571
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How can the Iranian people ever forget the pictures of Prince Charles embracing the despised Khatami on the eve of the sham elections and on the 25 anniversary of the Islamic Republic!

Or Jack Straw rushing to Tehran & Qom to embrace the despised Mullah$ like a trained chimpanse everytime the Islamist mafia snaps its fingers! This shamful support of genocide, and a brutal dictatorship is repulsive to all Iranians and anyone with any decency or humanity!

The more the Mullah$ sink, the more the UK, France and Germany rush in to save their monstrous creation, forgoeing all appearances in revealing their greedy support of a brutal, tyrnnical and despotic theocracy! Shame on the EU.

The more desperate the Mullahs get, the more the British, French and Germans rush in to legitimise their monstrous creation. EU's desperation is only as evident, pathetic, and self-destructive as the last dying dance of the Mullah$!

Blinded by Greed and Avarice, the EU bets on the Losing Horse!


---------------------------
The Filthy Colonialist British are Deporting Dying Iranian Asylum Applicants for Execution to their Mullah Buddies Yet Again! Evil or Very Mad


The shameful support of the Islamist Iranian Mullahcracy by the British government is perhaps one of the most repulsive acts of modern day Neo Colonialism in our world!

The way and manner in which the British government installed this barbaric Mullahcracy and has continued to act as its protector and champion is offensive to any democratic minded person anywhere in our world!

The shameless British are responsible for 25 years of Islamist genocide, torture, mass imprisonment, despotic rule, oppression, stonings, amputations, poverty, ethnic cleansing, misogyny, and child molestation of the Iranian people in the hands of the Mullahcracy they installed and continue to sponsor, all in return for the mass looting of Iran's oil and gas.

Even though their own laws prevent an asylum applicant from being deported if they risk death and torture they are deporting 3 Kurdish dissidents to Iran for execution. Why? The men are scheduled for execution, and the British have no intention of doing anything other than handing them over to their Mullah buddies for execution. I don't support all the political beliefs of these individuals, however I cannot imagine how the British government could break their own laws in order to accomodate the Mullahs' massacres! The Greed and avarice of the Colinilaist British is frankly offensive to any human being in our world!

The British are the single most disgusting and Repulsive Colonialists of all time, they have no honor, no decency, no humanity of any kind. Shame on the Filthy British and their Filthy Islamist Colonialist Mullahcracy!


Ban all British Products.

Do not buy anything made in the U.K.

Use every chance you have to educate the world about the filthy Colonialist practices of the British government in Iran

Write to the British government letting them know what the Iranian people think about the Islamist Colonial hell that they have created in Iran, and what you think about their shameful and repulsive sponsorship of the Mullahcracy, and their shameful abuse of Iranian asylum applicants!

Demonstrate outside British embassies all over the world on behalf of the oppressed people of Iran.



---------------------------------------------



http://www.sundayherald.com/40451

Execution threat for hunger strikers facing deportation
Back to top
asher



Joined: 03 Mar 2004
Posts: 305
Location: Portland, Oregon

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is absolutely tragic, heartbreaking, shocking, and horrifying to read about those hunger strikers. Britain should be ashamed. I pray that some miracle will occur to change their fate. But "we do not depend on miracles" and we have a grave responsibility as human beings to create a better future for one another.

And once again, thanks for posting Rep. Andrews' letter.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
asher



Joined: 03 Mar 2004
Posts: 305
Location: Portland, Oregon

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To: uk@un.int

I am writing to protest the threatened deportation of three Iranian dissidents, now on hunger strike, to certain torture and death in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Britain should be opposing the criminal regime of the mullahs, not appeasing it. I urge the United Kingdom to act in accord with the highest traditions of the civilized world and afford safety to those seeking refuge within its borders.

Asher Abrams
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    [FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index -> Noteworthy Discussion Threads All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 1 of 8

 
Jump to:  
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