NUCLEAR

The Iran threat

The Iran threat has been envisaged by the Western powers and in particular by the USA. As the year of peak oil production approaches the control of known oil and gas reserves becomes all the more important. The major Western oil companies have a stranglehold on all the known oil and gas reserves of the world which includes all of the middle east (except Iran ) North Africa, South America, Canada, the Caspian sea region and elsewhere other than Russia.
Iran's quest for nuclear technology is to show off to the Islamic world that it is an advanced country. The bulk of electricity which Iran will be producing in the future will be from gas and oil based power plants. Nuclear energy being produced on a mass scale as in France or Japan is still a distant dream for Iran.
So all this hype by the USA about Iran's intention to gain nuclear technology to produce a bomb is just a lever to put pressure on Iran into accepting the terms on which Western oil companies will be doing business in Iran.
The pressure will be there till such time as Iran agrees to such terms. The USA will get along fine with the Mullahs if the terms are agreed to by the mullahs.
I am living in North Vancouver of British Columbia of Canada. I must say that the Pakistanis who are here and with some of whom I had to associate are total Islamic fanatics. The Mullahs in Iran can be called Islamic liberals compared to these Pakistanis.
The unfortunate part is that the number of Pakistani immigrants in Canada is increasing by leap and bonds. I talked to some of them and all of them have only one aim which is to make Canada Islamic. If you say anything against the Prophet or even Iman Khomeni, the Pakistanis will slit your throat. So the nuclear issue is not the main issue regarding Iran. It is the control of its oil and gas wealth.
Pourandokht Rostamian
North Vancouver
Canada

Mojgan, not to be sarcastic,

Mojgan, not to be sarcastic, but I absolutely appreciate you proving my argument ! If you read my posting again, I never said that countries do not interfere with each others business. Even the Shah himself contributed close to $75 million to the Republican party during the
1976 election. Please look it up. Did it achieve the desired result for the Shah? See my point? The article clearly states that some foreign countries wanted Mosaddegh to go and some even planned for it. My point is who executed the plan? The monarchy and their millions of supporters. Who overthrew the Mosaddegh government? It wasnt the U.S or the British, we overthrew him and brought the Shah back, just like we overthrew Shah in 1979. What U.S or Britsh weapon or plan would've been able to stop the millions of Iranians in 1953 or 1979? Not even nuclear bombs. We did it, and we should take responsibilty for it. Isnt it naive to think that the Shah and Zahedi and their gang would've stopped plotting against the Mosadegh government if the U.S or british would have not introduced so called "plans" ?

Re: Anti Casmii

Anti Casmii, that assessment along with W’s comments this morning show just how correct Soraya is.
My crazy friend, Anti Casmii, please give me the honor and add me to your sh*t list as well. Put me in the stinkiest part of your list, since I am an unpaid mercenary who supports Iran and is against MKO and Reza 2.5 mercenaries.
Kind regards.

Re: Arezu

With the threat of war diminished, will you now join the opposition to IRI?

To: Anti Casmii

I really don't understand what you are talking about!!

This news is good not only for Iran but for the American people. If there is a speck of a chance that this NIE report may prevent the warmongers from waging an illegal war against Iran, this is fantastic!!

It seems like you are quite un-happy. 75,000,000 people in Iran are not composed of Mullahs; they are inncoent Iranian people. Are you stating you want to sacrifice a country and its people because of your hatred for the Mullahs?.

You must be a Ziocon who is really angry that the threat of war just got reduced. Shame on you, even Americans are happy with this news. They are questioning why the Bush Administration has been misleading them with fear of a nuclear weapons program, and faulty intelligence when he knew about this news as far back as a year ago.

It just proved that this Administration cannot be trusted on anything it says.

Bush had to save face somehow he knew he had no means to attack Iran. Not one foot soldier, not one General would be willing to engage in such a criminal act.

Let's hope this is not another hoax!

R. to bad news for war mongers

This rather a bad news for IRI' mercenaries like Soraya and a number of Casmii traitors on this site who misuse war as an the excuse to defend the Mullahs.
I wonder what they will replace with this excuse when the game of "Us attack" does not work.

bad news for war mongers

In case you haven't seen:

U.S.: Iran not building nukes

(//www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/03/iran.nuclea...)

Sabz. .....the truth is........

 The truth is that other countries interfered with the government of Iran for their own selfish gain. They never cared about Iran or Iranians. It is why it is so important that Iranians resolve the current issues with Iran and not look for outside help. Iran needs to stand on its own in order to be truly free.

Natalia Nadia

To Farhad Kashani

Your writing is so familiar it reming me of a person in Sweded, his real name is Peyman.
Is that you ? Please confirm it here, so I can contact you.
You know me well, I live in Canada, an old friend.
Thanks.

WHAT THE HELL!! (I'm being

WHAT THE HELL!! (I'm being polite)
.

What is the truth?????
And who is telling the truth here???
.
Confusion IS my epitaph.... HELP...

Manufactured coup against

Manufactured coup against the Shah:
Excerpts from the "A Century of War":

"In November 1978, President Carter named the Bilderberg group's George Ball, another member of the Trilateral Commission, to head a special White House Iran task force under the National Security Council's Brzezinski. Ball recommended that Washington drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the fundamentalistic Islamic opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. Robert Bowie from the CIA was one of the lead 'case officers' in the new CIA-led coup against the man their covert actions had placed into power 25 years earlier. Their scheme was based on a detailed study of the phenomenon of Islamic fundamentalism, as presented by British Islamic expert, Dr. Bernard Lewis, then on assignment at Princeton University in the United States.

Lewis's scheme, which was unveiled at the May 1979 Bilderberg meeting in Austria, endorsed the radical Muslim Brotherhood movement behind Khomeini, in order to promote balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. Lewis argued that the West should encourage autonomous groups such as the Kurds, Armenians, Lebanese Maronites, Ethiopian Copts, Azerbaijani Turks, and so forth. The chaos would spread in what he termed an 'Arc of Crisis,' which would spill over into Muslim regions of the Soviet Union.

The coup against the Shah, like that against Mossadegh in 1953, was run by British and American intelligence, with the bombastic American, Brzezinski, taking public 'credit' for getting rid of the 'corrupt' Shah, while the British characteristically remained safely in the background.

During 1978, negotiations were under way between the Shah's government and British Petroleum for renewal of the 25-year old extraction agreement. By October 1978, the talks had collapsed over a British 'offer' which demanded exclusive rights to Iran's future oil output, while refusing to guarantee purchase of the oil. With their dependence on British-controlled export apparently at an end, Iran appeared on the verge of independence in its oil sales policy for the first time since 1953, with eager prospective buyers in Germany, France, Japan and elsewhere.

In its lead editorial that September, Iran's Kayhan International stated: In retrospect, the 25-year partnership with the [British Petroleum] consortium and the 50-year relationship with British Petroleum which preceded it, have not been satisfactory ones for Iran … Looking to the future, NIOC [National Iranian Oil Company] should plan to handle all operations by itself. London was blackmailing and putting enormous economic pressure on the Shah's regime by refusing to buy Iranian oil production, taking only 3 million or so barrels daily of an agreed minimum of 5 million barrels per day.

This imposed dramatic revenue pressures on Iran, which provided the context in which religious discontent against the Shah could be fanned by trained agitators deployed by British and U.S. intelligence. In addition, strikes among oil workers at this critical juncture crippled Iranian oil production. As Iran's domestic economic troubles grew, American 'security' advisers to the Shah's Savak secret police implemented a policy of ever more brutal repression, in a manner calculated to maximize popular antipathy to the Shah.

At the same time, the Carter administration cynically began protesting abuses of 'human rights' under the Shah. British Petroleum reportedly began to organize capital flight out of Iran, through its strong influence in Iran's financial and banking community. The British Broadcasting Corporation's Persian-language broadcasts, with dozens of Persian-speaking BBC 'correspondents' sent into even the smallest village, drummed up hysteria against the Shah.

The BBC gave Ayatollah Khomeini a full propaganda platform inside Iran during this time. The British government-owned broadcasting organization refused to give the Shah's government an equal chance to reply. Repeated personal appeals from the Shah to the BBC yielded no result. Anglo-American intelligence was committed to toppling the Shah. The Shah fled in January, and by February 1979, Khomeini had been flown into Tehran to proclaim the establishment of his repressive theocratic state to replace the Shah's government. Reflecting on his downfall months later, shortly before his death, the Shah noted from exile, I did not know it then perhaps I did not want to know but it is clear to me now that the Americans wanted me out. Clearly this is what the human rights advocates in the State Department wanted What was I to make of the Administration's sudden decision to call former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an adviser on Iran? Ball was among those Americans who wanted to abandon me and ultimately my country.[1][1]

With the fall of the Shah and the coming to power of the fanatical Khomeini adherents in Iran, chaos was unleashed. By May 1979, the new Khomeini regime had singled out the country's nuclear power development plans and announced cancellation of the entire program for French and German nuclear reactor construction. Iran's oil exports to the world were suddenly cut off, some 3 million barrels per day. Curiously, Saudi Arabian production in the critical days of January 1979 was also cut by some 2 million barrels per day. To add to the pressures on world oil supply, British Petroleum declared force majeure and cancelled major contracts for oil supply. Prices on the Rotterdam spot market, heavily influenced by BP and Royal Cutch Shell as the largest oil traders, soared in early 1979 as a result.

The second oil shock of the 1970s was fully under way. Indications are that the actual planners of the Iranian Khomeini coup in London and within the senior ranks of the U.S. liberal establishment decided to keep President Carter largely ignorant of the policy and its ultimate objectives. The ensuing energy crisis in the United States was a major factor in bringing about Carter's defeat a year later. There was never a real shortage in the world supply of petroleum. Existing Saudi and Kuwaiti production capacities could at any time have met the 5-6 million barrels per day temporary shortfall, as a U.S. congressional investigation by the General Accounting Office months later confirmed. Unusually low reserve stocks of oil held by the Seven Sisters oil multinationals contributed to creating a devastating world oil price shock, with prices for crude oil soaring from a level of some $14 per barrel in 1978 towards the astronomical heights of $40 per barrel for some grades of crude on the spot market. Long gasoline lines across America contributed to a general sense of panic, and Carter energy secretary and former CIA director, James R. Schlesinger, did not help calm matters when he told Congress and the media in February 1979 that the Iranian oil shortfall was 'prospectively more serious' than the 1973 Arab oil embargo.[2][2]

The Carter administration's Trilateral Commission foreign policy further ensured that any European effort from Germany and France to develop more cooperative trade, economic and diplomatic relations with their Soviet neighbor, under the umbrella of détente and various Soviet-west European energy agreements, was also thrown into disarray. Carter's security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and secretary of state, Cyrus Vance, implemented their 'Arc of Crisis' policy, spreading the instability of the Iranian revolution throughout the perimeter around the Soviet Union. Throughout the Islamic perimeter from Pakistan to Iran, U.S. initiatives created instability or worse." --

William Engdahl, A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, © 1992, 2004. Pluto Press Ltd. Pages 171-174. [1][1]

In 1978, the Iranian Ettelaat published an article accusing Khomeini of being a British agent. The clerics organized violent demonstrations in response, which led to the flight of the Shah months later. See U.S. Library of Congress Country Studies, Iran. The Coming of the Revolution. December 1987. The role of BBC Persian broadcasts in the ousting of the Shah is detailed in Hossein Shahidi. 'BBC Persian Service 60 years on.' The Iranian. September 24, 2001.

The BBC was so much identified with Khomeini that it won the name 'Ayatollah BBC.' [2][2] Comptroller General of the United States. 'Iranian Oil Cutoff: Reduced Petroleum Supplies and Inadequate U.S. Government Response.' Report to Congress by General Accounting Office. 1979.

//www.amazon.com/Century-War-Anglo-American-P...

Kashani

What are you going on about with your rewriting of 1953 CIA coup ? The least you can do is to do some reading .

1953 coup

By JAMES RISEN

The Central Intelligence Agency's secret history of its covert operation to overthrow Iran's government in 1953 offers an inside look at how the agency stumbled into success, despite a series of mishaps that derailed its original plans.

Written in 1954 by one of the coup's chief planners, the history details how United States and British officials plotted the military coup that returned the shah of Iran to power and toppled Iran's elected prime minister, an ardent nationalist.

The document shows that:

Britain, fearful of Iran's plans to nationalize its oil industry, came up with the idea for the coup in 1952 and pressed the United States to mount a joint operation to remove the prime minister.

The C.I.A. and S.I.S., the British intelligence service, handpicked Gen. Fazlollah Zahedi to succeed Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and covertly funneled $5 million to General Zahedi's regime two days after the coup prevailed.

Iranians working for the C.I.A. and posing as Communists harassed religious leaders and staged the bombing of one cleric's home in a campaign to turn the country's Islamic religious community against Mossadegh's government.

The shah's cowardice nearly killed the C.I.A. operation. Fearful of risking his throne, the Shah repeatedly refused to sign C.I.A.-written royal decrees to change the government. The agency arranged for the shah's twin sister, Princess Ashraf Pahlevi, and Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, the father of the Desert Storm commander, to act as intermediaries to try to keep him from wilting under pressure. He still fled the country just before the coup succeeded.

//www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/04160...

Farhad Kashani I went on the ..........

 I did check out the web aftabyazd.com you so graciously recommended and it is all in Persian script. Now, how about recommending one in English for me. Thanks so much. :o)

Not all of us were blessed with instruction in Farsi as children. :o)

Natalia Nadia

Mr. Rashidian and Rosie T

Mr. Rashidian and Rosie T jaan, personal attack is all these leftist got left ! The more and more their argument and world view is becoming bankrupt and isolated, the more vicious and mean they become ! So let history takes its course and prove our argument, and let them show how classy they are, but lets initiate breaking their grip on the Iranian intellectual movement. They have hijacked it and totally destroyed it along with our country by siding with the IRI. We need to become active, just like them. They are a minority, but they are more vocal than the silent majority of Iranians, specially the ones inside of Iran. We need to change that , and quick, before a disaster inflects on Iran. We need to challenge them, and by using reason and logic and facts, unlike them, expose their dark idelogy and false arguments. We are at fault for not doing that. Do not for a second think these people represent the majority of Iranians. Try to visit aftabyazd.com, and read the "Payam Mardom" (Reader's postings) section, and see what the people in Iran leaving under this brutalness really feel. Although offcourse they cannot come close to expressing what they really feel, but what they can express is in total contrast to what these leftist really think.They feel how we feel. They have the same world view, because they see and feel and analyze the barbarism of the facist regime in Tehran.

Dear Ari, I do not see the

Dear Ari, I do not see the logic of your questions such as “are you intending to engage in real discussion” and “I don’t want to answer the simplistic questions you raised”. The first question seems more an intimidation than anything else! Nonetheless, you are entitled to either answer or ignore my questions or comments. You are accusing me of “manipulation” and “unseriousness”, I really don’t have any “complicated” answer to those accusations other than “No I’m not doing either”. That being said, as you are aware, “complicating” obvious matters is as much misleading and confusing as “simplifying” it. I do understand that Iranians are generally pessimistic and conspiracy theory fans, probably more than many other nationalities I met in my life, and I met a lot. I do have to commend you for not name calling me, I think this is the first time an Iranian with a different point of view actually had the decency to engage in a civilized discussion, although I do see that you are bashing my argument. As far as the 1953 coup goes, like I said, it is well documented that the masses who went marching on the streets were the cause of Mosaddegh’s failure. If we want to look at foreign or even cultural and social influences and historical concepts relating to those masses that went to the streets, then I believe that we need to go back as far as the beginning of the creation of the Iranian nation sometime 2500 years ago. Like I said in the article, we have, and still are, I believe suffering from social illnesses such as lack of feel of responsibility, and personal accountability, and the hard work attitude, and tyrannical social and political structure. That does not mean we are “evil” or “bad”..or clichés like that, I sincerely believe that Iran’s culture is one of the most liberal and tolerant cultures in the history, and we have done great achievements in many fields throughout our history and I’m very proud of that. My belief is that those social disorders are the cause of most, not all, of our miscues. I think it is your argument that is clearly simplistic to blame ancient old problems on CIA and the British. I think it is you who is simplifying the argument by using street clichés that has poisoned the minds of our masses. Clichés such as “Kaar-e-Englisihast” (Its all British fault, although I’m not even denying the fact the British interfered heavily in our affairs for a long time), but I like to compare our country to others and see how come countries, like for example, India who has been under direct British occupation for centuries, has succeeded in becoming a major power in today’s world, and we are still in the bottom of successful countries rankings in all areas? I refuse to believe that we are some simple innocent, and perfect at the same time, people, who is sitting back working hard and innovating, and its foreign nations who come and destroy our achievements. That is simply against common sense and reason, and historically not true. Regards. Farhad.

cartoons

1.
Constantin Ciosu
//www.irancartoon.com/2005/0/077ciosu.jpg
2.
Gerald Scarfe
//www.irancartoon.com/2005/0/GeralScarfe400.j...
3.
Ares
//www.areshumour.com/images/1195605153dollar%...
4.
David Dees
//rense.com/1.imagesH/bushbombs_dees.jpg
5.
David Dees
//rense.com/1.imagesH/OK_dees.jpg
6.
Mikhail Zlatkofsky
//www.irancartoon.com/110/invention/mikhail.j...
7.
Hassan Bleibel
//www.irancartoon.com/110/daily/IRAQN.jpg

Bravo to Shaer

you said it the best . do you know Marzban ?:)

if aggression against Iran eventually stops! (Re: Rashidian)

Rashidian says: "..which has turned Islamic societies where it has power, into a 7th century caliphates"

Rashidian, Your whole paragraph specially this last part is outright exaggeration.

Despite my disagreements with many of the things IRI has done during past 28 years, I see Iran evolving into a better country. If aggression of all sorts (economic, and military) against Iran is stopped that process will go even faster.
Regime change is not the best way to have a more balanced Iran (economically and politically).

SALUTE TO REASON, LOGIC AND IRANDUKHT SORAYA

Can any valid person make any sense of these oponents'assertions?! Don't they remind you of neighbors'crying cats on rainy days? meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow ... Bring it on, you camoulflaged zionist jack ass. I don't mean your cuss, insults or filthy mouths; show me your reason and logic which you have nothing yet.Take that tellephone, call your mouthfull profetional hookers Dr.noorizadeh, Dr. noori ala, etc., show the world contrary to the honourable Soraya. Why in serious discussions they always desert you?
We True Iranians, have been observing that any joke, pictorial, article, document, history, fiction, and facts that is in favor of "present Iran" or even tacitly sided in favor of "present Iran" GIVE YOU A DEATH SENTENCE!? I wish I was a millionair, bought couple of minutes on Fox channel with this announcement: Hay, you Farsi speaking traitors, Farsi speaking Zionists, king lovers, queen lovers, closet gays and lesbians, cream of the crops scapees,and all of you that are sick of Islam, the holly prophet, nuclear Iran, IRI, lovely Akhonds, elected strong Ahmadinegad: LEAVE THEM FOR THE NATIVES. What you've got to lose? You are free! Enjoy this paradise and breathe this abundant democracy til you go to hell! Amen

Thank you!

Dear Ms. Sepahpour-Ulrich,
Thank you for your informative and well-documented article. I congratulate you on your extensive knowledge of the subject. And I specifically congratulate you on your courage for putting yourself out (with you real identity) to present your thoughts in such a web community which is usually hostile to Iran (and I emphasize "Iran" and not necessarily the present Iranian regime). Please continue your fine work of investigating and presenting the truth and please don't get discouraged by some of the illiterate and scatterbrained noises that you encounter in this pandemonium.
With my best wishes.

unnecessary risk

I do not understand why you are defending the Iran regime. As far as I am concerned, there is no need to deny Holocaust or provoke the American's by behaving badly in Iraq. These macho schemes by Iranian government will bring no good to the country and makes the life of the people ever more difficult.

Soraya, you should not defend the Iranian and their bad behavior and you should think about the Iranian people being under threat of war and suppression of their spirit by a bunch dispeakable Mullah's.

R:Ari

I think you are the one who twists the replies. Kashani just asked you the precise questions, " You are supporting a regime which has brutally oppressed women, which has brutally oppressed opposition, which has brutally oppressed minorities, which has brutally terrorized anything that doesn’t represent them, which has turned Islamic societies where it has power, into a 7th century caliphates, where it has banned technological achievements, which has jailed, tortured, exiled its own citizens, which has distorted religion, which has trashed, bashed and destroyed every democratic and liberal achievements the world worked for thousand of years, which has left countries in backwardness and ruins, ..Solely because it bash the U.S?..."
I do not probably share all Kashani's thoughts, but this part of questions you are equally mein. So by replying him, tell me as well your precise and logical reasons of defendding the IRI.
Regrds
JR

To: Kashani

Dear Mr. Kashani:

I truly wonder if you intend to get involved in real discussion or you are simply looking to twist what was said? You ask many questions, which if you are truely interested in obtaining answers can be easily provided. However, I don't wish to engage in come back with facts and figures so that we become a tool of your manipulation.

Some of your questions are quite simplistic right of the bat. If you are not aware of these basic historical events, then I believe it is useless to exhaust one's effort to respond to the rest of your comments. You are either not understanding what is said, or are pretending you don't simply to get us entangled in a question and answer session.

Your questioning of the 1953 event and that the coup was a result of "simply" some pro Shah elements is quite simplistic when tons of material are evident on this subject and even the former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright after 50 years gave her apology to the Iranian people, about the U.S. involvement in the 1953 coup published in the New York times.

By making such a statement you are basically stating that the U.S. had absolutely no involvement in the 1953 coup. The U.S., CIA, and the British were directly behind Operation AJAX. They of course used some of the members who were close to the Shah like General Zahedi and others to gather their support in bringing the masses to the streets. However, you have to look behind to see which foreign elements were the architects of such a coup and were directly involved.

If you still have any doubt about how the CIA planned this coup, all you have to do is read, the:

CIA Clandestine Service History, "Overthrow of Premier Mossadeq of Iran,
November 1952-August 1953," March 1954, by Dr. Donald Wilber

AS WELL AS THE National Security Archive (Electronic briefing book no.28) THE SECRET CIA HISTORY OF THE IRANIAN COUP OF 1953

//www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/

Whenever you are serious please do let us know.

Best regards

Ari

to american chinese and

to american
chinese and Russian need the business of the west. now that their economies are going up they are dependent on the western markets. so they do save their own asses.
do you think they should help a little country and sacrifice self? they are not Jesus or are they?

Planet Isolating Iran? (Re: American)

American said: "If Iran is no threat, why is the planet isolating the country?"

Planet is not Isolating Iran, US has been isolating Iran and in many cases intimidating or bribing other countries to do the same. Even after so many years and rounds of US sanctions/US manipulated sanctions, Iran has been trading with most of the world and even US (with US indirectly).
Interestingly enough among those counties and regions that Iran has high level of trade with is Iraqi Kurdistan (the best part of Iraq), and per Kurdish regional government Iran's trade is very important for them, and consequently for US.
I don't agree with many of what IRI has done during past 28 years but they have been very smart to get around all these economical and military aggressions against Iran (from embargoes and US instigated Iraq war against Iran to recent sanctions and covert arming of extremist anti Iranian religious groups {see Seymour Hersh reports}).

Rhyme and reason

No, please keep on debating in civilzed fashion or at least do not discourage debate.  People are following, truth asserts itself in time.  Fred, if you wish to "expose", if there is something to expose, please expose in transparent, documented and coherent fashion.
Best regards,

Robin (Unidentified Flying Leftist)

Role of Israel in attacks of 9/11

On October 14, 2007 (10/14/2007) there was an article in New York Times (NYT) which states that the QWEST phone company's former chairman has submitted documents to court indicating that 7 MONTHS BEFORE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, US NAtiona Security Agency (NSA) had been forcing his company and other phone co's to intercept phone calls without court warrent. Please see:

//www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/business/14qwest...

This along with all other conspirecy theories we know adds another interesting angel to the suspecious that in fact US Government (and its ally Isreael) KNEW OR PLANNED (or both) the attacks of 9/11. This interesting angel that has not received much attention was also reported by Carl Cameron of FOX NEWS (at the time I think with a local TV station in NYC and now reported with with FOX). In that report he stated on the day of 9/11 after the attacks) (I was listening to his report) that 15 Israeli nationals who were working as truck drivers and delivery men in NYC were caught by police (tipped by an old woman neighbor) who were tape recording the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center buildings. After the videos tapes were uncovered and played by police, police had noticed that the recording has actually started 5 minutes or so BEFORE THE FIRST BUILDING was hit by a plane. While there are still hundreds in jails in NYC on supession, from the 9/11 days, these Israelis were let go back to Israel after only a week or so in jail. Peter Jennings of ABC News followed that story and asked Dick Chaney's office why these Israelis were let go? The office of the VP had responded that, "their mothers in Tel Aviv were missing them and wanted them back"!!! and so we released them!!!! (statement from VP's office).
Folks, I am sure there are more documented evidence that indicate role and/or knowledge of US and Israeli governments in 9/11. Lets share and discuss. But please no made up stories. Lets go with documented and reliable sources.

Thanks

No rhyme or reason

Some still have not grasp the situation and try to convince this sort of article mill workers of the error of their ways. The very same way as one does not reason with a shylock because that is his livelihood. These have to be exposed for what and who they are minus wasting of any time to rhyme or reasoning with them. After all they are neither dumb, nor blind and know what type of Islamist regime they are defending.

IRI's Intellectuals

. باید اذغان داشت که در شرایط خطیری هستیم
در حالیکه اکثرا ما مخالف حمله نظامی به ایران هستیم, برخی از شیفتگان ج. ا. با پیروی از نظرات اردشیر عمانی، ثریا اولریش و..., در این سایت فعال شده اند. نگاهی به مواضع برخی از خانمها و آقایان، بیان این کوشش آنها را بخوبی نمایان میسازد.که این لابیهای رژیم جمهوری اسلامی از شرایط موجود برای دفاع از مشروعیت ج.ا دفاع میکنند کمیته .

//stopwaroniran.org/ در امریکا سازمان دیگری که به لابیگری برای جمهوری اسلامی در آمریکا میپردازد عبارت است از:
CASMII - Campaign Against Santions and Military
Intervention in Iran
با نگاهی به نوشته برخی از نظرات روشنفکر جمهوری اسلامی متوجه می شویم که، اکثرا همان شعار "تجاوز نظامی به ایران موقوف ! و یا دست امپریالیسم آمریکا از ایران کوتاه باد! " این دو تشکل را میدهند. ، این مزدوران به هر نظری که خواهان سرنگونی جمهوری اسلامی باشد حمله می کنند. این روشنفکران که یا در طیف طرفدار قدرت بنیادگران رژیم جمهوری اسلامی اند و یا، در طیف "چپهای" قلابی و سازشکار، توجه افکار مخالف تجاوز نظامی آمریکا و خواهان سرنگونی رژیم حمهوری اسلامی را به تجربه عراق فرا می خوانند و به این ترتیب ازمردم ایران میخواهند که یا رژیم جمهوری اسلامی سازش کنند، یا در مقابل تجاوز آمریکا به ایران در مقابل حکومت اسلامی کوتاه بیایند و از فکر حمایت از حقوق دمکراتیک خود منصرف شوند. تمام کوشش اینان در جهت ادامه سلطه دیکتاتوری ج.ا است. در همین زمینه روشنفکران ملی-مذهبی حامی که تاکنون دست در دست همین حکومت به سرکوب و توطئه علیه مردم ازاده پرداخته اند نیز در این دو طیف قرار میگیرند. اما این روشنفکران طبقات اارتجاعیی حاکم میتوانند افکار خود را با حمایت رژیم در خارج نیز بسط دهند_ میزان مطالب انان در این سایت نمونه ای از
این ادعاست.

در صورت بروز جنگ , هر نوع سازش با این رژیم خیانت به ارمانهای صدها هزار قربانی این رژیم
و بی اعتنائی به دمکراسی و سکولاریزم مورد نیاز جامعه است که با این رژیم عملی نخواهد شد

در عین مخالفت با تهاجم خارجی ما باید توجود رژیم ج.ا را عمده ترین عامل تخریب و تحریکات نظامی
ارزیابی کنیم .در صورت حمله بیگانه ما باید متجاوزین داخلی و خارجی را محکوم کنیم وگرنه
همانطور که میدانیم رژیم و مدافغان رنگارنگش از "نعمت" جنک برای بقا خود استفاده خواهند کذد.

If Iran is no threat,

why are the Russians and Chinese going along with the sanctions?

This is a captured article...because you probably don't trust an American's assessment:

Agreement expected

on Iran sanctions

PARIS — Leading international powers may have an agreement within weeks on a third U.N. sanctions resolution against Iran over its nuclear program, a French diplomat said after talks in Paris on Saturday.

A compromise text on a new resolution would be circulated next week among the six countries involved in the talks — the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany — the diplomat said on condition of anonymity.

"We could have a resolution in the short term," the official said.

The talks were held a day after the collapse of an 18-month European Union effort to persuade Iran to stop uranium enrichment, a process that can be used for producing nuclear energy and nuclear weapons.

On Friday, EU envoy Javier Solana held meetings with Saeed Jalili, Iran's senior nuclear negotiator, in London. The meeting was seen as a last chance for Iran to give in to U.N. pressure and freeze its enrichment program before an EU report on Iran's nuclear program that will be used in the discussion of new sanctions.

The U.S., France and Britain are urging tough new sanctions, but Russia and China appear to be skeptical.

Still, the French official insisted that there were no "deep differences" among the six countries at Saturday's talks.

Back to me....

If Iran is no threat, why is the planet isolating the country?