U.S.: Iran will not be allowed nukes

"If they proceed we will to stop it," says Defense Secretary Panetta

CBS: The U.S. Secretary of Defense said Iran will not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. In an interview, Leon Panetta, said despite the efforts to disrupt the Iranian nuclear program, the Iranians have reached a point where they can assemble a bomb in a year or potentially less. Secretary Panetta spoke with us at the end of an overseas trip during which he reviewed strategy in Afghanistan and formally ended the war in Iraq >>>


Recently by Ghormeh SabziCommentsDate
Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day
Dec 02, 2012
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day
Dec 01, 2012
Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day
Nov 30, 2012
more from Ghormeh Sabzi

On Nuclear or Regime.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

The Khameneii Team have to go and secret services have been working on it unsuccessfully for awhile, yet the core Qomi's are wanted/islam is adored progress is suppressed, so they are trying to kill/terror him, but have failed so far.  Nuclear side is tough to know as detailed info is not available, it could be a lie, especially since regime has no scientists that could succeed in that area and that is why to make it look credible the west is admitting the iranians themselves are incapable of doing it in even 20 years but with russian/north korean help they might be able to.


Shah Never listened to others, it's all the guy did!

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

A normal manager/leader in the West would listen to 4 to 5 people, shah would have contacts with 20 to 30 people before making a decision.  You would know that fact if you got your information like me by speaking with people that used to work with shah every week for over a generation, of course they may have bias to them, but the details you can not ignore, head of tehran university who passed away explained it detail why the shah was no dictator at all.  There are many others on the iranian side that worked with him weekly who know the truth also.  Go ahead and cuddle up with your Shah was a Dictator Teddy.  Let me know how it's working for you. 

On the foreign side the head of french intelligence made it clear in his book shah was no dictator, not even a hint of being one.  I ask for proof of using absolute power and you give me an example of what was recommended to shah by the concensus of a dozen of his top officials for the specific purpose of getting the country gradually on a democratic path while being able to handle foreign intruige.  Rastakhiz was his most democratic act, you would know ths if you had any detailed information on how and why it came about.  Your issue is you have little comprehension of the difference between popularity and democracy. Its tough communiacting with you too.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Nuclear or regime

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


Is this about stopping the nuclear program or regime change? If IRI were to totally abandon all nuclear tomorrow will it then be alright. I want some honest responses. 

This nuclear thing is a bad way to go; America be honest. Do you want a regime change. If so say it and make it obvious. Then work towards it and drop the nuclear pretense.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


You are so biased as to ignore basic well known reality. Of course Shah was a dictator and never listened to others. 

On Shah and Dictatorship, your view is nonsense and non factual, he never used absolute power, if you have a case, provide it.   

  • Rastakhiz.

Plus many other things which so many have provided. Maybe Divaneh will do the honors this time. Because I am sick of repeating them. You are very stubborn and rigid; wear people down. I am tired and going to take a break. 



Dem: Iran sanctions bill

by vildemose on

Dem: Iran sanctions bill worth the risk of oil market disruption


The Iran Threat Reduction Act, H.R. 1905, would tighten sanctions against Iran, and authorize the administration to sanction the Central Bank of Iran if a required report finds that the bank has supported Iran's terrorist activities.

"This measure would cut Iran entirely off from the world's banking system, dealing an unprecedented blow to Iran's economy," Berman said. "This may cause short term difficulties for the world's oil market, and it may rankle some of our allies, but it is necessary, because stopping Iran's nuclear program is of paramount strategic importance, and we're running out of time."




Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

It's not enough that faith claims to be the solution to all problems but is now demanded that such a preposterous claim be made im


On Right/ Wrong

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Ultimately most of us have errors in our arguments, they develop based on our experiences hopefully.  I look at the actions of Dennis Kucinich, he is totally different than the US policy I am talking against, if he had power at the higher levels the US would be totally/entirely a different actor in the world.  That he exists at all and does have significant impact shows in some areas I need evolution, though I don't see the 4 subjects used as genuine by the so called free world, which is actually a neo-colonialist empire, breaking down due to its own corruption from within.


My definition of sheep.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

I only use sheep in the metaphorical sense to express many being
mislead, happily and willingly, yet in Irans case dishonestly in order to exploit it not help build a freer or more democratic society.  Make no mistake, I don't use this metaphor with issues of slight difference, never, I use it on 4 subjects of propaganda repeated again and again as if Iran was a Utopia and Shah was the problem.1) Unwarranted Repression, 2) Corruption, 3) Dictatorship, 4) dismal/declining human rights.  If anyone has a personal agenda like mine to restore freedom in Iran, it will be very difficult to accomplish without taking on Iranians mistakes on these 4.

I have no problem with anyone expressing themselves, this does not mean  have to accept their sheepish opinions, repeated again and again out of context, without evidence and based on self serving partially true definitions though not entirely true. Creating Value, without defending Freedom and character is not easy.


VPK your values/actions are not what I was referring to

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Forgveness is essential for those values and actions directly harmed or transgressed against you or those you care for.  Each of us is the judge of the values and actions of the other assuming you have belief in democracy.  So who is the judge of our values and actions in your book, Jesus?

"Maybe they know something you don't."  That's my issue, I have listened to their side and I see it completely flawed, Maybe if some would listen, they would realize that I know something that they don't.  If Iranians continue the intentionally created ill intended dellusions propagated by western media, it is Iran that will continue to be harmed.  

On Shah and Dictatorship, your view is nonsense and non factual, he never used absolute power, if you have a case, provide it.   

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


What is your definition of "sheep"? It sound like you call anyone with a slight difference sheep. Maybe you are the one who is wrong. Maybe other people have a point and you are missing it. 

You get a really insulting attitude. What makes you think you know more. It is just this kind of "superiority" *** that ruined Shah. Do you realize I am basically on your side. You and your insulting attitude has managed to alienate me.

Why don't you respect other people. Maybe they know something you don't. Did it ever cross your mind? You make claims but never prove them. May "God" protect Monarchy from people such as you. Because your will ruin it as with Shah.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


My parents told me Shah was a Swiss educated liberal when he took power. Because of events including 1953 and those around him things changed. Over time he became more full of himself and eventually a dictator.

He made a whole bunch of terrible mistakes. Initially they were just annoying people. But if got worse and the final mistake was Rastakhiz. That pretty much got everyone to hate him. Including Monarchists like my father. 

Amirparviz: no one is asking for your forgiveness. Please do not elevate yourself about us. You are not our judge whatever we did. Personally I did not "betray" the Shah; I supported him. But it does not matter because you are not our judge.


For the love of god!

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

What is it about sheep that they flock?

BTW I only use sheep in the metaphorical sense to express many being mislead, happily and willingly, yet in Irans case dishonestly.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


Thank you very much for a sane and intelligent post. For once someone gets it right. Personally I have had enough from ideologues of all kind. We need more people like you. 

If people would put aside their preconcieve notions it would be really good. But I am afraid most are so stuck in their ways nothing will bring them back.


Divaneh I hear what you are saying

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

please allow me respond with my own distinctions to your comments to me.

1) "When you say "people betrayed Shah" it only shows your lack of respect for the people."

I would say that looking over the information and political pressure put out against the Iranian system in the 1970's I forgive Iranians since I can see that making mistakes under such immense pressures is only human, but I would find it unjustified to forgive them if I am expected to forget what they actually did do and not remember and learn from it myself.  The point is with the 24/7 propaganda being spewed out against the pahlavi family and iranian government in the 1970's, I would be surprised if even the royals were not anti-monarchist themselves.  Since then, many Iranians have honestly changed and accepted they acted in a gutless way against the late Shah and were duped by their own intellectuals. Yet betrayal it was regardless of who got them to do it. Speaking truth is not disrespectful.

2)"He was not a dictator but he was turned into one by people around him"

My contempt for some Iranians comes from statements like these.  He was a King that acted at all times within the law, while his enemies did not.  The Strategy of the west is to split the world into 2 groups for the political purpose of dominating them using their own people.  We have democracies, defined as systems where the leaders change every few years and dictatorships defined as systems where the leaders do not change.  This defnition is itself self serving and untrue.  To this approach the west only applies pressure to dictatorships that don't do as they are ordered and the ones that are NowKar against their own peoples interests are kept and helped to stay in power. 

So according to the wests approach the late shah was always a dictator and not because of what the people around him did.  So we have a King in Iran, leading a Monarchy, who not a single time during his entire time as king used absolute power, yet in the most self serving way he is defined a dictator by not his enemies only, but also by his countries enemies.  So there is the game.  How many Iranian Sheep can you find in the room to manipulate and then fleece and rape all the way to the bank. Well apparently we have quite a lot more sheep than genuine intellectuals. 

Ask Iranians to give a single instance when the shah used absolute power and the intellectuals become what they always were, mass manufactured sheep based on western influences and agendas.  Since they can't give an honest answer, the blank look on their face only needs a Bahhhhh Bahhhh and there you have it, sheep.  It's as obvious as the light of day that the late shah was no dictator based in the real definition.  A Victim of his own peoples sheepish mistakes in the face of pressure, not his own.   

3) "We can not blame other countries for our own mistakes."

That goes without saying and why I responded to the 2 mistakes I could see you made on 1) betrayal of the late shah and on 2) being made a dictator by people around him.  I make mistakes too, but these 2 are not mine and hopefully people will help point out mine as I make them.  I do not see the shah as above the law, if he had broken a law I would be the first person in the country to seriously take him up on it, but since he never did, what am I supposed to say that he was a dictator?  Please no more bahhhhh bahhhh.


I heard that.....

by ilovechelokebab on

I heard that the latest string in "accidents" can be attributed to pissed off people within Iran's own security establishment. But I'll tell you, the closure of the Iranian Embassy and the terrorists with diplomatic status getting kicked out is a HUGE BLOW to the leadership because the Iranian government has/had allot of intelligence activities going on there and they hosted allot of "cultural" events.....plus allot of the leaderships accounts in the U.K got frozen and I was laughing so hard when I heard this that I almost puked!


Iran And Its Rivals Dig In

by vildemose on

Iran And Its Rivals Dig In On Nuclear Dispute




 Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

It's not enough that faith claims to be the solution to all problems but is now demanded that such a preposterous claim be made im


Aides Qualify Panetta’s Comments on Iran

by Hooshang Tarreh-Gol on

An assertion by Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta that Iran
could have a nuclear weapon as soon as next year was based on a highly
aggressive timeline and a series of actions that Iran has not yet taken,
senior Pentagon officials said Tuesday.

But on Tuesday, George Little, the Pentagon press secretary, said Mr.
Panetta’s comments should not be taken as a prediction that Iran would
have a nuclear weapon within a year.

“The secretary was clear that we have no indication that the Iranians
have made a decision to develop a nuclear weapon,” Mr. Little said. “He
was asked to comment on prospective and aggressive timelines on Iran’s
possible production of nuclear weapons — and he said if, and only if,
they made such a decision. He didn’t say that Iran would, in fact, have a
nuclear weapon in 2012.”

Mr. Little said inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency
remained in Iran and had “good access to Iran’s continuing production
of low-enriched uranium.” Should Iran choose to “break out” — diverting
low-enriched uranium to produce weapons-grade highly enriched uranium —
the inspectors could detect it, Mr. Little said.

“We would retain sufficient time under any such scenario to take appropriate action,” he said.



Hear this IRI

by divaneh on

There is no way out. Even if you stop the enrichment, they will still attack the country. There is only one way to save Iran. Regime Change. IRI has been causing mistrust and making enemies since its inception. Now only a change in the ruling power may leave no excuse for an attack. IRI must now go for the good of the country.

Amir Parviz

When you say "people betrayed Shah" it only shows your lack of respect for the people. You are right, he could not change anything at the end and even killing Khomeini or use of force would not save the country. The revolution however was caused by his undermining of the constitutional monarchy. By denying people the political freedom that they had gained in the constitutional revolution. By empowering Akhonds. He thought he was doing the right thing, but it was not always so. He had become a dictator and overestimated his own wisdom. He was not a dictator but he was turned into one by people around him. People like you who praised him for every right and wrong thing that he did. If you want to blame people, blame those like you who view Shah or Imam as divine authority and turn them into dictators. We can not blame other countries for our own mistakes. Even if they did, I can't see why they shouldn't shaft us if we bend over for them.


That explains what makes the opinions childish, listening to

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

just the military.  Shah couldn't blow Irans problems out of the sky.  The USA/UK/France had united and had put extraordinary political pressure on iranians who betrayed the shah, against that, there was nada, nothing,zilch the shah could have done at that point in time.  With your logic we are blaming the victim, not the criminal.  Shah didn't make any unlawful mistakes and made a good judgement with respect to the forces against him. 

The others all did make mistakes and have had written a thousand and one books that what they did was just fine.  So listen to them.  Since you think he could have done something.  Ghaddafi's and Saddams end wasn't enough for you to realize that Shah actually went down the path that actually caused the least harm for Iranians compared with what they had planned for Iran.  Because you can't imagine what they had in store for Iran was far worse than IRI and the war with Iraq.  Iran would be in 3 pieces already had the late shah acted differently, with a far worse cost that the Iraq war.  Blaming a victim is very rich of you little kitty.  If they had done it just 7 years later you'd be right, but they did it before the shah or Iran had the capability to do anything about it. 


My Childish Opinions

by Faramarz on

My childish opinions are based on the conversations of the people who called the late Shah, begged him to do something, had their jet-fighters ready to go and get some of these people, called the palace and talked to Farah but she said that the late Shah was not there to talk.

The man was talking to the American Ambassador instead.

Let's not blame this on the others. This is our own child, let's deal with it.


Interesting analysis little Kitty.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

I'm sure he gave himself, his doctor and his prime minister the radioactive isotope necessary to give them cancer too.  Your opinions are totally childish, he was betrayed and did the best that he could under the circumstances. As for our Intellectuals, that is a persian myth we really didn't have many of them. In fact forget our intellectuals, we have a bunch of sell outs happy to eat out of the A$# of the USA/UK with less intelligence between them than my adorable little doggie friend louie.

"Let's not blame this one on the US or the Brits".  Funny thing is, I'm surprised the Royal Family didn't all become anti-monarchist with all the 24/7 nonsense propaganda against the pahlavi's and the dictatorship, corruption and repression, we were supposedly the victims of repeated again and again and again!  That makes them innocent, no?


Amir Parviz Khan

by Faramarz on


The late Shah removed himself, not the US, Carter or Brzezinski and if I have one problem with that motherfuc*** is that he got a whole bunch of honest, decent and patriotic Iranians killed, including a few people that I know.

People went to the Shah and begged him to do something about Khomeini, but the man was convinced that Hazrat-e-Abbas will come to his rescue.

The man was dying and he knew it. But instead of transitioning to Bakhtiar or even his own wife, he just sat there as if some miracle would save him.

He screwed up big time. Let's not blame this one on the US or the Brits. Also, our intellectuals screwed up too.


Forget the misleading message, stick with reality.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

No options off the table is code for, the IRI will stay in power no
matter what they do to their people and/or how unpopular they are with
their own people.  So No help to the legitimate democracy seeking
opposition is on the way and the USA loves Islam in power as it always
has since the IRI suppresses growth and development of their people
which is the #1 goal of US Policy for iran.  Thanks Chief, crystal clear
why you really removed the late Shah.  Don't worry most intellectuals
won't figure you out. 

A Defence Secretary in his position can't publicly say any dfferent, what were you expecting to hear, we will sit by and let the IRI do whatever it wants because we especially like the results the regime is producing in terms of suppressing Iranians and we don't want to see it replaced? 

Oon Yaroo

No nukes for mullahs! That doesn't mean there won't be nukes

by Oon Yaroo on

dropped on mullahs!

That's what is being conveyed by the message!


And Merry Christmas to every one....

by Bavafa on


'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 



Crystal Clear

by Faramarz on

The message needs to be delivered loud and clear that nuclear bombs in the hands of the Regime will not be tolerated and he is doing that.

The party that's looking for a war and devastations and the martyrdom for other people's kids is the Regime not the Obama administration.


But Iran has never intended

by Khebedin on

But Iran has never intended nor wishes to make / have nuclear weapon. Looks like no matter how many times Iran says this, these war mongring bunch want to create an excuse for their eveil means.


He remainds me of Colin

by farzad53 on

He remainds me of Colin Powell before going to war in Iraq.as Regan said here we go again these SOBs are trying to start another WAR. Last time it was Bush and his group whom got fat with stealing billions of dollores from poor tax payers and this time is these SOBs trying to do the samething. God helps the poor people in Iran.



What the seretary of defence means.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Neither the USA nor Israel will be doing anything to remove Islam from power in Iran now or in 2012.

No options off the table is code for, the IRI will stay in power no matter what they do to their people and/or how unpopular they are with their own people.  So No help to the legitimate democracy seeking opposition is on the way and the USA loves Islam in power as it always has since the IRI suppresses growth and development of their people which is the #1 goal of US Policy for iran.  Thanks Cheif, crystal clear why you really removed the late Shah.  Don't worry most intellectuals won't figure you out. 


Just because he says it, this means NOTHING

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

First the USA has to decide it no longer wishes Islam in Power in the middle east and north Africa.  Once the USA does that, then it can stop helping defend the IRI & other islamists and pursue policies and political pressure for the people of Iran to remove the IRI, like the USA did to the Shah's team where Iranians mistakenly betrayed the late Shah and helped remove his team and supported IRI in his teams place.  When ever the West openly states they will do something that is rarely what they are going to do, if ever, whether bringing freedom and democracy or fighting terrorists/insurgents(which happen to be local people not terrorists/insurgents).

Esfand Aashena

He wants war, he wants his defense budget back, 2bit politician!

by Esfand Aashena on

Everything is sacred