Iran News and Discussions

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 28 Jun 2009 21:57

>>Islamism in its core essentially Jihadi form is never crushed unless it suffers an overwhelming military defeat, and at the hands of an enemy that is equally ruthless in using counter terror - i.e., counter-jihad. The Shias differ from the Sunnis only in elements that are not really significant for non-Muslims facing jihad from either of these two sects.

I'm not sure why we are still disputing this fundamental common sense conclusion. Brihaspati has put it just right.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 28 Jun 2009 22:13

Absolutely correct.Islamism has to be countered ruthlessly.No quarters asked and none given

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 29 Jun 2009 14:54

First round in Internet war goes to Iranian intelligence

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report

June 28, 2009

Millions of sympathizers around the world looked forward to seeing Iran's protest movement using the Internet for the first online coup in history. Instead, the Iranian Islamic regime turned the tables: Its Internet police, arguably the largest in the world, pushed "control," "halt," "delete" and "send" buttons to activate a deadly weapon for suppressing the movement, as soon as it took to the streets to protest the June 12 election which was believed to have given Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a false victory.

By Sunday, June 28, when the Guardian Council was to hand down its final verdict on their complaints, the street rallies had petered out.

Part of the reason, DEBKAfile's intelligence sources report, was their organizers' heavy reliance on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Flickr and other social sites to orchestrate their protest movement. They did not at first appreciate that Iranian intelligence Internet experts, operating from secret headquarters established months ago, were using their communications to shoot them down.

According to our sources, that headquarters is located at the telecom center on Sepah (Khomenei) Square in Tehran. It was built for the Shah in the 1970s by the Israel construction contractors Solel Boneh and designed by Israeli intelligence and telecommunications experts.

The high-end apparatus, installed in late 2008 by the German Siemens AG and Finnish Nokia Corp. cell phone giant, gave Iranian intelligence the most advanced tools anywhere for controlling, inspecting, censoring and altering Internet and cell phone messaging. Those tools were being used weeks before the poll to identify penetrations by alien spy services, their local agents and dissident activists.

This system is capable of conducting "deep packet inspection" of every type of text and video communication in all parts of Iran on three tracks:

1. Like other advanced electronic spy systems in the world, this one uses such keywords as attack, weapons, cash, data, explosives, meeting, demonstration, resistance, protest, etc. to alert Iran within milliseconds to feeds of interest by computer or phone - mail, signals or visuals.

In a flash, intelligence analysts get a fix on the sender and the electronic addressee which are then placed on a surveillance list for further monitoring. Once identified, the sender or receiver and their connections are closely shadowed by field agents.

2. By "deep packet inspection," the secret controllers can cause delays in online data transfers, which surfers may attribute to glitches connected with their providers. The more targets under surveillance, the more online transfers are slowed down.

DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report that the day after the presidential poll and resulting street outbreaks, Iran's Internet control and tracking supervisors took over the 10 leading service providers in the country. Their first action was to slow down incoming and outgoing cyber traffic from 1,500 to 54 kilobytes to make sure that not a single byte by Internet or cell phone to or from protest leaders escaped their notice.

Tehran has vented its ire on Britain because it is accused of providing the organizers of the dissident movement with London telephone numbers to circumvent the deliberate slowdown of online traffic from inside the country. These numbers gave anti-government activists instant, direct links through Western Internet providers for getting their messages out to the world. Iran suspects they were laid on by British intelligence.

Eventually, the British lines became jammed by overload.

3. Iranian intelligence made cynical use of the large amount of electronic and personal data accumulated on anti-regime elements. Instead of detaining their prey at once, Iranian intelligence invaded their computers and cell phones to plant false leads for smoking unsuspecting activists out in the open and keeping them under inspection.

Within a few days of their protest, Mir Hossein Mousavi and the bulk of his supporters, realizing their electronic campaign had been taken over by the regime to hunt them down, disappeared from the streets of Tehran.

Wednesday, June 24, when the extent of the damage the Iranian Internet invasion had inflicted on American interests was brought home to him, US secretary of defense Robert Gates ordered a special cyber defense system set up to protect the US armed forces' 15,000 Web sites, which encompass seven million computers. Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander, head of the National Security Agency, was put in charge of getting the new system up and running by the end of 2010.

Tuesday, June 23, a group of US senators led by the Republic presidential candidate John McCain and independent Joe Lieberman initiated legislation to fund a cyber defense system capable of combating Internet assaults like the one mounted by the Iranian government.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 29 Jun 2009 18:51

this war is going on both sides. My wordpress blog seems to have been affected too.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 30 Jun 2009 08:09

avram et al., who were discussing the issue of democracy and dictatorship etc..

Dilip Hero in Outlook has this article which tries to connect the dots.

http://outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodnam ... hiro&sid=1

Between 1979, the year of the Islamic revolution, and 1999, Iran's population doubled to 65 million, two-thirds of them under 25 years of age. Those young Iranians had no direct experience or memory of the pre-Islamic regime of the Shah -- its inequities and injustices, and its subservient relationship with Washington. Therefore, their commitment to the Islamic regime was less than total. Moreover, the post-revolutionary educational system had proven inadequate when it came to socializing them the way the republic's religious leaders wanted.

During those two decades, Iran's student body increased almost threefold, to 19 million. The overall literacy rate jumped from 58% to 82%, with the figure for females -- 28% in 1979 -- tripling. There was a remarkable upsurge in the enrollment of women in universities. Nationally, their share of university student bodies shot up to 60%. At prestigious Tehran University, they were a majority in all faculties, including science and law.

Much to the disappointment of the mullahs, a study of university students in the late 1990s showed that whereas 83% of them watched television, only 5% watched religious programs. Of the 58% who read extracurricular books, barely 6% showed interest in religious literature.

Irrespective of their social backgrounds, what indisputably impinges on the daily lives of university students and other young Iranians are the restrictions the regime tries to impose on their social and personal freedoms, including going to mixed-sex parties, holding hands with someone other than a marriage partner, drinking alcoholic beverages, listening to modern Western music, watching foreign television channels via satellite, and having extramarital sex. While reformists recognize that restricting such activities is having the singular effect of alienating the young from the Islamic Republic, their conservative opponents consider these restrictions essential to uphold Islamic morality and culture.

Not surprisingly, politically conscious university students have been striving to enlarge the arena of personal freedoms as a means of countering social repression and administrative corruption, and making the Islamic system more transparent and accountable.
During the first year of Khatami's presidency, the country experienced an explosion of new publications. Following a landslide victory by the reformists in the first round of parliamentary elections in February 2000, a newly bullish pro-reform press even began publishing stories of corruption in the pre-Khatami period. These proved immensely popular.

Khatami's supporters viewed this as a sign of the growing maturity of the Islamic system and the evolution of democratic governance. Before the second round of the elections could take place in May, however, a conservative-minded parliament reacted speedily. Encouraged by Khamanei, it stiffened the Press Law in April, leading to the closure of dozens of publications by the judiciary.

In the 2005 presidential contest, leading reformists were barred from the race by the Guardian Council.

and so on.... will post full article eventually, even if it goes under subscription.

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 30 Jun 2009 20:52

US senators call for crackdown on companies selling IRAN technology that spy on DEMONSTRATORS.
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/new ... s/2397222/

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 02 Jul 2009 02:33

Recently, Khatami denounced those "rioting against the regime", dealing a blow to the protest movement. But now he's suddenly done a 180, and has denounced the election, while calling for detained protesters to be released:

http://www.reuters.com/article/gc08/idU ... J420090701

About time this fence-sitter and waffler got off the fence.

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 04 Jul 2009 22:20

Mousavi 'must face treason trial'

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Jul 2009 21:02

Saudis give nod to Israeli raid on Iran

Israel denies Saudis gave IDF airspace clearance for Iran strike

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Jul 2009 22:40

There have been dissenters within the regime in the past, such as Montazeri. There were some lines they refused to cross, as a mark of loyalty to the Revolution. Like dissenters (Trotsky, etc) within the the Bolsheviks/CPSU, they were unwilling to band together and take to the streets and publicly attack their comrades until it was too late. The result was that they could be relatively quickly isolated and semi-silenced.

This is a qualitatively different situation - establishment figures with revolutionary credentials banding together, and rallying Iranian public opinion against the elections, against the parallel theocratic structure, and even against the supreme leader.

Nothing decisive will happen until and unless the regular armed forces stop listening to Khamenei of course, but the regime's internal legitimacy has been shot to pieces.

The centre of gravity of the hardliners support base are not the clergy, but lay Islamists - the veterans of the Baseej and Pasdaran who fought the Shah, who fought Iraq, who fought the Marxists and the Liberals.

It's very much like the base of support of the extreme right regimes that rose in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and 1930s - lower middle class war vets who believe in the power of violence and felt that the upper classes that ran the show sold them out and screwed them over. They hate those who were older and made money off the war while they died like flies, and they detest the younger generations who neither experienced the war nor care about it.

This conflict in Iran is much more about class, generation and gender than it is about secular vs. Islamist, or lay vs. clergy.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 13 Jul 2009 21:57

I am getting the feeling that Mousavi was actively supported by the US intel. Apparently, their online movement was funded by an american agency.

Irans internet and comms networks are using Nokia/Siemens equipment, so some people are pissed off with the companies, especially the Moussavi supporters abroad.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 13 Jul 2009 23:51

brihaspati wrote:Replacement of religion in France with the French revolution and under threat of being overrun produced a fanatical Republic.

Which is the only remotely civilized western nation. Why cant we hope that this would happen to Iran? After all to us, the Iranian nationalism is a much lesser evil as compared to any other (and for US)

In fact if the original democracy in Iran was to let live (which US killed) that would have been rather better for us after all would it not? More like a Egypt than a Islamic theocracy?

So if US by mistake (for itself) ends up putting democracy back in Iran, shouldn't we be happy?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 14 Jul 2009 04:12

We can go into how civilized the French became after the revolution, but will become OT.

However, the main point was, that such a revolutionary "nationalist" Iran could be quite volatile. It could be good for Iranians themselves. But an Iran flush-with nationalism need not discard Shia Islamism, or even the covert war against Israel. In fact the Saudis and Iranains could be racing each other to be seen as the liberator of the Ummah by liquidating Israel, and gaining the strategic advantage in the eastern Mediterranean. In order to show off that "nationalism" has added value to their "Islamism" they could do things that a saner mind would refrain from. Such a scenario need not be good for India, as alliances with inimical forces are quite possible. An Iran allied with the US or UK, as well as with PRC after becoming "democratic" and "nationalist" with perhaps aspirations for joining the NATO and the EU! Long shot, but just imagine the potential.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 14 Jul 2009 11:43

An Iran allied with the US or UK, as well as with PRC after becoming "democratic" and "nationalist" with perhaps aspirations for joining the NATO and the EU! Long shot, but just imagine the potential.

Werent you saying that Iran would not get close to west if it gets national?

So my "dream" Iran would be a non-Islamic/non-theological democratic Iran -- something like the Iran that would have been if the 40s movement was not crushed and removed by the west.

Iran has that potential -- unfortunately the only set of people who will benefit from it (apart from Iranians) are in no shape to foster it.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 14 Jul 2009 17:48

Initial heat of nationalism will compensate for loss of "Ayatollaic authority" this was my prediction. This would mean and initial overzealous projection of perceived "Iranian interests". But overzealous actions or posturings against something usually means also a tendency towards using that extra belligerance as a bargaining tool. Those within Iranian power structure having personal rivalries or jealousies with the initial leadership of the "nationalist" turnover will take the opportunity to offer a "scaling down" in return for concessions and alliances.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Jul 2009 05:51

About a week ago a Dolphin class sub passed through the Suez. Today:

Israel warships pass through Suez

Israeli media described the passage of the two Saar class missile boats as a "message" to Iran.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jul 2009 01:16

Two related stories from nightwatch, 14 July 2009

Russia-US-Iran: For the record. Russia will not agree to increase sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program in exchange for a new nuclear arms reduction treaty with the United States, a source in Russia's foreign ministry said today, according to Reuters. The source said, "There are no reasons to link these issues or count on Russia being more cooperative in toughening sanctions against Iran if there is progress in talks with the United States on further cuts in strategic offensive weapons."

Nothing in the public record suggests that kind of bargain had any chance of success, ever. This apparent misread of Russian policy and intentions supports the NightWatch concern that administration officials are not listening to friends in the Middle East who report consistently the Russians are making a run at strategic leadership in the Middle East.

They are strategic competitors, not partners. Their proxies are Syria, Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, according to the Middle Eastern sources. If Russia backs these four entities and protects their machinations, US initiatives for behavioral modification will never work. The implications are that US policies promoting peace stand no chance of success if they do not contain provisions to counter Russian interests that promote continuing hostility, which Russia can exploit and is exploiting for profit and influence.

[/quote]

and

Israel: The Jerusalem Post Online reported today, "Two Sa'ar-5 class Navy ships reportedly crossed through the Suez Canal from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea on Tuesday to beef up Israel's naval presence in the Red Sea. The passage of the ships comes several weeks after a Dolphin-class Navy submarine passed through the waterway for the first time. One of the ships, the Hanit, already crossed the canal both ways in June, in what an Egyptian source said was the first case of a large Israeli warship using the strategic waterway, AFP reported. The other ship to cross on Tuesday, the Eilat, was named after a destroyer sunk by Egypt with the loss of 47 lives shortly after the 1967 Six Day War.”

Haaretz.com , "Israeli defense officials said that two missile boats did cross the canal, but they spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the matter. During the maneuver in June, the Hanit accompanied an Israeli Dolphin-class submarine for a drill off Eilat - the first such voyage for the secret craft and a sign of Israel's growing strategic reach, Reuters quoted defense sources as saying. Witnesses told Reuters the vessel docked briefly at Eilat's naval base before departing. But an Israeli defense official was quoted as saying there would be no permanent deployment there of the German-made submarines - of which Israel has three, with two more on order.”

For the record, Sa’ar 5-class ships are missile corvettes that displace 1,279 tons and carry a crew of about 75. They were built by Ingalls in Pascagoula and are extremely well armed and long range. They are not patrol boats, as that term is used in US and other media. The deployment to Eilat with a Dolphin-class submarine suggests they will begin workups in preparation for an operation, also known as, rehearsals.

The nature and timing of any operation remain unclear, but the options include preventing resupply of Hamas from Iran via Sudan and the Red Sea to support for operations against Iran directly.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Jul 2009 12:00

Any attack on Iran will be catastrophic for Gulf tanker shipping and send oil prices skyrocketing,resulting in another global economic collapse.The controversial Iranian lection is an internal matter between two competing factions of the Iranian revolution,one side being used and encouraged by the west.This will actually be detrimental to the legitimacy of Ahmed-in-a-jam's opponents giving the hardliners a stick with which to beat Moussavi and Co. The CIA has for many years been hard at work within Iran trying to engineer dissidence against the regime using the students,who are fired up because of their youth and ideas,wanting a more open and transparent society not ruled in perpetuity by the omnipotent mullahs.Open support for the opposition by the west will eventually backfire.

The problem of Iran's nuclear weapon ambitions will now be even more critical,with the regime even perhaps accelerating their plans and wanting to conduct a test to unite the country and restore their popularity.Perhaps this is the message the Israelis are trying to tell the Iranians,that such an act would be unacceptable to Israel and would give it the green light for taking pre-emptive military action.Israel would definitely get assistance from many of the Sunni nations who fear Iran,but a wounded Iran that could hit out at its enemies,perceived and real,is far more dangerous .In fact,all Iran has to do is drop a number of "dirty" nuclear bomb to achieve the same results,or pass on "dirty" nuclear material to any of the terror groups that it supports/sympathises with.Messing with Gulf shipping is the easiest task for it as it has hundreds of small boats that could be used for suicide attacks by its revolutionary guards.

As for the US's fond hope that they can armtwist Russia into stopping arms sales to Iran,Washington still doesn't understand the mentality of the Russian two,Putin and Medvedev,who deeply resent the US's undiminished arrogance despite Obama in charge,who still fondly thinks that there is only one superpower in existence.The asinine act of putting missiles into Poland smacks of neo-Nazism to the Russians,who still vividly remember the horrors of Nazism. The Russians will not sign any nuclear weapons reduction treaty at the point of blackmail over its arms sales to any of its clients.The US does not listen to Russian concerns about NATO expansion in Eastern Europe,especially in the Caucasus,so why should Russia listen to the US over Iran? In fact any Israeli attack againt Iran would immediatley send a number of other neutral Arab nations right back inot the Russian sphere of influence,as they would want weapons to defend themselves from Israel.
As it is,the US has just eaten humble pie asking Russia to allow it to use Russian territory as a supply corridor for its troops in Afghanistan,who are taking a pasting from the Taliban !

Report: Warships in Suez prepare for Iran attack
British Times quotes Israeli defense official as saying movement of warships in Suez Canal 'should be taken seriously…Israel is investing time in preparing for an attack on Iran'. Source says public showcasing of maneuvers intentional

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 30,00.html

rohiths · Post by **rohiths** » 17 Jul 2009 13:42

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 69,00.html

At the moment, Iran's gasoline imports are not affected by U.S. sanctions or the international, U.N.-agreed sanctions. But the willingness of other countries to sell gasoline to Iran has faltered as political pressure mounts over Iran's nuclear program. India, a major supplier, recently suspended exports of gas for a brief while, according to the Paris-based International Energy Agency. "If you really want to use effective sanctions, then you want to cut off gas imports," says Erica Downs, China energy fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "If the Chinese do invest $40 billion and dramatically increase Iran's refining capacity, it would definitely weaken one of the weapons in the U.S. arsenal."

The worst diplomatic blunder that India could have possibly done.
Now a chinese "pearl" will appear on the straits of Hormuz and china will have India by the scruff of the neck since majority of India's oil comes from the gulf

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Jul 2009 14:54

...and gas from Qatar.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 19 Jul 2009 05:47

Passionate denunciation of international leftists decision to side with Ahmadinejad and Khamenei by an Iranian leftist.

Something worth carefully reading for those who think what is going on inside Iran is directed from the outside.

Left is wrong on Iran
by Hamid Dabashi

Al Ahram
Saturday, July 18, 2009

Text from Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran
http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/inde ... =node/8289

Over the decades I have learned not to expect much from what passes for "the left" in North America and/or Western Europe when it comes to the politics of what their colonial ancestry has called "the Middle East". But I do expect much more when it comes to our own progressive intellectuals -- Arabs, Muslims, South Asians, Africans and Latin Americans. This is not a racial bifurcation, but a regional typology along the colonial divide.

By and large this expectation is apt and more often than not met. The best case in point is the comparison between what Azmi Bishara has offered about the recent uprising in Iran and what Slavoj Zizek felt obligated to write. Whereas Bishara's piece (with aspects of which I have had reason to disagree) is predicated on a detailed awareness of the Iranian scene, accumulated over the last 30 years of the Islamic Republic and even before, Zizek's (the conclusion of which I completely disagree with) is entirely spontaneous and impressionistic, predicated on as much knowledge about Iran as I have about the mineral composition of the planet Jupiter.

The examples can be multiplied by many, when we add to what Azmi Bishara has written pieces by Mustafa El-Labbad and Galal Nassar, for example, and compare them to the confounded blindness of Paul Craig Roberts, Anthony DiMaggio, Michael Veiluva, James Petras, Jeremy Hammond, Eric Margolis, and many others. While people closest to the Iranian scene write from a position of critical intimacy, and with a healthy dose of disagreement, those farthest from it write with an almost unanimous exposure of their constitutional ignorance, not having the foggiest idea what has happened in that country over the last 30 years, let alone the last 200 years, and then having the barefaced chutzpah to pontificate one thing or another -- or worse, to take more than 70 million human beings as stooges of the CIA and puppets of the Saudis.

Let me begin by stating categorically that in principle I share the fundamental political premise of the left, its weariness of US imperial machination, of major North American and Western European media (but by no means all of them) by and large missing the point on what is happening around the globe, or even worse seeing things from the vantage point of their governmental cues, which they scarcely question. It has been but a few months since we have come out of the nightmare of the Bush presidency, or the combined chicaneries of Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and John Ashcroft, or of the continued calamities of the "war on terror". Iran is still under the threat of a military strike by Israel, or at least more severe economic sanctions, similar to those that are responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis during the Clinton administration. Iraq and Afghanistan are burning, Gaza is in utter desolation, Northern Pakistan is in deep humanitarian crisis, and Israel is stealing more Palestinian lands every day. With all his promises and pomp and ceremonies, President Obama is yet to show in any significant and tangible way his change of course in the region from that of the previous administration.

The US Congress, prompted by AIPAC (the American Israel Political Affairs Committee), pro-war vigilantes lurking in the halls of power in Washington DC, and Israeli warlords and their propaganda machinery in the US, are all excited about the events in Iran and are doing their damnedest to turn them to their advantage. The left, indeed, has reason to worry. But having principled positions on geopolitics is one thing, being blind and deaf to a massive social movement is something entirely different, as being impervious to the flagrant charlatanism of an upstart demagogue like Ahmadinejad....

My concern here is not with that retrograde strand in the North American or Western European left that is siding with Ahmadinejad and against the masses of millions of Iranians daring the draconian security apparatus of the Islamic Republic. They are a lost cause, and frankly no one could care less what they think of the world. What does concern me is when an Arab intellectual like Asad AbuKhalil opts to go public with his assessment of this movement -- and what he says so vertiginously smacks of recalcitrant fanaticism, steadfastly insisting on a belligerent ignorance.

On his website, "Angry Arab", Asad AbuKhalil finally has categorically stated that he is "now more convinced than ever that the US and Western governments were far more involved in Iranian affairs during the demonstrations than was assumed by many." He then tries to be cautious and cover his back by stipulating, "Let us make it clear: the US, Western and Saudi intervention in Iranian affairs does not necessarily implicate the Iranian protesters themselves. And even if some of them were involved in those conspiracies, I do believe that the majority of Iranian protesters were motivated by domestic issues and legitimate grievances against an oppressive government." This latter stipulation is in fact worse than that categorical statement about the conspiratorial plot behind the movement, for it seeks to play fancy speculative footwork to cover up a moral bankruptcy -- that he dare not take a stand, one way or another. AbuKhalil's final edict: "I was just looking at US and Western media coverage of Honduras, where the situation is rather analogous, and you can't escape the conclusion that the US media were involved with the US government in a conspiracy the details of which will be revealed years from now." In other words, since the US media is not covering the Honduras development as closely as it does (or so AbuKhalil fancies) the Iranian event, then the US media is in cahoots with the US government in fomenting unrest in Iran, and thus this movement is manufactured by US imperial designs with Saudi aid; and though we may not have evidence of this yet, we will learn of its details 30 years from now, when a Stephen Kinzer comes and writes an account of the plot, as he did about the CIA- sponsored coup of 1953.

One simply must have dug oneself deeply and darkly, mummified inside a forgotten and hollowed grave on another planet not to have seen, heard and felt for millions of human beings risking their brave lives and precious liberties by pouring into the streets of their cities demanding their constitutional rights for peaceful protest. Thousands of them have been arrested and jailed, their loved ones worried sick about their whereabouts; hundreds of their leading public intellectuals, journalists, civil and women's rights activists, rounded up and incarcerated, harassed and even tortured, some brought to national television to confess that they are spies for "the enemy". There are pregnant women among those leading reformists arrested, as are such leading intellectuals as Said Hajjarian, who is paralysed having barely survived an assassination attempt by precisely those in the upper echelons of the Islamic Republic who have yet again put him and his wheelchair in jail. Three prominent reformists, all heroes of the Islamic revolution (Khatami, Mousavi, and Karrubi: a former president, a former prime minister, and a former speaker of the house to this very Islamic Republic) are leading the opposition, charging fraud, declaring Ahmadinejad illegitimate. The senior most Grand Ayatollah of the land, the octogenarian Ayatollah Montazeri, has openly declared Khamenei illegitimate. The Iranian parliament is deeply divided and in turmoil. A massively militarised security apparatus has wreaked havoc on the civilian population: beating, clubbing, tear gassing, and plain shooting at them. University dormitories have been savagely raided by plainclothes vigilantes and students beaten up with batons, clubs, kicks, and fists by oversize thugs. Millions of Iranians around the globe have taken to the streets, their leading public figures -- philosophers like Abdul-Karim Soroush, clerics like Mohsen Kadivar, public intellectuals like Ata Mohajerani, filmmakers like Mohsen Makhmalbaf, pop singers like Shahin Najafi, footballers of the Iranian national team, countless poets, novelists, scholars, scientists, women's rights activists, ad infinitum --coming out to voice their defiance of this barbarity perpetrated against their brothers and sisters.

Not a single sentence, not a single word that I utter comes from CNN, The New York Times, Al-Arabiya or any other sources that Asad AbuKhalil loves to hate. None of these people means anything to Mr AbuKhalil? Can he really face these millions of people, their best and brightest, the mothers of those who have been cold- bloodedly murdered, tortured, beaten brut ally, paralysed for life, and tell them they are stooges of the CIA and the Saudis, and that CNN and Al-Arabiya have put them up to it? AbuKhalil has every legitimate reason to doubt the veracity of what he sees in US media. But at what point does a legitimate criticism of media representations degenerate into an illegitimate disregard for reality itself; or has a sophomoric reading of postmodernity so completely corrupted our moral standards that there is no reality any more, just representation?

Asad AbuKhalil dismisses a mass social uprising that is unfolding right in front of his eyes as manufactured by Americans and the Saudis. What else does AbuKhalil know about Iran? Anything? Thirty years (predicated on 200 years) of thinking, writing, mobilising, political and artistic revolts, theological and philosophical debates -- does any of it ring a bell for Professor AbuKhalil? Do the names Mahmoud Shabestari, Abdul-Karim Soroush, Mohsen Kadivar, among scores of others, mean anything to him? Has he ever listened to these young Iranians speak, cared to learn the lyrics of their music, watched the films they make, gone to a photography exhibition they have put together, seen any of their art work, or perhaps glanced at their newspapers, journals, magazines, weblogs, websites? Are all these stooges of America, manipulated by CIA agents, bought and paid for by the Saudis? What depth of intellectual depravation is this?

In his most recent posting, AbuKhalil has this to say about Iran: "For the most reliable coverage of the Iran story, I strongly recommend the New York Times. I mean, they have Michael Slackman in Cairo and Nazila Fathi in Toronto, and they have 'independent observers' in Tehran. What else do you want? If you want more, the station of King Fahd's brother-in-law (Al-Arabiya) has a correspondent in Dubai to cover Iran. And according to a report that just aired, Mousavi received 91 per cent of the vote in 'an elite neighbourhood'. I kid you not. They just said that." The Iranians have no reporters, no journalists, no analysts, no pollsters, no economists, no sociologists, no political scientist, no newspaper editorials, no magazines, no blogs, and no websites? If AbuKhalil has this bizarre obsession with the American or Saudi media that he loves to hate, does that psychological fixation ipso facto deprive an entire nation of their defiance against tyranny, their agency in changing their own destiny?

What a terrible state of mind to be in! AbuKhalil has so utterly lost hope in us -- us Arabs, Iranians, Muslims, South Asians, Africans, Latin Americans -- that it does not even occur to him that maybe, just maybe, if we take our votes seriously the US and Israel may not have anything to do with it. He fancies himself opposing the US and Israel. But he has such a deeply colonised mind that he thinks nothing of us, of our will to fight imperial intervention, colonial occupation of our homelands, and domestic tyranny at one and the same time. He believes if we do it then Americans and the Saudis must have put us up to it. He is so utterly lost in his own moral desolation and intellectual despair that in his estimation only Americans can instigate a mass revolt of the sort that has unfolded in front of his eyes. What an utterly frightful state for an intellectual to be in: no trust, no courage, no imagination and no hope. That we, as a people, as a nation, as a collective will, have fought for over 200 years for our constitutional rights has never occurred to AbuKhalil. What gives a man the authority to speak so cavalierly about another nation, of whom he knows nothing?

Ten years I spent watching every single Palestinian film I could lay my hands on before I opened my mouth and uttered a word about Palestinian cinema. I visited every conceivable archive in North America and Western Europe, travelled from Morocco to Syria, drove from one end of Palestine to another, was blessed by the dignity of Palestinians resisting the horror of a criminal occupation of their homeland, walked and showed bootlegged videos on mismatched equipment and stolen electricity from one Palestinian refugee camp in Lebanon to another; then I went to Syria and found a Palestinian archivist who knew infinitely more about Palestinian cinema than I did, and I sat at his feet and learned humility, and I still did not dare put pen to paper or open my mouth about anything Palestinian without asking a Palestinian scholar -- from Edward Said to Rashid Khalidi to Joseph Massad -- to read what I had written before I dared publishing it. This I did not out of any vacuous belief in scholarship, but out of an abiding respect for the dignity of Palestinians fighting for their liberties and their stolen homeland, and fearful of the burden of responsibility that writing about a nation's struggles puts on those of us who have a voice and an audience.

For people like Zizek, social upheavals in what they call the Third World are a matter of theoretical entertainment. It is an old tradition that goes back all the way to Sartre on Algeria and Cuba in the 1950s, down to Foucault on Iran in the 1970s. That does not bother me a bit. In fact, I find it quite entertaining -- watching grown up people make complete fools of themselves talking about something about which they have no blasted clue. But when someone like AbuKhalil indulges in cliché ridden leftism of the most banal variety it speaks of a culture of intellectual laziness and moral bankruptcy so outrageously at odds with the struggles of people from which we emerge. Our people are not to conform to our tired, old, and cliché-ridden theories. We need to bypass intellectual couch potatoes and catch up with our people. Millions of people, young and old, lower and middle class, men and women, have poured in their masses of millions into the streets, launched their Intifada, demanding their constitutional rights and civil liberties. Who are these people? What language do they speak, what songs do they sing, what slogans do they chant, to what music do they sing and dance, what sacrifices have they made, what dungeons have they crowded, what epic poetry are they citing, what philosophers, theologians, jurists, poets, novelists, singers, song writers, musicians, webloggers soar in their souls, and for what ideals have their hearts and minds ached for generations and centuries?

A colonised mind is a colonised mind whether it is occupied by the European right or by the cliché-ridden left: it is an occupied territory, devoid of detail, devoid of substance, devoid of love, devoid of a caring intellect. It smells of ageing mothballs, and it is nauseating.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 19 Jul 2009 06:01

rohiths wrote:The worst diplomatic blunder that India could have possibly done.

Nothing to do with Indian diplomacy or the Indian government.

India's Reliance halts petrol sales to Iran

India's Reliance Industries Ltd has stopped gasoline exports to Iran, to help avoid possible restrictions on sales of its fuel to the U.S. market, the Economic Times reported on Thursday.

Choose our $13 trillion market or Iran's $250billion

“We know who these companies are - Shell, Vitol, BP and Reliance - and we need to give them a choice: you can do business with Iran's $250 billion economy or our $13 trillion economy, but not both,” said Senator Mr Jon Kyl, who was a part of the bipartis an coalition of 25 Senators that introduced the Bill.

The legislation also authorises the President to impose stronger penalties on these firms, including a ban on conducting business in the US.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Jul 2009 07:56

The worst diplomatic blunder that India could have possibly done.

The worst is MMS tailing between Russia and Egypt. And, then saying just the opposite of what was released with the Pkai PM.

IF India can have a leader with a backbone, it would help the country a ton.

tarun · Post by **tarun** » 20 Jul 2009 15:24

We need our own version of
http://www.bis.doc.gov/complianceandenf ... liance.htm

U.S. companies continue to report receiving requests to engage in activities that further or support the boycott of Israel. U.S. companies may receive similar requests in the future. If you have questions, please call (202) 482-2381 and ask for the Duty Officer or you may contact us by email.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 21 Jul 2009 03:42

Iran's Police State Apparatchiks

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Jul 2009 12:36

Cowgirl Clinton to the rescue...of the Gulf states if Iran goes nuclear.

Talk about showing a red rag to the Iranian bull ! This will only enrage Iranian nationalists further and give further ammo to Ahmed-in-a-jam and the ayatollahs to brand the opposition as being agents of Uncle Sam and the Sunni Arab clique.My sympathies for Moussavi.As for upgrading Gulf state forces,they're doing very well at the moment with upgrades and new weaponry all around thanks to the earlier oil bonanza.There's a limit to what they can absorb with their limited manpower too and all that the Iranians have to do is to block the Gulf and stop oil shipping which it can easily do through multiple attacks from hundreds of its small craft manned by the Revolutionary Guard and mining the Straits also using its Kilo and midget subs.In addition,its large inventory of tactical missiless which can reach anywheer in the Gulf,can cause utter havoc with these states and their economies.Even the threat of firing salvoes of missiles at Dubai,etc. will result in a fleeing of investment from these states.Iran can develop and hide a "bomb in the basement",which is probably what it is trying to do,perhaps with a NoKo/AQK design,which does not need testing.In fact,the recent NoKo test could've been intended for the benefit of Iran too which no analyst has mentioned so far.Remember that China did the very same for Pak earlier.Iran might very well employ the same strategy as Israel.Hide its bombs without the need for testing a warhead already tested outside the country and build up its inventory steadily,whilst perfecting its delivery systems.This is what Israel fears most and is prepared to strike before this capability becomes a reality.Ahmed-in-a-jam and the Ayatollahs will care a fig for the cowgirl and her statements.

Hillary Clinton vows to protect Gulf states from Iran
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -Iran.html

Hillary Clinton has warned Iran's leaders that Washington will extend a "defence umbrella" across the Gulf if it develops nuclear weapons.

By David Blair, Diplomatic Editor
Published: 5:38PM BST 22 Jul 2009

Hillary Clinton: Mrs Clinton's words were designed to reinforce America's message that Iran will not become more secure by building nuclear weapons
The Secretary of State said that if Iran spurned President Barack Obama's overtures and continued with its programme, the US would respond by increasing its military aid to friendly nations in the region.

She reminded the regime that Washington's offer of talks would not be on the table indefinitely.

Related Articles
Analysis: US hopes of new relationship with Iran fade
Hillary Clinton sends wrong signal to Iran
Pakistan and US 'at odds' over Taliban threat
US ready to protect Gulf allies from Iran weapons
US investigator exposes Iran's nuclear weapons 'shopping list'

Mrs Clinton's words were designed to reinforce America's message that Iran will not become more secure by building nuclear weapons. As well as placing direct economic pressure on Tehran, the US wants to persuade its rulers that joining the club of nuclear-armed states is not in their interests.

"If the US extends a defence umbrella over the region, if we do even more to support the military capacity of those in the Gulf, it's unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer because they won't be able to intimidate and dominate as they apparently believe they can once they have a nuclear weapon," said Mrs Clinton during an interview in Thailand.

In 2007, the Bush administration agreed to provide weapons worth at least £10 billion to US allies in the Gulf, notably Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

Mrs Clinton said this could be taken further and America could choose to "upgrade the defence of our partners in the region".

Within weeks of taking office, Mr Obama offered Iran's leaders direct talks on the future of the nuclear programme. America and the world's leading powers, including Russia and China, have jointly offered Tehran technical help with a civilian nuclear power industry, along with trade and investment, if Iran obeys five United Nations resolutions and stops enriching uranium.

So far, Tehran has not given a definitive reply to this offer. Western diplomats fear Iran will simply play for time, knowing that every month brings its scientists closer to achieving the option of building a nuclear weapon.

Mrs Clinton said "we will still hold the door open" to talks, but added the "nuclear clock is ticking". Mr Obama has previously said that America would wait until the end of this year before reassessing its approach towards Iran.

Observers believe that Iran's scientists could be capable of producing enough weapons-grade uranium for a nuclear bomb by the end of next year. Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, who monitor Iran's declared nuclear plants, say its scientists have already produced more than a ton of low-enriched uranium.

But Tehran would need more time to enrich this to weapons-grade level.

Speaking ahead of an Asian security conference in the Thai resort of Phuket, Mrs Clinton also demanded "irreversible" denuclearisation by North Korea and warned Pyongyang may be transferring atomic technology to Burma

She said the communist state, which has pulled out of multilateral talks, must abandon its nuclear programme if it wants to receive incentives.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 23 Jul 2009 21:16

No 'deepwater' gas pipeline to link Iran, India

A top Iranian oil official has ruled out the possibility of gas exports to India through the Sea of Oman and the Indian Ocean.

Earlier Tuesday, The Financial Express quoted an Indian energy official as saying that Tehran and New Delhi held 'positive' talks on Iranian gas exports to India through 'deepwater pipelines'.

Hojatollah Ghanimifard, director of international affairs at the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), said that Iran would only supply India with natural gas through Pakistani territory, under the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline project.

The initial agreement of the $7.5 billion project, also known as the Peace Pipeline, was signed in May between the Iranian and Pakistani presidents in Tehran. However, India has so far refused to take part in the project.

Subodh Kumar Jain, director of South Asia Gas Enterprise (SAGE), a global consortium, said, “The talks with Iranian authorities over the supply of natural gas through deepwater pipelines were very positive and they indicated that they are keen to work with India.”

Ghanimifard confirmed Iran's talks with the consortium, but said, “We have told the Indian side that in the current situation, Iran's priority is to supply India with gas through Pakistan's soil.”

“There is no possibility to export more gas to India through sea routes.”

The Financial Express said SAGE plans to build the deepwater route across the Arabian Sea.

“The deep water section will reach a depth of 3,500 meters and will be just over 1,000 kilometers in length,” said Jain.

Ghanimifard further said that Tehran would soon host a meeting between Russian energy giant Gazprom and several Pakistani companies to discuss the construction of the IPI pipeline with their cooperation.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 Aug 2009 16:00

Evidence of Britain's secret bombings in Iran.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 65891.html

Did British bomb attacks in Iran provoke hostage crisis?

Abduction of computer expert and bodyguards in Iraq were an act of revenge by Tehran, source reveals

A source in Baghdad says Alec MacLachlan, Alan McMenemy and Peter Moore were kidnapped in revenge for attacks on Ahvaz, including one in January 2006, pictured, by Arab separatists allegedly backed by the UK

The abduction of the British computer expert Peter Moore and his four bodyguards was carried out partly in revenge for deadly bomb attacks in south-west Iran which Iranian officials blamed on Britain, according to a well-placed source in Baghdad.

The five men were abducted by an Iranian-backed group in 2007 and it is now believed four of them have been killed. The fate of Mr Moore remains unclear. The Iranians orchestrated the abduction through an Iraqi proxy, the Asaib al-Haq, which they largely controlled, the source said.

Their main motive was to obtain prisoners to be used as a bargaining chip to secure the release of Qais al-Khazali, the leader of Asaib al-Haq, and other imprisoned militants who had split from the movement led by the Shia anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

Related articles
Ahmadinejad denies rift with Supreme Leader and attacks conservatives
Iran starts moderates' trial for post-vote unrest

But the Iranians had a second motive for targeting the British, says the source who, as a member of Mr Sadr's movement, is well-informed about Asaib al-Haq and its supporters. He says Iran was convinced Britain was backing Arab separatist groups in the Iranian oil province of Khuzestan which had made a series of bomb attacks on civilian targets, killing 28 people and wounding 225 in the two years before the kidnapping of the five Britons in Baghdad. Khuzestan has an Arab minority of two million.

These bombings attracted little attention outside Iran, but were taken very seriously by the Iranians who furiously denounced the US and Britain for supporting small gangs of anti-government militants planting the explosives. The attacks included four blasts in a single day in Ahvaz, the Iranian city across the Shatt al-Arab waterway from Basra, on June 2005, which killed 11 people and wounded 87.

The bombs were planted near government offices and a television station. Targets were evidently chosen without regard for civilian casualties. Iran blamed Britain, and British forces in Basra in particular, for the bombings in Ahvaz. These incidents have never really stopped, the latest being the discovery in May this year of an explosive device in the toilet of an Iranian plane flying out of Ahvaz with 131 people on board which was defused before it blew up. After two bombs exploded in Ahvaz in October 2005, killing six people and wounding at least 100, Iran's Deputy Interior Minister, Mohammed Hossein Mousapour, said: "Most probably those involved in the explosion were British agents who were involved in the previous incidents in Ahvaz and Khuzestan." The Foreign Office publicly denied any British involvement for which Iran produced no evidence.

But at the time Mr Moore and his four security guards were kidnapped, America was escalating its own covert war against Iran. It was revealed last year by the US newsletter Counterpunch that President George W Bush had asked Congress for $300m (£180m) to destabilise Iran by funding dissident groups.

"The covert activities involved support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organisations," added the journalist Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker magazine. He said US special operations forces had been conducting cross-border operations into southern Iran during 2007, seizing members of the al-Quds, the commando arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and bringing them back to Iraq for interrogation.

The fate of Mr Moore and the four British men working for the Canadian security company GardaWorld may have been affected by this tit-for-tat secret war between the Americans and the Iranians. "The Iranians did not want to provoke the Americans into an all-out war, so Britain was a useful target as America's main ally," said one former Iraqi official. He quoted the old Iraqi saying: "If you don't dare fight your neighbour, you beat his dog."

The Foreign Office has been blamed for its conduct of negotiations with the kidnappers, but its officials were faced with a uniquely complicated situation. They had to deal not only with Asaib al-Haq, but with its shadowy Iranian backers and with the Americans, who actually had Qais al-Khazali and other militant leaders in prison.

It is unlikely that Mr Moore was abducted in order to suppress evidence of corruption in the finance ministry whose information service he was seeking to upgrade. Ali Allawi, the former Iraqi finance minister, says the idea is "far-fetched", though bureaucrats in the finance ministry were opposed to a new system of financial management which would have made the flow of government money more visible. Mr Allawi says that official resistance in the finance ministry was sufficient to kill off the scheme.

The abduction by men dressed as interior ministry forces was not out of the ordinary in Baghdad at the time, where there was no clear boundary between police and death squads.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 01 Aug 2009 17:09

The british special forces also raided the base of the revolutionary guards in Ahwaz, which the author neglects to mention.

Iran has received back 3 of its Al Quds members arrested in Jan from Erbil. Probably as a result of negotiations.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 03 Aug 2009 00:13

The Brown government (like Blair before him) has always been with the EU rather than the US on the question of how to deal with the Iranian nuclear issue, the matter of Hezbollah, etc.

The British did work with the US on curbing IRGC/Pasdaran networks in southern Iraq because that directly affected British troops, but they were not interested in the bigger American project in Iran.

The hardliners around Khamenei have always aimed at the British as a proxy message for the far riskier task of escalating matters with the Americans.

The hardliners backed off in each case because it was clear that the entire EU, including Germany (one of Iran's biggest trade partners) backed the UK's position.

There is no way the EU would have done this if the UK was indeed on the American bandwagon when it comes to Iran.

Strategically, its a poor choice on the hardliners part - it fails to send a message to the Americans, since they are going their own way in any case, and instead it makes the EU more sympathetic to stronger measures such as trade and banking sanctions and public condemnation that go against EU economic interests in Iran, but which hurts the Iranian economy even more.

It is precisely this kind of 'tactical brilliance' on the part of hardliners that infuriates the long service professionals in the Iranian government against Ahmadinejad and Khamenei.

Especially since the EU's fundamental inclination is towards accommodating Iran in the geopolitical order as a means of discouraging the acquisition of a nuclear arsenal, while counting on American, Israeli, French and British deterrence to keep Iran in check should it go nuclear.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Aug 2009 16:39

Embarrassment for Britain,as one of its embassy staff "confesses"...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 788611.ece

Embassy official ‘confesses’ UK role in riots

Jon Swain

BRITAIN’S fraught relations with Iran suffered a further setback yesterday when a local member of its embassy staff on trial in Tehran “confessed” to espionage. He said Britain had provided financial assistance to Iran’s reformists to undermine the hardline clerical regime during June’s disputed presidential elections.

Hossein Rassam, a political analyst with the embassy, said a budget of £300,000 had been allocated by the embassy to establish contacts with political groups, individuals and activists.

He said he had personally made contact before the election with the campaign headquarters of Mir Hossein Mousavi, the pro-reform candidate who claims he was robbed of victory by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

“My main responsibility was to gather information from Tehran and other cities by setting up contacts with individuals and other influential parties and political groups and send reports to London,” he said.

Miliband attacks Iran over Embassy trial
White House U-turn on 'elected' Ahmadinejad

He said because of Britain’s hostile policies towards Iran and fear of exposure, the embassy employed local staff to establish such contacts.

Rassam was paraded in Tehran’s Revolutionary Square in a mass show trial along with dozens of opposition figures accused of crimes, including rioting, spying and plotting a “soft overthrow” of the regime after the elections. Apologising for his “mistakes”, he appealed for clemency. The charge of espionage carries the death sentence in Iran.

His appearance seemed to catch the Foreign Office unawares. The first the embassy knew about it was when diplomats spotted him in television coverage of the trial. The Foreign Office said his trial was an “outrage” and directly in contravention of assurances it had received from the Iranian authorities after they had released him and eight other local staff arrested during the postelection violence.

Rassam was paraded together with Clotilde Reiss, a Frenchwoman, who was arrested on July 1 as she prepared to leave Tehran after five months as a university teaching assistant. She was accused of collecting information and provoking rioters. France said the allegations against her were “absolutely baseless”.

The trial of Rassam and Reiss demonstrated the clerical regime’s determination to paint the opposition as tools of the West, particularly Britain and America, trying to spark a revolution to overthrow Iran’s Islamic system.

Human rights groups and opponents of the regime criticised it as a sham and said the confessions were scripted by the authorities and extracted through pressure.

PS:"300,000 pounds" is a pittance with which to destabilise Iran! The "confession" does indeed look suspicious,but the fact remains that historically Britain and the US collaborated in destablising Iran,assassinating Mossadegh and for decades have carried out a covert war against the Islamic regime of the Ayatollahs.

However,here is no doubt whatsoever that the western media,BBC and US in particular,have tried to show that Ahmedinejad rigged the polls.One mag showed the same pics of a huge A'jad rally,cropped by the BBC,etc.,falsely claimning that it was an anti-A'jad rally! We saw the same chicanery years ago,when Chechen fighting was purported by the BBC to be fighting in Kashmir.Reliable western reports indicate that the US and Britain allegedly are using Paki territory (Baluchistan),to send in covert ops agents into Iran for sabotage,etc.British troops/special forces where also caught, one might remember in Iraq in disguise,with bombs in their possession which they were allegedly using using to cause mayhem,to be blamed upon the Sunni insurgents.The captured British troops were dramatically rescued as they held too many secrets.What is clear though is that Britain and Iran are once again on a serious collision course,with both sides unwilling to give the other any relief.Expect more such allegations and look for more covert ops in the future.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 21 Aug 2009 22:18

Iran Daily
Iran Threatens To Ban Haj

Pilgrimage to holy cities in Saudi Arabia would be banned unless Saudi officials agree to change their disrespectful and offensive behavior toward Iranian pilgrims.
.
.
Mohammad Taqi Rahbar, a senior parliamentarian, earlier condemned the move, proposing to boycott the Haj pilgrimage until the Saudis provide an explanation.

“The parliament would question the concerned officials at the Iranian Foreign Ministry regarding the fingerprinting of Iranian women, and we in the parliament are also going to issue a communiquŽ,“ he said.
.
.
The bid to ban Haj pilgrimage was seconded by leading religious figures such as Ayatollah Nasser Makarem-Shirazi. “If extremist Wahhabis continue their shameful behavior, we will have no choice but to ban Umrah (minor pilgrimage),“ he said.

Wahhabis, a small minority in the Muslim world, are believed to be extremists dominating Saudi Arabia.These extremists prevent women from driving, voting and even visiting graves.

In a separate incident, an Iranian cleric, Hojjatoleslam Mohammad Garmab-Dashti, was sentenced by a Saudi court to three months in prison and 75 lashes, after a Wahhabi man accused him of “spitting on the grave of the first Caliph“.

Garmab-Dashti rejected the charges and urged the court to review his case. Arab judicial officials, however, refused to review footage on surveillance camera on the premises, arguing that the testimony of the Arab witness is sufficient.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 25 Aug 2009 22:32

Iran rebel, on death row, says U.S. supported group
Tue Aug 25, 2009

ZAHEDAN, Iran (Reuters) - Iranian authorities presented a condemned Sunni rebel to reporters on Tuesday who said his group had received support from both the United States and al Qaeda to attack targets inside Iran.
.
Before the news conference in a government office, a video was shown in which Abdolhamid Rigi said Jundollah was engaged in kidnappings, robberies and drugs smuggling to make money and also received backing from the United States, Iran's arch-foe.

"We were told that it is religiously allowed to get America's help ," he said on the film.
.
Iran rebel, on death row, says U.S. supported group
----
Al Qaeda is America's True friend...

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Aug 2009 02:50

Link

India plans to build a gas-based power plant in Iran with a capacity of at least 4000 megawatts, the federal power secretary said Monday.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 30 Aug 2009 23:51

Ahm-a-needin-jihad says that any rapes occurring inside prisons in the holy Islamic Republic of Iran are actually being carried out by foreign infidels:

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0 ... e-not-new/

Heh, this guy is such a shameless liar, he should join the Kaangress party.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 02 Sep 2009 01:45

Good article by Atul Aneja(ME Expert) of Al-Hundi

Iran: Ahmadinejad toughens stance

Mr. Ahmadinejad is also a follower of the Haghani religious school, based in Qom, which is headed by the influential cleric, Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi. Many influential IRGC personnel belong to this school, apart from several members of Iran’s security apparatus. Their shared ideological and religious ties under a powerful cleric have further cemented the President’s bonds with the IRGC and its affiliates.

Many in Iran are of the view that a combination of the followers of the Haghani School in the IRGC, the President, along with Ayatollah Khamenei, forms the core group of decision-makers. This triad has been responsible for Iran’s defiance on the nuclear issue and for supporting resistance movements such as the Hizbollah in Lebanon and the Hamas in Gaza. The group firmly believes that its policies have paid rich dividends in limiting Israeli and American influence in the region. It counts the Hizbollah’s success against Israel in the 2006 war and the Hamas’ credible response to the Israeli assault in Gaza in January as major successes. The decline of American influence in two neighbouring countries — Iraq and Afghanistan — is seen in Tehran as a golden opportunity for expanding the country’s influence in the region in league with its allies, especially Syria.

During a recent meeting with Syrian President Bashar Al Assad, Ayatollah Khamenei stressed that in future, Iran, Syria, Turkey and Iraq should play a key role in the region. The Ayatollah’s observation signals the adoption of a proactive disposition by Tehran to challenge the influence of the Americans and their allies in West Asia. Focussed on realising its ambitions in the oil-rich region, Iran’s core leadership is in no mood to relent to the Opposition and risk its larger geopolitical agenda, even if it means taking Iran down the path of totalitarianism.

arun · Post by **arun** » 02 Sep 2009 07:24

Iranian President Ahmedinejad's spiritual mentor, Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi on the religious sanctioned permissibility of raping both male and female prisoners in custody

.

If this is not Israeli misinformation, then it is simply disgusting that a man of the cloth holds such views to be religiously sanctioned :

Ahmadinejad's Imam: Islam Allows Raping, Torturing Prisoners

by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz

(IsraelNN.com) A highly influential Shi'a religious leader, with whom Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regularly consults, apparently told followers last month that coercion by means of rape, torture and drugs is acceptable against all opponents of the Islamic regime. .......................

"Can an interrogator rape the prisoner in order to obtain a confession?" was the follow-up question posed to the Islamic cleric.

Mesbah-Yazdi answered: "The necessary precaution is for the interrogator to perform a ritual washing first and say prayers while raping the prisoner. If the prisoner is female, it is permissible to rape through the vagina or anus. It is better not to have a witness present. If it is a male prisoner, then it's acceptable for someone else to watch while the rape is committed."

This reply, and reports of the rape of teen male prisoners in Iranian jails, may have prompted the following question: "Is the rape of men and young boys considered sodomy?"

Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi: "No, because it is not consensual. Of course, if the prisoner is aroused and enjoys the rape, then caution must be taken not to repeat the rape."

A related issue, in the eyes of the questioners, was the rape of virgin female prisoners. In this instance, Mesbah-Yazdi went beyond the permissibility issue and described the Allah-sanctioned rewards accorded the rapist-in-the-name-of-Islam:

"If the judgment for the [female] prisoner is execution, then rape before execution brings the interrogator a spiritual reward equivalent to making the mandated Haj pilgrimage [to Mecca], but if there is no execution decreed, then the reward would be equivalent to making a pilgrimage to [the Shi'ite holy city of] Karbala." .........................

Arutz Sheva

sunnyP · Post by **sunnyP** » 06 Sep 2009 18:13

A CARGO ship that vanished in the Channel was carrying arms to Iran and was being tracked by Mossad, the Israeli security service, according to sources in both Russia and Israel.

The Arctic Sea, officially carrying a cargo of timber worth £1.3m, disappeared en route from Finland to Algeria on July 24. It was recovered off west Africa on August 17 when eight alleged hijackers were arrested. The Kremlin has consistently denied that the vessel was carrying a secret cargo. It claims the ship was hijacked by criminals who demanded a £1m ransom.

The official version was challenged by sources in Tel Aviv and Moscow who claimed the ship had been loaded with S-300 missiles, Russia’s most advanced anti-aircraft weapon, while undergoing repairs in the Russian port of Kaliningrad.

Mossad, which closely monitors arms supplies to Iran, is said to have tipped off the Russian government that the shipment had been sold by former military officers linked to the underworld.

The Kremlin then ordered a naval rescue mission which involved destroyers and submarines. Any evidence that the Kremlin had let advanced weaponry fall into the hands of criminals or be sold to Iran would be highly embarrassing, so military officials believe a “cover story” was concocted.

“The official version is ridiculous and was given to allow the Kremlin to save face,” said a Russian military source. “I’ve spoken to people close to the investigation and they’ve pretty much confirmed Mossad’s involvement. It’s laughable to believe all this fuss was over a load of timber. I’m not alone in believing that it was carrying weapons to Iran.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 823300.ece

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 07 Sep 2009 06:43

Follow up to SunnyP's post

http://www.kyivpost.com/world/48048

"Some influential people called me and ... advised me to leave Russia within several hours," Mikhail Voitenko, editor of Russia's respected Sovfracht maritime journal, told Reuters by telephone from Turkey.

"I am afraid of being detained (in Russia)." He said the callers did not identify themselves.

The Maltese-registered Arctic Sea, officially carrying timber from Russia to Algeria, was boarded by a group of eight men on July 24.

Its whereabouts were a mystery for weeks until Russian warships intercepted it off Cape Verde in the Atlantic Ocean on Aug. 17.

Charges of kidnapping and piracy have been brought against eight men -- citizens of Estonia, Latvia and Russia -- last week in Moscow. Their lawyers had called them "peaceful ecologists".

Prosecutors maintained the ship was carrying timber.

While the ship was still missing, Voitenko caused an international storm by saying the ship was carrying illegal weapons. Describing the situation as "cloak and dagger stuff", he had said the state was most likely involved.

Speaking to Reuters on Thursday, he said: "They warned me, saying they didn't want another scandal."

He rejected a comment made by his journal on its website, www.sovfracht.ru, that he had not fled but rather gone on a business trip to Istanbul.

"Sovfrakht simply doesn't want any problems connected to me," he said.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 07 Sep 2009 07:08

deleted, duplicate post