NUCLEAR

waste of money

even if nuclear development in Iran was for a sake of developing peacefull energy (only fools believe that!), it is a waste of money! The country is seating on sea of Oil and Gas. Iran has the second largest gas supply in the world after russia. So much gas is being burned every day from the existing oil fields that if you use that in Generating electricty it will probably solve the nergy need. As for the nuclear bomb, it has not make life any better or easier for Pakistan, Soviet Union, korea and many other nations. this is simply an illusion. What's important in tody's world is a kick ass robust economey, not owning some nuclear bombs. I am simply astonished as why so many of Iranians even the ones that lived so many years in West haven't learned these basic lessons....

rudne and illogical Jamshid

I see no need to tell u about my background since u dont even know how to talk,I dont know hajiagha or you but u seem to be even ruder than he is, dont like my view then dont read them. U need to go and get some mental tretment and some social skill.I refuse t use the same kind of language because I am a gentelman , what I do or dont in regard to my land Iran i my personal matters.

Re: Bahram the Iranian

Bahram, you douche bag of scum, spare us your lecture on what a real warrior is. Hajiagha and many others (you couldn't dream who some of those may be) served in the war and risked their lives not so that a garbage like you could today loaf off and give him lecture who a "real" basiji is. What a laugh!

I don't like some of Haji's views, but don't you f&*% dare give veterans your stupid lectures and compare the nightmare of the war front with your even more stupid movie.

Imbecile.

Re: Arezu

Thank you for summarizing most of IRI propoganda material on the nuke issue in one concise post. You are truthful when you say you have done all your reading, except with the problem that you have read only IRI's propoganda.

Take the earplugs out of your ear and listen: ALL IRANIANS ARE AWARE OF IRAN'S RIGHTS TO NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY. Did you get that? I suggest you read the last sentence a few times. The issue is HOW Iran will go about getting that technology.

Unlike today when IRI is getting out of date AND OUTRIGHT DANGEROUS UNSAFE nuclear technology from Russia, more than 30 years ago, under the Pahlavis, Iran was getting the most advanced AND safest technology from Europeans and Americans WITHOUT ALL OF THE FUSS that is going on today. By 1982, Iran would have nuclear power. That's 25 years earlier than today!

The west was not objecting and Israel would not "dare" to even "think" of bombing Iran's nuclear sites.

Got that?

So spare us all your sermon. The nuclear problem for Iran is neither the west nor israel, as history proves us. It is the IRI which is depriving Iranians of basic human rights as well as modern technology.

Arezu, if you are not an IRI lackey, then you must be an imbecile.

Hajiagha abusing the name of basiji

Mr batarbiet Hajiagha, have you watched an iranian movie called"glass agency"or agance shieshaieh in farsi with Parviz Parastoui performing the first role??.there is a line in that, the guy who is ill and looking the medical treatment the buddy of Parviz, He tells his firend Parviz(his name in movie was something else) quote, let these pepole go, I didnt deal with them I dealt with my own god. That is what Basiji stod for if you were a basiji then you should have dealt with your own god not with money, position or benefit, if u did for god then he will pay u when the time comes and if u dealt with Khameni, Rafsanjani, Ahmadeinejad or ............then too bad because they were wrong parties and guess what??you got ripped offffffff and I mean "off" Either u never been a basaiji or you didnt get the idea in either cases you have no right no claim to make .....your own mistake

To: Mythbuster - your name says it all

Your name says it all - a big fat MYTH

Stop Genocide of Iranians by Islamists

Iranian and Iranian culture are under attack by these Islamists. Islamists are genociding Iranians and Iranian culture.

Iranians can not be Iranian in their own country. If today you can not dare to be an Iranian in today's Iran, imagine what these mullah and Islamists will do to us after their nuclear bomb. Imagine, the boosted mullahs and their regime will do to us Iranians after their bomb.

If today, our women are half of men, if today, our 9-years and older Iranian girls can be forced to wed with much older males, if today Iranains have no rights to speech, press, expression, if today, Iranians must live mostly under poverty so mullahs can rule, and many more savageries and harm done to Iranians, imagine what Iranians will receive after this mullah and mafia gang will do to us Iranians after having nuclear bomb!!

Becareful what you wish for? This IRI does not have the interest of Iranian nation.

These Islamists and mullahs have eliminated we Iranians and our voice.
Iran belongs to us Iranians. Stop genecide of Iranians by islamists.

To: Farhad Kashani

Mr. Kashani:

Yes, you missed that part of history !! Back to the history books for you.

Also back to reading the entire history of Iran's nuclear program from 1968 to present in order to figure out what Iran did and did not do. As well as all of the agreements that the Europeans abrogated while they pocketed billions of dollars of of Iran's money!!

Detailed discussion on Iran's nuclear activity is also included in all of the IAEA reports; they are long and you need to go back for many years and read each and every one of them. However, to fully understand this matter you need to do your homework. I have!!

In addition do not forget to read the entire detailes of the relationship and discussions of the EU-3 with Iran including the Paris Agreement until the year 2005; and then take it from there to the present. I have provided you with a good starting point.

I have done my reading and my homework, and know full well what I am speaking about.

I am not preaching the U.S./neocon/Israeli propaganda line which you seem to be preaching. Or simply because you just have not bothered doing your homework and are mesmerized by the bias media.

HOWEVER HERE IS A SUMMARY OF IRAN'S NUCLEAR PROGRAMM: FACTS AND LIES:

1. There is no evidence of a nuclear weapons programme in Iran . The US and its allies pressure Iran to prove that it is not hiding a nuclear weapons programme. This demand is logically impossible to satisfy and serves to make diplomacy fail in order to force regime change. Numerous intrusive and snap visits by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors, totalling more than 2,700 person-hours of inspection, have failed to produce a shred of evidence for a weapons programme in Iran . Traces of highly enriched uranium found at Natanz in 2004, were determined by the IAEA to have come with imported centrifuges.

In July 2007, IAEA and Iran agreed on a work plan with defined modalities and timetable to clarify all issues of concerns in relation to Iran 's nuclear programme. On 27 th August 2007 IAEA announced that “The Agency has been able to verify the non-diversion of the declared nuclear materials at the enrichment facilities in Iran and has therefore concluded that it remains in peaceful use ”. The Agreement also cleared Iran 's plutonium experiments, which the Cheney Camp had accused of being evidence of Iran 's weaponisation programme.

Dr Mohammad El-Baradei, the IAEA Director General, said on 7 th September 2007, “For the last few years we have been told by the Security Council, by the board, we have to clarify the outstanding issues in Iran because these outstanding issues are the ones that have led to the lack of confidence, the crisis” , “We have not come to see any undeclared activities or weaponisation of their programme”.

Two years earlier, in June 2005, Bruno Pellaud, former IAEA Deputy Director General for Safeguards, was asked by Swissinfo if Iran was intent on building a nuclear bomb. He replied: "My impression is not. My view is based on the fact that Iran took a major gamble in December 2003 by allowing a much more intrusive capability to the IAEA. If Iran had had a military programme they would not have allowed the IAEA to come under this Additional Protocol. They did not have to."

2. Iran 's need for nuclear power generation is real. Even when Iran 's population was one-third of what it is today, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, negotiating on behalf of President Gerald Ford, persuaded the former Shah that Iran needed over twenty nuclear reactors. With Iran 's population of 70 million, and growing, and its oil resources fast depleting, Iran may be a net importer of oil in just over a decade from now. Nuclear energy is thus a realistic and viable solution for electricity generation in the country.

3. The "crisis" over Iran 's nuclear programme lacks the urgency claimed by Washington . Weapons grade uranium must be enriched at least to 85%. A 2005 CIA report determined that it could take Iran 10 years to achieve this level of enrichment. Many independent nuclear experts have stated that Iran would face formidable technical obstacles if it tried to enrich uranium beyond the 3.5% purity required for electricity generation. According to Dr Frank Barnaby of the Oxford Research Group, because of contamination of Iranian uranium with heavy metals, Iran cannot possibly enrich beyond even 20% without support from Russia or China. IAEA director, Dr. Mohammad ElBaradei, too, reiterated in October 2007 that “I don't see Iran , today, to be a clear and present danger. And our conclusion here is supported by every intelligence assessment I've seen that even if Iran has ambitions to develop nuclear weapons, it's still three to eight years away from that”.

4. Iran has met its obligations under the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Iran voluntarily accepted and enforced safeguards stricter than IAEA's Additional Protocol until February 2006, when Iran 's nuclear file was reported, under the pressure from the US , to the Security Council. (The US , by contrast, has neither signed nor implemented the Additional Protocol, and Israel has refused to sign the NPT.)

Iran 's earlier concealment of its nuclear programme took place in the context of the US-backed invasion of Iran by Saddam. Not only the U.S. , Germany , and the UK were complicit in the sale of chemical weapons to Saddam which were used against Iranian soldiers and civilians but Israel 's destruction of Iraq 's Osirak reactor in 1981 was treated with total impunity. Iranian leaders then concluded from these gross injustices that international laws are only “ink on paper”.

But the most direct reasons for Iran 's concealment were the American trade embargo on Iran and Washington 's organized and persistent campaign to stop civilian nuclear technology from reaching Iran from any source. For example, in 1995 Germany offered to let Kraftwerk Union (a subsidiary of Siemens) finish Iran 's Bushehr reactor, but withdrew its proposal under US pressure. The following year, China cancelled its contract to build a nuclear enrichment facility in Isfahan for the same reason. Thus Washington systematically violated, with impunity, Article IV of the NPT, which allows “signatories the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy”.

Nevertheless, Iran 's decision not to declare all of its nuclear installations did not violate its NPT obligations. According to David Albright and Corey Hinderstein, who first provided satellite imagery and analysis in December 2002 [7], under the safeguards agreement in force at the time, " Iran is not required to allow IAEA inspections of a new nuclear facility until six months before nuclear material is introduced into it."

5. Iran has given unprecedented concessions on its nuclear programme. Unlike North Korea , Iran has resisted the temptation to withdraw from the NPT. Besides accepting snap inspections under Additional Protocol until February 2006, Iran has invited Western companies to develop Iran 's civilian nuclear programme. Such joint ventures would create the best assurance that the enriched uranium would not be diverted to a weapons programme. Such concessions are very rare in the world, but the U.S. and its allies have refused Iran 's offer.

6. Enrichment of uranium for a civilian nuclear programme is Iran 's inalienable right. Every member of the NPT has the right to enrich uranium for a civilian nuclear programme and is entitled to full technical assistance.

But with the US as the back seat driver and in violation of their assistance obligations, France , Germany , and the UK insisted throughout the three years of negotiations that Tehran forfeit its right, in return for incentives of little value. Some European diplomats admitted to Asia Times Online on 7th September 2005, that the package offered by the EU-3 was “an empty box of chocolates.” But “there is nothing else we can offer,” the diplomats went on to say . “The Americans simply wouldn't let us.”

7. The Western alliance has not tried true diplomacy and relies instead on threats. Iran refuses to suspend its enrichment of uranium before bilateral negotiations begin, as demanded by the White House, because it suspects Washington will stall with endless doubts regarding verification of suspension.

WESTERN HYPOCRISY

8. The UN resolutions against Iran , in contrast to the treatment of the US allies, South Korea , India , Pakistan , and Israel , smack of double standards. For example, in the year 2000, South Korea enriched 200 milligrams of uranium to near-weapons grade (up to 77%), but was not referred to the UN Security Council.

India has refused to sign the NPT or allow inspections and has developed an atomic arsenal, but receives nuclear assistance from the US in violation of the NPT. More bizarrely, India has a seat on the governing board of IAEA and, under US pressure, voted to refer Iran as a violator to the UN Security Council. Another non-signatory, Pakistan , clandestinely developed nuclear weapons but is supported by the US as a “war on terror” ally.

Israel is a close ally of Washington , even though it has hundreds of clandestine nuclear weapons, has dismissed numerous UN resolutions and has refused to sign the NPT or open any of its nuclear plants to inspections.

The US itself is the most serious violator of the NPT. The only country to have ever used nuclear bombs in war, the US has refused to reduce its nuclear arsenal, in violation of Article VI of NPT. The US is also in breach of the Treaty because it is developing new generations of nuclear warheads for use against non-nuclear adversaries. Moreover, Washington has deployed hundreds of such tactical nuclear weapons all around the world in violation of Articles I and II of the NPT.

9. Iran has not threatened Israel or attacked another country. The track records of the US , Israel , the UK and France are very different. These so called “democracies” have a bloody history of invading other countries. Iran 's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has declared repeatedly that Iran will not attack or threaten any country. He has also issued a fatwa against the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons and banned nuclear weapons as sacrilegious. Iran has been a consistent supporter of the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and called for a nuclear weapons free Middle East .

The comments of Iran 's President Ahmadinejad against Israel have been repeated by some of Iran 's leaders since 1979 and constitute no practical threat. The statement attributed to him that “ Israel should be wiped off the map” is a distortion of the truth and has been determined by a number of Farsi linguists, amongst them, Professor Juan Cole, to be a mistranslation. What he actually said was that “the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time". Ahmadinejad has made clear that he envisions regime change in Israel through internal decay, similar to the demise of the Soviet Union . Iranian leaders have said consistently for two decades that they will accept a two-state solution in Palestine if a majority of Palestinians favour that option.

This is in sharp contrast to the explicit threats by Israeli and the US leaders against Iran , including aid to separatist movements to disintegrate and wipe Iran off the map, as reported by Seymour Hersh and Reese Erlich. There is considerable evidence of clandestine operations by the US , British and Israeli agents who are arming, training and funding terrorist entities such as Jundollah in Baluchistan, Arab separatists in Khuzestan, and PJAK in Kurdistan . These concrete attempts at disintegration of Iran , as well as the 100 million dollars congressional funding for ‘democracy' promotion in Iran , constitute aggression and are interference in Iran 's domestic affairs and Iranian people's rights of sovereignty. They violate the bilateral Algiers Accord of 1981, in which Washington renounced any such actions in the future.

Furthermore, President Bush and Vice President Cheney, former UN ambassador, John Bolton, Senator Lieberman, as well as presidential candidates Guilliani, Romney and McCain are openly advocating and pushing for pre-emptive military attack on Iran. The French President, Sarkouzy, and his Foreign Minister, Kouchner, the new recruits to the Neo Cons camp, have added their voice to this chorus for war . British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, too has not ruled out the pre-emptive military option against Iran .

Iran is no match for Israel , whose security and military needs are all but guaranteed by the US . Iran is surrounded on all sides by the US Navy and American bases.

Iran has not invaded or threatened any country for two and a half centuries. The only war the Islamic Republic fought was the one imposed by Saddam's army, which invaded Iran with the backing of the US and its allies. When Iraq used chemical weapons, supplied by the West, against Iranian troops, Iran did not retaliate in kind. When Afghanistan 's Taliban regime murdered eight Iranian diplomats in 1996 and remained unapologetic, Iran did not respond militarily.

10. The US “democratization” programme for Iran is a hoax. Although violations of human rights and democratic freedoms do occur too often in Iran , the country has the most pluralistic system in a region dominated by undemocratic client states of the US . It is sheer hypocrisy for the US, which turns a blind eye to the gross human rights abuses by its allies, such as Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Libya, and Egypt, to misrepresent its agenda in Iran as a “democratization” programme. Washington 's pretensions ring especially hollow when one remembers that in 1953 Iran 's nascent democracy under Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq was overthrown by the CIA, which restored a hated military dictatorship for the benefit of American oil conglomerates.

UN SECURITY COUNCIL INVOLVEMENT TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED

11. There are no legal bases for Iran 's referral to the UN Security Council. Since there is no evidence that Iran is even contemplating to weaponize its nuclear programme, no grounds exist for this sidelining of the IAEA.

Michael Spies of the New York-based Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy has clarified the issue: "Under the Statute (Art. 12(C)) and the Safeguards Agreement, the Board may only refer Iran to the Security Council if it finds that, based on the report from the Director General, it cannot be assured that Iran has not diverted nuclear material for non-peaceful purpose. In the past, findings of `non-assurance' have only come in the face of a history of active and ongoing non-cooperation with IAEA safeguards. The pursuit of nuclear activities in itself, which is specifically recognized as a sovereign right, and which remain safeguarded, could not legally or logically equate to uncertainty regarding diversion."

IAEA director, Dr ElBaradei, has consistently confirmed that there has been no diversion of safeguarded nuclear material in Iran and the recent IAEA-Iran workplan of July 2007 has reconfirmed this. He has also said, under pressure from Washington , that he cannot rule out the existence of undeclared nuclear activities in the country. However, according to the IAEA's Safeguards Implementation Report for 2005 (issued on 15 June 2006), 45 other countries, including 14 European countries, in particular Germany , are in this same category as Iran . ElBaradei added in September 2007 that in Iran “we have not come to see any undeclared activities ... We have not seen any weaponisation of their programme, nor have we received any information to that effect” . He has also repeatedly urged skeptics in Western capitals to help the IAEA by sharing any possible proof in their possession of suspicious nuclear activity in Iran .

Moreover, according to the UK-based Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, certifying non-diversion of nuclear material to military purposes for any given country takes an average of six years of inspections and verification by the IAEA. In the case of Iran , these investigations have been going on for only about four years now.

Iran 's file, therefore, must be returned to the jurisdiction of the IAEA and the rules of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT). The US and its allies violated the rules by exerting massive pressure on the IAEA to report Iran without any legitimacy to the UN Security Council. For example, David Mulford, the US Ambassador to India , warned the Government of India in January 2006 that there would be no US-India nuclear deal if India did not vote against Iran at the IAEA. On February 15th 2007, Stephen Rademaker, the former US Assistant Secretary for International Security and Non-Proliferation, admitted publicly that the US coerced India to vote against Iran. Clearly, reporting Iran to the UN Security Council and the subsequent adoption of the Resolutions 1696 and 1737 have been carried out with US coercion and have thus no legitimacy at all.

SANCTIONS NOT A GOOD IDEA

12. Dr ElBaradei, the head of the IAEA, has said that more sanctions are counterproductive. Economic sanctions on Iran will harm the people of Iran , as they were devastating to Iraqis, resulting in the death of at least 500,000 children. Sanctions would not however bring the Islamic Republic to its knees. Instead, any kind of sanctions, including the so-called "targeted" or "smart" sanctions, are viewed by the Iranian people as the West's punishment for Iran 's scientific progress (uranium enrichment for reactor fuel). As sanctions tighten, nationalist fervour will strengthen the resolve of Iranians to defend the country's civilian nuclear programme.

13. Sanctions are not better than war; they can be exploited as a diplomatic veneer and a provocative prelude to military attack, as they were in Iraq . Thus, countries which support sanctions against Iran are only falling into the US trap in aiding the war drive on Iran .

STATEGIC SHIFT TO MULTI-FOCAL TARGETS

14. A US attack on Iran is imminent. The end of George Bush's presidency in 2009 could be a serious set back for the NeoCons' hegemonic dreams to control the energy resources in the region. He is unlikely to leave office bearing the legacy of failures in Afghanistan and Iraq and particularly leaving Iran a stronger player in the region. Thus the likelihood of military attack on Iran before Bush leaves office is a reality. Washington insiders have told security analysts that preparations for military attack have been made and are ready for execution.

Since January, in addition to the nuclear issue, the US has also focused its propaganda to falsely implicate Iran in the violence and failures of US policies in Afghanistan and Iraq . The Iran-US bilateral dialogue this summer was derailed amidst accusations that Iran aided the killing of American soldiers by providing sophisticated weapons and training to Afghan and Iraqi fighters. As in the nuclear case, Washington has provided no proof .

British Foreign Minister, David Miliband, admitted in an interview with the Financial Times on 8 th July 07 that there was “No Evidence” of Iranian involvement in the violence and instability in Iraq . Likewise, the British Defence Minister, Des Browne, in August 07 maintained categorically that “No Evidence” existed of Iranian government's complicity or instigation in supplying weapons to Iraqi militias. The Washington Post, too, reported from Iraq that hundreds of British troops combing southern Iraq for sign of Iranian weapons have come up empty-handed. Furthermore, Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, and Al-Maleki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, have stated Iran 's positive role in providing whatever limited stability there is in both these countries. Nevertheless, G eorge Bush's speech on 28 th August, authorizing the American military to “ confront Tehran 's murderous activities”, and the deployment of British troops to the Iranian border to guard against Iran 's “proxy war” in Iraq , signaled a systematic building towards a casus belli for another illegal pre-emptive war. The Kyle-Lieberman Amendment to the Defence Authorisation Bill, too, accused Iran of killing American servicemen in Iraq and nearly authorized the military to take all necessary action to combat Iran .

A third focus in the US war drive has now been launched by branding Iran 's Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization. This unprecedented move in US foreign policy and international relations is the proclaimed basis for imposing the toughest sanctions ever on Iranian banks, companies and individuals.

These new measures represent a massive escalation in the US war drive, they are a prelude to a military attack on Iran and provide the legal pretext for the US military to wage war on Iran without the prior approval of the US Congress.

ILLEGALITY OF A MILITARY ATTACK

15. Foreign state interference in Iran violates the UN charter. According to Seymour Hersch, the US is running covert operations in Iran to foment unrest and ethnic conflict for the purpose of regime change. Unmanned US drones have also entered into Iranian air space to spy over Iranian military installations and to map Iranian radar systems. These actions violate the UN Charter's guarantee of the right of self-determination for all nations.

The Bush Administration has also confirmed, in the 2006 US National Security Strategy, its long term policy for pre-emptive military action against Washington 's rivals. Former British prime minister, Tony Blair, supported this policy in his 21st March 2006 foreign policy speech, and his successor Gordon Brown has not rejected the pre-emptive use of military force against Iran . However, unprovoked strikes are illegal under international law. To remove this obstacle, John Reid, the then British Secretary of Defence, in his speech on 3rd April 2006 to the Royal United Services Institute for Defense and Security Studies, proposed a change in international law on pre-emptive military action.

16. Reports of nuclear attack scenarios against Iran can serve to raise the public's tolerance for an act of aggression with conventional military means. People of conscience and sanity must not only condemn even contemplation of a nuclear attack, but also denounce any conventional attack.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF AN ATTACK ON IRAN

17. Bombing cannot end Iran 's nuclear programme. Since Iran already has the expertise to enrich uranium up to the 3.5% grade for a fuel cycle, no degree of bombing will halt Iran 's civilian nuclear programme. On the contrary, the resulting mass casualties and destruction would strengthen the voices that argue Iran , like North Korea , should build a nuclear deterrent.

18. An attack on Iran will unite Iranians against the US and its allies. A great majority of the public in Iran support the country's right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes. This has been confirmed by all opinion polls conducted in the country, including polls taken by Western institutions. Therefore, a bombing campaign will not lead to an uprising by the Iranian people for regime change as envisaged by the US . Rather, it would ignite nationalist feelings in the country and unite the population, including most of the government's critics, against the West.

19. A nuclear attack on Iran would fuel a new nuclear arms race and ruin the NPT. Any military intervention against Iran will lead to a regional catastrophe and expanded terrorism. Senator McCain, the Republican presidential hopeful, who has himself advocated the use of force on Iran , has predicted that an attack against Iran will lead to Armageddon. American or Israeli aggression on Iran , coming on the heels of the Iraq disaster, would inflame the grievance and outrage of Muslims worldwide and help jihadi extremists with their recruitment campaign. The region wide conflagration resulting from an Israel/US attack on Iran would dwarf the Iraq catastrophe.

20. The cause of democracy in Iran will suffer gravely if the country is attacked. President Bush's "axis of evil" rhetoric severely undermined the reformist movement in Iran at a time when the country's president promoted Dialogue Among Civilizations. Bush's hostile posture strengthened the hands of Iranian hardliners and contributed to the reformist movement's electoral defeat in 2005. That setback would be dwarfed by the consequences of a military assault on the country.

Hopefully this provides you with a summary a basis upon which you can complete your own research.

Best regards

Bush should attack on mullahs only

//hajiagha.tripod.com

//www.avini.com/Sokhan/mataleb.asp

م الله الر حمن الر حیم......نامه مخلصا نه یک حانباز حنگ و برادر شهید
به شهید آوینی....شهید عزیز.تو رفتی و ما را با این همه چه کنم ها تنها
گذاشتی...ای کاش مارا هم می بردی و این همه عذاب و فکر کردن.....داشتم فکر
می کردم احمدی نزاد دکتر هم آمد و ه ما دروغ گفت مثل رفسنحانی و خاتمی و
رهبر و ......از رهبر پر سیدم از سید خدا در مورد ثر ت های کلا ن مسئو لان
حکومتی و لی رهبر هم حوابی نداد...از دکتر احمدی نزاد و سرباز مهدی آقای
مان پرسیدم این قصرهای چند میلیونی و حساب های بانکی در خارح متعلق به
کیست......دکتر هم حوابی نداد.....پرسیدم...شایعه است فرزند رفسنحانی و
واعظ طبسی و آیت اله یزدی و شا هرودی و فلا حیآن و رفیقدوست ها و مولوی و
حافظ و مولا نا گویا ا اعتماد مردم سوع ستفاده ها می کنند.....کفتند حزب
الی بدون عقل بهتر از کنحکاو بودن آن است ....کفتم ما به شما اعتماد کردیم
....گفتند اشتباه شماهم در همین بود....گفتم در کا نا دا زندگی می
کنم....مملکت کفار....و عدالت آنها و صدا قت آنها بهتر از رهبران و
مسئولان حکومت مهدی امام زمان من است....لا آقل دروغ گو تنبل و سر بار
رمردم نیستند......شهید آوینی عزیزم تو بگو آیا پرسیدن از مسئو لان ی گناه
و یک حرام است.....ما را دعا کن شهید من از کنا ها نم و روز عذاب و پرسش
وپاسخ وحشت دارم

RE: If anyone thinks the fascist

Farhad Kahshani says:
"What should the U.S do with a government that is according to every single human rights group, the vast majority of world countries, the majority of ..."

Kashani, the current US governemnt does not have any moral authority over Iran. It is worse than bankrupt in that department. This Bush-necon AIPAC controlled government does not have any good records regarding human rights, and internationl affairs. It is riddled with curroptuon and scandals of various types extending beyound the US borders.
You call IRI "fascist" without knowing what it means, repeating ultra right wing political analysts of fox news and retard W. IRI is not without mistakes but it is not IRI that has created misery of massive scale in Iraq and has wasted billions of dollars of American tax payers(including my money). That money could be used in much better ways such as insuring some 50 million Americans, or fighting poverty in Africa ( --War cost: (//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/war_costs))

Arezou, the U.S tolerated

Arezou, the U.S tolerated tens of countries who stood up to it and so called “said NO”, whether to their benefit or not, during the cold war era, and even today. Are you telling me that the U.S went and staged a war against them? Let me name you 5 for now : Cuba, China, Angola, Venezuela (Now) , USSR, Maybe I missed that part of the history. It is not U.S policy to stage a full scale war against countries who say NO to it, like you said. Now whether this “saying no” is benefiting Iranian people or not or whether the IRI is using the “saying no” as tool to massacre Iranian lives and rights, or whether it really believes in “saying no” is a whole different subject. Furthermore:
A-Iran violated IAEA law by hiding facts about its nuclear program for the past 20 years. If it so peaceful why did it hide it? Common sense isn’t it.
B- Your sentences sound like Lenin in 1920s and fascist Chavez in modern era. Both destroyed and destroying their countries.
C- When Khomeini entered Iran after the revolution was over, He stated: One day we will raise the flag of Islam above the White House. Translation =Regime Change. Don’t even get me started on their policies the last 30 years that was aligned with this belief. Not even considering all the non stop bashing of U.S by the Fascist regime in Iran and working against U.S interests around the world at the expense of the Iranian people and the wish of the overwhelming majority of Iranian people who are seeking foreign help to help them rid of this barbaric regime, that itself gives enough motive for U.S to pursue regime change.
Finally, I’m glad that you made it as a law student in the “imperialist, anti-Iranian, anti-worker, anti-this, anti-that” country of U.S and still bash it. I wanted to ask you, how come I never hear you mention anything about the undeniable violations of human rights LAWS by the IRI..? A regime that oppresses religious minorities (The population of Jews and Armenians have almost halved since the revolution and they, by law, cannot become president, judge, serve in army. among others). Oppresses women (Only country in the world that requires dress code for women), executes children under 18, executes opposition within record trial time (Recently in Ahvaz, executed people guilty of bombing in Ahvaz just after 10 days after the bombing ), executes homosexuals,(in Mashahd,) just to name a few out of tens of thousands of examples.

If anyone thinks the fascist

If anyone thinks the fascist government of IRI is after peaceful nuclear power, he must be living in a different universe. What should the U.S do with a government that is according to every single human rights group, the vast majority of world countries, the majority of world opinion, and the overwhelming majority of Iranian people, one, if not the, most oppressive and barbaric regime in the world today and the biggest threat to world security? With the 24/7, unjustifiable, unreasonable bashing of U.S, with 24/7 actions of the IRI to damage U.S interests around the world,, most importantly, all for absolutely no benefit to the Iranian people, and as a matter of fact, as a tool to cruelly oppress the Iranian people, why are some of us so cold hearted and so evil minded to think that U.S or anyone else if it was in its place, should sit back and tolerate this?

Why more pressure on dividing Iranians?

These days more forces are at work on dividing Iranians because many other ways to make them capitulate are harder to implement or are deemed ineffective.
--Last year's Israeli/US experiment in Lebanon (shock and awe aerial attack) failed
--Afghanistan is not under control by any measures after so many years
--Pakistan with all its nukes, and fanatics is very unstable
--Iraq is not at its worst, but by no means under control, reconstruction efforts riddled with Iraqi and US corruption. “moderate” Arab governments continue to create problem for US despite their friendly talks
--Kurdish issue is no longer just a problem for the bad guys but for US as well
--War costs, and debt to China could cripple US and potentially West (//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/war_costs)

Dear Hoder focus on the British not their servants

Spend the rest of your life to help your country get rid of the British. Talking about their servents in Iran such as Ebadi et al will not get you naywhere.

Read this article please and see what is being done to your motherland:

-------------------------------------------------------تشکیل لژ اسدآبادی ملایان
توسط شریف امامی

پس از انتشار اسناد مهم و شگفت انگیز شبکه فراماسونری در ایران توسط اسمائیل رائین، آن هم در زمانیکه حاکمیت ماسونها در ایران برقرار بود این گمان بوجود آمد که به زودی شاه از طریق اقدام کودتا مانندی به حکومت دویست ساله این باند فاسد و خیانت پیشه خاتمه خواهد داد ولی دیری نپایید که واکنش های تند و خشم آلود رهبران این شبکه نظیر شریف امامی که از حمایت و پشتیبانی دولت و طراحان انگلیسی برخوردار بود، زمینه سرنگونی شاه را فراهم نمودند که سبب شادی و شادمانی هر چه بیشتر این شبکه فاسد گردید.
تعداد زیادی از رهبران و رؤسای لژها و اعضای سازمان فراماسونری ماهها و هفته ها پیش از سقوط رژیم پهلوی و حتی پس از انقلاب با حمایت انقلابیون با خارج نمودن سرمایه های نامشروع خویش ایران را ترک نمودند و تعداد معدودی هم زیر چتر حمایت حکام شرع قرار گرفتند و با آنها همکاری نمودند.
پس از انقلاب، شریف امامی در انتقال بسیاری از سرمایه ها و ثروت های بنیاد پهلوی که بعدها نام بنیاد مستضعفین را به خود گرفت، نقش اصلی را عهده دار بود. در ابتدا او توانست شبکه عظیم فراماسونری ایران را زیر چتر انقلابیون خارج کرده و در لوس آنجلس بازسازی نماید و سپس رابطه های جدید شبکه خارجی فراماسونری را با حکومت اسلامی فراهم می سازد. آشنایی دیرینه او با ملایان در ایران زمینه ایجاد لژ فراماسونری اسدآبادی را در حکومت اسلامی امکانپذیر می سازد که در سال 1361 تشکیل لژ اسدآبادی که محل اجتماع اعضای آن در میدان ونک تهران می باشد صورت گرفت. ریاست آن را به آیت الله مهدوی کنی طبق تشریفات فراماسونری می سپارد. چنین اقدامی و تشکیل چنین مجمعی با آگاهی ارتباطات بسیار نزدیک و دیرینه آیت الله مهدوی کنی (که همسر او نیز انگلیسی می باشد) با دولت انگلیس بوده است. نام لژ اسدآبادی از جمال الدین اسدآبادی یکی از مزدوران فراماسون انگلیس گرفته شده است که در نشر استعمار مذهبی، خدمات فراوانی کرده است و لژ فراماسونری اخوان المسلمین توسط شاگردان او با حمایت انگلیس در مصر بوجود آمد.
همانطور که می دانیم در زمان سلطنت پهلوی در لژهای همایون، مولوی و لژ بزرگ ملی ایران که محمد رضا شاه ریاست آن را به عهده داشت و همچنین در لژ اسدآبادی حکومت اسلامی تابلوی بزرگی از سید جمال الدین با پیشبند فراماسونری و در لباس استادی در محافل خود نصب می کردند و می کنند.)
سید جمال در مصر با لژهای دیگر فراماسونری نیز در تماس بوده و در محافل آنها نیز به عنوان مهمان (ویزیتور) شرکت می کرده است، از جمله:
۱- گراند لژ محلی مصر Grand lodge of Egypte
۲- لژ مازینی Mazzini که به زبان ایتالیائی کار می کرده
۳- لژ نیل Nile Lodge
۴- لژ یونانی قاهره که به زبان های یونانی و فرانسه کار می کرده است.
سید جمال الدین پس از چهار سال فعالیت در لژ ماسونی وابسته به انگلیس و رسیدن به مقام « استاد اعظم » در سال ۱۸۷۹ به گفته ای به دلیل اعلام نمودن لائیسیته و مذهبی نبودن، از لژ کوکب شرق اخراج شد چرا که لژهایی که مستقیماً به انگلیس وابسته می باشند نهایتاً می بایست مذهبی باشند در صورتیکه ما می دانیم که سید جمال و دستیار او شیخ محمد عبده و جورجی زیدان از بنیانگذاران فکری اخوان المسلمین می باشند یعنی در مسیر پروژة استعمار مذهبی انگلیس فعال بوده اند، بنابراین او چگونه می تواند ناگهان اعلام لائیسیته کند؟ و این نیز سناریویی بود که در آن زمان توسط انگلیس برنامه ریزی شد.

معماران و استادان سازمان منحوس و مصیبت باری که نام فراماسونری بر آن نهاده اند، بعد از انقلاب شوم 1357 زمانیکه دو سه میلیون ایرانی باسواد و میهن دوست از مملکت خویش مهاجرت نمودند برای اینکه مبادا این نیروی عظیم انسانی با امکانات فکری و مالی خویش علیه حکومت اسلامی برخیزند، سه گروه از عمال مورد اعتماد خود را که سالها پیش به عضویت شبکه فراماسونری در آمده بودند مانند دکتر شاپور بختیار، فرح دیبا، مسعود رجوی و ... را مأمور نمودند تا با همکاری با سازمانهای جاسوسی سیا، انتلیجنس سرویس و موساد و همچنین دریافت کمکهای مالی اپوزیسیون خارج از کشور را به دست آورند و با استخدام گروه بیشماری از باند روشنفکران و مزدوران خودفروش، نیروی سه چهار میلیونی میهن دوستان را خنثی نمایند.

به گزارش ساواک مورخ 26/9/1356 :
« در حال حاضر اعضای شورای عالی، درجه سی و سوم 16 نفر می باشند که قریباً آقای شریف امامی استاد اعظم لژ بزرگ ایران به عضویت شورای عالی پذیرفته خواهد شد ... »

سند شماره 14: سوگندنامه نامبرده
« من جعفر شریف امامی اسوار و سرباز حقیقت این شمشیر را چون رمز تکلیف و نشانه فداکاری در راه دفاع از دیگران (یعنی سایر اعضاء) و کتاب آسمانی را چون چراغ راه خود می پذیرم (کدام کتاب آسمانی؟ انجیل؟! تورات؟! یا قرآن؟!) و به ایمانم و شرافتم و دینم (کدام ایمان؟ کدام شرافت؟ کدام دین؟) سوگند یاد می کنم و پیمان می بندم که با وفاداری همه تکلیف های یک بزرگ بازرس کل و با اختیار درجه سی و سوم (بزرگترین درجه فراماسونری در ایران) انجام دهم ... »
هم اکنون لژ اسدآبادی متشکل از بیش از سی لژ وابسته که انجمن حجتیه، مؤتلفه اسلامی، جامعه واعظ در آن جای دارند، با قدرتی بیشتر بر دستگاه رهبری عمل می کند. همه آخوندهای بانفوذ و مؤثر در حکومت اسلامی مانند رفسنجانی و ... در شبکه های فراماسونری اسدآبادی عضویت دارند و همچنین از بازاریان بانفوذ همچون عسگراولادی و ... در مسیر هماهنگ با سیاست های استعماری انگلستان به پیش می روند. این شبکه های فراماسونری اسدآبادی با همکاری فراماسون های مزدور رژیم سابق در لوس آنجلس ارتباط مستقیم دارند و در ترفندهای ضد ملی و میهنی برای استمرار حکومت اسلامی اشتراک مساعی می نمایند.
روزنامه مكزيكو هرالد فاش كرد كه در كنگره بين المللي فراماسونها كه بطور محرمانه در اكتبرسال ۱۹۸۲ در مكزيك برگزار شد، دونفر نماينده از طرف خمينی ، بنامهای سيد محمد شيرازی و سيد محمود دعايی، شركت داشته اند (مكزيكو هرالد، چاپ مكزيكو سيتی.مكزيك-اكتبر۱۹۸۲)
ارتباط خمينی و دارو دسته اش با فراماسونری بين المللی، پيشتر ها آشكار گرديد. محمد بهشتی، عبدالكريم موسوی اردبيلی، ربانی املشی، سيد عبدالله شيرازی و عده ای ديگر عضو لژ اسلام فراماسونری بوده و هستند كه پس از آنكه خمينی جنايتكار از سيد جمال الدين اسد آبادی، اين سرسپرده انگليس، صهيونيسم و فراماسونری جهانی بعنوان نخستين رهبر انقلاب اسلامي خاورميانه نام برد، لژ اسلام به لژ سيد جمال الدين اسدآبادی تغيير نام يافت و مهدوی كنی رييس مادام العمر اين لژ است كه همواره يك پايش در تهران و پای ديگرش درلندن است. سيد محمد خاتمی. هنگامي كه دوشادوش بهشتی معدوم در آلمان و در شهر هامبورگ كار مي كرد، ديگر مدتها بود كه عضو فراماسونری بود. خود بهشتی در زمان اصل چهار ترومن در دفاتر اصل چهار كار می كرد و از آن هنگام به عضويت فراماسونری در آمد.
در اينكه بيشتر رهبران و دست اندركاران رژيم جمهوری اسلامی يهودی -ماسون هستند بر هيچكس پوشيده نيست. شيخ خزعلي، عطاالله مهاجرانی، برادران لاريجانی، ناصر مكارم شيرازي (كه زني انگليسی- يهودی نيز دارد)، نوربخش، هاشمی عراقی شاهرودی (از يهوديان عراق)، كمال خرازی (وی هنگامی كه در سياتل آمريكا درس می- خواند به همه هم دوره ای های خود گفته بود كه يهودی است) حبيب الله عسكر اولادی تازه مسلمان (از آنجا وی تازه مسلمان است كه پس از مهاجرت خانواده اش از عراق به ايران، از دين يهوديت به اسلام گرويدند. گرويدن به اسلام مليت يهودی عسكر اولادی را تغيير نمی دهد. از آنجا كه امام يازدهم شيعيان فرزندی نداشت و بدين خاطر افسانه مهدی موعود پيش آمد، خانواده عسكر اولادی نيز خود را اولاد عسكر خواندند و بدينگونه به ريش مسلمانان اينگونه خنديده اند.) از جمله يهودی-ماسون های حاكم بر ايران می باشند.
از باند-خانواده هاشمی رفسنجانی سخن نمی گويم كه اين مسئله مانند روز برای هر ايرانی روشن است. باند-خانواده رفسنجانی مانند باند خانواده خواجه رشيداالدين فضل الله همدانی وزير يهودی اشغالگران مغول. تمامی اهرم های اقتصادی-سياسی را در دست دارند. باند يهودی- ماسون رفسنجانی بی اعتنا به خامنه ای تمامی كارهای خود را انجام می دهند. اين باند با در دست داشتن راديو و تلويزيونهای درون و برون مرزی (تلويزيون تپش و ديگر راديو و تلويزيونهايی كه مزدور عليرضا نوری زاده با آنها كار می- كند) چندين سايت اينترنتی از جمله سايت رادیو فردا، رادیو اسراییل، رادیو بی بی سی ،روزي دات كام و گويا و... تلاش می كنند ايرانيان برون مرز را نيز همانند ايرانيان درون مرز كنترل كنند. بايد افزود كه پس از خواجه رشيدالدين فضل الله همدانی، سعدوالدوله يهودی وزير مغولها شد كه مردم پس از پيروزی بر مغولان، سعد الدوله را تكه تكه كرده و جلوی سگ انداختند. در ايران هم روزی می- رسد كه مردم ما ماسونهای فرمانروا بر سرزمين ما را تكه تكه كرده و جلوی سگ بیاندازند. آن روز پشت دروازه است.

کامران بهروزی - سازمان دانشجویان مبارز

The Nobel has gone to Ebadi's head

she's acting like she had to please all the Euro-liberals that got her the Nobel prize. So she's throwing out Iran's rights.

The oldest trick in the colonial book...

Stand for our Right!

You don't know to be a rocket scientist to see the dark side of the American government toward Iran.
I hundred percent agree with the Hoder. Look through the history:
Reza Shah was ousted by British and the USA
Mosadegh: was ousted by the USA and the British.
Shah was placed and they milked the Iranian Nation.
Shah was ousted once he was not any of worthy to them.
Downing the Iran Air and killing the passangers.
Pursuing Sadam with the war with Iran.
Sanctioning Iranian people and putting hardships on them.
Now this Nuclear Issue: They(USA and British) lie through their teeth! Why? Because they want to have a puppet government in place so they can milk the Iranian people again.

Iran does not need the USA. This is a sheep and wolf relationship!

The USA is run by the Industrial Military Complex and always looking to creat an enemy! They need an imaginary enemy to convience the American people for the big military budget spending.

Why don't the USA go after the Pakistan? they have the nuclear bomb now. Or, why don't they go after Saudi Arabia to push for the so called Democracy! It is easy. Thay are taking the Oil for a penny! So, that is pretty Democratic to the USA.

I think now is the time for all Iranians to stick together for our rights priod.

i do not care , it is iran

i do not care , it is iran obligation to develop the bomb to secure iran. it was me who was waking up during iran-iraq war, missile miss my home by 500 meter. bunch of iranain kids who do not remember, or bunch who have not been to iran prescribing what is good for iran. i can tell you it is noy your f...ing busiiness. we want have a bomb . if israel want to harm us it is our right to kill them. it is our right to kill all arabs who sided with saddam. and it is our right to kill american who help saddam.

RE: Mistranslated comments?

AT says: "What Ebadi is concerned about is the welfare of Iranian people. The oridinary people who are going to get bombed and suffer from economic strangulation."

Ordinary Iranian people would be in a much worse situaion, a situation similar to the one Iraqis are going through if IRI had shown any weakness.
Just look at many articles published in the US regarding advantages and disadvantages of a military attack on Iran.... or better look at:
"A Lesson from History on Attacking Iran"
By Manouchehr Hosseinzadeh
//www.payvand.com/news/07/oct/1209.html

Iran has every right!

Arezu, I love you for what you dare to say! It's not popular to talk about Iranian rights anymore, especially on this site. You're absolutely right! Iranians should have every right to develop and use the nuclear technology in any form that they wish. When others like India, Pakistan, and Israel in the region have that right, why not Iran? As a matter of fact, the only country that should be banned from using this technology is the US, the one that has actually used it to kill millions of innocent people.

Mistranslated comments?

Mistranslated comments? What about the holocaust conference in Tehran? What part of that is mistranslated? What part of Iran's national interest is served by conducting a holocaust conference in Tehran? Do you seriously believe such buffoonery will not give ammunition to the Bush and Olmert and company? A more measured and diplomatic approach will solidify the middle of the road members of international community against any possible action against Iran. Even members of the regime themselves have criticized Ahamdinejad for his careless nonsense resulting in potential isolation of Iran and further economic sanctions. Are you holier than the ayatoallahs? Look, folks, it doesn’t matter what US plans for Iran is. Everybody knows about the facts and documents you are talking about. The question is how to neutralize these plans. How to take advantage of cracks in US policy. How to bring more Europeans and Asians and so forth to Iran’s side. Bush and company are ideological bastards just as Ahmadinejad and his cohorts are. What Ebadi is concerned about is the welfare of Iranian people. The oridinary people who are going to get bombed and suffer from economic strangulation. Iran is not Iraq. It didn’t invade two of its neighbors in expansionist wars. It hasn’t used chemical weapons against its Kurds. Making a case against Iran is a hell of lot harder, if the regime takes a sensible approach towards its foreign policy.

To: Anonymous-toady

Dear Anonymous-toady:

I beg to differ with you in reference to some of the statements you made.

1. You indicated “She said Iran should abide by international law which is not the same thing as capitulating to US position of dismantle your program or else”

• Iran has abided by international law? What international law is she speaking about – the UNSC demands? If this is what she is referring to she should question why Iran’s dossier was illegally taken out of the hands of the IAEA and placed in the hands of UNSC members. This was illegal by all international norms.
• By making such statements she is feeding the same line that the Bush Admin. and the neocons are preaching. Exact same sentence. Therefore her statements are not only wrong but misleading and to the detriment of Iran’s sovereign rights!!

2. You state: “The problem has always been verification of enrichment which may be used to develop a bomb. Even El-Baradi has raised the question regarding Iran’s openness in that regard.”

• It is impossible to prove a negative – this is what the U.S. wants and they know that no country, including Iran can prove something like this. As such, the U.S. ulterior motive is right here in this statement, it has nothing to do with Iran developing nuclear weapons;
• To date El Baradei has had access to all documents, visited nuclear facilities, sensitive military sites (which by the way no other country in the world will allow such inspections, even those who are signatory to the NPT)
• The IAEA has never received a clean bill of health from any country who is a signatory to the NPT and never will. The only reason Iran has to meet benchmarks that are not requested by other NPT signatories is due to the arm twisting of the U.S. forced upon the IAEA. I believe you have heard the statement that even by indicating that the IAEA has not found any evidence that Iran has diverted material towards a nuclear weapons program, and has been quite cooperative has lead the hardline, neocons including Israel to demand that El Baradei be sacked. John Bolton continues to label him as an Iran apologist.
• Intent to do something in the future cannot be verified by anyone!

3. You state: “Ahmadinejd’s anti-Israel bark (a reactionary point of view by the way when it comes to holocaust) only muddies the water and helps those same neo-cons and their right wing Zionist allies that the likes of Derrakhshan decry.”

• The U.S. view about halting of uranium enrichment has nothing to do with Ahmadinejad’s statements. The U.S. knows this, and so does Israel. The plan for regime change has been a plan by the U.S. and Israel as far back as the early 2002. These are merely another set of excuses to fool the ignorant masses who will buy off on such propaganda.
• The U.S. was given all the opportunity to negotiate with Iran for dialogue, and open relations under the moderate Khatami. Iran agreed to the Two State Solution between Palestine/and Israel as proposed by other “moderate Arab allies”, Iran agreed to work with the U.S. in fighting “terrorism”; Iran agreed to help integrate Hezbollah into the Lebanese political system; Iran provided massive assistance to the U.S. in fighting the Talibans – in fact if it was not for Iran, the U.S. would have never been able to defeat the Talibans; Iran agreed to work with the U.S. in stabilizing Iraq; Iran agreed to work and discuss the nuclear issue - however all such gestures were rejected by the U.S. U.S. wanted permanent stop by Iran on its nuclear enrichment program; and wanted regime change.
• At every stage the U.S. needs to bring about another excuse under false pretexts to demonize Iran. So now it is Ahmadinejad’s mis-translated statement about Israel being wiped off the map and the holocaust.
• This is not true the U.S. has had an agenda and will not divert away from it.

I would highly recommend for those who have not read this article to read it in its entirety to see who is the aggressor, and who wants war, and regime change. It is definitely not Iran but the U.S.

//mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=f4c350902a&at...

The following are just excerpts of the article:

BURNT OFFERING

How a 2003 secret overture from Tehran might have led to a deal on Iran's nuclear capacity -- if the Bush administration hadn't rebuffed it.

Gareth Porter | May 21, 2006

Iran's "mad mullahs" want nuclear weapons to destroy Israel and can only be stopped by the threat or use of military force. That's what the Bush administration would have the public believe, as it pushes toward a confrontation with Iran over that country's nuclear program. A key link in the argument is that Tehran has shown no interest in negotiating over the nuclear issue. As State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters last January, the administration didn't then see "anything that indicates the Iranians are willing to engage in a serious diplomatic process on the nuclear issue."
In the woeful history of falsehoods about the targets of potential U.S. force, however, this one is particularly egregious. In the spring of 2003, the Islamic Republic of Iran not only proposed to negotiate with the Bush administration on its nuclear program and its support for terrorists but also offered concrete concessions that went very far toward meeting U.S. concerns.

The story of that Iranian negotiating proposal and the U.S. failure to respond, which has never been covered by major U.S. media, reveals the underlying pragmatism driving Iranian policy toward an agreement with the United States. It also reveals a fierce struggle between realists who wanted to engage Iran diplomatically and the inner circle of advisers who were determined to avoid it. The stubborn rejection by President Bush and his neoconservative advisers of normal diplomatic practice in their dealings with Iran, detailed for the first time here, raises grave questions about the Bush administration's real motives as it maneuvers through the present crisis over Iran's nuclearprogram..................................

READ THE FULL ARTICLE!

REPLY : Nobody else`s business?

1. excuse me please I have just a question: do you mean the strangeras should not beginn to leak the Iranian`s .....? So use the iranians say when someone tries to intervene in their business. especially then when the stranger gives advises. In some languages they have a speech it says: an unrequested advise stinks. is this speech compatible with that what in farsi is used in similar situations?
2. and my second question is: Iranians use also to say in situations when a friend or asecond strnger repaets what the first has said: why do you eat what He/she has vomitted?
3. Is the following equivalent to what is discussed ebove: The repeater ( = imitatore) eats his/her own faeces from Dog`s backpassage? do you mean in your comment the honourable Lawyer Mrs Ebadi is doing the last? because you know I mean she has got allready so much mony from strangers that she owes them something. she must act as she does. For herself she does well. she does nothing illegal, lives officially in IRI, gets offen invitations from strangers to talk against so much Harm that is done to Iranian nation and she has never lost a single word about guantanamo, about abused children in the western countries an so on.
4. better I finish now. In "IRANIAN" is nothing sacred but some subjects are less sacred and if someday I had no "IRANIAN" I know wouldnt be happy. Greeting

Chill out and stick to the topic

Instead of carrying on about everything else but what Derrakhshan has said here and what Ebadi did say in her interview and calling each other Shahi and Isreali agent and all other nonsense try sticking to the topic. Derrakhsan has likened Iran's nuclear program to the nationalization of oil in 1953 and has attributed to Ebadi a position tantamount to opposing Mossadegh's position back then. Firstly, Ebadi did not say that Iran should forgo its right to development of nuclear technology. Derrakhshan’s Stalinist approach to those who criticize the IRI is shameful. She said Iran should abide by international law which is not the same thing as capitulating to US position of dismantle your program or else. IAEA is also part of what is called international law and not just US unilateralism which by the way didn’t start with Michael Ledeen and goes back to what is termed the Cheney-Powell Doctrine in the late Eighties. Yes, Iran does have the right to do so under IAEA and El-Baradi has been in favour of working with Iran to ensure that. The problem has always been verification of enrichment which may be used to develop a bomb. Even El-Baradi has raised the question regarding Iran’s openness in that regard. Ahmadinejd’s anti-Israel bark (a reactionary point of view by the way when it comes to holocaust) only muddies the water and helps those same neo-cons and their right wing Zionist allies that the likes of Derrakhshan decry. By the way, and this is to the dude who keeps quoting Ledeen as if he / she invented the guy, what do you think US plans for the Middle –East are? Removing pockets of anti-Americanism and guarantee of free flow of cheap oil for US economy. Could you tell me how, in the bigger scheme of things, the IRI will do anything to interrupt this? This is still a highly resource-based country that needs to hawk its oil to pay its bills. What has Iran done to consolidate a challenge to say globalization, the way Nasser and Nehru did vise a vise the Cold War with the non-Alliance movement fifty years ago, aside from aligning themselves with non-democratic and potentially reactionary groups like Hezbollah, Hamas and Bashar Assad? One last thing and this is to those who keep talking about Iran’s future. Can we take care of the present first? The unemployment, the inflation, the insane housing crisis, the brain drain, the continuation of violence at every level of the society, the social despair, the drug addiction, the increasing gap between rich and poor in this so-called republic of mostasafeen, the prostitution, the pummeling of women’s rights, the suppressing of unions and labour groups. Never mind the human rights; that’s for bourgeois pussies of course. It’s easy to get lost in the fog of anti-imperialism when you live in the comfort and freedom of the West.

REPLY : RIGHTS of Iranian Nation

sure every word is correct, BUT: please dont say too much the truth. Greeting

Iran's rights must be preserved and Israel should just but out

Iran has every right to nuclear fuel enrichment for civilian purposes. It is its rights granted to it under international legal agreements, to which Israel has never agreed in being a signatory to.

Iran has not lied about its nuclear program, but Israel has for years denied having one, until their President by mistake blurted it out this past year.

Israel should start cleaning its own house and stop creating havoc in another country. I wonder if they have learned anything from last summer with Hezbollah. Within 30 days the 5th largest army in the world was defeated. QUITE AN EMBARRASSEMENT FOR ISRAEL, I DO ADMIT!! But look you can’t make up for your defeat by going after Iran! You tried using your F-16 fighters with Hezbollah and still got defeated. And if you attempt to use nuclear bunker busters to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, you know exactly what your government is doing; contaminating the region with radiation; massacre of millions of Iranians; and destruction of Iran.

If this is what you are advocating for all the Israelis/Zionists on this web-site then your government is far worse than the leader of that European country which inflicted the greatest catastrophe on the Jewish people. I hope that he is not your role model as a leader. Though most experts have acknowledged that Israel, U.K. and the U.S. have used depleted uranium in their attacks in the Middle East.

By firing radioactive ammunition, the U.S., U.K., and Israel may have triggered a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East that, over time, will prove deadlier than the U.S. atomic bombing of Japan.

So much ammunition containing depleted uranium (DU) has been fired, asserts nuclear authority Leuren Moret, “The genetic future of the Iraqi people for the most part, is destroyed.”

“More than ten times the amount of radiation released during atmospheric testing (of nuclear bombs) has been released from depleted uranium weaponry since 1991,” Moret writes, including radioactive ammunition fired by Israeli troops in Palestine.

Moret is an independent U.S. scientist formerly employed for five years at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and also at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, both of California.

Moret adds, “the (Iraq) environment now is completely radioactive.”

Doug Rokke, formerly the top U.S. Army DU clean-up officer and now anti-DU crusader, says Israeli tankers fired radioactive shells during the invasion of Lebanon last year. U.S. and NATO forces also used DU ammunition in Kosovo.

DU is outlawed under the 1925 Geneva Convention prohibiting poison gas!! But hey what do Israel, U.S. and U.K. care about over stepping international law, they have violated so many laws that one can't keep up with them anymore! It is only for other countries to ensure 180% adherence to international law not for the super power nor for Israel.

In fact I am more afraid of nuclear weapons and radioactive elements in the hands of Israel, the U.S., U.K. as opposed to Iran. These three countries have already used such lethal weapons on innocent people.

We need to really re-define the terminology of who is "MAD", "INSANE", "TERRORIST", and threat to the peace and security of the world. It is not Iran. Even these terminologies have been conveniently defined by the bullies to serve their own interest while engaging directly and indirectly in acts of terrorism.

RE: Islamic and Mullahs are subhuman, therefore they must be

Goh Smith,
You couldn't handle a bunch of rag tag Hezbollah army in summer 2006. How can you handle Iranians?

Islamic and Mullahs are subhuman, therefore they must be

exterminated. Israel will do it with ease. Islamic Republic and its regime are two biggest cancerous organs in the middle east that must be taken out before they contaminate the organs around them.

Israel know very well that the Brits are behind the mullahs. Israel has all the means and capabilities to take care of the Islamic Republic. It is just waiting for the right moment. And the right moment is getting closer and closer.

nahidroxan.blogspot.com

A differet view!

Nato's Islamic revolution!

Dear Ayatollah Derakshan,
You should not bad mouth sister Ebadi too much. After all you both support IRI.
Yes,the Nato's Islamic revolution in Iran is a model in the region however it is loosing its luster in its birth place.
If West decides for Iran to have nuclear capability they will give it to them if not they wont have it. You can not buy this stuff in candy stores...
Cheers,

Re: shalom gohsmith

salom shalom, learn something from smart supporters of Israel in the US (such as Soros), or smart Israelis such as Efraim Halevy:

//www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...

(Efraim Halevy, the former head of the Israeli intelligence agency advocate coexistence with Iran)

My crazy friend war is not the solution, specially between Iran and Israel. You see we Iranians have a good amount of stubborn Jewish blood specially those of us from Isfahan and central Iran (google the Iranian Jewish history).