May 30, 2003
For Your Soul
Was there any truth at all behind this Iraq invasion? I know those who supported the war and are now finding themselves in the unpleasant position of re-writing history (or erasing general public's short term memory files), are going to talk about what a horrible beast Saddam was and blah blah blah, but honestly, can they look themselves in the mirror and not admit they were fooled big time? Did I say big? That may be the understatement of the century, try huge, colossal, enormous, gigantic, massive. This was probably the snow job of the history. Here are some samples;
1 - Source of Iraqi WMD information was Chalabi (1.a - As source for Iran is MKO)
2 - Iraqi WMD claims were used for "bureaucratic" reasons to justify the war
3 - The "Saddam Bunker" we hit, didn't exist.
4 - Some quotes to remember.
5 - 71 days and still nothing
6 - Doubts are raised over the intelligence used to justify an attack on Iraq
7 - More quotes
Now if you supported the immoral and illegal invasion of Iraq and can't publicly admit to your mistaken assessment, it's okay. At least somewhere in a secluded and solitary corner, where no one can hear or see or sense, please find a moment of candor with your soul and admit that you were had. Admit that you fell for the BS, although your heart was probably in the right place. You need to do it to move on, to forgive yourself for a blunder, a fable, a corrupted vision. It will do your character, essence and psyche a lot of good. Trust me, it will. Then come back and in public curse me out for not wanting the tyranny of Saddam to end or to support baby-in-the-incubator-killers or whatever other excuse you may need to justify your flawed position. I'll understand.
Lawyer Story
A lawyer friend sent this to me. I don't know if it's entirely true but she claims it is and I believe her. Then again, we are talking about truthfulness and integrity of a lawyer so who knows. You be the judge...
This is the best lawyer story of the year, decade and probably the century and it's true:
A Charlotte, NC, lawyer purchased a box of very rare and expensive cigars, then insured them against fire among other things. Within a month having smoked his entire stockpile of these great cigars and without yet having made even his first premium payment on the policy, the lawyer filed claim against the insurance company. In his claim, the lawyer stated the cigars were lost in a series of small fires. The insurance company refused to pay, citing the obvious reason: that the man had consumed the cigars in the normal fashion. The lawyer sued....and won!
In delivering the ruling the judge agreed with the insurance company that the claim was frivolous. The Judge stated nevertheless, that the lawyer held a policy from the company in which it had warranted that the cigars were insurable and also guaranteed that it would insure them against fire, without defining what is considered to be "unacceptable fire", and was obligated to pay the claim. Rather than endure lengthy and costly appeal process, the insurance company accepted the ruling and paid $15,000.00 to the lawyer for his loss of the rare cigars lost in the "fires."
NOW FOR THE BEST PART... After the lawyer cashed the check, the insurance company had him arrested on 24 counts of ARSON!!!! With his own insurance claim and testimony from the previous case being used against him, the lawyer was convicted of intentionally burning his insured property and was sentenced to 24 months in jail and a $24,000.00 fine. This is a true story and was the 1st place winner in the recent Criminal Lawyers Award Contest.
May 29, 2003
Shark Sightings
Mr. Rafsanjani, the main man behind the scenes at the Islamic Republic of Iran is at it again. After having his close ally Mohsen Rezaei meet with the high ranking U.S. delegation in Greece (and then reportedly in Geneva), he is already creating a replacement figure for Khatami, the "moderate" president. Khatami will not resign as expected by some circles in Iran, but does not have much left of his last term at the helm anyway and this time Rafsanjani is planning another coup.
Reportedly, there are two candidates being prepared so far. First the most obvious, a darling of some intellectual sets, former minister of guidance A. Mohajerani. The other one is a familiar face being brought back into service after a few years of mostly quiet operation. Former MP and one time trail-blazing "moderate" Faezeh Hashemi, Rafsanjani's own daughter may become the first female president of Iran. She is currently in London, where a friend suggests she is in intense English training to prepare her for a more visible international presence.
It seems in both cases, he is going with a person with an even more "moderate" image both in Iran and abroad suggesting he plans to continue ruling with the carrot and stick approach. Basij, Ansar and other tools of oppression will be busy limiting personal and social freedoms, while a new figurehead will attempt to keep the masses at bay with empty promises that will also fool the governments abroad.
Why try to re-invent the wheel if the current situation is working so well for him and his cohorts?
I Agree
I finally came across a report by a western journalist that makes the point I have been thinking of and was planning to write about over the next few days. De-politicization of Iranians after voting for Khatami's second term is at a stage not seen in years. Only after the mass executions of the 80's and regime's obsession with continuing a useless and damaging war with Iraq do I remember seeing Iranians so uninterested in anything political. This is a factor totally ignored by the NewCons who advocate "regime change" in Iran through encouraging the masses to rise up and overthrow the government. One must be so out of touch with he current situation in Iran to even think of such ridiculous notion. Oh yeah, I almost forgot. They ARE clearly out of touch with Iran and Iranians. After all, their American-born "expert" on Iran, Mr. Rob Sobhani's only obsession about Iran seems to be based on three key principals: 1 - Finding an easier way for the "resources of Caspian basin" to reach the free markets 2 - To keep the strait of Hormuz free of any crisis for the passage of oil out of Persian Gulf and 3 - Safety of Israel. As for what Iranians want or what may be best for them, he and his cronies do not have a clue.
Iranians, normally a highly political population, conducted three major revolutions in one century, they also experienced many other uprisings and political conflicts in the same period, all in the name of freedom and to gain control over their own destiny. After suffering from corrupt leaders who betrayed their trust, foreign interference to crush their progress and loss of many lives and dreams, they are at an exhaustion point. Like an athlete hitting the wall at the end of a gruesome race, they are tired, out of breath and in desperate need of recovery. Who could blame them? Furthermore, there are no pressing issues or a charismatic leader that could change that in a hurry and start what will undoubtedly be the bloodiest unrest Iran - or perhaps the world - has ever seen.
Read Washington Post's article by clicking below.
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51233-2003May28.html?nav=hptop_ts
Iranian Apathy May Hinder U.S. Bid to Foment Unrest
Reformists Warn Against Destabilization Campaign
By Karl Vick
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, May 29, 2003; Page A14
ISTANBUL, May 28 -- Iranian analysts warn that any U.S. plan to foment popular unrest in Iran will run up against the same challenge that has stalled the country's struggling reform movement: The careworn Iranian public is steadily disengaging from politics.
"In the current situation, it's impossible," said Saeed Laylaz, a reformist journalist and businessman. "The people are going to their homes, not coming out into the streets. The atmosphere in Tehran and Iran is being de-politicized, step by step and day by day."
As U.S. policymakers debate what stance to adopt toward a country they accuse of sheltering senior members of al Qaeda and seeking to develop nuclear weapons, the assessment voiced by Laylaz and echoed by other reformists and foreign diplomats in telephone interviews this week suggests scant support for those urging destabilization of a government that remains largely under the control of unelected conservative clerics.
Iranian officials today dismissed Bush administration allegations regarding Iran's support of terrorism and its pursuit of nuclear armaments. Speaking at a conference of Muslim nations, Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said Iran abhorred the "fanatic and perverted beliefs" of al Qaeda, which Tehran worked to defeat, along with al Qaeda's Taliban patrons in Afghanistan, for years before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks drew the United States into war there.
A Foreign Ministry spokesman said several al Qaeda suspects had been held for questioning but that it was not clear whether they were senior operatives or more like the 500 foot soldiers Iran says it has arrested and shipped to their home countries since 2001.
In addition, Kharrazi denied reports by an Iranian opposition group that Iran had built two small nuclear plants as back-ups to a uranium enrichment facility that inspectors from the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency examined in February. He warned against preemptive military strikes against any of the facilities.
"Resorting to force, or directing unverified accusations . . . will only undermine the current international arrangements," Kharrazi said.
U.S. officials are watching Tehran's response closely as the Bush administration mulls shifting to a policy of destabilizing Iran. Senior U.S. officials were scheduled to discuss policy toward Iran on Tuesday, but the meeting was postponed until Thursday and specifics regarding any program to influence public sentiment within Iran have not emerged.
By many accounts, Iranians remain broadly dissatisfied with the conservative clerics who, almost a quarter-century after the 1979 Islamic revolution deposed a U.S.-backed monarchy, still control the government's most powerful institutions. But the reformist politicians who dominate the elective positions in Iran's government also have lost popular support for failing to deliver promised social freedoms and economic opportunities. Gone, analysts say, are the hopeful legions who twice in six years swept President Mohammad Khatami and a reformist parliament into office, both times with more than 70 percent of the vote.
"Because we're here on the ground, we see more shades than the U.S. does," said a foreign diplomat in Tehran, where the United States has had no diplomatic presence since militants seized the U.S. Embassy on Nov. 4, 1979, and held its diplomats hostage for 444 days. "We don't see a disaffected mass -- apathetic, yes, but not disaffected."
That public frustration, though widespread, is focused inward, according to Iranian observers and diplomats. When a few thousand students took to the streets last November, witnesses said the demonstrations were confined to campus of Tehran University both by security forces and the disinclination of bystanders to join in. And when municipal elections were held across Iran on Feb. 12, no city recorded more than a one-third voter turnout. Only 12 percent of those eligible to vote turned out in the capital.
"In the last few years, when the majority of people participated in elections, their experience was disappointment," said Davoud Hermidas Bavand, a law professor at the Supreme National Defense University. "Non-participation has become a kind of protest against the system as a whole."
Laylaz, an editor at the reformist newspaper Norooz, said hard-liners have mollified some segments of society, particularly Iran's youthful majority, by granting limited, marginal freedoms while keeping a tight hold on political power. Young couples hold hands in public now without apparent fear of admonishment from the religious police. Women in Tehran routinely wear head scarves well back on their head, and some don coats that hug their figures.
"This is very, very important to making the people relaxed," Laylaz said. "The atmosphere is not comparable with six years ago. The regime has changed."
Regardless of how they feel about their leaders, said another reformer, ordinary Iranians would likely resist any outside efforts to stir up dissent.
"If anybody took a look at Iranian history, the likelihood of fomenting mass popular uprising in the midst of foreign interference is naﶥ," said the reformer, an academic who spoke on condition he not be identified by name. "Right now it would result in the opposite, emboldening a sense of collective resentment against a superior outside power.
"This is at the popular level," the academic added. "At the elite level it would be even worse. You would have strong resentments and a closing together of various factions, reformers and conservatives."
One issue on which reformers and hard-liners already have closed ranks is development of a nuclear program -- which officials maintain is solely intended to meet energy needs -- that for them emphasizes both national pride and the existence of Israel's nuclear program.
Likewise, in interviews last month, reformers and hard-liners also warned that the United States should not ally itself with the Mujaheddin-e Khalq, or People's Mujaheddin. The Iranian opposition group, long based in Iraq and supported by Saddam Hussein, is on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations.
Because the group seeks to unseat the Tehran government, Pentagon officials last month made moves toward making it a U.S. client before amending that plan and demanding the group surrender its tanks and other heavy weapons. The back-and-forth sent mixed signals to the people of Iran, analysts and diplomats said, and today a Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hamid Reza Asefi, said "America is not serious about fighting terrorism. It adopts a double standard."
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
May 28, 2003
Next Target!
The stage is being set. Accusations grow by the day and the large scale attempt to pursuade the public opinion is under way. Iranians beware!
1 - Official: U.S. to consider destabilizing Iran
2 - Taking on Iran
3 - Will Iran be next U.S. target on 'axis of evil' list?
4 - Iran's predicament
5 - Iran: don’t fence it in
6 - US: Neo-cons Move Quickly on Iran
On Weblogs!
Much discussion has been centered on the unique ability of this medium (weblogs) to provide individuals their own forum and soap-box to express and exchange ideas and opinions, without much interference from the controlling hands of information conglomerates.
What most experts have missed in this dialogue is the ability of weblogs as an organizing tool. Of course we have already seen them used in that fashion by anti-war demonstrators or those protesting the IMF and G8 meetings, but that is a group already familiar with electronic media for most parts and use of a blog to organize would only be natural. But what if this became a much more accessible tool used by the greater masses, blue-collar workers, the unemployed and under-employed, minimum wage slaves, the poor, the homeless? What if THEY could get together, organize and co-ordinate their efforts this way?
One such site I have been following regularly is maintained by the workers of government-owned Al Mahdi aluminum production facility in Iran (sorry, it’s all in Persian). It is a group log of mostly worker’s whistle-blowing about management’s corruption and dishonesty. Anything from bribery accusations and the questionable way tenders have gone to foreign companies, to boss’ brother-in-law getting a cushy job. One of the latest posts is about the process of selecting a “female employee of the year” and the corrupt way it was handled, comparing it to the “damn Pahlavis” way of conducting business.
The language is down to earth, satirical at times and obviously refers to very specific situations and people that I am sure other workers would find most useful. Here’s translation of one post, explaining a sort of editorial policy: “On this weblog nobody is supposed to be disrespected without justification. If someone has been disrespected, be sure that whoever it is, has already disrespected over 800 honest employees of the facility by abuse and ignoring of their rights”.
Now if they are successful in getting their grievances out to me thousands of miles away, imagine if there was a government in place that actually cared and could use such a direct pipeline to what actually goes on in their very expensive ($2 billion to built, according to the site) facility.
May 27, 2003
Hooray!
Those who know me from my activist days in Canada know about my dislike of the Liberal party up there. To me it is much easier and better for the sheep to fight the wolf while he/she is still in his/her wolf appearance and Canada's Liberals are the same wolf, dressed like a sheep. More on that later.
However, even the wolves deserve credit when they do something right.
I must preface this by admitting to my own considerable lack of coolness in stating that I have never personally inhaled. Not that I'm bragging, but I grew up in a different set of circumstances and my concerns at the time when "fun" should have been a priority were other things. With that in mind, I applaud Jean Chretien's government for having the necessary gall to put forward legislation to decriminalize pot.
It takes great chutzpah to swim against the tide and ruffle some feather, and Liberals known for the lack of such qualities, have for once showed there may be hope for them afterall. Well, at least some of them, maybe.
Now only if they could do the same with prostitution.... I know, I'm dreaming again. Sorry!
Links A Lot!
1 - Oh, What a Tangled Web Bush Weaves, by Eric Margolis
2 - Next stop Tehran?
3 - Petition to "Stop the Florida-tion of the 2004 election"
4 - Book review: The Neocons in Power
Buzz Machine
All in "an effort to keep the dialogue going here in the Blogosphere"...
Not surprisingly, my Abu Ammar post caused more than a few public and private discussions, some even taking place on other blogs and sites.
There was of course the usual name-calling and accusations, not only at myself but Arafat and others too. You saw a small sample of that here in my own comments section. I will not even validate those with a reply here, as such discussions are nothing but a waste of energy and will accomplish nothing. There are others however that I wish to address.
One is a rather lengthy post by Jeff Jarvis on his influential blog, BuzzMachine. Jeff expressed that he has “had a twinge of difficulty” linking to my blog because of my “anti-Israeli” comments, and also did not like it that I considered his rather tactless comment for the elected leader of a people to blow himself up, to belong to the “far right end of the political spectrum”.
He then goes on further and expresses his dislike of two of my other posts where I condemned the “pro-Israeli group in Washington DC" for meddling in Iran's affairs and then uses someone else’ comment about "hard-line American Jews” without pointing that it was not written by me but by somebody else and I only quoted him and included full details of where it came from as well as a link to the original source, to discredit my arguments.
I don’t think I need to defend myself against such false and dishonorable tactics. Other journalists and writers have also tried in the past to use similar strategy without much success as my stance regarding Israel and the people of Jewish faith is very clear and although attacked by both sides at times, condemning me on such bogus allegations will not work.
I will however give Jeff the benefit of the doubt since he mentions my Stop the Hate petition and remind him that I recognized Israel’s right of existence, under a fair and equitable arrangement for Palestinians, long before it became fashionable and even adopted by most Palestinian groups. I have also written extensively about the discrimination against various minority communities in Iran (particularly the people of Baha’i and Jewish faith) and paid for it dearly in the past. The last time a barrage of serious life-threats and personal attacks followed me was for defending the Jews on trial for bogus charges of espionage for Israel. So, I don’t think your tongue-in-cheek and sloppy references to the “Jewish” comments would work.
Not all Jews are Israelis, Israel includes many non-Jewish citizens, and there are no shortage of Israeli Jews who condemn the far-right conduct of Sharon and his Likud types and support underlying principles other than “God promised us this land, therefore it’s ours” logic of the fundamentalists. So, like I always do, I suggest for Jeff to separate other’s Jewish versus Israeli comments.
Jeff says not everything is about Israel. I agree. The unethical embargo against Cuba, the Zapatista struggle in Mexico and the Tamil-Sinhalese conflict in Sri Lanka have little to do with Israel, at least directly. However, every move the current U.S. administration is making in the Middle East is directly and unequivocally about Israel. With the installation and appointment of a fundamental Christian administration in Washington, or Zionist Christians as they like to call themselves, it is now officially and wholeheartedly the tail that wags the dog. Just look at the lobbying that took place to persuade the administration, our elected officials and then the general public to warn the world of the imminent catastrophe we were faced by Saddam’s WMD’s to pave the way for an illegal invasion of that country, or what is currently on the way to make Iran their next target.
Jeff offers the old arguments of invading Iraq was for Iraqis and to rid them of “Saddam’s tyranny”, so I’ll ask the same old questions; How about the tyranny of our ally and friend Pervez Musharraf? Why isn’t Pakistan, a dictatorship that took power with a military coup, openly taunts their nuclear ability and is the ideological hometown of many Islamists, including Taliban and Al-Qaeda, our “next target” instead of Iran? Why do we look the other way when tyranny is happening in Kuwait if without their help invading Iraq would not have been as easy, but insist on Iraqis suffering? Is the tyranny any different in our main regional “friend” Saudi Arabia? Why is the unofficial military rule in Turkey our symbol of democracy for the region? Obviously, picking our targets has little to do with tyranny, establishing democracy or even reducing the most prominent terrorist threat. Invading Iraq (Afghanistan is a rather different story because of the UN mandate and other factors) had many reasons, but as I described months before the actual invasion, it was mainly because of Israel.
Jeff then asserts that he would like for U.S. to stay out of Iran and Iranian affairs and leave it as “Iran’s issue”. In that case, I’d like to challenge him on that point. Let’s see him take a strong stand against the views expressed by current administration advisor Michael Ledeen of American Enterprise Institute (AEI) as well as others who openly and discreetly are advocating a broad and extensive targeting of Iran, including supporters of Coalition for Democracy in Iran (CDI); Jack Kemp, Paul Simon, Frank Gaffney and James Woolsey. Jeff heads a large publishing firm and his strong stand against such idiocy will carry some weight. Will he do it? The ball is now in his court per se, we’ll see.
Before I totally forget, all this does not take away from Jeff’s efforts in the past, including his coverage of Sina Motallebi’s case. Without his help, along with others, we would not have been able to gain so much attention to Sina’s plight and gather the support. Even if chooses to fail us on this current discussion, his hard work on that issue will not be forgotten.
Needless to say, regardless of his decision, I will still read Jeff’s blog regularly and will link to him, even if he continues to put out comments only fitting of the furthest right of the political spectrum, while disagreeing with him thoroughly.
May 26, 2003
Monday Morning Motivationals
I know it's not morning as I post this, but have some mercy. After all, this was supposedly a holiday but I was forced to work. Yeah, not many of us are lucky enough to be able to sit back and write or paint or sculpt or debate or read, without being forced to do something we don't necessary like to pay for it.
With all that negativity aside, click on the "continue" link below and have a wonderful week.
============================================
This summer, commit to a conscious program of personal
growth. Buy or borrow three books on a topic you want to
study. Buy or rent tapes on a skill that will immediately make
you better at your job, or make you a better spouse, or a
happier, healthier person. Then, READ the books and
LISTEN to the tapes! Make this your summer of intelligent,
intentional self-development. Your life will never be the same!
============================================
'Hide not your talents. They for use were made. What's a
sundial in the shade?'
-- Ben Franklin
'Picture in your mind a sense of personal destiny.'
-- Wayne Oates
'We have much to do together. Let us do it in wisdom and
love and joy. Let us make this the human experience.'
-- Gary Zukav
'We don't know who we are until we see what we can do.'
-- Martha Grimes
Go Jays Go!
On Memorial Day, this most "American" of holidays, I've chosen to pay tribute to America's favorite pastime by acknowledging my hometown team, Canada's very own Toronto Blue Jays. The not-so-mighty Jays just finished sweeping the mighty Yankees, a team with a payroll many times their own, in a four-game series in New York.
aaaah , the sweet feeling of gloating.
A one star team sweeping the multiple overpaid stars of Bronx Bombers is almost as sweet as winning back-to-back World Championships in the early 90's and even if they don't win a single more game for the rest of the season, they have made us fans very proud.
Now only if they somehow pass those Damn Yankees in divisional standings, I may be forced to seek out a satellite connection to catch some of the games. Then again, I don't want to even fantasize about that as it will remind me of the "Babe's Curse" and the possibility of a colossal underdog playing baseball in October. aaaah...
May 25, 2003
Ya Abu Ammar
I could have my own disparaging complaints about Yasser Arafat, particularly his administration's performance, even if it was/is under the savage restrictions of an occupying army. However, there are facts one can not disagree with. 1 - He is the elected leader of the Palestinian people and even if another election was held today, he'd most likely win it by a large margin. 2 - Even before being elected, he has been the voice and undeniable leader of Palestinian struggle for decades. 3 - He really pisses the right wing Israelis as well as the NeoCons and their friends off, so he must be doing something right.
Here's the latest example; Asharq al-Awsat newspaper is reported to have published Arafat's comments regarding the issue of "suicide bombers", in particular his condemnation of such tactics. He is quoted as saying "we oppose violence against Palestinian and Israeli civilians". Sounds pretty straight, clear and to the point, right? Well, not to the right-wing extremists. South Africa's News24.com suggests in a report that he then specified what he meant by civilians by adding "The struggle against occupation is legitimate and I mean 'soldiers of the occupation'. It is inadmissible to kill a child or a woman in a restaurant or a cafe," concluding or suggesting that only women and children are exempted by Arafat.
This has caused many in the far right ends of political spectrum to rejoice to the point of suggesting "Yasser Arafat both endorses suicide bombers ... and supervises them." and then "Show us how it's done, Yasser: Blow yourself up." What amazing violent imagery from those supposedly advocating peace and peaceful solutions.
Of course nothing can be further from the truth and anyone familiar with the middle-eastern cultures and the language used to separate "civilians" and "innocents" from the rest could easily understand the reference to "children and women", so common in the region. But that wouldn't satisfy or endorse their view of the world, so it is decided to try to use the opportunity and his comments to discredit Arafat.
The attack on Arafat is not new. He has always been the target of very same groups and ideologies. Now, with the urgent need to diminish Palestinian demands in a new attempt at peace, nothing would be more useful to them than to weaken the Palestinian leadership. This includes suggestion of an exaggerated discrepancy between Arafat's views with his Prime Minister and others, ridicule of world leaders who recognize him as the legitimate leaders of Palestinians, possible attempts on his life, and just plain calling for his removal.
Meanwhile, Israeli government declares to the world that it has accepted and approved the "road map" proposed as the basis for a final resolution to the prime conflict of the region, while showing other intentions. Here are some comments by prominent members of the government as reported by Haaretz.com about the road map. You decide if they have actually accepted it's terms, or really only accepted an imaginary version of their own:
"Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz said that he would vote to approve the road map, despite his belief that the plan is dangerous and bad for Israel. He explained that he would be voting in favor of a complete range of understandings with the Americans, and that his "yes" vote would not actually be an expression of support for the road map itself." and then "(Education Minister Limor) Livnat also proposed that the government's formal acceptance of the road map be subject to several conditions. Livnat's proposal stipulated that "Israel agrees to accept the steps defined in the map, but states that there will be no compromise on the right of return, there will be no withdrawal to the 1967 borders, there will be no concession on Jerusalem, and there will be no agreement on a Palestinian state before the bases of terror are completely uprooted."
As long as such criminal two-faced hypocrites are leading the occupation of Palestinian land, the hearts and minds of many in the rest of the world is with Yasser Arafat and his people. Stay strong Abu Ammar.
Links, Links, Links
On The "New Target", Iran:
1 - U.S. Eyes Pressing Uprising In Iran.
2 - Yo, Ayatollahs!
3 - Iran Unlikely Key to Mideast Stability, Bush Re-Election.
4 - Lawmakers Say Remove Iran's Rulers.
5 - Goudarz Eghtedari on "US-Iran relations from Containment to Empowerment"
And On The "Last Target", Iraq:
1 - Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction: Blix
2 - Frustrated inspectors gather own intelligence in search for Iraqi weapons.
Anti-Spam Bill
This new anti-spam bill is so weak and useless, it will do little in getting rid of somewhere between 40 to 80% of today's e-mail traffic, namely the unwanted, unwelcomed and useless junk e-mail.
Maybe one day we can all decide to choose to vote for the type of politicians that have enough spine to write, pass and enact laws that actually solves problems and is not just a gutless gesture to pretend something is being done. Then again, if we did that way too many things will change and change is a scary idea to those who currently pull on the strings attached to most of our limbs.
$
The value of U.S. dollar keeps dropping and although some suggest this is by design and is to spur exports, I wonder if this has in a small way contributed to the situation.
Personal Notes
I will be in Los Angeles for one day somewhere between June 6th and 13th (the exact date is somewhat flexible). If you know of anything cultural or otherwise Iranian (show, movie, etc.) happening in that period and worth checking out, please e-mail me with details.
I'm trying to visit Toronto too, sometime this summer. Tell them to close the borders down. S**t disturber is back in town.
Lastly, one of these days I'll be updating the links list on the right of this page. If you think I'm missing an important link or would like your own blog added, write me. I can't promise to include everyone, but will try.
May 24, 2003
North Tehran
© Yalda Moaiery
Tehran's North and Northwestern parts are a world of their own. This is where the middle and upper class of capital's elite live and where government's restrict religious rules or their influence is minimal. Except for the ever-so-shrinking scarves women are obligated to wear over their head, you'd think you are in Ankara, Moscow, Paris or Chicago. This collection of pictures by Yalda Moaiery of mostly young female shoppers in a mall are proof of that and an example of how North Tehranis live. I am not going to judge this as being good or bad, or attempt to dissect the socio-political reasons behind such disparity between the haves and have-nots in today's Iran, just passing the link and let you be the judge. All I will say is that I hope one day all Iranians are in a situation to be able to choose how they wish to live, what to wear and which lifestyle to follow, with equal opportunities and access for all, regardless of their financial capacity.
Monarchist Meeting!
Our beloved monarchists, currently under strict order by their neocon masters to build a coalition, have gathered again in muggy south Florida this weekend to figure out how best to stab their people in the back and bring about the rule of their darling Knight, Prince Reza Pahlavi.
The rumor mill's "ears" at the event reports: our monarchists seem extremely excited about the "two antenna" television station they are promised with dual broadcasting ability from Iraq and Afghanistan (why don't we send some troops to invade Azarbaijan and give them a third antenna too?). They also listened to speaker after speaker telling them how the mullah's government is a "house of cards", ready to fall and how the Iranian people will rise and support their cause as soon as they emerge. Tabarzadi (leader of a student coalition inside Iran) is a hot topic in reference to "coalition building", so is the trio of former intelligence ministry officials recently defecting to the west and present at the gathering. A new declaration by Iranian opposition to support a republic (as opposed to a monarchy) has been brought up more than once or twice.
Supposedly there may have even been a rift between Rob Sobhani and some of Reza's close associates, I doubt "Rob" is even aware of the mess he has stepped into. Lastly, some "delegates" didn't show up at all, still upset at inviting some anti-monarchy activists to the last meeting in DC.
I wonder if I start checking my visitor's IP's I may find more than a few visitors with Miami connections this week. Then again, some of these guys are known to still live in a frozen time capsule, stuck somewhere around 25 years ago, so they may not be too familiar with the internet or web logs, not to mention cell phones, PDA's or reality television.
Celebrate Victory?
Reasons not to celebrate Iraq victory, by James O. Goldsborough
Two months after the Iraq war was launched, ask yourself this question: "Are the United States, Iraq and the world safer places?"
Terrorist acts are up, with bombings last week in Saudi Arabia and Morocco, and we are told al-Qaeda is on the march again. The Israel-Palestinian conflict has turned into perpetual terrorism by both sides. America enters the Memorial Day weekend on high terror alert.
From: Source
Reasons not to celebrate Iraq victory
James O. Goldsborough
May 22, 2003
Two months after the Iraq war was launched, ask yourself this question: "Are the United States, Iraq and the world safer places?"
Terrorist acts are up, with bombings last week in Saudi Arabia and Morocco, and we are told al-Qaeda is on the march again. The Israel-Palestinian conflict has turned into perpetual terrorism by both sides. America enters the Memorial Day weekend on high terror alert.
The CIA warned months ago that war in Iraq would increase terrorism, which is what made the war such an exercise in perversity. The bombings in Saudi Arabia were no surprise. The Saudis opposed Bush's war, and now the U.S.-Saudi relationship, so strong for so long, is unraveling.
Bush's advisers shed no tears over the Saudis. One of their aims in Iraq was to marginalize Saudi Arabia.
Those advisers wanted a war that helped Israel and think they've succeeded. Israel's hawks are soaring, and Ariel Sharon's clear plan is to take more Palestinian land while pretending to negotiate peace. There will be no Palestinian state with Sharon, and if Bush thinks war brought a deal closer, he is, as someone said recently of Newt Gingrich, "off his meds."
Bush's policy is marked by a fatal flaw in reasoning: His advisers sold him the idea that Iraq was the cause of Middle East instability. The truth is that Iraq is on the periphery. Saddam's departure makes the situation worse, for in addition to fueling the terrorism predicted by the CIA, it has created anarchy in Iraq itself.
Anarchy, for time immemorial, is the patriarch of terrorism.
The Pentagon, so good at fighting wars, has no talent at nation-building. The best thing Bush could do before anarchy completely devours Iraq is to invite those people in who know something about peacekeeping, reconstruction and nation-building to help us out before it is too late.
I'm talking about our allies and the United Nations. Unfortunately, the Bush people are too arrogant and vindictive to seek the help that could save the situation.
Bush makes no greater mistake than to insist America has the wisdom and capacity to govern and rebuild Iraq alone. We cannot do it, and improvisation is leading to disaster. What are Bush's answers to these questions:
Should the Pentagon or State Department be in charge for now? Should we work toward a provisional government or interim administration? How is crime to be policed and stopped? What to do with the Baathists?
More: How are the Kurds to be kept in Iraq? How are Muslims to be kept from creating an Islamic republic? Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Who will control the oil? Who is going to pay?
For Bush to argue that America doesn't need help in answering these questions is inexcusable hubris.
The bombings in Saudi Arabia and Morocco and the increase in mutual terrorism in Israel-Palestine should surprise no one. While Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle pontificate on the rise of Middle East democracy, the "street" has other ideas. Will terrorist bombs move pro-West Arab regimes closer to democracy or further away?
Every Arab regime except the Gulf protectorates opposed Bush's war, for while Wolfowitz lectured about Jeffersonian democracy, Arab leaders feared his war would animate Muslim fundamentalism. Can any rational being believe the U.S. occupation of Iraq will bring Saudi Arabia closer to democracy and closer to turning off the Saudi fount of terrorism?
And what of the Palestinians? Bush has walked into a trap of his own making – or rather of his advisers' making. They told him Saddam's ouster would take pressure off Israel, lay the foundation for an Israeli-Palestinian deal, the famous "road map" for peace creating the new state of Palestine, side by side in peace with Israel.
The truth is that Saddam's fall and the spread of CIA-predicted terrorism make it easier for Sharon to reject the road map and crush the Palestinians, who naturally retaliate. Once again, Colin Powell is caught in the middle. After he carried the road map to Israel, Sharon lost no time saying the White House doesn't agree with Powell.
This week, the White House hints Bush may go to the region himself. In present circumstances, it's hard to think of a more perilous idea.
America, the Middle East and the world are less secure today than before Bush's war. That was as predictable as the autumn leaves. The Pentagon destroyed a Third World nation with smart bombs, but roused the world against us. While Americans shout hosannas and wave Memorial Day flags, the consequences of Bush's war are just beginning to appear.
The beast of Baghdad was destroyed. The discovery of mass graves proves – if anyone had any doubts – that Saddam ruled his country by fear and by murder.
We have destroyed the beast and created a monster. Bush's war was advertised as a solution to the problem, but signs multiply that the problem is greater than ever – including in Iraq. Americans celebrate the great victory, but it is a victory that begins to look like Tet.
Remember Tet? We won that fight against the Vietnamese, too. But who won the war?
More Links
1 - Pentagon sets sights on a new Tehran regime.
2 - Bush 'is on brink of catastrophe'.
3 - Victims of the peace decide Americans are worse than Saddam.
4 - ADC's Landmark Report on Hate Crimes.
5 - Iraqi troops took bribes to surrender?
6 - The Truth Will Emerge by; Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D – WV)
May 23, 2003
Hello?
Are you having some difficulty in connecting to the eyeranian today? A couple of you wrote me to complain of various issues and I myself had a hard time getting the pages to download connecting from work today. I'd normally ignore such signs but last time I checked, my counter shows 28 visitors to the sites for the entire day! That's several hundred shorter than where it should be and doesn't make much sense. I even wondered if the "gremlins" had something to do with it but have so far found nothing (remember, Iran may be the only country that pays people to sit all day at computer terminals and wage war on what they don't like).
I need your feedback. Please tell me if you have been here today, how many times with approximate timeframe, had any difficulties or is it fixed now. Anything from you will be useful. Thank you in advance for your help.
May 22, 2003
Amazing Picture
This is one of the most incredible and touching (for the Iranian nostalgic types) picture of a traditional tea house in south Tehran area. I'd love to join them for some tea and a turn at the water pipe. Courtesy of one of my favorite sites: Tehran24
Readings
1 - Newsday - A senior congressional Middle East analyst predicted yesterday that an Iranian-backed cleric who is a protege of the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini will become the most powerful leader in postwar Iraq.
2 - Khatami will not resign, give up the fantasy of him being the leader in the shining armor on a white horse to resue us all. It just won't happen.
3 - First we were sure Iraq had these stockpiles of WMD's, now we are certain there are Al Queda members operating in Iran. Gotta love this quote by Ali Younesi (Iranian Intelligence Minister) though; in response to Rumsfeld allegation of Queda members in Iran, he said "I can counter by saying that many al Qaeda members are in America right now".
Is Iran the Next Target?
Patrick Seale writes in Al-Hayat:
"Now that Iraq has been conquered, hard-line American Jews, supporters of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, are urging the United States to overthrow the Islamic government in Iran. A systematic campaign of accusations, lies, propaganda and disinformation, very similar to the one which preceded the attack on Iraq, is now being mounted against Iran by a cabal of neo-conservatives in Washington."
Is Iran the Next Target?
Patrick Seale Al-Hayat 2003/05/23
Now that Iraq has been conquered, hard-line American Jews, supporters of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, are urging the United States to overthrow the Islamic government in Iran. A systematic campaign of accusations, lies, propaganda and disinformation, very similar to the one which preceded the attack on Iraq, is now being mounted against Iran by a cabal of neo-conservatives in Washington.
As in the case of Iraq, the real reasons for the campaign against Iran remain uncertain and ambivalent. Is the goal to spread 'democracy' in the Middle East so as to make the United States safe from 'terrorism'? Or is it to destroy any regional challenge to Israel? The most likely explanation is that it is a combination of both. The neo-conservatives, who now dictate the pace and direction of American foreign policy, consider that American and Israeli interests are identical and cannot be separated.
Shaping American Opinion
To understand the way American opinion is shaped, one needs to read and listen to what is being said in the American press and in Washington's numerous right-wing think-tanks. The Weekly Standard is a leading organ of neo-con opinion. Its editor, William Kristol, one of the most strident voices in favour of the Iraq war, has now turned his bellicose attention to Iran. In a lead editorial on 12 May he wrote: '... The liberation of Iraq was the first great battle for the future of the Middle East. The creation of a free Iraq is now of fundamental importance...We are already in a death struggle with Iran over the future of Iraq. The theocrats ruling Iran understand that the stakes are now double or nothing... as success in Iraq sounds the death knell for the Iranian revolution.
'So we must help our friends and allies in Iraq block Iranian-backed subversion. And we must also take the fight to Iran, with measures ranging from public diplomacy to covert operations. Iran is the tipping point in the war on proliferation, the war on terror, and the effort to reshape the Middle East. If Iran goes pro-Western and anti-terror, positive changes in Syria and Saudi Arabia will follow much more easily. And the chances for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement will greatly improve...'On the outcome of the confrontation with Tehran, more than any other, rests the future of the Bush Doctrine - and, quite possibly, the Bush presidency - and prospects for a safer world...'
I have quoted Kristol's editorial at length because it is a clear expression of the neo-con's determination to pressure, even blackmail, President George W Bush into using American power to 'reshape' the Middle East in Israel's interest.
At a conference at the Saban Center in Washington on May 14, Kristol enlarged on his views by remarking that an American strike against Iran might possibly take place before the November 2004 American presidential elections.
Another leading neo-con guru, Michael Ledeen, who throughout the 1990s called for an attack against Iraq, is now pressing as persistently for an attack on Iran. The new 'Center for Democracy in Iran', an American action group calling for regime change in Tehran, is largely his creation. The flavour of his approach may be grasped from a speech he delivered at the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) in Washington on April 30, entitled 'Time to focus on Iran - The Mother of Modern Terrorism'. In it, he declared: 'The time for diplomacy is at an end; it is time for a free Iran, free Syria and free Lebanon.' A week later on May 6, at a conference at the American Enterprise Institute, another leading neo-con think-tank, Ledeen repeated his call for a U.S. attack on Iran, in which he was supported by Uri Lubrani, a long-time adviser to Israel's Ministry of Defense and architect of Israel's disastrous 'security zone' in Lebanon, which was only wound up when Israeli forces were finally driven out of south Lebanon in 2000.
In their campaign against Iran, neo-cons and pro-Israeli lobbyists are joined by exiled Iranian monarchists, active among the large Iranian community in California, who pin their hopes on Reza Pahlavi, son of the late pro-Israeli Shah. In a recent interview with the Italian newspaper La Stampa, Reza Pahlavi declared: 'The fall of the current regime would not only liberate the forces of a great nation, it would free the world of an imminent atomic risk and the biggest terrorist network in existence.'
What is Iran accused of?
Inflammatory accusations leveled against Iran by American officials, by friends of Israel, right-wing ideologues and others are given wide prominence on American television and in the mainstream American press. They usually include the following: that Iran's nuclear programme has reached such an advanced stage that it might soon test a nuclear weapon; that it is developing biological weapons and is seeking foreign help in developing chemical weapons; that it supports such 'terrorist' organizations as Hezbollah in Lebanon as well as militant Shiite groups in Iraq and Afghanistan; and, most recently and sensationally, that the suicide bombings against residential compounds in Riyadh were planned by top Al Qaeda commanders sheltering in Iran!
According to the American TV programme Nightline, Al Qaeda leaders in Iran include Saif al Adel, wanted in connection with the 1998 bombings of two American embassies in East Africa. Needless to say, no firm evidence in support of these serious allegations is ever produced. It is noteworthy, however, that the charge of Iranian-Al Qaeda complicity strongly resembles the accusation of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda made repeatedly against Baghdad in the run-up to the war (including regrettably by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell himself) - but of course never documented or proven.
In spite of the clamour from the neo-cons, few experts predict an early American military assault on Iran. For one thing, fear of a new wave of terrorist attacks, following the bombings in Riyadh and Casablanca, has captured America's attention, almost to the exclusion of other foreign policy worries. For another, the United States has its hands full in Iraq, where resistance is mounting to the American occupation and where the task of putting the country back on its feet is proving far more difficult than Washington had anticipated. Another reason for caution on the Iran front would be strong European opposition to any U.S. military attack - including this time opposition from Britain's Tony Blair.
For all these reasons, some experts believe that a military strike against Iran by either the U.S. or Israel - or by both together -- would only become a possibility if there were convincing proof that Iran was about to test a nuclear weapon or that an Al Qaeda cell located in Iran had attacked U.S. or Israeli targets in the past or was about to do so in the immediate future.
Rather than risk a major military assault, these experts believe that, if the United States and Israel wanted to send a strong message to Iran, they were more likely to use special forces against Iranian proxies in Iraq or Lebanon, or seek to undermine the Tehran regime by encouraging separatist tendencies among Iran's Azeri and Baluchi communities, in an effort to destabilize the country.
Should Iran be America's ally?
The truth would seem to be that policy-makers and opinion formers in the United States are divided over what to do about Iran. Some follow the President's lead in characterizing the Islamic Republic as the leading member of the 'Axis of Evil'. They identify political Shiism backed by Iran as one of America's most dangerous enemies and they fear that Iraq can never be stabilized unless Iran and its Shiite supporters in Iraq are neutralized - a totally impossible task unless the Shiite community is slaughtered en masse!
A radically different point of view, however, is that America's most fearsome opponent is not Shiism but fundamentalist Sunni Islam, as preached and practiced by Osama bin Laden and other Islamic extremists. According to this view, the United States should forge an alliance with Shiite Iran and encourage the emergence in Iraq of a Shiite-dominated government, thereby creating a 'friendly' counterweight to the Sunni-ruled oil states of the Gulf! There have been repeated references in the American press to discreet meetings of U.S. and Iranian representatives in Geneva, suggesting that some sort of dialogue is, in fact, in progress. The policy debate in Washington has rarely been sharper. Following the swift military victory in Iraq, the neo-cons imagined they had gained in influence and routed their critics. Now, however, with Iraq in chaos, terrorism rampant, Sharon unrestrained, and the dollar and the American economy heading lower, the tide is turning once again. The strategic wisdom of the neo-cons is being questioned.
The sensible opinion would seem to be that America will need to show some success in rebuilding Iraq and resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict before it turns its attention to the mullahs in Tehran.
Champions
May 21, 2003
For Victor
Just last week I was showing this weblog to a young Hispanic kid that was chock-full of energy and curiosity. He was from a working class family, trying to help his family out by working full time. He was bursting with dreams and aspirations, wanted to get into real estate and was very curious about this girl I was talking to earlier. He said he liked Asian women but had no girlfriends.
I just found out that 18 year old Victor Alfonso Flores was killed last Friday while trying to race a BMW in his borrowed Honda. Apparently he lost control and smashed the car into a building. I saw his dad who is understandably shaken, as is his twin sister. I wish them all the best and hope they have the needed strength to get through this very difficult time. Victor was sure a great kid and full of potential. I will not forget him.
Please be careful and drive very safely. This life is often shorter than we all assume. Live it to the fullest and tell a loved one what they mean to you today.
Wonderin'
I wonder if it's true that Rafsanjani's right hand man, Mr. Mohsen Rezaei met with some very high ranking U.S. officials in Athens, Greece recently? I wonder if it is true that he assured them the only faction capable of making any deals in Iran is theirs and they are ready to negotiate? I wonder if we will see any signs of what must've been agreed upon in the weeks and months to come? What do you think?
Ah So Nice!
We don't often get to do what we enjoy doing the most and earn a living from it too. So, whenever I see somebody that does, I'm just awed and maybe even a bit jealous. This is one such person I recently ran across. Doesn't it just look divine to create such great work, enjoy the beautiful outdoors and get paid for it too?
Click on the image above for a larger version.
Nasim the Handyman
Finally there's a genuine permanent Iranian character on a major network show. Whoopi, the new sitcom by Whoopi Goldberg debut this week and one of the four main characters is Nasim, the Iranian handyman. There has been other Iranian characters on TV as well as Hollywood (who can forget the Soup Nazi of Seinfeld fame based on a real Iranian character, Mr. Ali Yeganeh of New York's Soup Kitchen International, or the backward Iranian neighbors in Down & Out in Beverly Hills) but this is the first time there's a possibility of breaking certain stereotypes and gaining some ground in the struggle for equality and fairness, all in the name and format of entertainment.
I haven't watched the premier episode yet but hope that Whoopi and company do their best in advancing the cause of many cultural and ethnic minorities, including Iranians.
As for the actor playing Nasim, he is Omid Djalili, a UK-based veteran entertainer and stand-up comic who has previously had minor roles in Spy Game, The Mummy and Gladiator. This is an interview with him done shortly after 9/11.
To can watch a preview of the first episode of Whoopi by picking your internet connection speed: 56 I 300.
"I haven't felt so oppressed since the Ayatollah blew up my beach house."
Japanese Beltorchicca
Could someone translate what Demi says about Iranian bloggers (and eyeranian) in Japanese here?
JUST STAY COOL
Ted Rall says: "It's an open secret that hard-right Administration ideologues are jonesing for another war. After briefly flirting with the possibility of an invasion of Syria, Paul Wolfowitz, Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld are now quietly plotting wars of preemption against Iran and North Korea. It makes sense: as the world's third-largest oil producer and the strategic crossroad between Central Asia and the Middle East, Iran would make a handsome addition to the United States' growing portfolio of Muslim colonies. The U.S. occupation of Iran would also make possible a short, sweet pipeline route to carry oil and gas from the huge oil and gas fields in landlocked Kazakhstan, allowing the Bushies to abandon Karzai's Kabul city-state once and for all."
"Right now we're maintaining more than 100,000 troops right next door in Iraq, at a cost of more than a billion bucks a month. Hawks ask: why not attack Iran now, while it's cheap and convenient?"
JUST STAY COOL
Thu May 15, 7:01 PM ET Add Op/Ed - Ted Rall to My Yahoo!
By Ted Rall
How Republicans Can Win Big in 2004
NEW YORK--Last week I doled out some free advice for Democrats hoping to recapture the White House next year. This week, I turn to the Republicans.
Such heady days! "Some Republicans," writes Deborah Orin in Rupert Murdoch's New York Post, "are dreaming and plotting how President Bush (news - web sites) can do what even Ronald Reagan (news - web sites) couldn't do: win all 50 states in 2004." That arrogant attitude could lead to the Republicans' downfall. A lot can go wrong in 16 months. If chief Bush political advisor Karl Rove is as brilliant as advertised, he'll focus on what not to do.
It's an open secret that hard-right Administration ideologues are jonesing for another war. After briefly flirting with the possibility of an invasion of Syria, Paul Wolfowitz, Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) and Donald Rumsfeld are now quietly plotting wars of preemption against Iran and North Korea (news - web sites). It makes sense: as the world's third-largest oil producer and the strategic crossroad between Central Asia and the Middle East, Iran would make a handsome addition to the United States' growing portfolio of Muslim colonies. The U.S. occupation of Iran would also make possible a short, sweet pipeline route to carry oil and gas from the huge oil and gas fields in landlocked Kazakhstan, allowing the Bushies to abandon Karzai's Kabul city-state once and for all.
Right now we're maintaining more than 100,000 troops right next door in Iraq (news - web sites), at a cost of more than a billion bucks a month. Hawks ask: why not attack Iran now, while it's cheap and convenient?
North Korea may not offer much in the natural resources department--we're hardly suffering for lack of fluorspar and tungsten--but, unlike Saddam's Iraq, it's a genuine security threat. On May 7 the Washington Times reported that North Korean negotiator Li Gun has warned his U.S. counterpart that his country plans to "export nuclear weapons, add to its current arsenal or test a nuclear device." Experts say Pyongyang is probably cranking out a nuke a month--and has missiles capable of striking the continental U.S. Going after North Korea now would be both smart and legitimate--but practical-minded Republicans should not allow national security to trump electoral politics.
Bush should order his hawks to put off their next D-Day until after his inaugural. For one thing, war is losing its luster. Our failure to locate Iraqi weapons of mass destruction is causing many Americans to realize they have been deceived. New terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia indicate that the war in Afghanistan (news - web sites)--where a Taliban resurgence is underway--hardly put Al Qaeda "on the run," as Bush claimed. Two wars per term is something of a historical limit--a third might make edgy voters think that Bush is more bloodthirsty than the terrorists.
Furthermore, financial markets are reacting favorably to peace. Stocks have rallied 17 percent since the fall of Baghdad. Healthier 401(k)s will help Bush make the case that the recession is really over.
World domination can wait until 2005.
The U.S. economy has bled 2.4 million jobs since Bush took over in 2001. Most of that's not his fault--the dot-com crash began on Clinton's watch--but Republicans are crazy if they think Americans will blame the last president for the current recession--er, recovery.
Jobless voters and their nervous neighbors are looking for three things from Bush: action, sympathy and truth. The Republican Party's ideological aversion to government jobs programs prevents Bush from doing anything meaningful to stimulate the economy. But talk is cheap--so talk! During the 1992 recession Bush I came off as clueless and uncaring. W. has begun to talk about feeling our pain, but he needs to upgrade his empathetic capabilities. Talk about caring, talk about understanding what it's like to get laid off. But for God's sake, stop talking that tired old trickle-down BS and sympathy for the rich folk.
The Bush Administration prefers opponents who can't fight back (see Iraq and Afghanistan). But Americans don't like bullies, the self-entitled or the cocksure. Republicans looking to win big in '04 must work hard for every vote, presenting themselves through their advertising and public appearances as humble guys trying to do the best they can under trying circumstances. Point to military successes, but don't brag about heroism--firing laser-guided missiles at soldiers armed with World War II-era rifles isn't brave. Do what your party does best: present an optimistic, can-do vision of a country whose best days are ahead of us. Claim to respect your opponents. Let your ads inundate us with images of waving flags and sooty firefighters, and emphasize that we need you to continue to lead us in the war on terrorism. Then if you can just get the pro-life school-prayer Christian nuts to keep quiet until November 2004, you might just get those 50 states.
(Ted Rall is the author of "Gas War: The Truth Behind the American Occupation of Afghanistan," an analysis of the underreported Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline project and the real motivations behind the war on terrorism. Ordering information is available at amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com.)
May 20, 2003
Supporting Democracy???
© Paul Lachine
The pro-Israeli group in Washington DC is at it again. This time, Michael Ledeen and company have put two Republican senators in the forefront of a venture they’ve labeled “Iran Democracy Act”.
In short, it is a bill to provide even more and overt funding to a select group of Iranian dissident groups (read those in favor of re-establishing a puppet regime in Iran) as well as their radio and television stations broadcasting to Iran from Santa Monica and vicinity.
Of over a dozen Iranian opposition groups that I am regularly in contact with and would consider to have a solid commitment to democratic principals, not a single one has been contacted to help in drafting the bill, possibly identifying those who may benefit from such a bill or to take part in events announcing it.
So far the qualifications criteria seems rather limited; do you support our narrow agenda and puppet-to-be Reza Pahlavi or not? Negative answers don’t need to apply. The main organization created to receive “support” is their very own Coalition for Democracy in Iran (CDI).
As for the media outlets they have included in a list of those committed to democracy, strangely enough they only have guests and commentators who follow a certain line of thinking and even re-broadcast the Israeli Persian program for their newscasts.
I wonder if the “democracy” they are talking about is the type we have already established in Afghanistan and Iraq, where citizens are free to choose whatever form of government they want, as long as it meets the approval of U.S. administration.
To learn more about Ledeen, a friend just forwarded me an article about him that is well worth reading.
One of the other faces now very visibly in this fray and a listed supporter of CDI, is our dear former Republican Senate candidate; Rob Sobhani. I will write about “Rob” much more in the future but for now click here for something I had posted about him on my old blog (my archives on that blog have mysteriously disappeared, unfortunately.)
If you wish to express your opinion on this topic and more specifically write U.S. politicians who will be deciding on this issue, National Iranian American Council has set up a site to facilitate it. Remember, you can edit their suggested text before sending your email.
First, let me assure you that “Rob” Sobhani does not speak for Iranians (A friend suggested may be he will when he might start using his Iranian name Sohrab instead of Rob, but that’s another topic for another day). “Rob” is so submerged in his ultra-right Republican views, he’ll say anything to appease his honchos. After all, he has been groomed by the party elite to one day represent the community, unfortunately the community he represents is an inconsequential minority within the greater Iranian as well as Iranian-American community. He was a Republican candidate for Senate from Maryland in 2000, when his claim to fame was that he had “opened the Caspian sea resources to the American corporations”. Anyone familiar with the politics of energy in that region knows what he meant. Some of his recent “achievements” include his hostility and intolerance towards immigrant communities. In a July 2002 article he goes so far as to say “...multiculturalism is eroding America's sovereignty and the national identity of its citizens” (note to Rob; take a trip up to Canada to see how multi-culturalism has made ALL communities flourish), he goes on to decide that “English must become the official language of America” (I hope by “America” he means the USA, since the name includes two very diverse continents). Then he shows his true bias when he attacks the entire current system of immigration, based on family reunification principals as “an enormous burden on our nation’s resources” (goddamn immigrants come to this country and take our jobs away... or is it that they all collect welfare? not sure). So, is it a surprise that to him George W. Bush is another Abraham Lincoln? Perhaps not. However, if by that definition he draws parallels between oppressed Iranians and Americans under slavery, then perhaps he is right in that a true emancipator like Martin Luther King Jr. (and not Honest Abe) is most welcomed and needed.
A couple of links:
Canada’s Globe & Mail has a piece on Iranian blogs, including an interview with Hoder.
Irish webzine, The Blanket has re-published my “undesirables” post. Thank you.
The Rumor Mill
A little birdie tells me about more than one or two clashes that happened
when
The Future of Iran forum took place a couple of weekends ago in D.C.
and I don’t mean passionate debates or heated exchanges either, I mean actual
brawls and boxing matches.
The monarchists attending the event held at Wohlstetter Conference Center apparently couldn’t put their pity inner-fighting aside for a weekend to listen to “distinguished” panels that included experts in Iran affairs such as Uri Lubrani of Israeli Defense Ministry and Morris Amitay of The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs. The panels were moderated by Meyrav Wurmser, director of the Center for Middle East Policy and yes, Michael Ledeen of American Enterprise Institute.
Overheard wishing for future “jobs” at the same event: “I’m sure they already have other people in mind as ambassadors but even a lower diplomatic post would be okay. I mean imagine being assigned to Paris or New York or even Australia at the embassy? Then again, I’m sure we’ll need a consulate in L.A.”
Oh what a tangled web we weave.
May 19, 2003
I Was Wrong
At the beginning of this month I wrote a piece called Stop the Hate about a certain pro-Nazi Persian weblog. I expressed my irritation and asked readers to sign a petition asking the company hosting the site to remove it .
The post caused some negative comments here but also started a three way email discussion with two of the eyeranian regulars and myself on that topic. This is why I stopped writing about that post or promote the petition (it only has 4 signatures as a result), but it was clear from the start that none of us could be very solid on our convictions until we were done dissecting and digesting all the exchanges. I don't know if they'd like their names used, so I wont, but the three of us had three different points of view and as discussions continued, I'd like to think that we each modified the other two views to some extent. There was no clear "winner" as it wasn't about that. It was a nice discussion and each of us "won" on some of our points. At the conclusion we came to some conformity and as a result I am changing my earlier position on this issue.
Although I find the content still very objectionable and believe it is clearly hate-speech in both style and substance, I don't think removing it is the solution. So thank you for your pro and con comments as well as your acceptance of my admission to error. On this, I was wrong and I will find other ways to encounter the ignorance that is so present in this world.
If you'd like to read more on this topic, I really enjoyed an essay forwarded during the same discussion. It is posted on York University's site and is by Rick Goldberg.
Must Be Nice!
One of the readers sent me an invitation to this anti-war forum in Tokyo. I wish I could go but life's other engagements makes it impossible. However, I was looking at their invitation and noticed ANA Air is their chosen airline. Since I hadn't heard of them before, I went to check out their web site and look what I found:
This is their first class "sleeper" seats for New York - Tokyo flights. Boy, this would make that long flight such a pleasure. That top 1% sure lives nice, no?
A Few Links
Who is the U.S. trying to fool?
Robert Fisk: So what was the war for?
Agency inflates terrorism charges
Monday Morning Motivationals
I know I sometimes forget to do these on Mondays. However, since this is going to be such an amazing week for you and I (power of positive thinking), I couldn't forget this week. Just click on the "continue" link below and have a greeeeeat week!
============================================
Our ability to care for each other is an amazing thing, and
we take it for granted. They say it 'takes a village to raise a
child', and we all know that our lives, our businesses, our
goals and our dreams depend on the quality of our relationships.
This week, take action, take a risk, to improve the quality
of your most important relationships.
============================================
'Go to the truth beyond the mind. Love is the bridge.'
-- Stephen Levine
'Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds
from the achievement of one's values.'
-- Ayn Rand
'How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment
to improve the world.'
-- Anne Frank
'Our prayers are answered not when we are given what we
ask, but when we are challenged to be what we can be.'
-- Morris Adler
May 18, 2003
Rafsanjani's Nukes
One of the things I've learned in traveling to many countries and/or meeting people of various lands via cyber-space is that every country has a certain number of "myths" that have become entrenched into the folklore of that country. So much to the point that people have accepted them as undeniable facts.
This is also true for Iranians. For example, as the value of their currency was on a horrible downward spiral, I heard this saga from many Iranians over and over again that Bill Clinton himself had held a 1,000 Rial note in one hand and a dollar bill in another at a speech and had promised to make them equal (a dollar was worth about 70 Rials just before the revolution of 1979).
If you talked to 10 Iranians, it seemed that 9 had heard of it, 5 listened to the news of it on the radio, and occasionally one would even swear that he watched the whole speech on CNN. Such a speech, obviously never took place but even to this day it is part of a nation’s psyche.
A couple of years ago I found another one of these myths, this one through a few Israeli friends.
The myth of Rafsanjani’s nuclear speech seems to be a reality to many Israelis and when it came up in my comments section, I was happy to confront it, although I got beat by another reader. I really wanted to ask where they heard this and how did it become such a matter of fact story in Israel. The answer is rather obvious, as I found out this is how certain Israeli media, particularly the ones close to the far right in Israel reported it as such.
But is it true? Let’s see.
Before I begin, although I do not believe it is needed, let me clarify one thing. In the mind of this writer, Rafsanjani is the true powerhouse behind the murderous regime in Iran and as such I consider him one of the most despicable beings on the face of this earth. Having said that, even he deserves to be questioned or even condemned for what he has actually said and done, not what is alleged or imagined against him.
First, what is being alleged he has said; most people I have heard this from point to a Friday sermon Rafsanjani delivered on December 14, 2001. “Brant” summed it up best in the same comments section stating Rafsanjani said that "Iran would use a nuclear bomb against Israel as soon as it had one.”
Unfortunately the full text of Rafsanjani’s speech is not available to confirm or deny this without any suspicion. Friday sermons are rather long and as such they are usually abbreviated by most newspapers and are published the next day. More than one source has searched for what was actually said on that day and here is the quote closest to the actual allegation reported by Michael Rubin of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, hardly an anti-Israeli outfit: "If one day, the Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like those that Israel possesses now, then the imperialists' strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything."
The most detailed account comes from The Middle-East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). They highlighted various parts of that entire speech and here is their version of what was said about Israel and nuclear weapons: “Rafsanjani said that Muslims must surround colonialism and force them [the colonialists] to see whether Israel is beneficial to them or not. If one day, he said, the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel's possession [meaning nuclear weapons] - on that day this method of global arrogance would come to a dead end. This, he said, is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.”
Now you want to blame the guy for continuing an unwanted and costly war against Iraq, despite the opportunity to end it 6 years earlier and with a relative victory, go ahead. You want to hold him partially responsible for thousands of executions, rapes, imprisonments and torture committed during his reign and afterwards, please feel free. You believe he is to blame for causing some of the international havoc caused by this regime, be it by supporting terrorism, harboring fugitives or sponsoring terrorist acts abroad, I won’t stop you. You judge him accountable for an irresponsible economic platform, soaring unemployment and theft of Iran’s natural resources, I will not dispute it. But blame him for something he hasn’t said, because it fits your own mischievous agenda, I have a problem with that. And so far, I have not found any unbiased report of Rafsanjani ever stating publicly or privately that “Iran would use a nuclear bomb against Israel as soon as it had one.”
My Morning
I spent most of the morning on this bench/chair reading. It was as close to heaven as I can imagine it. Click on the thumbnail image below for a larger view. aaaahhhh, love a day off work.
MCI and Issa
MCI, the new operating name for WorldCom, has been awarded
the initial contract to re-build
WorldCom filed for bankruptcy protection last year amidst disclosure of a massive accounting scandal, defrauding investors and others in a substantial scale. MCI is also angering customers at home with substandard service.
The contract was also sought by Qualcomm which many insiders
believe will still go ahead with building their CDMA network in
Darrell Issa’s arguments for a CDMA network included his claim that GSM
is supported and used in
Darrell Issa is a multi-millionaire who made a name for
himself when he spent $10 million of his own money in a losing bid for
The tragic events of 9/11 once again brought Darrell Issa
even more prominence when he first claimed he was discriminated
against by the airlines and then used his Arabic background to act as
administration’s emissary
to the middle-east , traveling to
He recently donated
$100,000 more of his own money to a campaign to recall Gray Davis, Democrat
Governor of
In the years to come, watch Darrell Issa. Depending on your point of view, he is either a superstar up and coming future leader within the ranks of GOP, or a privileged snake in the grass willing to turn his back on his heritage and background to delight his masters.
May 17, 2003
Quote of the week!
Shame on Democrats, particularly the faction that considers itself most progressive, led by Nancy Pelosi and company. As it becomes even more obvious that the main justification used by the Washington hawks to invade Iraq, namely the extensive WMD program of Saddam Hussein was nothing but a huge lie, none of the democrats has the chutzpah to challenge the administration on the issue. This system is built upon the polls and an obsession to get elected or re-elected and in that arena, truth as well as democracy often becomes the victim.
Read more about that here.
this post however, is dedicated to the wildest quote I could find and it comes from the same story. Check see what this official has to say about the lack of finding anything resembling a broad WMD industry in Iraq:
"It's just very strange," said Kenneth Adelman, a member of a Pentagon advisory board who had predicted weapons would be found a month ago. "There will certainly not be the quantity and proximity that we thought of before." Adelman says Hussein may even have launched "a massive disinformation campaign to make the world think he was violating international norms, and he may not have been."
My head is spinning. It is just amazing what they try to (and often will) get away with.
Games Governments Play
You throw enough crap at the wall, some of it will eventually stick. Washington hawks and their pro-Israeli cohorts have decided already that their next target is Iran. Now the sales job begins. Just as they sold the Iraqi "threat" to the average U.S. voter, now they need to be convinced of the terror awaiting all of us if we don't do something about Iran. First, we need to establish a possible cause of danger;
It started with Iran's nuclear program. Although not a single shred of evidence has been presented, we are told that Tehran is very close to developing their first nuke and god forbid if they do because although they lack the necessary weaponry to threaten us directly, there's always the ever-present possibility of those little "dirty bombs" hidden in a suitcase. Stop me already if this is all starting to sound very familiar. Next was Iran's stockpiles of WMD's and a chemical missiles program including weaponized anthrax. Now there's the Al-Qaida connection and how the Saudi bombing was orchestrated in Iran.
Meanwhile, Zalmay Khlilzad meets with the Iranian authorities and reportedly works out a deal that in short includes U.S. getting rid of MKO at the same time as Iran convinces the Hizbollah to move away from a military existence under the guise of uprooting terrorism. Iran also would not interfere in Iraq while U.S. looks the other way while they crackdown on any internal opposition. This allows Iranian government to start a broad campaign of terror and fear. The number of executions suddenly jumps drastically to broaden the public horror (see the disturbing images of a public hanging last week in the city of Mashad below). Members of legal and allowed opposition get unprecedented harsh sentences, Sina Motallebi is arrested (and then releaed with a large bond) and free internet access is targeted. Amir Farshad Ebrahimi and Heshmat Tabarzadi, two outspoken critics of the regime get life threats and new pressure is applied to those jailed on bogus charges (Zeidabadi, Pourzand and Afshari).
And this is just the first round. There's much more to come.
Politics is a dirty game and when you have three corrupt and illegitimate administrations involved, it becomes just pure nasty.
Bushehr Plant
An afterthought; do you think Israel will bomb and destroy Bushehr's nuclear plant just before or shortly after it's completion?
Weekend Traffic
What happens to you on the weekends? For the past couple of weeks that I have been paying attention, the traffic to this site drops considerably starting on Fridays and especially on the weekends and jumps right back up on Monday (I have a "hit counter" but don't collect IP's or ISP information or use cookies).
My only guess is that you are either too busy doing other stuff on the weekends or mostly access the eyeranian at work. Let's see if this weekend is also the same way. I'll miss your comments. My favorite part of the weblog.
May 16, 2003
More Links
Letter From Iran by The New Yorker magazine.
The Road To Victory Goes Through Tehran by Robert W. Tracinski of the Ayn Rand Institute, another pro-Israel entity. Hardly surprising.
Blogging in Iran, a report from NPR.
U.S. wrestling team is in Iran, despite Washington's warnings. Good for them!
Bad Journalism
There's something fundamentally virtuous about the profession of writing and in particular journalism. Maybe it is only because of the high expectations we insist for them to live up to or the ornate conviction of what they put on paper must be true, we require our writers to be saints.
This is why when one of them is found to have broken every rule in the book, invented information and reported them as facts, fabricated situations and settings, concocted quotes, copied materials from others and presented them as originals, and even reported from locations he never visited, we are rightly outraged.
This was the case for Jayson Blair, a former reporter for The New York Times. But this post is not about him.
Today, I'd like to introduce you to another one of Time's fine journalists; Judith Miller. At least by all accounts Blair fabricated his stories without a political or other predisposition. I won't defend him, nobody can. But to me he seems like someone either suffering from a mental illness or just a lackluster reporter trying to get by, doing very little and hoping to never get caught. Miller on the other hand fabricates her stories with a very clear agenda.
This is most evident on her recent piece about Iraqi WMD's. Here's her original story and then I'll let you be the judge, by reading three critics of her; Jack Shafer of Slate, Patrick Martin of World Socialists and finally my favorite by Daniel Forbes.
Let me know what you think, please.
Zarif Again
Watched Javad Zarif last night appearing on the Charlie Rose show again. Providing there's no blood on his hands, meaning he is cleared of any involvement in this regime's crimes, I'd vote for him if he ran in a free election for a seat on Iranian parliament or a similar post.
Everyone is responsible for their own actions. Not every revolutionary guard is guilty of murder because the organization he serves in is a criminal entity. In a free Iran of future, we can't make the same mistakes this regime made and assume everyone's guilt by simple association. Of course, everyone within the current power structure is subject to civil and/or criminal prosecution if there are direct charges and complaints against them. But even then, they are innocent until and unless are proven guilty, beyond any reasonable doubt and in a fair and public trial.
Unless Zarif is ever in that situation, he can count on my vote.
eyeranian mini polls
I've retired one of my eyeranian mini polls. It was the first one posted here and here are the results (drum roll please):
Question: How long do you think the U.S. military will maintain a presence in Iraq?
Answer (in order of popularity): The winner; "Until we are all driving fuel cell powered cars" with 19% of the total votes, 1-2 Years, 2-5 Years and "Until they get kicked out" all tied at 17%, 5-10 Years and 10-50 Years tied at 14%, 6-12 Months got only 3% and finally "Less than 6 months" received not a single vote.
Well done!
Now I have a bunch of new polls, ten to be exact. They are on a random rotation, so every time you stop by you'll probably see a different one. You can only vote once on each but please do vote on all of them. I look forward to seeing a brief snapshot of opinions by eyeranian readers. Thank you!
A Few Links
1 - MKO is obviously getting pretty desperate and desperate times call for desperate claims.
2 - The coalition of the pathetic.
3 - Robert Fisk on Iran.
4 - To wear a tie or not to wear a tie, that answers the question about your economical background.
5 - More on 'Saving Private Lynch' story.
May 14, 2003
The Undesirables
By the time I was finally able to go for a visit back to Iran in 1995, my grandfather had already surrendered his life for over a decade. I never got a chance to say goodbye to him when I left Iran, as I departed under rather temporary intentions. A brief trip that turned into a lingering existence. He passed away shortly after I left, although the family kept the news away from me for a year. I was never particularly close to my grandfather. By the time I had started to develop a personality and find out who I was, he was rapidly deteriorating as a result of worsening Parkinson's disease along with aftereffects of a major stroke. Most of my memories of him consist of him trying to remember who I was and me getting so excited when he remembered I didn't like salads but loved plain cucumbers with salt sprinkled on top.
Naturally one of the first places I wanted to visit was his burial place. I needed to tell him that despite our distance and disassociation, I loved him oh so much. So, shortly after arrival and despite other relative's grumb