THAT - AMERICAN GUY

State Department Backs "Reformers" who don't Exist

2004-06-27T21:58:00.000-07:00

State backs Iranian "reformers” who don't exist
National Review - By Mohammad Parvin
June 24, 2004

Recently, the State Department has posted a 15-page document on its website under the title of "Voices Struggling to be Heard." This document has been presented as a "fact sheet," but much of it is more fiction than fact. Although it's a positive step on the part of the State Department to publish such a report in the first place, what is disappointing is that this publication is geared more towards promoting the so-called reformists in Iran than exposing human-rights violations by the Islamic regime.

State Department: "Today the courageous voices of the Iranian people are being stifled as they call for their rights, beliefs and needs to be respected. In response, the non-elected elements of the Iranian Government hierarchy are rebuffing these calls and attempting to extinguish the voices."

Fact: The State Department reference to "non-elected elements of the Iranian Government" implies that some elements of the government in Iran are elected. The State Department is wrong. There are no democratically elected elements in Iran. For example, President Mohammed Khatami, the darling of the U.S. and Europe, was among just four selected candidates by the Guardian Council after 234 candidates were eliminated. All the so-called reformists who were "elected" in the previous parliament were first selected by undergoing the same filtering process.

State Department: "In June 1997 and again in 2001, a decisive election victory ushered President Mohammed Khatami into office under the auspices of a reformist agenda. The realization of this reform movement has been actively stifled by hard-line elements within the government, most specifically by the un-elected Guardian Council, a board of clerical leaders and legal scholars. Reformist and dissident voices within the government and society have been repressed and harassed by government and quasi-government factions under the influence of the hard-line clerics."

Fact: The proclaimed "reform movement" by Khatami did not materialize because he never had the intention of changing the status quo. He used the hollow promise for reform to stabilize the shaky regime and to prevent the escalation of popular unrest. What the oppositionists (not the reformists) want is very different from what the reformists within the government want. The reformists realize that some changes must be made if the whole system is going to be preserved. What the freedom-loving people of Iran want is a fundamental overhaul of the system; they want a separation between religion and state.

State Department: "In a move to diminish pro-reformist reelection chances, the Guardian Council disqualified approximately one-third of the 8,200 submissions for candidacy, including those of more than 80 reformists currently holding Majlis seats, effectively limiting the democratic alternatives available to Iranian voters."

Fact: The Guardian Council follows the rules and laws written into the Islamic constitution. Contrary to the State Department's assumption, all these actions are very much within the law. Those who accept this constitution, including the reformists, have nothing to complain about. Where were they when the other candidates were eliminated in last "election"? These sham elections are not democratic because at best, they only allow regime loyalists to participate, thus eliminating any chance of a real democratic election for Iranians. Therefore, there is no democratic alternative available to Iranians.

State Department: "Students have mobilized to demand greater freedoms and to support reform efforts by the Khatami Government, the Majlis, and individuals willing to speak the truth."

Fact: The Iranian students no longer support reform efforts by Khatami and his government and have repeatedly rejected him. Slogans such as "shame on Khatami" and "Resign Khatami" have been favorite catchphrases in recent demonstrations. The Iranian students are struggling for a secular democratic regime that by its definition cannot include the clerical elements.

In sum, the State Department has used human rights as a tool to promote the reformist faction of the government in order to justify reestablishing relations with the Islamic regime. The so-called hardliners have also started making hollow gestures towards reform. And why shouldn't they? It works. It does not cost them anything and it makes them competitive with their reformist rivals. (The recent move of the hardliners on banning torture in Iran was well received by the entire world. Nobody noted, however, that the Islamic constitution allows torture under the name of tazir and that this has remained intact.)

We believe that the majority of Iranian people does not recognize the Islamic regime as its elected representative and is determined to change the regime of terror by civil disobedience and nonviolent action. If the Islamic regime claims otherwise, it should take up the challenge of a nationwide referendum monitored by the international human-rights community.

Let's hope that the State Department and other U.S. institutions will eventually show respect for the freedom movement in Iran by not legitimizing and promoting its enemy, the Islamic regime of Iran.

Mohammad Parvin is an adjunct professor at the California State University and director of the Mission for Establishing Human Rights in Iran.

The Iranian People Deserve the Free World's Support

2004-06-27T17:37:00.000-07:00

The Iranian People Deserve the Free World's Support
By Owen Rathbone
June 27, 2003

Iran is back in the spotlight again following a recent series of student revolts and mass gatherings calling for greater freedoms and an end to Muslim clerics twenty-four year stranglehold on the Iranian people. According to observers and participants, the demonstrations and displays of defiance are the most intense in five years of sporadic protests.

Whereas earlier protests were mainly against the mullahs (the Iranian word for clerics), today "moderate" President Mohammad Khatami is also being denounced for failing to implement meaningful reforms. Although many Western leaders and commentators still pin their hopes on Khatami and the possibility of reform from within, most Iranians have accepted that true change is impossible without a radical transformation of the entire political system.

The desire for democracy is not restricted to students or fringe elements in Iranian society. Disenchanted people from all backgrounds and regions have taken to the streets over the past two weeks to demand an end to the Islamic Republic and the establishment of a secular government based on democratic principles. A Christian Science Monitor poll reveals that "90 percent of Iranians want change" and "70 percent want dramatic change."

Liberal pundits would have us believe that the increased displays of public defiance against the Iranian clerics and government are U.S.-orchestrated and part of a wider plot to destabilize Iran and increase American influence in the region. Such characterizations not only parrot the mullah's party line, but also do a great disservice to the Iranian people, who must endure great hardships on a daily basis.

In the late 1970s, Iran's per capita income stood roughly equivalent to Spain's, but since the time of the Islamic Revolution the country has experienced steady economic decline. Inflation sits at 20 percent, while unemployment has soared to 30 percent. Although Iran is rich with petroleum and natural gas, nearly 60 per cent of the population lives under the poverty line.

Far more disturbing than the dismal economic conditions in Iran is the political repression of the Iranian people. Up to 700,000 Iranians are imprisoned in secret jails, claim dissidents. Floggings, torture, mutilations, public hangings and executions are just a few of the means the conservative mullahs use to terrorize the populace.

In the past several weeks, pro-mullah vigilante paramilitary forces, many of them foreign thugs recruited from Afghanistan and other terrorist hotbeds, have scoured the country intimidating pro-democracy activists. Wielding chains, clubs, knives and guns, the vigilantes have attacked and threatened demonstrators in a brutal bid to quell dissent. According to human rights organizations, the vigilantes have even resorted to driving motorcycles into crowds to break up demonstrations and injure protesters.

In such a repressive political climate, freedom of the press is non-existent. Nearly 100 pro-reform journals and newspapers have been shut down since 1997, leaving the Internet and foreign radio and television broadcasts as the only means to spread democratic ideals. To the chagrin of the mullah authorities, hundreds of tech-savvy Iranians have become expert Internet bloggers, skilled at providing up-to-the-minute commentary on local developments and disseminating information from outside news sources. U.S.-based Iranian satellite TV shows have also become a favorite of viewers ranging from students to housewives.

As Iranians clamor for freedom it is worth noting the outside world's reactions.

The U.S. government, steadfast in its principles, has expressed strong support for the demonstrators. President George W. Bush recently went on record saying that he viewed Iranians' protests as the beginning of people expressing themselves toward a free Iran. U.S. National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice echoed the President sentiments in a June 20 Fox News interview, stating how important it is to recognize the rightness of the peoples cause and to let them know that there are those in the international community who care.

In contrast to the U.S.A's highly principled response, the United Nations (UN) has been noticeably reticent. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who should be expected to side with the Iranian people, has kept tight-lipped over the pro-democracy demonstrations. Rather than expressing any overt support for greater freedoms and improved human rights in Iran, Annan has only managed to say that "Any change in regime is a matter which only the Iranian people can decide," indirectly chiding the U.S. for rallying behind pro-democratic forces.

For good reason, Iranian political activists have lost complete faith in the UN. For more than two decades, Iranian civic groups have made repeated appeals to the UN's Human Rights Commission only to be rebuffed. In fact, to the great anger of the Iranian pro-democracy movement, Kofi Annan has actually praised President Khatami's accomplishments and the freedoms he has bestowed upon the Iranian population.

The flourishing democratic nations of Western Europe have similarly displayed a marked indifference to Iranians' pleas for democracy. While the U.S. maintains a near total ban on trade with Iran, the European Union (EU) profits handsomely from being Iran's largest trading partner, which means that European support for true reform has been tepid at best.

The EU, through representatives such as External Affairs Commissioner Chris Patton, maintains that engagement with Khatami's moderate government is the most effective means to induce positive changes in Iran. However, seeing that it is business as usual with Europe, the mullahs have unsurprisingly been reluctant to alter their oppressive ways. The bloody clampdowns on dissidents over the past two weeks only confirm that conservative hardliners have no intention of acquiescing to the public's demands for greater freedoms and reveal the EU position as a complete sham.

Russia is another interesting case. Eager to earn cash and curtail American power, the former communist nation has been working closely with Tehran to construct a nuclear plant in Bushehr. As Moscow stands to net some $1 billion dollars from the deal, it has remained aloof and refrained from commenting on Iranian politics. That Iran is using Russian experts and technology to establish a clandestine nuclear weapons program seems to be of little concern to Russia. For Putin and other Russian leaders, profits take precedence over justice and regional stability in the Middle East.

It is indeed a topsy-turvy world we live in. European leaders and UN representatives were quick to vilify the U.S. government for overthrowing Saddam Hussein, one of the greatest human rights violators of modern times. These same objectors to U.S. aggression in Iraq are now turning a blind eye to the Iranian people. As European and other supporters of the status quo donned a false cloak of anti-war morality to further their economic or political gain in Iraq, so do they profit from the misery of the Iranian people by supporting engagement and dialogue with the mullah theocracy in Iran.

Ironically, the country Ayatollah Khomeini once called "The Great Satan" is now seen as a beacon of hope by millions of Iranians. In view of Iranians' experiences with Europe and the UN, the United States is esteemed nationwide for its firm commitment to democratic ideals and reluctance to trade with a repressive regime. Formerly denounced for being evil, America is heralded as the only world power that supports the change Iranians desire.

Now that the Iranian people have taken their lives into their own hands and are striving to throw off the yoke of their Islamo-fascist oppressors, they deserve the free world's support. America, at least, has stood behind the Iranian people. It is high time other privileged nations and the UN did the same.

* Owen Rathbone is a political commentator based in Seoul, South Korea.

Copyright 2003 SMCCDI:

HAPPY (belated) NO ROOZ!!

2004-03-23T18:12:00.000-08:00

On the recent Spring Equinox, Iranians and Persophiles (is that a word?) everywhere celibrated "No Rooz" or Now Roos, or even...oh well, I guess it doesn't matter how you spell it. To me, spring seems like a much, much nicer time to celibrate the new year than the middle of winter does.

So what exactly is No Ruz? Where did it come from? (It's not Islamic)

Here is an excerpt from my favorite resource for learning about Persian culture."

"No Ruz, new day or New Year as the Iranians call it, is a celebration of spring Equinox. It is the most cherished of all the Iranian festivals and is celebrated by all. This occasion has been renowned in one form or another by all the major cultures of ancient Mesopotamia. Sumerians, 3000BC, Babylonians, the ancient kingdom of Elam in Southern Persia and Akaddians in the second millennium BC, all celebrated this festival. What we have today as No Ruz with its’ uniquely Iranian characteristics has been celebrated for at least 3000 years and is deeply rooted in the rituals and traditions of Zoroastrian belief system of the Sassanian period.

The familiar concepts of Hell, Heaven, Resurrection, coming of the Messiah, individual and last judgment were for the first time incorporated into Zoroastrian belief system. They still exist in Judo-Christian and Islamic traditions. In order to understand No Ruz we have to know about Zoroastrian cosmology. "

Read the rest...

He might be right

2004-03-23T16:48:00.000-08:00

Sistani may have a point. But isn't this just a temporary step?

I certainly can see the logic in trying to encourage Iraq's new leadership to work together to gain consensus.

All of Iraq's ethnic groups have hungered for a greater say in government, for a very long time. What the nation is used to is one group grabbing power and using it to further it's own goals at the expense of others.

I'm not convinced that Ayatollah Sistani truly has the best wishes of ALL Iraqis at heart. He may very well be against the power sharing because he wants to see a Shiite president for a change.

Kitman - Why the mullahs can't be trusted

2004-01-14T09:55:00.000-08:00

This explains SOOOOOOOOOOOO much. I never knew there was a special word for it. I just call them lies. - American Guy

New York Post - By Amir Taheri
Jan 13, 2004

A Policy of Deception

ONE man put up a ladder and another climbed it to take off the nameplate of a Tehran street. Passersby report that the operation lasted a few minutes.

The street in question is a villa-lined boulevard in a once-fashionable part of the Iranian capital. One of the villas housed the Egyptian Embassy before the 1979 Khomeinist Revolution.

In October 1981, the street was renamed after Khaled Ahmad Showqi al-Islambouli, the army lieutenant who murdered Egypt's President Anwar Sadat. In 1992, President Muhammad Khatami, then minister of Islamic Guidance and Culture, inaugurated a giant mural portrait of al-Islambouli on a building facing the Egyptian Embassy.

One of Khomeini's first moves in 1979 was to break relations with Egypt as "punishment" for Sadat's decision to make peace with Israel. When Sadat was murdered in 1981, Khomeini was jubilant: "A true son of Islam has acted to rid us of the Apostate Pharaoh," he declared. He vowed that his regime would never restore ties with Egypt until the Egyptians renounced peace with Israel and joined a Muslim front to wipe it off the map.

So why have the mullahs decided to take the name of the Egyptian terrorist off the street? Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak insists that without the name change he will not go to Tehran for the annual summit of developing nations next month. That would be a major diplomatic snub to the mullahs, at a time when they are feeling the heat of U.S. pressure in the region.

Does the change signal a genuine shift in Iranian policy? The answer must be no.

Even as the workmen were taking down the controversial sign, a team of Khomeinist dignitaries was inaugurating a symbolic tomb for al-Islambouli in Tehran's Behesht Zahra cemetery, in the area reserved for the "hero-martyrs of Islam." The tomb is adorned by a large portrait of the assassin.

And the daily newspaper Jumhuri Islami (Islamic Republic), owned by the "Supreme Guide" Ali Khamenei, has published an editorial implicitly calling for Mubarak's assassination. It says: "The great Egyptian people are fully capable of seizing the Islamic leadership over the Arab world. Naturally, Mubarak's revolting presence is an obstacle to that goal. But the followers of the martyr Khaled al-Islambouli know well how to remove this ugly cancer."

Meanwhile, Tehran's propaganda is trying to present the street name change as a climb-down by Egypt. The official media have invented a story according to which Egypt made the first move by taking the name of the last Shah of Iran off a street in Cairo. "When they took the cursed name of the Shah down, we decided to make a small gesture," says Ali Taskhiri, a cultural advisor to Khameini. In fact, no street in Cairo ever bore the name of any Iranian shah, and Egypt has made no concessions to the mullahs.

Also to hide the fact that they were eating humble pie, the mullahs have found a new name for the street: "Intifada Street." "The new name shows our commitment to the destruction of the Zionist state and the rejection of all peace deals with [Israel]," said a Foreign Ministry spokesman.

The tactic here is one the mullahs have practiced to perfection. It is based on the theological principle of Takiyah, which means hiding one's true beliefs to confuse adversaries. Its political version is known as Kitman (dissimulation).

The idea is to back out of an unequal contest with an adversary by giving him concessions that can easily be revoked later. Political discourse based on Kitman is capable of multiple, almost endless readings, re-readings and misreadings. This is why as Khatami is telling the Egyptians that Iran has made a major concession, Khamenei is telling the Iranians that it is, in fact, Egypt that is begging pardon from Iran.

Khomeini used the tactic in 1988 when he surprised everyone by accepting a ceasefire to end the eight-year war with Iraq. He presented his humiliating retreat as "the greatest victory of Islam in centuries."

The mullahs used the same tactic in 1998 over the Rushdie affair. While Khatami was promising the Europeans that the murder fatwa against the British novelist would not be executed, other mullahs were raising the bounty offered to anyone who would kill Rushdie. "The fatwa is not annulled," Khatami explained, "Its implementation, however, is not government policy."

The Iranian propaganda declared "victory" by claiming that the Europeans had agreed to force Rushdie to leave Britain and settle in the United States.

Late last year, we saw Kitman in action once again, this time over their nuclear-weapons program: The Europeans were sent home dancing with jubilation over a promise made by Hassan Ruhani, a junior mullah who acts as secretary of the High Council of National Security, that Iran would suspend production of weapons-grade enriched uranium.

The promise is backed by nothing concrete as it has never been approved by the Cabinet, let alone the Majlis (Parliament). It could be canceled at any time. In exchange, the mullahs avoided a clash with the United Nations while demanding that the European Union provide them with extra financial and technological aid.

Will the Egyptians fall for the Kitman trick as have the Europeans and others on so many occasions? Perhaps not. The Egyptians are local boys and know many of the tricks in our neck of the wood.

Mubarak may end up going to Tehran, and this writer believes that he should, but Egypt should insist on three points before full ties are restored:

* Acknowledgment of Egypt's right to make peace with Israel, thus ending the Khomeinists' attempts to seize control of a major part of Egyptian foreign policy.

* Closing down the offices and training bases, in Iran, of terrorist groups dedicated to the destruction of the Egyptian state.

* Handing over for trial in Egypt a number of Egyptian terrorists, including dozens who fled from Afghanistan to Iran after the fall of the Taliban in Kabul.

Iran is at the crossroads with what could be a decisive general election only weeks away. (Of course, Iran's "democracy" is itself a form of dissimulation; the recent mass disqualification of candidates is only one sign of that.) Many in Iran believe that it is time to abandon a strategy based on lying and cheating in the name of Takiyah and Kitman, and that a serious review of Iranian foreign policy is long overdue.

By taking a firm and principled stance now, Egypt could help those in Tehran who want a genuine end to two decades of subversive diplomacy by the Khomeinist regime.

Fascinating commentary

2004-01-12T11:00:00.000-08:00

Are Muslims masochists? What motivates a society to be like this?

Muslim Eye for the American Guy

2003-11-27T01:29:00.000-08:00

'Muslim Eye for the American Guy,' premiering this fall, aims to improve US image abroad. Makeover to include everything except a substantive change in American foreign policy.

Each member of the cast of 'Muslim Eye' has his own unique skill. From left, Jarfouz, the Arabic language specialist; Mohammad, the Islamic fashion guru; Hassam, the militant fundamentalist; Muhammed, the media analyst; and Hiram, the foreign policy wonk.

Mecca--Meet Hassam, Jarfouz, Mohammad, Hiram and Muhammed, the cast of the makeover show that is sweeping the nation and promises to improve the image of the United States in the eyes of Muslims around the world.

It's called "Muslim Eye for the American Guy" and it is the first of many spin-offs planned for the popular "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" series featured on Bravo.

"Muslim Eye" was born out of the growing anti-Americanism in Middle Eastern and Muslim nations resulting from their sneaking suspicion that we are trying to kill them. According to a recent report released by a panel of experts chosen by the Bush administration, good will towards America has plummeted in the past year, from Jordan to Indonesia.

The report, "Changing Minds, Winning Peace", found that 61 percent of Indonesians say the US is the Great Satan and 99 percent of Jordanians have a picture of Bush over the bullseye on their dart boards.

State Department official Jonathan Sperling gets a crash course in rocket launching from Hassam, the militant Islamic fundamentalist Muslim guy, as part of the Muslimization process.

"Anyone want to bet on which way public opinion is leaning on the Arab street in Iraq, Gaza and Saudi Arabia?" Hiram, the foreign policy expert, asked rhetorically. "But that's OK, we're here to help."

Further complicating the situation is neoconservative Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. He came up with the idea to make minor cosmetic changes to the US propaganda effort as a way to avoid any serious reevaluation of American foreign policy.

"The bottom line is we gotta have that oil. It's a strategic necessity and if any interruption occurs in the flow of oil to the homeland our our whole way of life will come crashing down like a tomahawk missle on an Iraqi camel herder," he said, using exactly the kind of language that made the makeover necessary. "So what we're trying to do here is put a happy face on our American brand of imperialism. This is all about packaging."

And the "packaging" is where the Muslim guys come in.

Mohammad, not to be confused with Muhammed, will lead the way by advising US government officials on how to dress when visiting foreign countries or infiltrating terrorist cells.

Secretary of State Colin Powell puts some of his new found Arabic language skills to good use with some one-liners to lighten the mood at a recent meeting with Saudi government officials.

"I hate to say it but you might as well just burn everything in your closet along with your American flag because none of it's going to fly here in Tehran," he warned with head cocked and hands on his hips, the way Muslims often do. "Oh my god, is this a velour tank top?!"

Jarfouz, the Arabic language teacher got busy feeding US diplomats key phrases to use in casual conversation with Muslim arabs.

"Unlike your selective use of Spanish to order mas cerveza at a Mexican restaurant or to find the bathroom, your Arabic will have to be a little more in depth," he instructed. "In a few short hours I'm going to teach you everything you'll need to speak fluently about jihad, Shari`ah law and sand."

Hiram noted that it won't matter how well American diplomats speak Arabic as long as the anti-Muslim, George W. Bush, is in office.

"Seriously, the Bush Doctrine? Going to war with Iraq when they didn't have any weapons or ties to al Qaeda? The terrorists are lining up to kill Americans soldiers in Iraq right now and no amount of spin or 'public diplomacy' will help," Hiram revealed. "I'm sorry, we are absolutely fabulous at what we do but the United States isn't Helen Keller and we damn sure aren't miracle workers."

MEI Article on Iran's current political climate

2003-11-26T17:33:00.000-08:00

America next door

Georgia's Velvet Revolution, Good Omen for Region?

2003-11-26T12:41:00.000-08:00

[ Georgia's Velvet Revolution, Good Omen for Region
Tehran Times - By M.A. Saki
Nov 25, 2003

Eduard Shevardnadze bowed to popular will on Sunday and stepped down from office. His resignation was the culmination of almost daily protests that followed a disputed parliamentary election on November 2 that officially returned pro-government parties to power. ] - MORE

Will this give Iran's pro democracy faction the will to try the same thing? Very interesting times are ahead. With Iran's Majlis (Parliament) elections coming up in February, Georgia's revolution, and Israels plans for air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, who knows what will happen?

Israel considers air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities

2003-11-26T12:26:00.000-08:00

[ As Iran moves toward nuclear weapons, Israel mulls a pre-emptive air strike
News Sentinel - By Zev Chafets (of the NY Daily News)
Nov 25, 2003

Earlier this month, supporters of Israel were outraged to learn that according to a poll conducted by the European Commission, 59 percent of Europeans regard the Jewish state as the single greatest threat to world peace.

This statistic has been loudly denounced as yet another example - as if more were needed - of Europe's chronic anti-Semitism.

And yet the Europeans aren't necessarily wrong about the threat to their security. In fact, nothing imperils world peace, such as it is, more than Israel's disinclination to be the target of Iranian nuclear weapons.

In the last few weeks, Israeli officials have made a series of declarations that they won't permit Iran to get its hands on atomic weapons. These statements should be taken with extreme seriousness, because they echo similar warnings on the eve of Israel's decisive 1981 air strike on an Iraqi nuclear reactor.

This attack - although not Saddam Hussein's virtually unopposed effort to get his hands on nukes - was denounced by the entire world. But the following day, an unrepentant Menachem Begin held a news conference in Jerusalem. The Israeli prime minister announced that Israel would not sit back idly while its enemies developed tools of extermination. Although he didn't use the term, he was essentially promulgating a policy of regional pre-emption.

Not all Israelis agreed with this policy. Indeed, many senior Israeli leaders had opposed the attack itself. Some generals thought it was operationally impossible. Diplomats were concerned that it would inspire a horrific international response.

Begin listened to the naysayers, weighed his own understanding of the responsibilities, post-Auschwitz, of an Israeli prime minister and went ahead. He wouldn't have done it without the strong support of his minister of defense, Ariel Sharon.

Fast-forward 22 years. Sharon, now prime minister himself, again faces the prospect of nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical Islamic enemy, Iran. And suddenly the Begin Doctrine - dormant for a generation - is back on full display.] - MORE

I've been prediciting this. Now it looks more and more likely to occur. How will Iranians respond? I don't mean the government, but the people of Iran. With the recent events in Georgia, I wonder if it might spark an uprising against the clerical regime???

The Unnoticed Alignment: Iran and the United States in Iraq

2003-11-19T19:44:00.000-08:00

On Monday President khatami made an historic annoucement. It hardly made a blip on the radar screen.

From the major American think tank - Stratfor

"Iranian President Mohammad Khatami has quietly announced his
recognition of the Iraqi Governing Council and acceptance of the
U.S. timeline on the transfer of power in Iraq. The announcement
speaks to a partnership that will direct the future course of
Iraq. The alliance is of direct short-term benefit to both
countries: The United States gains a partner to help combat Sunni
insurgents, and Iran will be able to mitigate the long-standing
threat on its western border. What is most notable is that,
though there has been no secrecy involved, the partnership has
emerged completely below the global media's radar. " - The Stratfor weekly (newsletter)

He said specifically, "We recognize the Iraqi
Governing Council and we believe it is capable, with the Iraqi
people, of managing the affairs of the country and taking
measures leading toward independence."

So where are the big news headlines?

Three little Pigs meet 6 year old

2003-11-16T17:32:00.000-08:00

The mind of a 6-year old is wonderful. First grade...true story: One day the first grade teacher was reading the story of the Three Little Pigs to her class. She came to the part of the story where the first pig was trying to accumulate the building materials for his home.

She read: "...And so the pig went up to the man with the wheelbarrow full of straw
and said 'Pardon me sir, but may I have some of that straw to build my house?'" The teacher paused...

...then asked the class, "And what do you think the man said?"

One little boy raised his hand and said:

"I think he said, HOLY SHIT? A TALKING PIG!!!"

The teacher was unable to teach for the next 10 MINUTES.

President Clark...

2003-11-16T16:52:00.000-08:00

...A bold prediction, I know. It's just a hunch I have. We'll have to wait and see how he holds up, but I have a feeling. For some reason it just sounds right to me. Try saying it: "President Clark"...see how it just rolls off the tongue? I haven't been impressed with GW Bush so far, and since us Californians are such "trend setters", I doubt GW Bush will get re-elected. So much can happen in a year's time.

At this point, the terrorists probably have the most influence on who will be our next president, as anyone. What they fail to realise though, is their tactics are more likely to get them the opposite of what they want.

Early Iranian Porn*

2003-11-14T20:21:00.000-08:00

Just kidding ya know. *Really they are part of a Qajar Era photo exposition.

Why not kill dictators with kindness?

2003-11-14T20:17:00.000-08:00

Here is a several month old article by Joe Klein of Time magazine. The always interesting, Whoman turned me onto it several months ago. I remember the concept of "The Fatal Hug" often in my musings, but I had forgotten where I'd first read about the idea.

["A year ago in Tehran, I noticed a defiantly goofy graffito inscribed on the wall of the old U.S. embassy building, the compound where the American hostages were held in 1979: ON THE DAY THE U.S. WILL PRAISE US, WE WILL MOURN. This was an official slogan — in Iran, as in America, graffiti are the work of miscreants, but in Iran the miscreants run the country — and it was an unintentionally revealing one: the mullahs are terrified of better relations with the U.S. Without the Great Satan, they have no excuse for, and no way to divert attention from, the dreadful brutality of their rule. A wicked thought occurred to me at the time, and recurred last week, as the Bush Administration continued its foolish refusal to meet with the North Koreans: Why not do the one thing that would most discomfort, and perhaps even destabilize, the precarious regimes of the Ayatollah Khamenei, Kim Jong Il and — for that matter — Fidel Castro and Muammar Gaddafi? Why not just say, "We hereby grant you diplomatic recognition, whether you like it or not. We're naming an ambassador. We're lifting the embargo. We're going to let our companies sell you all sorts of cool American things like Big Macs and Hummers. This doesn't mean we approve of the way you run your country, but it's silly for us to deny that you're in charge ... for now"?

Diplomacy is rarely so rash. And yet, "It would certainly catch the mullahs by surprise," says Azar Nafisi, an Iranian dissident who is a fellow at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. "It would drive them crazy," she adds, laughing, "the thought of having an American embassy in Tehran again, with lines of people around the block, trying to get green cards. There is a theory that American cultural and economic power is so insidiously attractive that opening up to the U.S. would be the death of these regimes. I've heard it called the Fatal Hug."]

I think it sounds like a marvelous idea! Read the rest here.

Peculiar goings on in Greece this week...

2003-11-14T18:19:00.000-08:00

(Click on image to read article)

...I'm Speechless. (But not because I'm in the middle of a kiss ;-)

Poll about poll results

2003-11-14T18:10:00.000-08:00

Statements from which of these countries carries more weight in the Islamic Republic?
-- Russia 28.41 % (25)
-- France 2.27 % (2)
-- USA 32.95 % (29)
-- China 0.00 % (0)
-- Japan 0.00 % (0)
-- Britain 31.82 % (28)
-- Germany 4.55 % (4)
Total Votes: 88

By carries more weight I would think that means that their word is more believable or that it has more effect. I'm a little surprised that Russia is so close to the US. So am I to believe that Japan is not believable at all and Britains word is like gold? And why is Russia so well respected? Well, at least I'm glad to see that Iranians aren't paying too much attention to the French. Either am I. If you can enlighten me, at all, I'd appreciate it. ;-)

Batebi kidnapped and held by Iran's Judiciary Intelligence service

2003-11-13T21:08:00.000-08:00

From SMCCDI: daneshjoo.org

SMCCDI News
Maverick kidnapped student held by Judiciary's Intelligence
SMCCDI (Information Service)
Nov 13, 2003

Latest reports on the kidnapping of Ahmad Batebi are stating that the maverick student, pictured on the cover of the London Economist, is being held by the Intelligence Unit of the regime's Judiciary force.

The infamous Judge Mortazavi, known as the "Butcher of Press" and involved in the murder of the Iranian-Canadian Journalist Ziba (Zahra) Kazemi, is the responsible for Batebi's abduction and capitivity.

Batebi's kidnapping follows the meeting he had with the visiting UN Rights envoy. He had used his vacation time, from prison, in order to see Ambeyi Ligabo and to give him informations on the fate of his comrades held in the Islamic regime's prisons.

He was initially arrested in the aftermath of the bloody crackdown on July 9th 1999 Student Uprising and tortured by the security apparatus. Condemened to death, his life was saved by a wave of international protests and intervention of NGO's groups as well as, Mr. Xavier De Villepin, the head of the French Senate's Foreign Affair committee, alarmed following the publication of Ahmad's public letter by SMCCDI.

Batebi's sentence was reduced to 15 years of imprisonment for the "crime" of having raised the BLOODED T-Shirt of a killed student in quest of Justice. He was charged as "Having raised the RED colored flag of rebellion" by the Islamic judges.

In his shocking letter, translated and available on the "Fax and Documents" of the Movement's website and mass e.mailed, Batebi was describing his harsh treatement by the regime's Judiciary and Intelligence forces.

The letter can be seen at: http://www.daneshjoo.org/article/publish/article_88.shtml

© Copyright 2003 SMCCDI: daneshjoo.org

Click on Ahmad's image above to read Amnesty Internatinal article about him, and use their form to write a letter to Iranian President Khatami.

Sanctions against Iran have been renewed

2003-11-12T20:02:00.000-08:00

George W. Bush's Executive Order's as follows:

"On November 14, 1979, by Executive Order 12170, the President declared a national emergency with respect to Iran pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by the situation in Iran. Because our relations with Iran have not yet returned to normal, and the process of implementing the January 19, 1981, agreements with Iran is still underway, the national emergency declared on November 14, 1979, must continue in effect beyond November 14, 2003. Therefore, consistent with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year this national emergency with respect to Iran.
This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

November 12, 2003.

END..."

Photo: Courtesy of CIA

Heroic words in wake of Italian deaths

2003-11-12T18:24:00.000-08:00

Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, whom CNN quotes as saying: "No intimidation will budge us from our willingness to help [Iraq] rise up again and rebuild itself with self-government, security and freedom."

Bravo Mr. Berlusconi! I feel exactly the same way.

- Prime minister Berlusconi. Photo courtesy "Yahoo!"

From an article on Yahoo News:

[The Nasiriyah attack was the deadliest against an American ally since the occupation began and appeared to send a message that international organizations are not safe anywhere in Iraq (news - web sites). It came on the same day the chief U.S. administrator for Iraq went to the White House to put forth proposals on transferring more authority to the Iraqis.

Col. Gianfranco Scalas said 18 Italians were killed: 12 Carabinieri paramilitary police, four soldiers, a civilian working at the base and a documentary filmmaker. A spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition said at least eight Iraqis also died. The bomber â€” whose nationality was not known â€” also died.

The blast wounded 79 people, 20 of them Italians, hospital sources and Italian officials said.

Italians were stunned by their nation's single worst military loss since World War II and its first in the Iraq campaign. At Rome's tomb of the unknown soldier, the green-white-and-red flag rippled at half-staff, and parliament held a minute of silence.

Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi pledged that Italy's mission in Iraq would not be derailed. Opposition leaders who opposed the deployment to postwar Iraq called on the government to withdraw the contingent.

Jalal Talabani, the head of the Iraqi Governing Council, called the slain Italians "martyrs of the fight for the freedom of Iraq."]

Coalition forces get tough on holdouts

2003-11-12T18:07:00.000-08:00

[No More Mr. Nice Guy

Coalition forces are getting more aggressive in their efforts to secure Iraq, the Los Angeles Times reports, describing an operation in Mamudiyah, south of Baghdad:

U.S. soldiers and Iraqi police arrived at the sprawling three-family farmhouse just after 4 p.m. with orders for the 15 or so people still living there: Grab what you can in the next 30 minutes, and then leave. Your house is about to be bombed.

Two hours later on Monday, a pair of F-16 warplanes screamed overhead and dropped 1,000-pound laser-guided armaments on the boxy, concrete structure. The bombs left a deep crater strewn with smashed furniture, broken concrete and other debris. The lawn, shed and date trees around it remained intact.

U.S. military authorities said the bombing of the Najim family house was a prime example of a firm new response to those who plant roadside bombs, hide weapons or carry out ambushes that kill or harm American soldiers, and they want the people in these parts to know about it. . . .

"The message is this: If you shoot at an American or a coalition force member, you are going to be killed or you are going to be captured, and if we trace somebody back to a specific safe house, we are going to destroy that facility," said Maj. Lou Zeisman, a paratroop officer of the Army's 82nd Airborne Division deployed here from Fayetteville, N.C. "We are not going to take these continuous attacks."

Hear hear. And let's not hear any more about how Israel is "overreacting" when it does exactly the same thing.]- Area between brackets not written by me. It's from the Wall Street Journal's - "Opinion Journal".

I must admit I have spoken out against Israel when they do the same thing. Considering all the lives that were lost though, it doesn't seem like an over reaction at all. War is war. If those loyal to Saddam think they can win, they will continue to fight. I don't think they can win. They must surrender. Actions like this should help to bring them to that realisation.

Power of numbers

2003-11-12T14:04:00.000-08:00

I just came across one of those cost of war in Iraq counters, I'm sure you've all seen on some blogs. It's closing in on $85 billion. That sounds like a lot of money, and it is. but to put things in perspective I decided to figure out how much that means to each taxpayer:

Estimated 2003 US population - 285,000,000

Cost of war in Iraq - $85,000,000

Your share, per US citizen - $298.24 Per household - $772.45 - so far

Based upon the latest median household income figures that comes out to 0.146% of household income.

Which founding father would you be?

2003-11-12T11:57:00.000-08:00

Which Founding Father Are You?

I'm Alexander Hamilton. Although, with only 8 questions it can't be all that accurate. Can it? Hmmmmmm.....

Discovered at: "The Conch"

PERSIA ON THE PACIFIC

2003-11-07T14:40:00.000-08:00

Iluminating article about California's Iranian community. Read it here, in - "The New Yorker".

I found the article interesting. At least one person I've come across took issue with the part about Iranian Muslims and Jews picking fights with each other. I'm sure it's not the norm, but I have no doubt it happens. The author is an Iranian herself, so I can't imagine what her motives would be to make it up.

I think she paints as accurate a picture as one could in the space alloted. It's a very good article. I learned a few things I did not know, and some of my personal observations were confirmed.

And thankfully, she reminded me that I haven't had any Mashti Malone's Rosewater ice cream in almost a year! Yikes, I must get some soon. It's the desert of gods, I'm telling you! Yum yum.

Time Lapse film of Largest fire in California history

2003-10-31T14:42:00.000-08:00

This video was taken from the top of Mount Laguna, about 50 miles east of Downtown San Diego. You are seeing the smoke of 1 fire only, there were two others burning but you can't see their plumes of smoke in this image. The video begins just after sunrise and squeazes the entire day into 45 seconds. One frame of video was taken every minute. Never before in California history has a fire gotten so large so fast. Look for the first signs of billowing smoke on the right of the screen the moment the film starts. Mount Laguna is about 6000 ft above sea level, and 50 miles east of the Pacific Ocean. Usually, you can see the Ocean from up there on a day like this - if it wasn't for the smoke. When the video first starts the fire measure about 10 miles across, then builds to about 40 miles by nightfall. This is the fire they call the "Cedar Fire". It now holds the record for the largest in California history.

Slow conections click here to view.

This is what I was breathing on Wednesday

2003-10-31T14:14:00.000-08:00

That odd looking circular object is the sun. The color of the sun that afternoon was a deep red. No problem at all to look directly at the sun.

I-15 where it crosses Highway 52, near Tierasanta and Marine Corps Air Station - Miramar. Looking west towards La Jolla. Photo was taken Sunday afternoon at around 1 or 2 in the afternoon. Luckilly this was also at about the time the wind began to die down in that area. If it had not, the fire would have traveled to the Ocean by nightfall. Through great efforts of firefighters and Marines, the westward progression of the fire was stopped before it crossed I-805 and entered San Deigo's coastal comunities.

Fires continue to burn in San Diego Mountains

2003-10-28T19:23:00.000-08:00

Today's picture from space shows active fire areas. This image shows all of southern California.

Photo, courtesy of New Scientist.

Last night I thought the worst was over. It wasn't. The fire continues to burn out of control in an eastward direction. The smoke got even heavier today. The smoke was so thick that the street lights were on at 3 pm. It seems that as the Cedar fire burns up the mountains the vegetation gets thicker and taller. The volume of smoke produced is massive. I've lived here during some pretty big fires, but this one out does them all many times over.

From the upper left, you are seeing fires in the following communities: Simi Valley/Ventura County, San Bernardino/Lake Arrowhead area, just west of Big Bear. Directly underneath that, the fire with the narrowest plume of smoke is in extreme northwestern San Diego County, near the point where Orange, Riverside and San Diego Counties come together, it started on Camp Pendleton Marine base and is now burning near the small town of De Luz. Directly to the right (east) of that fire there is a little bit of smoke from an older fire east of tenuously, below that is the "Paradise Fire" in Valley Center California. Below and to the left of that is the "Cedar Fire", that has been the most destructive so far. It's the one that burned through the Scripps Ranch neighborhood of San Diego on Sunday. As I'm typing it is devastating the communities of Julian, Descanso, Pine Valley, Julian, and Cuyamaca. My cousins have a vacation home up there that has been in the family for over 40 years, we don't know if it has survived or not. I have many fond memories from my visits there as a child. I hope it survives. I have a good feeling about it. Ensh Allah.

The other minor fire straddling the border is fully contained now. There is a new one on the map today, located at the lower part of the image, it is burning near Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico. When the wind shifts, sometime tomorrow, all that smoke that's out over the Pacific Ocean will come back through and push up against the mountains. That will be lovely...NOT! Blech.

San Diego usually has some of the cleanest air in California. I miss it.

Iranian of the day

2003-10-28T00:05:00.000-08:00

Today I bought a new mobile phone. I suspected the woman who ran the store was Iranian, but I managed to hold off on asking her until I was almost ready to leave. She has a very obvious accent, but it wasn't readily identifiable as Iranian, at least to me. So I asked her the cliche: "Where are you from?" She didn't seem to be the least bit offended by it. We talked for about a half hour or so after that. (Business was very light today, because of the fires.)

Strangely enough, she was another Jewish Iranian. I've mentioned at least once before that I tend to meet more Jewish Iranians here in San Diego than anything else. We seem to have a large population of Jewish Iranians and Christian Iraqis, here in San Diego.

I could write so much about our meeting, but I only have a little time. What I wanted to mention, is that she is yet another Iranian who supports US military intervention in Iran. Like me, she believes it would save many many Iranian lives. The Mullahs are not going to give up their power easily, like the Shah did.

While I would like to see the people free themselves, I do not think they will get the chance. For the time being it appears the Mullahs have solved the nuclear standoff, but for some reason I doubt their sincerity. I still hold to my opinion that some sort of US military action will ensue before it is all over.

The Mullahs must not be allowed to get the nuclear bomb, their support of anti-Zionist terrorism will have to be dealt with soon. I just can't imagine how the Iranian people are going to oust the regime without some help. If they could pull it off, many thousands would have to die for it, unnecessarily.

UPDATE ON FIRE SITUATION

2003-10-27T23:03:00.000-08:00

Image of Scripps Ranch neighborhood on Fire.

I lived in Scripps Ranch with my parents for about a year in 1983. People were talking about the high fire danger because of all the trees and cedar shake roofs, way back then. Cedar shake is commonly sold in front of grocery stores - for kindling. Most of the homes lost, had cedar shingle roofs. As of this evening's latest news conference, they are now saying that the number of lost homes in that neighborhood is closer to 300 than 150. Scripps Ranch has lots of tall Eucalyptus trees. It's located just north of MCAS - Miramar, on the East side of the freeway. Scripps is a beautiful family neighborhood with homes from $500k to over $1 million.

Last night's air quality was deplorable at my house. I'd say it has improved at least 60% since then. I drove up to Del Mar this afternoon and the air was clearer up there. It seems to be the worst near downtown San Diego and Mission Valley, where Qualcom stadium is. Everything is covered in ash and the air is not just smoky, but filled with little tiny particles of ash. Yesterday I was having pieces of debris up to the size of a half dollar coin falling on my house and yard. The nearest fire at the time was about 5 miles away. Today I collected oak leaves which fell in my yard - completely intact - although looking a bit toasted. That's quite an updraft! All the fires in or near town are out now. There are still active fires in the foothills and mountains though. Winds are light now, and humidity is rising. They could burn for another week or more, but won't cause the kind of catastrophic damage they did yesterday, because they are in sparsely inhabited areas now. If the winds had not let up yesterday afternoon, the fire would have made it at least to Mission Valley and possibly all the way to the Pacific Ocean near La Jolla. What a blessing the winds died down.

There were three main fires. As I listened to yesterday's news reports, it was hard to imagine that the most devastating fire had started way out in Ramona. It burned through Lakeside, Poway, Scrips Ranch, skirted Santee on the north, then burned as far west as I-805 and highway 52. The Marines fought the fire as it came onto the base at Miramar, and the City of San Diego landfill, south of the base helped to keep it from reaching the La Jolla area. The fire got within about 4 miles of the Ocean, when a wind driven ember landed in Clairemont along the west side of I-805. Luckily, the wind had died down near the coast by then. If it hadn't we would have lost houses there as well. That was all from one fire. That fire measures about 30 miles from where it started, to its western terminus - as the crow flies. It is still burning near Lakeside and Alpine, along the I-8 corridor. The eastern edge of that fire is still advancing towards mount Cuyamaca and the town of Pine valley tonight. So that's 30 miles west and 20 miles east of where the fire began on Saturday night. That's a 50 mile long wildfire. It's a miracle we didn't lose even more homes. Another fire started Early Sunday near the Mexican border, out highway 94 near the rural town of Dulzura. It burned as far west as the Otay Mesa area of Chulla Vista. As far as I know, no homes were consumed by that fire. It has burned over 20k acres. Luckily Otay reservoir stopped its western progression. West of the lake it is solid suburban development all the way to the bay. Another blessing that the wind died down. It's not that wide of a lake!

The third fire started in Valley Center, which is a semi rural area located between Escondido and Mount Palomar, about 40 miles north of San Diego. Many homes were lost up there as well. That fires is still burning east of Valley Center moving towards Julian. It is now in very heavy brush and mountainous terrain. The south side of that fire burns near the Wild Animal park tonight. The eastern edges of the two northernmost fires will become forest fires soon, as they move into higher elevations with pine forests.

As usual Gray Davis reacted too late. It seems he didn't want to help until the cameras were ready. This will grown into a scandal, as the truth comes out. We needed air support from the beginning, we still do. Too many resources were up north in Simi Valley and San Bernardino. The governor had the power to cut through the bureaucracy, but evidently he thinks that bureaucracy is more important than human lives. Today the bureaucracy is still in place and the fire still burns. He had some great photo ops though.

San Diegan's who have to venture outside are wearing particle masks. The smoke was so thick yesterday, I had to have inside lights on for much of the day and some of the street lights came on at mid day. Tonight's crescent moon came out briefly and looked blood red. I think last night was the new moon, which is my favorite to look at, and even though my window faces west, I never saw it.

Thousands of San Diegan's are homeless tonight. At least 12 people are dead. Over 300k acres have burned, county-wide. I worry about all the animals that lost their lives. This was the worst fire in San Diego history. It could have been even worse if the wind had not died down.

PS: As I mentioned yesterday, the national news media was slow to grasp the severity of the situation. They didn't seem to get it until this morning. Unless you knew San Diego well, it was difficult to tell how widespread the fires were, and just how fast they were spreading. I suspect the governor didn't understand for quite some time as well. I guess it's too late to recall him over it now, though. ;-)

SAN DIEGO IS BURNING!

2003-10-26T13:22:00.000-08:00

The air at my house is beginning to choke me. The air is brownish orange. When I awoke at 8 am the fire was about 10 miles north of me in Scripps Ranch. Since then it has burnt through several miles of brush, jumped highway 52 and continues to spread south and west. It is now within about 5 miles of my house. Not only that but there are fires in a 40 mile long line from Valley Center to the Mexican border near Dulzura and Otay Mesa.

This is unprecedented in California history. We have fires every year, but this is so big the firefighters can't even begin to get a handle on it. Our fire fighting equipment such as helicopters, air tanker planes etc. had been loaned out to fight the fires in San Bernardino County, near Rancho Cucamonga.

I may have to leave to get out of the smoke. At this writing things are getting worse, not better.

So far, national news outlets have failed to grasp the severity of the situation.

Humidity 7%, air temperature 90 degrees F, winds NE at 7, gusting to 28 mph.

Watch live breaking coverage. (Will no longer offer live coverage of the fire, but they have pre-recorded video available. You just have to look around for it.)

UPDATE - 5:40 PM Pacific standard time: It is now dark outside. The wind has died down a little and the temperature has cooled down considerably. The sun never came out today because of the smoke. I am not in imminent danger where I am - from fire - but the smoke has gotten very thick. I can barely see street lights that are less than a half mile away. The nearest flames are about 4 and a half miles NE of my location in central San Diego. I hope the winds remain calm over night. The percentage of containment is ZERO %.

UPDATE 7 PM Sunday: The Mayor has now asked all employers in the county to give employees the day off tomorrow. There are so many closed freeways and roads that it would cause grid-lock tomorrow morning. That could end up being lethal for people who get trapped in their cars when the fires comes through. Almost every school, government offices, and many businesses have announced they will be closed until further notice.

San Diego from space: I live in the midst of all that smoke. The fires in Riverside and San Bernardino County are causing that smoke way up in the upper right hand corner of the image, out over the Pacific Ocean. That narrower plume in the upper middle comes from the fire on the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base. That fire has been burning for several days already and seemed big until Sunday morning. Usually our wind comes from the Northwest brining in cool moist air off the Pacific Ocean, the hot, dry "Santa Anna Winds" come from the inland desert regions, which are at higher elevations. As the wind comes over the mountains it rushes through the canyons and heats up. The tiniest fire from a cigarette or something can quickly become a raging wildfire durring a Santa Anna.

This image shows an area about 70 miles by 120 miles wide.

FREE AMAD BATEBI!!!

2003-10-22T14:05:00.000-07:00

He's the young gentleman in the famous image above. Click on him to sign a pettition for his release. He's been held in prison for over 4 years. His crime???

Someone took this picture of him, holding up the bloody shirt of one of his classmates. The picture was then published.

What??? You're saying there is no crime in that? EXACTLY!

So sign the pettition.

Share your favorite Fesenjen recipes

2003-10-22T00:02:00.000-07:00

I have a freind named Fez. He loves the Persian dish "Fesenjen" so much that he changed his name because of it! Yes, I kid you not.

Last year, I swore that I would make myself some Fesenjen. (Sometimes spelled Fesenjoon.) I never got around to it. This year I swear I will. In fact, I plan to go out to an Iranian restaurant to try some of it. I figure that will help me to be able to mimick it in my own kitchen, or at least act as some inspiration for me. You see, I never had the pleasure of eating any while I was in Iran. But Fez has inspired me to try it.

So what I am looking for is your family's favorite way of making it. If you can please send in your recipes. You can either cut and paste it into the comments for everyone to see, or send it to me through e-mail.

Anti-Americanism. Where does it come from, and is America to blame?

2003-10-16T19:54:00.000-07:00

American bashing exists in Canada for some of the same reasons it does in Muslim dominated societies. The shear size of our economy causes American culture to spill over into their culture. It's very difficult to get away from American influence in today's world. Add a little ethnocentrism, and a national identity crises (in the case of Canada), and you get a lot of pent up resentments.

Most Canadians live within 50 miles of the US border. They can receive US TV and radio stations. They shop in American malls, smoke American made cigarettes, etc. (over-generalizing a bit, of course. Not all of them do.)

There are so many similarities between Americans and Canadians that Canadians have had a long standing identity crises because of it. I can't say I really blame them. I would too.

What Canadians might not understand right now is what it is like being an American in today's world.

When you are on top, there are always a lot of people attempting to knock you down a few pegs. Quite simply, our political, military and economic power causes a lot of jealousy. Many are threatened by it.

In the Muslim world, political and economic power have historically been tied to religious power. The boundary between religion and politics is often blurred because of that. Banditry and thugery are longstanding ways of gaining wealth and power, which is often legitimized through religion. The mix is quite toxic. To maintain power, successful leaders have often resorted to identifying an outside threat to rally the people behind them. The people must remain convinced that they need the leaders in order to protect their way of life.

For along time, it was the Jews, then the Christians, up until about 50 years ago, Great Britain was the favored scapegoat. In short, anyone who could truly pose a threat to the wealth and power of the ruling class had to be vilified.

Today the threat to that power is the United States. But this time, it is not just our power and economic might which causes a threat, but our political ideology. It seems the whole world wants to be free. Therein lies the problem.

For many thousands of years the way to power in the middle east has been gained and maintained through rather brutal means. Power and wealth has always rested in the state, which then, typically meters it out unevenly, with the larger share going to the most loyal subjects. Those who are seen as different than the ruling class then become an underclass who works largely to support the ruling class.

Then, about 70 years ago, those who lusted after political power in Muslim countries began to notice a brand new power had arisen in the world. Their people were free and prosperous. In that country political power rested in the citizenry, who then metered it out to those they wanted as their leaders. The people could giveth, and the people could taketh away.

In this system, the old ways would never work. It was a major threat, so they set out to vilify America. When the populace began to emulate Americans and demand American like freedoms, those who lusted after power could see their whole power structure was threatened. That is why the worst form of anti-Americanism emanates from the middle-east.

It is the only form which poses a threat to our safety. In truth, Canadians and Americans do share a lot of the same values. It's just that Canada is in a completely different position in world politics. That simple fact may make Canadian culture more different than ours in the future than it has been historically.

These are my thoughts on the issue so far. This is the first time I have attempted to write about it, so I got a little long winded. That's why I decided to post it here, instead of in Faramin's comments section. Over time my beliefs and thoughts will surely evolve.

Truth, War and Consequences - documentary about the war in Iraq

2003-10-16T14:09:00.000-07:00

I missed most of last weeks Frontline, on PBS. I lost track of time, so I just caught the end. So I was quite pleased to find the entire episode can be viewed from their website. I'll be writing about my thoughts and feelings after I've viewed the entire thing. Here's a link if you would like to watch it yourself. I found the sound garbled on the windows media version. The Real Player version is better.

I consider Frontline to be a highly credible source of information. I love watching their documentaries. There is a new episode on tonight that should interest readers of my blog. They usually come on at 9 PM local time on PBS. Tonight's episode is about the Lackawanna 6. Alleged Terrorists rounded up near buffalo New York last year. I'll write about tonight's show too, in a separate entry.

Too funny!

2003-10-16T00:35:00.000-07:00

Armed and dangerous - Iranian women's police force:

"Conclusion: The first two and a half years of the above training was spent towards avoiding a crucial and commonly fatal accident caused by tripping over the Chador (Islamic veil/covering) while carrying guns and rifles.

(I'd imagine the ACIDENTAL BEHEADINGS would really be a problem too. As they trip on their CHADORS and fall on their SWORDS. They sure look cool in their uniforms though. The swords make a great accessory, really livens up the drab black. - American Guy)

Asghari, watch out! there maybe bullets in your Khoreshe Gheymeh* will be their very intimidating motto.

*a favorite Iranian dish"

I can't stop laughing. Thank you very much Toomar!

About my name

2003-10-15T23:51:00.000-07:00

There seems be some confusion caused in the minds of some because of my choice of names. It seems that some people think that because I call myself "American Guy", that I somehow claim to speak for all American's. I assure you, nothing could be further from the truth.

As you can see, this blog is rather Iran-centric. I decided on it after spending several weeks reading the other Iranian blogs - last spring.

I had this little idea pop into my imagination of a group of Iranian blogers gathered together in a coffee shop, discussing the latest entries in the Iranian blogosphere. Since I am the only American bloger I know of (so far), who writes mostly about things pertaining to Iran, I imagined one of them saying, "you know, that - American Guy...Ohhhh, what is his name again?" So I thought I'd save all you nice Iranian blogers out there from the trouble of trying to remember my name, and just call myself: "that - American Guy".

I do not claim to be a mirror of what American's are thinking, nor do I attempt to speak for them. What I am is an American guy who once lived in Tehran and still care very much about what happens to the good people who live there.

Nobel Peace Prize and Piety - Christian Science Monitor

2003-10-15T23:12:00.000-07:00

The article also mentions that she has been imprisoned by the Mullacracy. The list of people who have is like a "who's who" in Iranian human rights circles. I pray that she will be protected.

["Ebadi's challenge to her country's rulers is to show them that sharia (Islamic law) can be compatible with democracy and equal rights without undermining Islam. The religion must be interpreted for the modern age, she says, and women can't be subjected to roles they had 1,400 years ago. (I would so love to hear how she proposes to do this. PLEASE SEND LINKS!)

She's personally experienced the ups and downs of women's rights in Iran. Under the shah, women gained freedoms that led Ebadi to become the nation's first female judge. But after the Islamic Revolution of 1979, women were barred from such posts because hard-line theocrats saw them as "too emotional." ]

...

["In trying to bargain with this pious patriarchy, Ebadi has used both Islam and women's rights in her arguments. This "conscious Muslim," as the Nobel committee called her, wants a separation between state and religion, but also wants Islam to support democracy and human rights. Iran can't have one small group of men assume power by a claim to divine authority and then "shove its patriarchal interpretations down our throats."

The dignity of each individual is the basis of every religion, and Ebadi deserves this honor for trying to genially persuade those in power that Islam gives that dignity to everyone."]

...

And I thought this paragraph from the Christian Science monitor was particularly poignant.

The list of laureates includes the Buddhist Dalai Lama, Roman Catholic Bishop Carlos Belo in East Timor, Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mother Teresa, and former US president Jimmy Carter. Those particular awards serve as a reminder that the concept of rights and nonviolent activism originated and flourish within communities of faith.

Shirin Abadi arrives at Mehrabad airport

2003-10-15T17:01:00.000-07:00

Photos posted on Tehran 24

www.tehran24.com

I thought I heard her home was in Paris, am I incorect?

As SleepWalker has informed me, Ms. Abadi lives in Tehran. I have removed an earlier statement that she lived in exile in Paris, from my entry entitled "Nobel prize for a pooped Pope?" That's what I get for trying to work and listen to the news at the same time. ;-)

And by the way. I meant no offense to Catholics with that remark. He has looked a little pooped lately, hasn't he?

Nobel prize for a pooped Pope?

2003-10-15T15:11:00.000-07:00

When I heard the banter on several American TV stations this week over who was more deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize, Pope John Paul or Shirin Ebadi - I had to cringe. One of the arguments seemed to be: Give it to the Pope, before it's too late. They were of course, assuming that because of his frail health he won't be around next year.

I love and respect Pope John Paul II. He's been an awesome leader for the Catholic Church. However, giving him the prize would do nothing to further the cause of peace and justice in the world. (IMHO)

Shirin Abadi was unknown to almost everyone who heard the news last week when she was awarded the Nobel Prize for peace. Today, I'd dare say that half of the people in the western world know her name and that she is an Iranian human rights activist.

The fact that she did most of her great humanitarian work since the rise of the Islamic Republic rose to power in 1979, makes it all the more noble. She was under constant threat of persecution for her beliefs from the powers that be in Iran. It has not been an easy road for her to travel.

If the Pope had won, nobody's life would be changed for the better, but by giving it to an Iranian Human rights activist they have drawn attention to the plight of the Iranian people and elevated her profile in the western media. This has the potential to help many millions of people and will make her future work more effective.

Those of us who write letters of support and sign petitions for victims of Iran's human rights abuses sometimes wonder if anyone important really notices. These campaigns to draw attention to the plight of these victims rarely even make a ripple in the news media. Now, when her name is part of it, there is a very good chance that the story will get picked up in western news media.

While there were many people who deserved it, awarding the prize to them might not have a positive impact on as many peoples live's.

I hope Ms. Abadi's newfound prominence will help many, many Iranians and help to bring down Iran's repressive - dictatorial - regime.

Israel's battle plan to take out Iran's 6 nuclear facilities - From WhoMan

2003-10-15T14:40:00.000-07:00

(My comments are in itallics, below.)

[Israel's air strike on Iran

Two possibilities came to my mind once I read about the military plan of a possible Israeli air strike against "six" nuclear sites in Iran (three of which is not known to the world according to a leaked report). However, it seems there are some people who have more or less the same ideas as I do.

When a military plan from a professional military force, like that of Isreal, is leaked to the outside world, you can't help but wonder that either:
1- it is all a bluff, and has a clear signal embedded for Iran.
or
2- Isreal is so certain of its military superiority and Iran's inability to prevent it that the publication of this news, to the Israeli planners, will not change the outcome of the air raid.]

WhoMan,

I think both are right.

On the one hand, Israel might be "leaking" this information as a sort of diplomacy by threat tactic. That is, hoping that the threat by itself will be enough to deter the Islamic Republic's nuclear ambitions. That way they avoid the political negatives that would come from a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

I'm sure Israel is quite confident in their ability to take out these sites, whether Iran is expecting it or not.

I must take issue with Faramin's comments, above (included herein):

["This might give an excuse to Iranian government to claim this as double standard and as a result to not cooperate with the International Atomic Agency, and subsequently an opportunity for the Americans to claim: "ahha, see Iran is not coperating" and increasing the level of fear factor in the world and in the US about the threats from Iran and setting the stage to attack Iran." - Faramin]

From what I've read, his seems to be an attitude shared by many Iranians. Those Iranian's seem to think protecting Iran's national pride is more important than protecting the lives of the inocent Iranian's who would become casualties of Israels air raids.

Iran has set the stage for an attack all on it's own. Iran openly supports terrorist groups. They have made it abundantly clear that their goal is "death to Israel" and "death to America".

At the present time, it looks to me like the confrontation may be inevitable. If it indeed comes to pass, I hope the Iranian people will have the soberness of mind to realise that it is not an attack on them, but a defensive measure necesitated by the actions of the IRI itself.

The IRI has made Iran, international parias. Now they have brought Iran to the brink of war with the western world. If Iranians decide that notional pride is more important and thereby decide to unite in support of the regime, it will be a disaster for the freedom movement. However, if the people place the blame for the crises on the failed regime who created the problem in the first place, then they can use it for a rallying cry to end the oppresive Mullacracy.

In this case, the spin one puts on the attack could make all the difference. If played right, the attack could be a blessing in disguise. - American Guy

Sounds yummy!

2003-10-10T20:53:00.000-07:00

[Beets
We were walking down the street when K spotted steam coming from a food cart. "Labu," he said excitedly. As we got closer we saw towers of red, steaming beets. Some of the beets were the size of mush balls (any mush ball players out there?) I am not sure how they get to be so big.

The beets are sold by weight. The guy behind the steam cuts them up, gives you a plastic fork, and you eat them on the street.]

From: View from Iran

The best site on Persian culture I have found so far

2003-10-09T02:07:00.000-07:00

But their Persian cuisine section doesn't include Fesenjen. The cool foggy evening tonight reminded me of it. One of my friends goes nuts over it, I've still not tasted it.

Everything you wanted to know about Persian Culture - but were afraid to ask.

Iran's fragile fault lines

2003-10-09T01:41:00.000-07:00

A very interesting and long - article. I haven't read the whole thing yet, but I will on the morrow. I agree with the conclusion, though. However, US intervention would register pretty high on the Richter scale and is still possible.

[From this expose, what becomes evident is that there will likely be no more revolutionary earthquakes in Iran. The impassioned demonstrations and student frustrations are aftershocks that, with time and perseverance, will eventually lead to a new political consensus and pluralist polity. What shape the future government will hold is uncertain. And Abdo and Lyons discuss only the Islamic democratic option, neglecting the entire debate around a secular democratic alternative. Evidently, though, this current reformist movement is neither cohesive nor widespread enough to effect radical or immediate change. The reformist factions remain at odds over their disparate political visions. This is why Abdo and Lyons deem the opposition movement embryonic.

Ultimately, however, there is no doubt that change will come for the Iranian people. As Abdo and Lyons have shown, even clerical opposition runs in tandem with the rigid nature of the regime. They have revealed that it is not only the average Iranian worker, bazaari, or student who struggles to survive in the midst of these theocratic contradictions, but also a clerical class that feels stifled by the hypocritical quality of the political system. It is this clerical opposition, the challenge from within, that poses the greatest threat. Hence the need for silence, the need to control the press, the need to contain the idealistic student groups, the need to maintain domestic unity as the American shadow ominously looms on the horizon. The conservatives in power can muffle this opposition only for so long. With time and increased momentum, the fault lines will continue to grow and, with them, so will the hope of achieving the dream of freedom.]

Read the rest:

Shi'ite protestors in Baghdad

2003-10-09T01:27:00.000-07:00

This situation sucks.
I hope this remains peaceful, but I'm worried. Law and order must be maintained. You can't just release people from jail because an angry crowd demands it. Due process must be followed. The protestors need to know this. If they become violent it will be most unfortunate, because the American troops guarding the complex will have no recourse accept to use force.

It does sound like this cleric was planning an uprising. They're just going to have to learn to live together. I don't want to see Iraq balkanized, that is broken up into many small countries divided along ethnic lines.

If they want a certain amount of autonomy for their region, they are better off to wait until the country stabilizes. If they revolt now, they will end up worse off in the long run than if they sat tight.

Turkey should stay out of Iraq

2003-10-09T01:08:00.000-07:00

Thirty seven thousand people have already died in fighting between Iraqi Kurds and Turkish troops. Allowing them to serve would be to destabilizing. Sorry, but we just don't need their help that bad.

I agree, that neighboring countries should not provide such direct support as sending in troops.

Here is an article about the situation.

Christopher Hitchens Interview with Hossein Khomeini

2003-10-06T17:34:00.000-07:00

Like most Iranian observers, I've met the words of Hossein Khomeini with great interest. Unfortunately, I knew nothing about him until I saw his name in the American press a few weeks ago. This article helps to fill in a few blanks. The more I learn about him, the more I want to learn. I'm quite fascinated that his views are sooooooo different than his Grandfather's. (Well, I guess I shouldn't be, really. My views are quite different from my grandfather's.) here are a few excerpts to wet your appetite. Click here to read the entire article.

"[Shiite Islam] considers earthly kingship to be profane. But no one can be completely uninterested in heredity per se, and my first thought, on meeting Hossein Khomeini, was that he has his grandfather's eyebrows. Still, our conversation quickly banished the notion that this 45-year-old cleric is the least bit interested in running for his grandpa's job."

...

"We cannot nowadays have executions in this form." Indeed, he added, it was the policy of executions that had turned the Islamic revolution in Iran sour in the first place. "Now we have had 25 years of a failed Islamic revolution in Iran, and the people do not want an Islamic regime anymore."

It's not strictly necessary to speak to Hossein Khomeini to appreciate the latter point: Every visitor to Iran confirms it, and a large majority of the Iranians themselves have voted for anti-theocratic candidates. The entrenched and reactionary regime can negate these results up to a certain point; the only question is how long can they do so? Young Khomeini is convinced that the coming upheaval will depend principally on those who once supported his grandfather and have now become disillusioned. I asked him what he would like to see happen, and his reply this time was very terse and did not require any Quranic scriptural authority or explication. The best outcome, he thought, would be a very swift and immediate American invasion of Iran. ']

Intriguing thought.

Notice the title of Christopher Hitchens book, at the bottom of the article. "Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair and author of "The Long Short War: The Postponed Liberation of Iraq." If that's Hitchens thesis for the book, I'd have to agree with him. It isn't easy being a trend setter, but it is oh so satisfying - later on - when others who are more learned than I, adopt the same ideas. It's a curse being so bright. ;-)

Truth Windows

2003-10-02T21:46:00.000-07:00

Among America's Granola eating types (hippies), there is a straw-bale house movement. They build houses out of straw, then they are usually stucco'd over so they end up looking almost normal, (in an Arizona-ish sort of way). To prove to people that their beautiful homes really are built out of straw they leave what they call "Truth Windows". I thought of them as I looked at this image on Iran Va-Jahan's web site.

Does she look oppressed or what?

And if you were wondering if Iran is still in the JIHAD business...

2003-10-02T21:22:00.000-07:00

[World > Middle East
from the September 25, 2003 edition

SHOW OF FORCE: Iran kicked off 'Sacred Defense Week' with a military parade in Tehran on Monday. Despite hostile rhetoric, there are signs Iran may try to thaw relations with the US.

Hostile in public, Iran seeks quiet discourse with US

A saber-rattling military parade in Tehran this week belies a number of diplomatic openings.

By Scott Peterson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

TEHRAN, IRAN – As a half-dozen of Iran's most advanced ballistic missiles roll by, at the climax of a military parade this week, the anti-US rhetoric appears unchanged.
"We will crush America under our feet," the painted lettering reads, on the Shahab-3 missile - a rocket with a 1,000-mile range that the Islamic Republic vows can "hit the heart of the enemy" US-ally Israel. ]

The rest of the story may be found - here.

You say you want a revolution?

2003-10-02T20:57:00.000-07:00

.

[ "Hizbollahi have come to my concerts, but they listened, because of the poems I chose to sing about," says Assar between practice sets for the upcoming concert. "Music is not a kind of war, where we [musicians] are fighting [the Islamic Guidance Ministry] and Hizbollahi."

He notes that Iran has "Islamic rules," and that performers "must understand their people. Maybe [Iranians] like heavy metal - I love it - but it is not our culture. To play that, you must know who is listening to you ... and this kind of music has side effects."

The result in Iran is a mixture of musical styles, and degrees of legality, as Iranians explore ways of expression. "People are looking for a new reality," says one amateur musician who first picked up a guitar during high school in the 1960s. "I couldn't find anyone interested in playing with me then, but now it is like a fever."

That fever is spreading. A website called "Tehran Avenue" (www.tehranavenue.com) launched a competition between underground groups last year. The competition turned into a big deal for local bands. Now on the site is a link to "Setting up a performance: A survival guide," that notes potential pitfalls.

....]

Great article on Iranian musicians from - Christian Science monitor.

Hossein Khomeini, Speaks truth - I listen

2003-10-02T20:50:00.000-07:00

This guy is growing on me. His take on things is uncanilly similar to mine. (Well, and Ledeen's, they have been hang'n together like buds you know. )

Cleric's grandson applauds the U.S.
United Press International - By Eli J. Lake
Oct 1, 2003

The grandson of the late Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini is in Washington this week and giving his blessing to the United States should it decide to invade Iran and throw the clerics out of power.

"The establishment of democracy should be taken very seriously in Iran," Hossein Khomeini said in an interview.

"Even if the situation necessitates for the United States to take military action in Iran, they should not hesitate," Mr. Khomeini said.

He called Americans liberators for invading neighboring Iraq and throwing out the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Hossein Khomeini has his grandfather's eyebrows, dark bushy lines arched like wide triangles over his dark eyes, but similarities to his grandfather, who established Iran's theocracy in 1979 and labeled the United States the Great Satan, end there.

For the interview, he wore loose-fitting gabardine slacks and a gray long-sleeve T-shirt with the outline of two arrows.

Mr. Khomeini said he opposed Iran's sponsorship of terrorism, a point he made last week at the United Nations for a terrorism conference.

"I like Washington," he said. "But I really love New York. The city has such a warmth to it."

Mr. Khomeini, a junior cleric, moved to the Iraqi holy city of Karbala last spring during the U.S. war against Saddam.

While he said he used the occasion of his Friday sermons to criticize the Islamic Republic while he was in Iran, since his arrival in Iraq his words have become sharper.

"The rulers of Iran have to go and they have to go forever," he said. "If the Iranian people rise up, they will kill them all."

This may be unsettling news to some in the Bush administration who had hoped for a bloodless revolution in Iran.

The State Department, for example, held preliminary talks last month to discuss how to funnel nonmilitary assistance and training to democratic groups in Iran.

Mr. Khomeini said he believed that President Bush's encouragement over the last year and a half to the democrats in Iran would ultimately be helpful to their cause.

"If there is honesty in what the president says and he follows up with it, it may not give them the result we want immediately, but in the long run, if the United States is committed to democracy and freedom for Iran, it is going to be effective and not hurt us."

But he also warned against U.S. policy-makers putting too much stock in the opinions of Iranian Americans.

"The United States should not make the mistake of looking at this generation inside Iran from the perspective [of the] Iranian community here," he said.

"With all due respect I have for the Iranian Americans, because of the historical baggage they carry they cannot be representatives of the young generation in Iran."

Isfahan or bust! --Iran's capital should be moved, says quake expert

2003-10-02T20:43:00.000-07:00

I'd be all for this. Isfahan is one of my favorite cities in the world.

From SMCCDI: daneshjoo.org

Current News & Articles
Iran's capital should be moved, says quake expert
Reuters - World News
Oct 1, 2003

TEHRAN - Iran's capital is in such a perilous location it should be moved, a leading Iranian earthquake expert told Reuters on Wednesday.

The sprawling concrete jungle of Tehran is perched on lethal geological faults and experts estimate six percent of the population, or some 720,000 people, could die if "the big one" shakes its ramshackle buildings to the ground.

Bahram Akasheh, professor of geophysics at Tehran University, has formally suggested to President Mohammad Khatami that the centre of government be moved deeper into the interior.

"It would be better to have the capital in somewhere near Isfahan: that would be safer. Other countries have changed their capital without any adverse effect," he said.

Iranian monarch Shah Abbas the Great made Isfahan in central Iran his capital in the late 16th century. Government was moved to Tehran in 1788 and around 12 million people now live there....... ]

Read the rest of the article - here. Faramin has an entry about this too. with a picture of a huge tower they are building in Tehran.

Montazeri speaks, I listen

2003-10-02T20:34:00.000-07:00

If Ayatolah Montazeri were the leader of Iran, I wouldn't be so affraid of visiting there. I do wonder how he ever got to be such good friends with Khomeini. They seem so different. I feel love for him. He stands up for what he believes, no matter what. I have to respect that. I wish I knew more about him, if you do or know where I could go to learn it for myself, I'd love to read your comments.

[ From SMCCDI: daneshjoo.org

Current News & Articles
Top Iran Clerical Dissident Calls for More Freedom
Reuters - World News
Oct 2, 2003

QOM - Iran's leading dissident cleric urged ruling authorities to ease restrictions on a restless population and said President Mohammad Khatami had failed to capitalize on the huge mandate he had won for reform.

"If officials really want to solve the crisis and satisfy the people, they should put aside their strictness. People should be free to express their ideas," Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri said in an interview at his home Wednesday.

Montazeri, 81, one of a handful of Shi'ite scholars to attain the rank of Grand Ayatollah, has first-hand experience of the consequences of standing up for his ideas.

Jailed and tortured under the former Shah for his close ties to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini before the 1979 Islamic revolution, he spent five years under house arrest for criticizing Khomeini's successor, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, before being released earlier this year.

But the short-statured cleric, whom Khomeini once referred to as "the fruit of my life" and designated as his natural successor, remains undaunted.

"This country and the revolution belong to the people and the officials are their servants. If the officials review their behavior, everything will be fine," he said, seated in his study in Qom, the center of religious studies in Iran.

Montazeri said the restrictive climate in Iran, where scores of liberal publications have been closed and dozens of writers, students and political activists jailed in the last four years, was forcing thousands of Iran's best minds to leave the country.

He highlighted the actions of the judiciary, where the Special Court for Clergy and Revolutionary Courts have jailed dozens of Khatami supporters in recent years, often after closed-door trials without a jury.

"We do not have Special Courts and Revolutionary Courts in our constitution, both have been invented. They should close these courts and stop the judiciary's harshness. Then many things could become better," he said.

Montazeri, sidelined by Khomeini in 1988 for criticizing the execution of political prisoners, has recently returned to teaching after a bout of heart problems leading up to and following his release from house arrest in January.

Analysts say hard-line officials released Montazeri because of fears that his death while under arrest could become a lightning rod for protests against the political system.

MESSAGE OF TOLERANCE

Around 300 men, including many senior reformist clerics, packed into a simple classroom Wednesday to listen to Montazeri's message of tolerance and equality.

"My point is that all human beings, no matter whether they are believers or not, or whether they are Muslims or not, should be respected," he told the attentive audience.

... ] Read the rest of the article - here.

Whitewashing Radical Islam

2003-10-02T20:03:00.000-07:00

Excelent article! We all need to know this stuff. Unfortunately, the oil money we pour into the mid-east enables them to bring their Jihad here. And Robert Spencer is right. Too many are whitewashing Islam in the name of political corectness. They are doing all of humanity a grave diservice. The truth will set you free.

Whitewashing Radical Islam
By Robert Spencer
FrontPageMagazine.com | September 17, 2003

The Economist this week demonstrated anew just how deeply dhimmitude has penetrated into Western thinking about Islam. Dhimmitude is the institutionalized subservience mandated by Islamic law, the Sharia, for non-Muslims, primarily Jews and Christians. Dhimmis must endure inferior status under the Sharia; if they protest, they risk forfeiting the “protection” that they buy with their special high tax rate (jizya) and their humiliation.

The elaborate legal superstructure of dhimmitude in Islamic law is founded on the Qur’an’s Sura 9:29, which calls on Muslims to “fight” against the “People of the Book” (primarily Jews and Christians) “until they pay the Jizya [special tax for non-Muslims] with willing submission, feel themselves subdued.” A vast body of Muslim theology and jurisprudence guaranteed dhimmis relative security as long as the jizya was paid; if payment ceased, jihad would resume.

This is the origin of the system of dhimmitude — a vast, uniquely Islamic institution of religious apartheid, implemented for over a millennium across three continents (Asia, Africa, and Europe) and still influential in Islamic nations’ policies toward non-Muslim populations. The native “infidel” populations of lands conquered by Islamic armies were required to pay the jizya, recognize Islamic ownership of their land and accept laws forbidding them to own weapons, ring church bells, build new places of worship or repair old ones, testify in Muslim courts, or dress like Muslims. If they complained about these inequalities, they risked forfeiting their “protection.”

Through political correctness, multiculturalist myopia, and the politicized pseudo-academic writings of dhimmi scholars such as Edward Said and John Esposito, the silence and subservience of dhimmitude has entered the public debate about Islam in America and Western Europe. It threatens to strangle that debate with whitewashes about the roots of jihad ideology, the reality of dhimmitude, and more.

A notable example appears in the September 13-19 issue of The Economist. In an article entitled “In the name of Islam,” Peter David goes so far as to acknowledge what few other analysts have dared to: that the jihad ideology that gives rise to terrorism “has, or claims to have, connections with some of the fundamental ideas and practices of the religion itself.” However, he never provides readers the smallest glimpse of what these fundamental ideas and practices might be. Instead, he shifts direction and explores the thought of the influential Egyptian Muslim radical, Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966), who taught that no (Muslim or non-Muslim) state, ungoverned by Sharia, had any right to exist.

David states that much radical jihadist theory “is modern, as political as it is religious, with origins in the late 20th century.” But his Economist piece offers no hint of the great pains that Qutb took in order to show the foundations of his teachings in traditional Muslim sources. David quotes Qutb as dividing the world into the House of Islam (dar al-Islam) and the House of War (dar al-harb) but makes no mention of the fact that this is an ancient distinction established by some of Islam’s earliest theologians and jurists, or that it remains significant to Islamic law today. Qutb himself was not so circumspect: he completed an immense thirty-volume commentary on the Qur’an, In the Shade of the Qur’an, in which he attempts to demonstrate again and again that the pure Islam of the sacred book is today’s radical Islam of blood and terror.

Qutb’s tradition is not the only one in Islam, and millions of peaceful Muslims would reject his theological and political ideas. But to imply that religious violence and religious terrorism are newly minted elements of Islam with no plausible traditional foundations is to ignore how jihad ideologues read (and use to recruit) the Qur’an, the Muslim Prophet Muhammad’s example, an elaborate body of Islamic theology and jurisprudence, and fourteen centuries of Islamic history.

David underscores his omission by breezily dismissing jihadist justifications for violent jihad, stating, “Islam has a concept of jihad (holy war), which some Muslims think should be added to the five more familiar pillars of faith: the oath of belief, prayer, charity, fasting and pilgrimage. But the Koran also insists that there should be no compulsion in religion.” Had David read Qutb further, he would have found, the great Egyptian radical also insisted that jihad in no way involved forced conversion. However, that is not the same as saying jihad is not violent. As I detail extensively in Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West, Qutb drew on traditional concepts of Islamic law to inveigh against the concept of jihad as a forceful means of converting people to Islam. Rather, he insisted, jihad was an offensive struggle to establish the hegemony of the Sharia and subservient dhimmi status for all non-Muslims — who would then be free, of course, to ease the pain of their inferior condition by converting to Islam if they chose.

According to David, “Only a small fraction of [the world’s] 1.5 billion Muslims will have heard of, let alone subscribe to, the ideas of theorists such as Qutb.” These ideas may be more widely diffused than he thinks. A casual look today at the Muslim blogspot www.clearguidance.com, run out of Staten Island, turned up bloggers quoting the writings of Qutb, Osama bin Laden’s mentor Abdullah Azzam, and Osama himself. Maybe there are few people reading such books, but only a few are needed to commit terrorist acts.

David goes on to say that “Islam and Christendom have clashed for centuries. But if there is something in the essence of Islam that predisposes its adherents to violent conflict with the West, it is hard to say what it might be.” The ignorance of this statement is nothing short of breathtaking. According to a traditional source of Islamic law, Muslims must make “war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians . . . until they become Muslim or pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” This obligation is amply delineated in numerous traditional Islamic sources, and it is the foundation for the institutionalized oppression inflicted by dhimmitude laws, under which Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus and others have suffered for centuries.

Knowingly or not, The Economist whitewashes radical Islam’s sources in Islamic theology and tradition. This plays into terrorists’ hands as clearly and directly as a whitewashed portrait of America’s pre-Civil War South plays into the hands of white supremacists, or a whitewashed picture of Nazi Germany into the hands of anti-Semites. A new organization, Dhimmi Watch, is forming to oppose all such whitewashes — on behalf of human rights victims of jihad and dhimmitude now and throughout Islamic history. Whitewashes have no place in any serious, honest analysis of modern-day terrorism.

Robert Spencer is the author of Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West (new from Regnery Publishing) and Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World’s Fastest Growing Faith (Encounter Books, 2002). He is an Adjunct Fellow with the Free Congress Foundation.

Hungry kids analogy

2003-10-02T10:34:00.000-07:00

Below is an excerpt from an entry in Faramin's blog, "Human first, then proud Iranian". He does specify that feeding the child is just for one day, but that isn't very applicable to the real problem the analogy deals with, which is the Israeli (Well fed child) Palestinian conflict. (To his credit he does go on to say he knows the analogy is not that good. ;-) )

After I posted my comments, I re-read what I had written and thought it would be worth sharing. I hope you agree. :-)

["Equaltiy in coverage? NO.
"Three years into the Aqsa Intifada Israelis suffer, Palestinians too"
This is what you see highlighted on the side of an article in Toronto Star called 3,432 graves mock notion of peace (NOTE: over 2/3 of the killed are Palestinian but the Star gives the priority in mentioning Israelis first: "..Israelis suffer, Palestinians too"). This is of course accompanied by a picture showing the pain of an Israeli woman after loosing her loved one perhaps after a suicide bombing. Pictures similar to this are frequently published in the Star; perhaps one of the most balanced papers in north America (imagine how terrible the rast are), but you know, you don't see many pictures of Palestinians suffering, you don't see the pictures showing Palestinians' pain of loosing their loved ones. Even if the content of the story is fair, still the impact of the picture is much more that the story itself, because many people don't even read the whole story and the sole picture gives them plenty of stories.

If a paper such as the Star, with millions of readers, is so much biased in what it publishes, how do you expect me to attribute the same and equal coverage of pain imposed to Palestinian and Israelis?

Again, I will not be so simple to think I have to pay the same attention to both in order to be fair. No, I shouldn't. let me show you what I mean, by an example:

If I have some limited amount of money (my money) in my pocket that I want to spend on buying food for two kids whom I am looking after for one day (and only one day), if one of them is always fed properly and the other one usually suffers from malnutrition and doesn't get much chance for good food, I will definitely spend more money on the second child, while I will still feed the first one. Is it because I dislike the first child? No, but I realize the first child will not suffer if the quality of his food is a bit less (for a day) but the second child does not get much chance like this. Here if I apply equality to both, I am just satisfying myself by feeling: "I am fair". But no, then I am in fact very unfair."]

To which - I replied:

Generosity of heart, without wisdom is folly.

I would also feed the hungry child.

But it would be much more effective to deal with the underlying causes of his (I shall assume the child is a boy) poverty and hunger than to just keep feeding him, out of my own resources. The responsibility goes first to the child's own family, then to the community he lives in, his own society, and finally to the larger world community.

I too would feed the child right away. God has seen fit to bless me with abundance and I am always willing to share it with others. The world is an abundant place. There is always enough for everyone. God designed it that way. Not sharing is too painful for me. I share when I can.

But I don't always share, because that isn't always what's best for them. Like when I see an alcoholic or drug addict pan handling. Money is what they are asking for, but giving it to them will never solve the underlying, true cause of their problems. If I did, I would become their enabler, and we would both end up worse off in the long run.

What's really sad for me is when the child lives in a society that cares less about feeding it's own children than it does about prolonging a senseless war, because hatred and selfishness rule their hearts. That's when it really hurts, because then there is little anyone outside that society can do to end that child's suffering.

Until the critical mass inside that child's society reaches a point where the dominant feelings of it's inhabitants are love and humility, then the suffering will continue.

A permanent sollution is so simple, yet it is also very hard without believing in, and trusting in a loving God.

The conflicts in Northern Ireland and Palestine come to mind. The inhabitants of both places are more willing to sacrifice their own children than to find humility inside themselves. Hatred has become their God, and unfortunately, it's not a very good provider. Hatred is a false God.

Believing in, and trusting in it will lead to famine. -- American Guy

His blog is getting better as of late, but saddly, as he gets more realistic and less radical (and therefore, more convincing) he is also less funny. I didn't even laugh at him once this time. ;-)

Found this at Whooman's blog today:

2003-09-26T18:39:00.000-07:00

[Bush: 'We have a problem with Sharon'

Haaretz is a credible Israeli newspaper that runs read-worthy analyses from time to time. I am not very well amused with their biased columns against Iran, though, unless I have just happened to come across those particular items.

In an article carried yesterday, it argues that US foreign policy is shifting from the Israeli to the Palestinian side. This article contains some interesting dialogues that occurred between George Bush, Israeli, and Palestinian authorities in a three-way meeting last week. According to a participant at the meeting Bush also told his National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice, "I see that we have a problem with Sharon," while saying of the Palestinians led by Prime Minister, Mahmoud Abbas, "We can work with them."

In another part of the discussion, an irritated Bush, according to the paper's source, reacted with "Their own security service? But you have destroyed their security service." to the Israeli defense minister's previous remark. The Israeli official had commented "Well, they won't be getting any help from us; they have their own security service." And when the minister shook his head and said: "I do not think that we can help them, Mr. President", Bush responded "Oh, but I think that you can. And I think that you will."]

After reading certain blogs and the all to frequent - Anti US biased news articles lately, it was refreshing to find this entry on Whooman's blog. --American Guy

Hostile in public, Iran seeks quiet discourse with US

2003-09-26T18:10:00.000-07:00

Christian Science Monitor - By Scott Peterson
Sep 25, 2003
(My comments are written in italics and embeded in the article. --American Guy)

A saber-rattling military parade in Tehran this week belies a number of diplomatic openings.

TEHRAN: As a half-dozen of Iran's most advanced ballistic missiles roll by, at the climax of a military parade this week, the anti-US rhetoric appears unchanged.

"We will crush America under our feet," the painted lettering reads, on the Shahab-3 missile - a rocket with a 1,000-mile range that the Islamic Republic vows can "hit the heart of the enemy" US-ally Israel. - (I'd like to point out that Israel is NOT IRAN'S ENEMY. --American Guy)
But behind the scenes, analysts say that the US occupation of Iraq - and continued instability there - is prompting both Tehran and Washington to reappraise their archenemy status, and find a number of pragmatic reasons not to antagonize each other.

"The Iranians are up for [a deal], to a point. They don't want a fight," says Ali Ansari, at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London. "On the US side, they don't want to make any more enemies in the region. If they antagonize [Iran], hard-liners could whip up real trouble." ...

...But a visit to Tehran a week ago by Jordan's King Abdullah II, followed by his trip to Washington to meet President George Bush at Camp David, may have been a key link.

"[Abdullah] received some new analysis about the region from President [Mohammad] Khatami and Foreign Minister [Kamal] Kharrazi, and transferred that analysis to the US," says Abbas Maleki, Iran's former deputy foreign minister who now runs a Caspian studies institute in Tehran.

Indeed, before visiting Bush, the Jordanian monarch told The Washington Post that he had found "common ground" between US and Iranian security interests, including a mutual fear of the threat from Al Qaeda and Sunni Muslim extremists.
The king said there is "common grounds for a dialogue," between the US and Iran, adding that a shift in policy is "a decision that [Bush is] going to make."

Though Iran remains on Bush's "axis of evil" list, strategic concerns may be causing a tactical thaw.

"We now have more border with the US [occupied countries] than Canada, and we hope this makes the US familiar with realities in the region," says Mr. Maleki. As the US military gets more deeply embroiled in postwar Iraq, anti-Iran rhetoric has tapered off, he says, "because they reached the conclusion they can't fight on different fronts."

Western diplomats and analysts in Tehran dismiss US claims from Baghdad that Iran is systematically seeking to undermine the Iraq occupation, saying that Iran also has a stake in stability there.

"Iran has no interest in creating, or being linked to, any kind of problems the Americans are facing in Iraq," says a Western diplomat. "They understand the price to be paid for doing that.

"If in some circles, [Iranians] are happy when Americans are killed in Iraq, the government and many conservatives don't share that joy," the diplomat adds. "Every setback for the Americans is bad news, because it lengthens the occupation and delays the moment when the Shiite [majority] will take control."

"They didn't raise a finger, and Saddam Hussein is gone. They didn't raise a finger, and the Americans are in trouble without them," notes another, senior Western diplomat. "The principle is not to act. I'm not saying they don't do anything [against the US in Iraq], but the role is marginal."

Secret back-channel meetings are known to have been held during the past two years. And despite the show of force on Monday - the largest parade of its kind in Iran for years, with everything on display from tanks and drones to heavy artillery - Iranian leaders sought to strike a balance.

"Even if we don't give a pretext to the enemy, they will find one," Khatami told the thousands of troops. "Despite all the pressure from our enemies, we will pursue our policy of de'tente, but we will also insist on becoming stronger." --(Uh, Khatami, It's like a little late to "not give the US a pretext". Sheesh! --American Guy)
The influential hard-line Revolutionary Guard commander, Brig. Gen. Yahya Rahim-Safavi, said the "powerful" display showed that Iran is "ready to help establish peace in the region." --(Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! - American Guy)

Those looking for a shaft of light on US-Iran ties, point to an article several months ago by Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful chair of the Expediency Council. He described ways to solve the problem, that included intervention by Iran's supreme religious leader - who has final say on all foreign policy issues - a referendum, or even a vote in parliament. --Those looking for a shaft of light should look elsewhere. Rafsanjani is NOT a purveyor of light!!! The ONLY reason he would say those things is to help the regime hold onto its power. A referendum is needed, but I have no faith that the current regime would allow a fair vote if ousting them was one of the options. --American Guy)
Interest in better bilateral relations has already filtered down to the street. Iranians are obsessed, pro and con, with America.

"The situation in Iraq has caused [Iranian leaders] to change their mind. They know there is no other way than friendship with the US. It's the only way to save Iran and the Iranians," [ie; Regime's stranglehold on power. --American Guy] says Kimia, a recent professional-school graduate. "I'm not a pro-American woman ... and people are not impressed with the Afghan and Iraqi examples. But people are tired and want to be free, and think [US ties] could be a good way."

Such high regard has led some here to expect US intervention, following Bush's encouragement of antiregime demonstrations last June. Upon hearing an American accent, Iranians often ask: "America good! When will Bush come?"

But anti-US actions often match the flag-burning public rhetoric. One example is the case of the Abbas Abdi - one of the students who took over the US embassy more than 20 years ago, who has since become a staunch reformer. Mr. Abdi was jailed last November, charged with "providing information to the enemies of the Islamic regime" for conducting a poll that found 75 percent of Iranians favoring renewed ties with the US. --( Yes, exactly! They have no desire to let go of their power, and anyone who believes their rhetoric, is a fool. --American Guy)
And there are still key obstacles that threaten any possibility of US-Iran warming. One is the officially confirmed presence in Iran of a handful of top Al Qaeda leaders, though their circumstances - are they being hosted or detained and by whom? - are unclear, diplomats say.

Among them are believed to be Osama bin Laden's son, Saad, the movement's No. 2 and No. 3, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Saif al-Adel, and spokesman Sulaiman Abu Ghaith.

Considering the long-standing enmity between Al Qaeda and Iran, analysts here say that the Al Qaeda presence is a high-stakes bargaining chip.

"[Iran] feels it has a hot potato, and doesn't know what to do with it," says a senior Western diplomat. "They don't like Al Qaeda, and had less contact with Al Qaeda than even the CIA did before Sept. 11."

Iran initially denied the presence of any Al Qaeda members, then extradited a handful to Saudi Arabia early last year. Iran has reportedly told the US and other countries that Al Qaeda leaders in Iran have now been detained, and are not allowed to communicate.

"The really difficult moment will be if there is a major attack on a Western target or America," says a Western diplomat. "If something is remotely tied to Qaeda operating in Iran - something that could have been prevented, if Iran had handled it right - I would hate to see the reaction from Washington."

And that possibility feeds skeptics in Tehran. "Because of the open hostility of Bush to Iran, the basis for those who want [US-Iran] relations is very weak," says Taha Hashemi, editor of the conservative Entekhab newspaper. "But as we say in Persian, there are many hopes in disappointment."

--Very weak indeed! There remains open hostility on both sides, not just from Bush. And the "open hostility" comming from our side is saying "Change your ways or else", while they say "death to America". How do you join sides with a regime like that? I guess what Iran is doing right now is learning from observing US/Saudi relations and trying to emulate them. Big difference though; Saudi Arabia does their dirty work secretly, while Iran is forced to vilify America publicly in order to hold onto power. There is no clean way our government can work with that. --American Guy.
PS: I'd like to point out, that the Iranian people are also saying to their leaders: "Change your ways, or else. -- American Guy

I'm with Lieberman

2003-09-26T16:27:00.000-07:00

From the Wall Street Journal, editorial page.

The Unpopularity Contest:
"What would you say is your biggest shortcoming?" When an employer asks this question during a job interview, the safest way to answer is by offering self-flattery thinly disguised as self-criticism: "Well, sometimes I have a tendency to work too darn hard." Moderator Brian Williams asked a similar question in last night's debate: "What in office, as president, would be the least popular, most right thing you would do?" Most of the candidates shoveled vigorously: wa hahahaha! :-)

Bob Graham: " I would begin the process of rebuilding America's relationship with the world."

John Kerry: "I intend to take the politics out of how we are going to guarantee that Social Security is sound into the future."

John Edwards: "In this effort to protect ourselves and fight our war on terrorism, we cannot allow people like John Ashcroft to take away our rights, our freedom and our liberties."

Carol Moseley Braun: "I would work to build community and civil society and fight the discrimination against women in daily life."
Way to go out on a limb there, guys! Only Dennis Kucinich gave a straight answer to the question:

Three things come to mind. First, I would take action to stop the federal death penalty.

Second, I would move to cut the Pentagon budget by 15 percent, which would in no way affect adversely our national defense, and put the money into child care.

Third, I would move to create a Department of Peace which would seek to make nonviolence an organizing principle in our society and to work with the nations of the world to make war itself archaic.

These ideas actually are unpopular--and with good reason. While there are respectable arguments against capital punishment, slashing defense during wartime and creating a Department of Peace are truly loopy ideas.

The most revealing answer, though, came from Joe Lieberman: "I'm going to prosecute the war against terrorism and win it even if it's unpopular, because that's where our future security rests." That Lieberman would think this an "unpopular" position just two years after Sept. 11 speaks volumes about his party.
---IT SURE DOES. I think Lieberman is the only Democrat who understands the nature of the threat we're facing. Scary. --American Guy

California recall election

2003-09-26T12:53:00.000-07:00

I continue to support Arnold Schwarzenegger for governor. Here's why:

1. It will shake up California politics for years to come.

2. He came to America with little more than a dream and has become one of the most successful Californians.

3. That kind of drive and ambition combined with his pro business, pro education stance will help our state where it is most needed.

So, what's wrong with the other candidates? I'll tell you:

While I like Mclintock, he has little chance of winning enough votes from our liberal majority to win the election. He impressed me in the debate, and I have no doubt that he would make a good governor, but one thing I kept hearing him say left me shaking my head. "Deregulation". Isn't deregulation what gave the big power companies the ability to yank Californians around by the balls a couple years ago? That fiasco resulted in businesses leaving the state, huge power bills and debts we are still paying on. So just what is it he wants to deregulate? I might ad that the big push for deregulation by the Republicans a decade or so ago always sounded backwards to me, and just look at the results. That brought us Enron, Worldcom, global crossing and the California energy manipulations. (There really wasn't a shortage, hence "manipulations.)

Bustamante is even more corrupt and short sighted than Davis. He and Davis have bought votes by passing or supporting legislation that is astoundingly stupid!! Such as drivers licenses for undocumented foreigners who are in the state illegally in the first place. That's just DUMB! Before the recall they were against it but now that they need the Hispanic vote they are for it. That's buying votes. Then there is his accepting of bribes from Indian gaming interests. That was blatantly illegal! And now a Judge agrees with me and has ordered him to give them back. "Oh sorry, spent it already." What a creep! Ok, deep breaths, calming down now.

Ariana and that Green party dude don't stand a chance. It's now a 3 way race, between Bustamante, Shwarzeneggar and Mclintock.

I hope Mclintock will bow out, so we don't end up going from bad to worse. I have mixed feelings on the corect timing for this, however. Maybe staying in till the last minute might turn out best for Arnold in the long run.

Friday's Follies -

2003-09-19T22:52:00.000-07:00

Speaking during Friday prayers, Ayatollah Jannati said Iran should "under no circumstances" sign the "additional protocol" to the NPT, the agreement that would allow for enhanced inspections of nuclear facilities and is demanded by the IAEA. "[It] is imposing an extra humiliation," he said.

"What's the problem about withdrawing from the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty? North Korea withdrew. Many countries have not even signed it."

Well maybe if you weren't always threatening foreign countries with "death" and such, the IAEA wouldn't be so concerned!!! And thank you, Ayatollah plutonium breath for confirming that President Bush was right about his "Axis of Evil" theory. Keep it up my friend, and the citizens of Iran will soon be free. Long live freedom and liberty in IRAN!

So there! :-)

Friday's Follies

2003-09-19T22:38:00.000-07:00

Back in the 1980's an alternative newspaper in Seattle had a weekly section devoted to the latest "fatwahs" (well, almost) issued by Jerry Falwell against America's gay community. The section was known as "Fallwells Follies". Except for the fact that reverend Falwells comments affected real human beings, Falwells Follies could get me to ROFLMHO. Part of what made it so funny is that Jerry Falwell takes himself so seriously. The column satirized his almost weekly rants against those Americans who choose to pursue - "life Liberty and happiness" in a different way than he did.

Sometimes as I read the latest Friday "Prayers" from Teheran, I am reminded of that old newspaper section.

So I hereby inaugurate my new, almost weekly section I'll refer to as "Friday's Follies". (At least for now, it's the best name I can think of so far, but I'm open to suggestions.)

Due to popular request....

2003-09-19T22:14:00.000-07:00

I have updated my comments provider to HaloScan. I agree, the other host sucked. Now you can rant all you want. :-)

What Iraqis Really Think

2003-09-19T21:49:00.000-07:00

Fascinating article with lots of opinions from ordinary Iraqis. Here is an excerpt:

America, some say, is hobbled in its policies toward Iraq by not knowing much about what Iraqis really think. Are they on the side of radical Islamists? What kind of government would they like? What is their attitude toward the U.S.? Do the Shiites hate us? Could Iraq become another Iran under the ayatollahs? Are the people in the Sunni triangle the real problem?

Up to now we've only been able to guess. We've relied on anecdotal temperature-takings of the Iraqi public, and have been at the mercy of images presented to us by the press. We all know that journalists have a bad-news bias: 10,000 schools being rehabbed isn't news; one school blowing up is a weeklong feeding frenzy. And some of us who have spent time recently in Iraq -- I was an embedded reporter during the war -- have been puzzled by the postwar news and media imagery, which is much more negative than what many individuals involved in reconstructing Iraq have been telling us.

Well, finally we have some evidence of where the truth may lie. Working with Zogby International survey researchers, The American Enterprise magazine has conducted the first scientific poll of the Iraqi public. Given the state of the country, this was not easy. Security problems delayed our intrepid fieldworkers several times. We labored at careful translations, regional samplings and survey methods to make sure our results would accurately reflect the views of Iraq's multifarious, long-suffering people. We consulted Eastern European pollsters about the best way to elicit honest answers from those conditioned to repress their true sentiments.

Conducted in August, our survey was necessarily limited in scope, but it reflects a nationally representative sample of Iraqi views, as captured in four disparate cities: Basra (Iraq's second largest, home to 1.7 million people, in the far south), Mosul (third largest, far north), Kirkuk (Kurdish-influenced oil city, fourth largest) and Ramadi (a resistance hotbed in the Sunni triangle). The results show that the Iraqi public is more sensible, stable and moderate than commonly portrayed, and that Iraq is not so fanatical, or resentful of the U.S., after all.

- Iraqis are optimistic. Seven out of 10 say they expect their country and their personal lives will be better five years from now. On both fronts, 32% say things will become much better.

OH BROTHER!

2003-09-19T21:37:00.000-07:00

Beckham Billboards Blacked Out in Iran

September 19, 2003
Reuters
Reuters.co.uk

TEHRAN -- David Beckham's face -- one of the most well-recognised in the world -- has been blacked out on billboards in Iran's capital in an apparent backlash against Western cultural influence.

Five billboards which carried a head and shoulders shot of the Real Madrid and England soccer star advertising engine oil have been draped in black cloth and television commercials featuring Beckham's famous legs have been pulled off the air.

"It happened two days ago in the middle of the night," a source familiar with the advertising campaign told Reuters on Friday. "They came and put black cloth over all the boards; first over Beckham's face and then over the whole thing."

The rest of the story

And this is probably all my fault too, bearing my sexy 16 year old legs in public. If you can remember late 70's US short styles, you may recall that what we were wearing were barely shorts. To a Muslim cleric I'm sure they seemed pornagraphic. So sorry.

SOUNDS LIKE THE MUSLIM MAFIA TO ME!

2003-09-17T21:02:00.000-07:00

["This is the origin of the system of dhimmitude — a vast, uniquely Islamic institution of religious apartheid, implemented for over a millennium across three continents (Asia, Africa, and Europe) and still influential in Islamic nations’ policies toward non-Muslim populations. The native “infidel” populations of lands conquered by Islamic armies were required to pay the jizya, recognize Islamic ownership of their land and accept laws forbidding them to own weapons, ring church bells, build new places of worship or repair old ones, testify in Muslim courts, or dress like Muslims. If they complained about these inequalities, they risked forfeiting their “protection.”]

Although many Muslims are good people, I am increasingly convinced the Islam itself is rooted in Evil doctrine. I would refuse to pay my "jizya". String me up if you must, but I will never forsake my lord and savior Jesus Christ. I would not pay extortion to the Mafia, nor will I to a muslim cleric - no matter whose will he says it is!.

Fascinating article!

TSK TSK!

2003-09-17T20:49:00.000-07:00

Buying influence from RafsanJani (the younger)? "

"Mr. Loeddesoel said that the size of the Horton contract, its 11-year time frame and the fact that deposits were being made to a Swiss bank account worried him more than Mr. Rafsanjani's family connections."

How silly of them. Don't they know the regime wont last that long?

Another excellent commentary from the "Wall Street Journal"

2003-09-17T14:37:00.000-07:00

["The answer is not pleasant. This war, in the most basic sense of a fight to defend our freedom, our society of liberty and justice, is far larger than Iraq, Afghanistan or even the entire Middle East. The real war here is the old human struggle of good versus evil, a war that is part of what we are, part of the long volatile history of mankind. Never has there been so much to celebrate; rarely has there been more peril. Among individuals, we cannot hope to eliminate entirely all cold and gloating killers, people such as al Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahiri, drunk on his dreams of destruction, threatening in recent weeks to launch "an attack that will make you forget Manhattan." There will always be someone who delights in terror and ruin, and seeks ways to inflict it. And as we all know, modern technology, along with its mighty blessings, offers arsenals so terrifying we can all have our moments of wishing to live forever suspended in that last spell of denial, the 10th of September."]

I wholeheartedly agree. Read more right here.

I had a wonderful time in Utah

2003-09-17T14:10:00.000-07:00

But I'm glad to be back home. I attended an educational seminar over the weekend and learned lots of stuff. The workshops ran from 7:15 AM till 6 or so in the evening and were then followed by dinner and entertainment. Because I didn't want to miss anything, I returned at least as tired as I was before I left. Not complaining though.

Utah has beautiful scenery, but I seem to be alergic to it. Everytime I go up there I sneeze and sniffle the whole time. It doesn't matter what time of year it is, so it has to be something other than the vegetation. I have a bit of an attitude over Utah's air quality. It seems they all think California has "air polution" and Utah has "fresh mountain air". HELLO! Here are the facts: California gets the air first and then sends Utah, Nevada and Arizona the leftovers. Utah has some of the highest levels of PM10's and PM 2.5 air pollution in the whole country. Utah never does anything to clean up their air that they aren't forced to do by the EPA. They have steel mills, copper smelters, open pit mining, oil refineries and other industries that belch out polutants which can only be measured in "tons per day". The entire state of Utah has a mere 2 million people, the population of San Diego County is simmilar, but 1/20th the size, yet our air is cleaner 99% of the time. Cough cough. Sorry, rant over.

Anyway - It's nice to be home.

May we never again - Pull an Arafat

2003-09-17T13:21:00.000-07:00

I thought this was an excellent commentary In today's Wall Street Journal. I too held out hope in 1993, but I and most of the rest of Western civilization were wrong. Arafat had never given up on anilation of Israel. Arafat can not and will not bring peace. He is worse than useless. I wholeheartedly agree with the commentary.

The End of 'Arafat'
Even if he lives, the idea of him must die.

Wednesday, September 17, 2003 12:01 a.m.

Reflecting the views of Israel's Cabinet, Vice Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said publicly over the weekend that "killing" Yasser Arafat was "one of the options." Secretary of State Colin Powell of course had to say that exiling or executing Arafat would incite Arab rage, that it would be most unhelpful to the peace process, etc., etc.

The truth is that Yasser Arafat's moment in history has ended. The world would do well to think hard about how it came to pass, after so many years and so much talk and blood, that the era of Arafat arrived at this endpoint--with Israel saying that it may be worth the trouble simply to kill him. How far we've come from the Rose Garden in 1993.

It is a fine irony that Mr. Powell spoke of the need to soldier on with Yasser Arafat while the Secretary himself was standing in Baghdad for the first time. Mr. Powell is in Baghdad because President Bush concluded after September 11, and after the political failure of the first Gulf War, that the years of Western self-delusion about the nature of global terror must be brought to an end. Similarly, the delusions about Arafat also must now end.

"Arafat" should enter history not merely as the name of one autocratic man, but as the name we assign to an entire Western phenomenon of false thinking. "Arafat," we now see, has come to represent the act of self-delusion on a massive, international scale. "Arafat" is about refusing to believe that an adversary is simply irredeemable. Most importantly at this particular moment, "Arafat" is about allowing barbarism, or its techniques, to challenge the political tenets of civilized life.

For years the Western nations that emerged from World War II and the Cold War have been playing with fire by pretending that their world and the alternative world of "Arafat" could somehow coexist. More than anything, this impossible notion reflected political and moral fatigue. Thus in the 1990s, the world came very close to letting "Arafat," this time in the person of Slobodan Milosevic, achieve its logical end on European soil, again. But the United States intervened and Milosevic is on trial for crimes against civilized humanity. George W. Bush's decision to go to war against the regime of Saddam Hussein was the opposite of "Arafat" thinking; it was a decision to refute "Arafat."

If you look at the Nobel Prizes' own biography of Yasser Arafat, you find this remarkable sentence toward the end: "Like other Arab regimes in the area, however, Arafat's governing style tended to be more dictatorial than democratic." That is to say, Arafat by his own choice of governance--dictatorship over democracy--bears individual responsibility for the legacy he leaves.

That legacy includes: the contemporary crime of hijacking and blowing up civilian-filled airliners; the attempted destabilization of Jordan and Israel and the successful destruction of Lebanon as a formerly sovereign nation; and decades of violated international agreements, culminating in the collapse of Oslo. Last year, in a perfect storm of bad faith, Arafat was caught paying for the shipment of arms from Iran to the Palestinian territories aboard the Karine A.

Across these years, the West, mainly the European nations, accomplished the post-World War II feat of pretending that crime is not crime, so long as the motives and politics for the crimes are moralized. The U.S. and Israel participated as well in the pretense, bringing Arafat out of exile in Tunis. The world has learned since that this apologetics (and much direct funding) has made possible any crime, culminating in the anti-moral act known as suicide bombers. Arafat most recently threw over Mahmoud Abbas, and the fatigued West barely sighed in complaint.

This past September 3, in an article published in the Palestinian daily newspaper Al-Ayyam, the Palestinian writer Tawfiq Abu Bakr wrote: "It is difficult to find a greater and more deeply rooted culture of self-deception than that in our Arab and Palestinian arena." But we in the West fomented that culture of self-deception, by perpetuating the conceit that Yasser Arafat--"Arafat"--was the singular vessel of peace for the Palestinians. He manifestly is not.

READ MORE

(Registration required)

Reaction to President Bush's Sunday-night address on Iraq (From: National Review - via SMCCDI)

2003-09-11T01:22:00.000-07:00

In the mean time, here is some good reading.

From SMCCDI: daneshjoo.org

Current News & Articles
On the "Frontlines of Freedom"
National Review - An NRO Symposium
Sep 8, 2003

Reaction to President Bush's Sunday-night address on Iraq

Michael Ledeen

My guess, listening between the lines, is that so many people all over the world viewed our appeal to the United Nations as a clear sign of retreat, that the president decided he'd better get out there and look tough. He rightly said that we've learned that weakness invites terrorist attack while strength deters it, and he insisted that we're strong, that we're taking the battle to the bad guys, and we're going to track them all down.

Let's hope it works, but I doubt it. I think we're in for a new wave of attacks, both here and in the Middle East, in part because the terrorists have to show signs of real strength, and in part because so much of what has been coming out of this administration of late really does reek of retreat.

As usual, it was a good speech, carefully crafted and elegantly presented. I like his clearly heartfelt reiteration of the theme of freedom versus tyranny, which is indeed the heart of the matter. He's clearly pleased, as we should all be, that there has been great progress throughout Iraq, electing local governments, getting schools up and running, and so forth.

But, alas, he has lost focus. He reminded us that he had always expected this to be a long war, but he never mentioned the Evil Axis, never once talked about the several countries that are supporting the terrorist attacks against us, never mentioned the Iranian atomic bomb or the North Korean nuclear program or the ongoing Saudi and Syrian support for terror. This speech was narrowly about Iraq, with a couple of afterthoughts about Afghanistan. If he's aware that we can't possibly win in Iraq unless we bring down the mullahcracy in Tehran, he didn't give any sign of it.

We're dithering again, wasting time while the terror masters prepare their next assault, instead of going after them where they live.

James S. Robbins

President Bush sought to contextualize the war and its various phases: Afghanistan, where the al Qaeda and Taliban strongholds were attacked directly and overwhelmed; attacks on the terrorist infrastructure, which has resulted in nearly two thirds of known senior al Qaeda leaders, operational managers, and key facilitators being captured or killed; breaking up terrorist financial and logistical networks; and taking down Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, which supported terrorism and had the potential to equip terrorists with weapons of mass destruction. Of these, the president's critics have focused most of their attention on denying the links between Iraq and al Qaeda. Whether or not they want to believe that such links existed in the past, they surely do now.

"Iraq is now the central front," the president said, and this is true not only from our perspective but also from the enemy's. Al Qaeda fighters and sympathizers are flooding into Iraq from all over the world to try to bring the battle to the Crusaders. They view Iraq as "the perfect place" to engage U.S. forces. They see our situation as similar to that of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, in which the Mujahedeen were able to wage unrelenting guerrilla war and drive the Red Army out. Of course, they also thought that Afghanistan would be our Afghanistan, a rather more precise analogy and one which did not turn out they way they expected.

The terrorists draw their strategic lessons from Vietnam, Beirut, and Somalia. In each case, the U.S. was wounded but not defeated militarily. Yet, in each case, the United States withdrew because the national will faltered. A combination of lack of leadership, mission ambiguity, and domestic political factors led to a defeat that was disproportionate to the might of the enemies we faced. Al Qaeda, their sympathizers, and other enemies of civilization seek to recreate those conditions.

President Bush explained to the American people what the press has been slow to understand, and the opposition has no interest in discussing â€” that the events taking place in Iraq today are connected directly to the central threat of our age, the Islamic radicals and secular despots who are seeking to push back the tide of freedom that burst through the Iron Curtain 14 years ago and is bringing the light of liberty and civilization to their neglected corner of the world. A free, secular, democratic Iraq would be a monumental and unparalleled achievement. The beneficial effects would redound across the region and the world. This is why the enemies of freedom are waging a desperate rear-guard action in Iraq. They cannot prevail unless the American people withdraw their support. The case the president made was not a new one â€” the administration has been remarkably consistent in its strategic approach to the war â€” but it bears repeating. There are too many people at home and abroad that will seek to exploit divisions over the conduct of the war. It helps to remind people what we are fighting for.

© Copyright 2003 SMCCDI: daneshjoo.org

Sorry to be gone for so long without explanation, should have new stuff next week

2003-09-10T23:55:00.000-07:00

I wanted to write a quick note to tell you all why I haven't been around lately. My note got very long and ivolved, I even had doubts I should be sending such a long message. Well as it turns out Microsoft made my decision for me, because after an hour and ahalf of writing to tell you all about my recent adeventures and future trip to Utah, Internet Explorer crashed and I lost the whole thing.

Here is the short version:

Cat bites twice, lands mom in hospital for week, has 4 kittens, kittens real cute, I'll be alright, just had sore fingers for awhile, mom will be alright too, cat now living at animal control, will live and find new home, mom's hospital bill will be really big, not even our cat, a stray - probably dumped, maybe the biting problem/pregnancy? Who knows. Grandpa's cousin died, he was 95, so is grandpa, then my cousin died, (grandpa is her grandfather), both died last week, she was only 56. Been workin real hard, not easy with sore fingers, leaving town for 4 days in morning for church related conference in SLC, toxic mold is bad stuff, neighbors house has it, saps all your strength and makes joints real sore for a few days, stay away from it! I didn't. Fine now though. Leaving in morning, be back Monday.

My thoughts on 10 commandments in court house flap

2003-08-23T23:00:00.000-07:00

Been meaning to comment about the idiot jusdge in Alabama. Now I have. But I did it over at "On The Third Hand".

That Judge and evidently the bulk of Alabamans fail to grasp the shear brilliance of the United States Constitution. But I know just how to help them get a grip on the concept.

Just have another huge block of granite carved into an image depicting the complete text of the Sharia. (Islamic law) How much do you wanna bet that they would take the oposite side of the argument if someone did?

And why stop there? We could add a Budha, a portrait of Joseph Smith and a statue of the nature god, Pan. Suddenly they would all be arguing how religion isn't so important when it comes to law.

I can just imagine how these Evangelical Christians would feel if the State of Utah were to suddenly begin requiring all witnesses in their courts to swear an oath while their right hand was on a Book of Mormon?

Posted by American Guy at August 24, 2003 01:52 AM

Interesting concept

2003-08-23T22:34:00.000-07:00

Mehdi has compiled a list of the most frequently appearing words in American news articles about Iran. Sorry to say, but for most of the population of north America this is the image of Iran.

Here is my top 10 list. These are the most common images that pop into my head when I think of Iran.

White marble sided, 3 to 4 level apartment buildings, covered in redish brown dust, (Well actually the dust gets everywhere.)

Sycamore trees, yeah they're covered with redish brown dust this time of year too. (Sometimes called Plain trees.)

Paykan's they're everywhere. Paykan is the national car of Iran, soon to be outnumbered by Peugeots though.

Chello Kebab.

Pistachios.

Five cylinder diesel engined Mercedes Benz Minibuses. (Minibusi?)

Shayad monument, now called Azadi monument. Azadi means freedom, how Ironic that the same guys who took much of it away named the Shah's largest monument after it.

Mountains, Iran has really really big snow capped mountains - rising to over 18 k feet. Tehran is built right up to the bottom of them too, much like Salt Lake City is.

Women in Chador's. Especially black ones, I alway felt sorry for them in the summer.

Ayatolah Khomeini. I always thought he looked like the devil incarnate, although I always assumed the devil would wear more red. How fiting that the man who would attempt to plunge Iran back into the dark ages would have such dark, hollow, deep set eyes. Chilling. I always thought that if more Iranians watched Disney movies, they would know he was the bad guy - just from the way he looked.

Although just like most people, I write mostly about Iranian politics, especially as they pertain to US interests. Funny, the nuclear (or "nuculer" if your name is GW Bush) threat seems of little importance to me. They'll have undergone regime change well before they have a working bomb. And I have no doubt they are working as fast as they can to get the bomb.

Why doesn't this surprise me?

2003-08-23T18:16:00.000-07:00

"Iranians Arrested for Planning Sabotage campaign in Iraq:

Iraqi police said that earlier this week they arrested a group of Iranians who were planning a sabotage campaign in Baghdad. A source within the Iraqi interior ministry told the BBC the Iranians had been handed over to the American military police for interrogation."

Pffffft!

El Jihad?

2003-08-21T22:41:00.000-07:00

From Buzzmachine: In a jam:

Cuba tells the U.S. that it wasn't jamming satellite broadcasts to Iran -- Iranians in the Iranian embassy in Havana were doing it. Well, that makes all the difference then. Doesn't it?

I wonder. Why all these regime changes half way around the world, when Cubans still suffer under Fidel Castro - just off our coast?

Oh yeah, no Muslim clerics urging them to blow themselves up killing inocent American civilians. Think about it. With just one airplane, strategicaly aimed at a tall building they could get rid of Fidel once and for all.

Anyone want to tackle translating Al Jazeera into Spanish for them?
Link to original article on Jeff's page.

What if?

2003-08-21T21:52:00.000-07:00

Too many Iranians are stuck in 1953. They constantly bring up the Mossadeq coups. While the chain of events leading up to the coups were unfortunate, it was not the dire catastrophe many Iranians have made it out to be in their own fantasies.

Some, and I'm glad that is a very small minority of Iranians are far to willing to overlook anything good that the United States has done for Iran and focus only on a few negatives. In response to one such Iranian's blog entry I left the following comment.

"Sometimes when you see a friend making a terrible mistake, especially when it is a mistake that will hurt you, it's a good idea to intervene.

The Soviet experiment failed miserably. The failure was hastened by the colapse of the economy. Had they been able to grab hold of Iran's warm water ports and her oil the Soviet Union might still be together today. All of the oil and gas in the Caspian region, and Iran itself, would have been theirs and today Iran might very well be fighting for her independance from the Soviet Union. Iran's per capita income never would have reached the heights it did in the 1970's, and today it would likely be one third or less, what it is.

Iran was a weak, undeveloped country in 1953. If it wasn't, no country, not even the United States, could have overthrown it's Prime minister.

The United States helped Iran to become strong, remain free from Soviet influence and develop a vibrant economy. some had a difficult time adjusting to the move from a largely agrarian economy to a more industrialised one. Then conspiring mullahs took advantage of their angst in order to further their own agenda, tried to plunge Iran back into the dark ages and Iran has spent the last 24 years regressing.

Do you ever stop to ask yourself what would have happened when Saddam invaded, if Iran hadn't been armed to the teeth by the United States? Today the capital of Iran might be Baghdad.

Within 2 years after the revolution, the Shah was dead. Do you ever stop to think of how prosperous Iran could be today if the Iranian people had simply been more patient?

Are the displaced villagers, working and merchant classes, any better off today than they were in 1978?

Someday I plan to develop these thoughts a little further. I thought I'd post this much - as a start.

In the 'Arab street', confusion reigns

2003-08-21T12:52:00.000-07:00

I just came across this intriguing article from the LA Times. It partially helps to explain what most westerners can't comprehend, that is why Arab terrorists would attack the UN. What I see is a lot of confused notions rooted in the vast misinformation so prevalent in Jihad-Land*. Their views are strikingly disimilar to those of most westerners.

Published on Thursday, August 21, 2003 by the Los Angeles Times
Turmoil in Iraq: To Many Arabs, the U.S. and U.N. Are One Entity
by Megan K. Stack

AMMAN, Jordan — The silence said the most: Aside from a chorus of official sympathy and condemnations, the devastation of the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad drew barely a shiver on the Arab street and in the Middle Eastern media Wednesday.

In a shift made blazingly clear with the bombing, the United Nations' status has become so thoroughly degraded in the Arab world that many people here no longer draw a distinction between the international body and the United States. It has long been criticized as puny and has traditionally been mistrusted in these parts, but the U.N.'s inability to stop the war in Iraq has sowed new seeds of resentment.

"Didn't they see it coming?" Mohsen Farouk, a 36-year-old carpenter from Cairo, demanded. He decried the deaths of innocent people but insisted that nobody should be surprised. "It was just a matter of time," he said. "The U.N. is just a puppet of the U.S., and anyone who is angry with the U.S. is likely to consider the U.N. a target."

The hard-line Iranian newspaper Kayhan was even blunter. A front-page headline Wednesday read, "Destruction and Killing the Result of Bush's Policies in Iraq."

Throughout the Arab world and Iran, the bombing was chalked up — tacitly or explicitly, depending on who was talking — to a blundering U.S. occupation, an organic outgrowth of the untenable instability in Iraq. Moreover, many Arabs argued, the U.S. invasion endangered the United Nations by rendering it irrelevant.

"There has been resentment simply because the U.N. became a tool in the hands of superpowers," said Hasan abu Nimah, a longtime Jordanian diplomat and former representative to the U.N.

The power wielded by the U.S. at the United Nations has long stoked anger in much of the Middle East. The Arab world has seethed whenever Washington used its U.N. veto — as it has done with some frequency — to quash efforts to send international observers into the Palestinian territories or halt the construction of Israeli settlements.

"The U.S. is so powerful and the U.N. is so weak," said Mishary Nuaim, a political analyst at Saudi Arabia's King Saud University. "Nobody can do anything to stop the U.S."

But in a region that scorns weakness, the United Nations sank to new depths in public opinion when the United States invaded Iraq without the international body's approval.

"There's a widespread feeling that the Americans were lazy in protecting the United Nations. Perhaps they've done it on purpose. Now it has been proven to the Arabs that it is a weak instrument," said George Jabbour, a Syrian political scientist. "It was assassinated twice — first when the U.S. went to war without a decision from the Security Council, and again yesterday."

When the U.N. entered Iraq after the war, some neighboring countries decried the move as lending a whiff of U.N. legitimacy to an unjust occupation. To critics, the world body appeared to endorse the controversial U.S.-led administration of Iraq.

"The U.N. did nothing for the Iraqis during the war," said Mohammed Hindawi, a 32-year-old engineer in Cairo. "They arrived in Baghdad when the coast was clear. People expected the U.N.'s support, and they didn't get it. It's payback time."

At a cafe in Cairo's leafy Zamalek district, where the drone of Al Jazeera television mingled with the clatter of conversation, a table full of men erupted in protest at the mere suggestion that the U.N. and the U.S. are two distinct bodies.

"The U.N. is just a screen for the U.S. — it lost all credibility during the war," said Ahmed Dafran, a 60-year-old retired cabdriver. "The Iraqis haven't had time to breathe since the war and haven't got their heads around what's happened. All they see is a stream of foreign bodies coming in and telling them what's good for them."

Although some Arab governments supported the war, most of the Arab street was bitterly opposed to it from the outset — and has interpreted the chaos of the occupation as confirmation of its worst fears.

In their political rhetoric, Arab countries have dealt uncomfortably with the occupation. A deeply divided Arab League decided this month not to grant a seat to the new Iraqi Governing Council. It wasn't an elected government, members explained, although it was a step in the right direction.

Beneath the criticism, analysts say, neighbors are gulping against the fear of what might happen if the United States eventually became so bloodied it pulled its troops from Iraq.

"We're now entering a dangerous phase, and there's an understanding that if the United States should leave Iraq, there would be chaos and it could engulf them," said Michael Young, a political analyst in Beirut. "So even though publicly there may be talk of ending the occupation, privately they understand the U.S. has to stay."

Still, many mainstream Arabs draw a certain quiet satisfaction from the stream of guerrilla attacks on U.S. soldiers, said Abu Nimah, the Jordanian diplomat.

"They didn't support the war, and they don't support the occupation," he said. "And they don't want to make the life of the occupiers easy."

Copyright 2003 Los Angeles Times

* I am trying out this new term I just came up with. I struggle to find a term which applies to all countries where a signifigant minority believes they are engaged in a "Jihad" against the west. Most western news refer to them all as Arabs, but Persians aren't arabs, although they share many of the same attitudes and beliefs. IMO many of those shared beliefs have similar origins in militant Islam.

Kaveh's blog "Observations of Tehran Life" has some interesting entries today

2003-08-20T21:56:00.000-07:00

"The concept of truth has no meaning to these kinds of people. They can't even agree on the meaning of words like "cease-fire"... it's easy to carry out this kind of attack, it only takes a few people. (Plus a very young population with no clear concept of morality.)"

"I wonder who's behind these attacks - see this mural in Tehran: "Israel must be destroyed" -- Imam Khomeini. " See the actual mural here.

He also has some interesing words about Zoroastrianism. He finds the religion interesting, so do I. My theory is that Zoroastrianism reaches back thousands of years to bring forth truths hearkening back to the times of Noah. But since there are few records going back that far, many religious schollars see it more like Kaveh does.

"All of the major monotheistic religions have elements from Zoroastrianism. Judaism, Islam, and Christianity divide the world up into two halves, and in Islam it's divided into another two halves (men and women). If you want to convert from Islam to another religion, Islamic law says you must be killed."

Good stuff, Kaveh. Keep it up!

Is America responsible for the terrorists thoughts, attitudes, actions ect???

2003-08-20T20:41:00.000-07:00

UPDATE: I thought of another division between the two groups. Whether or not you perceive yourself and others as victims or masters of their own destinies. I believe the latter is true. Unfortunately, for those living under Islamo Fascist dictatorships, few are able to reach their potential.

Lately I have gotten quite upset with certain people regarding what I call personal accountability. This Essay takes an interesting point of view on the subject of RESPONSIBILITY. I like to refer to it as personal accountability, but responsibility will do for now.

You may have noticed the bold lettering in my post about the UN headquarters bombing found below. The reason I decided to make that bold is because lately I have gotten quite upset with the attitudes of certain people in the "Blame America First Club". It's gotten to be a very big club since 9/11 happened. Before that most democrats weren't in it, but the war on terrorism has brought them out of the woodwork.

In the days immediately following 9/11 it didn't matter if you were conservative or liberal, we were all proud to be Americans and everyone could clearly see that terrorists were evil. But in the time since, things have changed. I've had a difficult time figuring out where all the anti Americanism comes from. Almost daily I read or hear somebody claiming that the United States somehow deserves to be attacked by terrorists. They say it is our fault because of this and that and if we just stopped defending ourselves then all would be well.

What I find so perplexing is how the Democratic party seems to have aligned themselves with the anti American attitudes of Islamist groups. It felt pretty ominous, as if the world were splitting into two parts right before my eyes. What I didn't realize is that the split had always been there.

The two sides are those who believe in being personally accountable for their actions and those who blame others for their actions. (But there are many flavors of each.) Below is a quote from this essay.

"Political Correctness, Deconstructionism, Trans-National Progressivism, Liability mania, Crime and Punishment, Terrorism, Welfare, Gun Control, Media Bias, Affirmative Action, Abortion, Education Reform, Social Engineering, all of it will divide people according to their idea of Responsibility. "

" Those on one side see individuals as rafts on that river of culture, swept along inexorably downstream, perhaps capable of a weak paddling, displacing our paths a few feet from side to side. I on the other hand, and others like me, see human potential as a powerboat, a nuclear-powered hydrofoil, one capable of cruising side to side at will, as easily able to race against the current as with it. I don’t believe people are rafts adrift in the destiny of their culture. I think all people have propellers, whether they use them or not, and rudders too. And rather than commiserating with people about the rapids that they endure and the battering that is their lot in life, we should be teaching them how to start those engines, take the wheel of their own futures, and steer themselves wherever they damn well please."

It's a very good read.

I used to count myself in the ranks of the Democratic party. I began to turn my back on them at the same time I began taking more responsibility for my own life. That was when I was about 28 or so. I still went ahead and voted for Clinton, twice. Now I am a registered Republican, but a bit of an odd duck. My politics are similar to Arnold Schwarzenegger. I believe in personal liberty so I support the rights of gays to do as they wish with their lives, for instance, but I also believe that countries that support and harbor terrorists must be held accountable. Fewer laws and more liberty are always best in my view. I also believe taxes should be kept to a minimum so people can do with their money as they please. Things always turn out better in the long run that way. Even when I was a democrat I thought abortion should be illegal. IMO the woman has the right to choose not to get pregnant in the first place, but once she is it is her responsibility to care for the child the best that she can; but not if it's the result of rape, because then she had no choice in the matter. Does that make sense? I also have some very strong beliefs about the family.

How to nominate someone to receive the Nobel Prize

2003-08-20T19:30:00.000-07:00

It sounds simple enough. Here's how it's done.

But not just anybody can do it.

UN headquarters in Baghdad bombed

2003-08-19T08:06:00.000-07:00

Many inocent people's lives were cut short or made more difficult due to injuries sustained. Inocent patients from the neighboring spinal injury hospital have been re-injured by this evil and despicable act.

This will only serve to steal the resolve of the god fearing, freedom loving peoples of the world to defeat terrorism.

Sadly, it is another example of Muslim killing Muslim. I pray these dispicable men will be held accountable for THEIR ACTIONS.

New unrest today as regime forces hold the dead bodies of yesterday's victims for cash payments

2003-08-18T15:47:00.000-07:00

"New clashes rock Semirom as Regime refuses to return bodies of killed protesters"
SMCCDI (Information Service)

"In most cases the regime's officials have requested the "payment of used bullets" from the families in order to give back the bodies of their relatives. The regime by placing such financial burden on the shoulders of the families of victims hopes to retard the burial processes in the current existing tense situation and avoid more protest actions at the occasion of the victims funeral ceremonies."

I have added a list of referrers

2003-08-18T15:32:00.000-07:00

It's located down at the bottom of the page underneath the archives. So far today I have 2 from WhoMan, 2 from Google and 2 from Yahoo! The ones from the search engines are probably just clicking and then saying to themselves: "This wasn't what I was looking for!" Then leaving. :-(

Tom De Lay hates delays

2003-08-18T14:03:00.000-07:00

He say's we should have gone into Iraq over a year ago but were "delayed by UN foot dragging". I agree, those UN folks seem to have lead boots on, (hence the foot dragging). They also seem to be bent on proving that their resolutions are useless.

According to Mr. Delay, the Whitehouse needs to turn up pressure on Iran's Mullacracy and Syria's (not sure what to call Syria's government) regime. I agree. Unfortunately there is little else we can do to pressure them, aside from millitary action of some sort. (although I'm open to ideas.) The whole idea of engaging the mullahs in anti terrorism talks is silly. Any agreement would be broken. Isn't that how the delays happened in Iraq?

Evidently Mr. Delay has not heard that Iran's foreign minster, Kamal Kharrazi - encourages strong US actions to dismantle Iran's terrorist regime. In regards to United States recent actions in the war on terrorism, he reportedly said"

(It was) ''a positive step that conforms to its international responsibilities,'' according to the official Islamic Republic News Agency.

Kharrazi said Washington should have "acted sooner against the dissidents as they had long been on terrorism list", the agency said. The agency news article goes on to say: Kharrazi said that the head of the dissident group in Iraq was under U.S. control...The onus is on the United States to confront the provocations by the (terrorist) group,'' the minister said.

This should make Tom Delay very happy, since he hates delays when it comes to dismantling terrorist regimes. As Kharrazi say's, BRING IT ON WASHINGTON, WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?

;)
I guess Mr. DeLay doesn't read my blog.

Iran's foreign minister on US "responsibilities"

2003-08-17T14:07:00.000-07:00

Iranian foreign minister praises US war on terrorism. Say's that we should have acted sooner. I'm wondering. Does that Apply to Iran, or only threats to Iran's Mullahcracy?

(I never claimed this was a "no spin zone".)

New reports of unrest in central Iran

2003-08-17T13:10:00.000-07:00

From SMCCDI: daneshjoo.org

Fresh deadly clashes rock Esfahan province again
SMCCDI (Information Service)
Aug 17, 2003

Fresh clashes rocked, for the 4th consecutive day and despite heavy military presence, the City of Semiram located in Esfahan province resulting in new deaths and injured among the residents and the Islamic regime's forces.

Additional units of heliported special units were not able to extingush the unrest which seemed to be controled on Friday evening and crowd came into the streets shouting slogans against the regime and its leaders....

...Several other cities and localities of the Esfahan province, such as, Khomeini Shahr, formerly known as Shahin Shahr, and Dastguerd locality have been scenes of sporadic clashes as well.

Read more here. And here.

© Copyright 2003 SMCCDI: daneshjoo.org

More on: "The War on Terror - A War for Human Rights"

2003-08-15T23:13:00.000-07:00

Still no one has commented on my post, "The War on Terror - A War for Human Rights" - found below. I don't know if that is because it is old news to everyone already - or what.

To me it is highly important to understand what motivates others to attack my country.

Perhaps part of the reason is that Americans tend to not like to criticize anyone else's religion. I don't like to either, but in the case of militant Islam I feel I have to make an exception. My parents taught me to respect everyone's religion. While I lived in Iran I had the utmost respect for Islam and the Muslim's I came into contact with. But I had little knowledge of it. I like to have an open mind about everything, until I learn about it for myself. Well, I still like to have an open mind, but at least then - I have opinions. Although I have met many Muslims who are good people, I have also had run-ins with some that would like to kill me. There are bad non-Muslim's too, who might want to kill me if I stood in their way, but they know it is wrong and don't believe that they are doing it in the name of Allah. In America, people who think like that are one in a million and we call them schizophrenics. Among Muslims, they comprise a good-sized chunk of the populace. (But still a minority)

I think many Americans think that the attacks on our soil are over. They are not. It will get worse. Most Americans still have no idea what drives this hatred towards them. September 11th was a wake up call, but I am afraid that most Americans have fallen back to sleep.

Nobel peace prize: "And the nominees are..."

2003-08-15T22:23:00.000-07:00

"In general, his judgement is that in the recent high profile politics of the war on Iraq, increasing US pressure on Syria and Iran, and the crisis with North Korea, no political leaders have distinguished themselves in ways deserving of the prize."

Blah blah blah...

"With this in mind, the Committee will look for dissidents, most likely in China, Iran or Russia (or even Vietnam)"

Blah blah blah...

"But the PRIO Director's favourite is for the prize to be awarded to a Muslim reformist, such as Mr Hashem Aghajari, the Iranian lecturer who was condemned to death last year on charges of blasphemy, and although the death sentence was revoked, still remains in prison. Awarding the prize to him could be interpreted as encouraging democracy and reform in Iran, and may even urge Iran to engage more fully in the world in a way that would prevent if from being further targeted by the US."

I hope the rumor is true. I would love so much to see an Iranian disident win the prize.

Other rumored nominees include:

[The following "possible" nominees are not confirmed. Although there is plenty of speculation in some cases, the nominators have apparently not chosen to publicly confirm their nominations]

Gholamreza Aghazadeh, Vice President of Iran and Head of the country's Atomic Energy Organisation

Hashem Aghajari, Iranian dissident in prison

Bono, Irish pop star from U2

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George W. Bush, nominated by Jan Simonsen, a right-wing Norwegian MP (who missed the 1 February deadline)

Hans Blix, United Nations chief weapons inspector & Mohamed El Baradei, Head of the International Atomic Energy Agency

The European Union - why???

Vaclav Havel, former Czech President

Saad Eddin Ibrahim, Egyptian dissident

International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia, or Carla del Ponte, Chief Prosecutor

The International Red Cross

Afghan President Hamid Karzai - Another of my favorites

Kathy Kelly, Wilderness Group ]

Among many others.

In my humble opinion, there aint no way in heck, that an American is going to win it this year! Maybe next year.

I hereby nominate Mr Hashem Aghajari. Read more about him, here.

Iraqis offer advice on coping without electricity

2003-08-15T16:46:00.000-07:00

Most Americans just help each other out and patiently wait for the power to come back on.

Sleeping on the roof is always a good idea. I spent a lot of time on my roof while I lived in Teheran.

Unfortunately most Americans have peaked roofs, (not me though). And in New York City many of them are at the top of 70 story buildings. It's a long walk just to get there, and if everyone were to go up there at the same time they wouldn't fit.

That's what makes the Top 10 list so humorous, the Iraqis don't know any more about Americans than we know about Iraqis.

Erroneous E-mail address

2003-08-14T17:37:00.000-07:00

Dear fellow blogers,

I am embarrassed to admit that I have been inadvertently using the wrong e-mail address when I leave comments on people's blogs. I'd forgotten that I used the word "that" at the beginning of my e-mail address when I signed up for it. I was beginning to wonder when I would get my first email??? (not even a lowly spam)

I discovered this two days ago and have been using the correct one since then.

I am sorry if anyone has tried to send me a message using that address.

The correct address is: thatamericanguy@msn.com
Sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused.

The War on Terror - A War for Human Rights

2003-08-11T11:32:00.000-07:00

From SMCCDI: daneshjoo.org

FRONT PAGE MAGAZINE

The War on Terror - A War for Human Rights
By Robert Spencer
Aug 11, 2003

The Indonesian terrorist group, Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), demonstrated last week that the war on terror is not just an effort to prevent recurrences of September 11; it is a struggle for human rights.

As JI celebrates (yes, celebrates) its murder of fifteen people and the wounding of 150 more in a suicide attack on the Marriott Hotel in Jakarta last Tuesday, as well as the death sentence given Thursday to JI member Amrozi bin Nurhasyim, the smiling bomber, who murdered 202 people in Bali last October, it is instructive to remember that JI is doing all this killing for the Sharia.

The Sharia is the classic code of Islamic law that mandates stoning for adulterers and amputation for thieves, disallows a rape victim's testimony in her own case, and hamstrings freedom of conscience by prescribing death for apostates from Islam and those who have blasphemed the Prophet, an offense that Christians in Pakistan and other beleaguered minorities in the Islamic world have found to be distressingly elastic. Jemaah Islamiyah, al-Qaeda's southeast Asian affiliate, dreams of the day when the Sharia holds sway over the entire world, or at least its own corner of it.

Jemaah Islamiyah is fighting to create a Sharia-ruled Islamic megastate in Southeast Asia, comprising Indonesia, Malaysia, southern Thailand, Singapore, Brunei, and the southern Philippines island of Mindanao. In a certain sense it's fitting that they see blowing up innocent people as a viable means to attain this end, for the utopia that group members envision is just as brutal and unreasoning. There have been numerous indications of that recently in places where the Islamic law that JI reveres is already (in varying degrees) in force:

- The supreme court of Afghanistan on Thursday upheld death sentences for two journalists, Sayeed Mahdawi and Ali Reza Payam. Their crime? Criticizing what they called the "holy fascism" that still holds sway in Afghanistan, and asking: If Islam is the last and the most complete of the revealed religions, why are the Muslim countries lagging behind the modern world?

- A court in Pakistan on Tuesday sentenced another man, Bashir Ahmed, to death for making â€œderogatory remarks against the Holy Prophet and his companions.

- Women's groups in Malaysia protested, thus far in vain, against a decision by that country's Sharia court that men could divorce their wives by leaving a message on their mobile phones.

- The Jordanian parliament rejected on Islamic grounds a measure that would have given women the legal right to file for divorce, as well as another that would have led to stiff penalties for "honor killings": the barbaric murder of young women by family members who believe that they have committed adultery, thereby shaming the family honor. Many young women have even been murdered after being raped, since traditional Islamic law allows a rape charge to be established only by the testimony of four male witnesses who saw the act itself.

- In Iraq, Muslim authorities in the Shiite holy city of Najaf overruled, also on Islamic grounds, the appointment by American authorities of a woman judge, Nidal Nasser Hussein. Afrah Najem, who like Nidal Nasser Hussein is a female lawyer in Iraq, knows that she has hit the mother of all glass ceilings: "Ours is an Islamic society that would not tolerate a woman judge."

Draconian blasphemy laws, appallingly loose divorce laws (for men only), a totalitarian resistance to self-criticism, institutionalized brutality and oppression of women, these are the features of the Sharia law that forms the centerpiece of JI's dream state. Their path to this utopia is stained with the blood of the nightclubbers, businessmen and bystanders that JI is rejoicing over having slaughtered in Indonesia.

Donald Rumsfeld has declared that the United States will not accept an Islamic state in Iraq. One may hope that this indicates that the human rights component of the war on terror has at least some advocates in high places. For the events recounted above illustrate why everyone who values freedom and basic human rights should oppose the Sharia, whether it is implemented in whole or part, not just in Iraq or Indonesia, but everywhere that it hinders the liberty of human beings, including Saudi Arabia.

Like a peevish schoolmarm, the judge who sentenced Amrozi scolded him for perverting Islam and jihad. But it is unlikely that any of the Muslim onlookers who cheered and shouted "Allahu Akbar" (Allah is great) when Amrozi entered the courtroom were brought to a moment of theological reckoning by the judge's lecture. After all, moderate Muslims still have not answered the nagging question of why, if Islam forbids terrorism and the Quran teaches nonviolence, have so many devout Muslims around the world misinterpreted it so thoroughly and repeatedly. Where are the moderate Muslims who can teach, not only Western non-Muslims, but their fellow Muslims that Islam is peaceful?
If the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other Muslim advocacy groups really want to demonstrate that Muslims follow a religion of peace, mercy and forgiveness that should not be associated with acts of violence against the innocent, let them definitively renounce the Sharia for which Jemaah Islamiyah kills, and which brings anything but peace and mercy to those who must suffer under it. Let them work to create in the United States a truly moderate Islam that accepts the principles of Western secular society and coexistence with non-Muslims. If they do not do this, it is clear: history will judge them as being on the wrong side of this great struggle for the rights of mankind.

Robert Spencer is author of "Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith" (Encounter Books) and Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West (coming this September from Regnery Publishing). An Adjunct Fellow with the Free Congress Foundation, he writes frequently on Islam in a wide variety of publications.

Mars is melting, if anyone is interested

2003-08-11T00:42:00.000-07:00

Check it out!

Mars is closer this month than it will ever be again durring our lifetime's. It looks very bright late at night.

Who will win the great battle?

2003-08-08T23:14:00.000-07:00

Islamists spread so many lies about the United States and our motives. It is so sad that so may people buy into them. What has it brought them? What will it ever bring them?

Their movement will never reach the critical mass necesary to accomplish their goal of world domination. There just aren't enough people who will fight on their side. How many people do you think will fight to destroy freedom, so that they can have the oportunity to live under the control of tyrants???

God gave all mankind free agency so that we may choose for ourselves, learn and grow strong. Those who wish to control men through compulsion are doing the work of the devil. Darkness will not triumph over light. So many have been deceived. It is sad that so many must suffer because of it.

MORTAZAVI MUST GO!!!

2003-08-08T21:15:00.000-07:00

Today in Iran, journalists went on strike to protest human rights abuses against journalists. Had the Iranian-Canadian journalist, Ms. Zahra Kazemi not died at the hands of the brutal Saeed Mortazavi, most westerners would still be ignorant of the Sadistic Mortazavi.

Thousands of inocent Iranians have been beaten, with many deaths at the hands of Mortazavi and his thugs. It is time this senseless carnage stopped!

You may read about today's protests here.

Oh what a fascinating article

2003-08-08T18:55:00.000-07:00

I was just reading through today's news over at SMCCDI and came across this article, at first I thought, oh good, it was much adieu about nothing. Somehow Uncle Donny's explanation seemed to easy.

But that wasn't the real interesting article, or more precisely - it was only after reading the second article, from Newsday when the first article became interesting.

The newsday article is chocked full of intriguing information. I thought it must be biased. They do seem to want the reader to think there is a scandal brewing.

My Favorite candidate

2003-08-07T01:10:00.000-07:00

I was happy to find out today The Terminator will be running for governor of California this October. I like him, and I think he will be a fun governor.

You see, our old Governor, like sucks, really really bad. So we like did this recall thingy, and so we are like, dumping him, and like getting The Terminator to like replace him...you know?

I just realised, I've spent more time in Iran than many Iranians have

2003-08-07T00:46:00.000-07:00

I was reading the discussion board at SMCCDI tonight and I was struck by how many participants said they had never been to Iran. These are real Iranians with real Iranian names, yet they have never set foot on Iranian soil.

Sometimes I wonder why it is that I am so drawn to Iran. After all, I only lived there for a short time. I am not even an Iranian, after all. Sometimes I even question my own legitamacy. (As if one needs legitamacy to have an opinion.)

How sad that I, an American, have spent more time in Iran than many thousands of Iranians. I know what the air smells like in the different seasons, I know what it's like to have to wait in traffic for the sheep to clear the road, on a crisp fall day. I've seen sturgeon pulled from the Caspian Sea, women weaving Persian rugs, and smelled the oil as it comes up out of the ground.

I've crunched my feet through the fallen sycamore leaves along Pahlavi Avenue (Vali Asr), savored a Coke served over green ice, (which made me think I had to drink it very fast - before the ice could melt). I know first hand what it is like to travel on a two lane highway with cars and trucks and buses stretched across 7 vehicles wide and scream in horror as the bus driver ducks in at the last possible moment, sparing our lives. Then wondering what are chances are a survival as we repeat the maneuver 15 more times between Teheran and Rasht.

I guess I was even part of history. I've walked the same halls in the American Embassy where the hostages were taken and held for 444 days. I even got to shake the hands of one of them because he had been my school principle - Dr. Keough. I must be one of very few Americans for whom seeing old pictures of the American Embassy brings back fond memories.

Did you know that you can't sit on the front fender of a Djyane? (sp?) They fall off if you do, or at least make horrible loud sounds as they threaten to fall off and leave you sitting back side down, in the dirt.

I can't imagine what it would feel like for the Iranian who steps foot in Iran for the first time. I think it must feel very surreal. Like being in a picture. After my realtively short time in Iran, it felt surreal to me to be back in the USA. Somehow I knew the experience had changed me forever.

Live webcams from Iran

2003-08-06T00:58:00.000-07:00

UPDATE: This page is better if you can't read Arabic script, on this one I can actually read the street names.

Just came acrossed these webcams while searching for something entirely different! Note: White painted lines on roadways are strictly for decoration only! :-)

In some of the pics, the air does look a little bit thick. Cough cough. As a friend who grew up in Redlands California once said: "I just don't trust air that I can't see!" No problem with that in Tehran.

Note: [Note 3: The images are sometimes unavailable.] Like today. ;-)

Part four of BBC series: US options on Iran

2003-08-05T23:48:00.000-07:00

US options on Iran

By Roger Hardy
BBC Middle East analyst

Joshua Muravchik, a prominent neo-con of the right-wing think-tank, the American Enterprise Institute, thinks that the goal of regime change in Iran is at least clearly implicit in what the Bush administration is trying to do.

"This is both in the rhetoric about the "axis of evil" and in the formal national security strategy paper that the president issued last September," says Mr Muravhick.

That was the paper which set out what has come to be known as the "Bush doctrine" of pre-emptive, or more accurately, preventive, action against perceived threats to the US.

A few of the neo-cons favour military action to remove what they see as the threat posed by Iran, for example, through strikes against its nuclear facilities.

Michael Hirsh is a senior editor at Newsweek and author of a new book on US foreign policy...

But if the neo-cons have been temporarily weakened, they are certainly not out of the game. They are determined and influential people, and there are some in Washington who feel they are biding their time, waiting for George W Bush to win a second term in next year's presidential elections.

If he is re-elected, then, in the view of Raad al-Kadiri, Middle East expert at the Washington-based energy consultants, PFC, the neo-cons will be ready to push forward their agenda on Iran.

"Rightly or wrongly, they see in Iran a country that is on the edge, a country that requires a simple push and will actually undergo transformation from within, and that is what they're aiming to achieve.

But what constitutes a "simple push"?

I have been very curious about what would happen if Washington decided to go into Iran with a limited military incursion. This could either be to capture Al Qaeda fugitives, Iran harbors - but refuses to turn over - or to disable the nuclear program. My opinion is that this would add fuel to the fire of the democratisation movement.

After all, the mullahs have now brought Iran to a state of war with the most powerful nation on earth. I keep hearing people say that this would be the dumbest thing we could do...but I wonder? The argument seems to be that Iranians are such fierce nationalists that they would unite behind their government agaisnt the foreign power. Yes, I am sure that some would, but I think the vast majority would be extremely angry that the Islamic regime had brought Iran to such a crises. I just can't imagine the people running into the streets to demand more of the same.

Third in a 4 part BBC series on Iran

2003-08-05T23:04:00.000-07:00

I just read this article on the BBC website.

I found some comments I agree with completely!

Here they are: "[A well-known figure in the Iranian-American community is the businessman, academic and political activist, Rob Sobhani.

"I think there's a role for all dissidents, including the son of the Shah - because Iran today is thirsty for leadership, Iran is thirsty for someone with vision," he says.]<br>
[Waiting in the wings

"I think what's lacking in Iranian politics today is someone with a vision. I think if that individual - a man or a woman - appears on the scene and grabs the attention of the Iranian people, with a vision of what he or she would like the country to move towards, they will certainly be the beneficiary of that goodwill, that thirst for a leader."]

I have basically been saying the same things for quite a while. I even have a theory that Reza Pahlavi will take over the leadership role. This is not a very popular opinion, I've discovered.

["Then there's the monarchists and Reza Pahlavi, the son of the late Shah, and he seems to have hit his stride (i.e. improved his performance), and to be learning better how to communicate.

"But a large part of that stride is to avoid any direct role in confronting the mullahs and to avoid presenting himself as someone who should run Iran in the future."]

I agree, he is improving. He say's he will defer to the people to choose the role he will play, which goes along with the democratic theme. Personally, I believe him.

[John Calabrese of the Middle East Institute, a Washington research centre, takes a different view.

"I think the street demonstrations and protests that have been occurring over the last month or two provide yet additional evidence that there is a deep resentment, a deep alienation - a gulf really - between the regime and the population," he says.

"Having said that, it's also clear from the protests and demonstrations that the regime is resilient, resourceful, and prepared to use repression in order to make sure that the protests are kept more or less under control."

Mr Calabrese believes the weakness of the student demonstrators is their lack of leadership and organisation. He believes the prospects for "regime change" from within are low.]

And that is precisely why I think Reza Pahlavi will take over the much needed leadership role.

The people's demands: What are they?

2003-07-30T20:25:00.000-07:00

From the blog, "Free thoughts on Iran".

"Here I'll argue that people's demands in Iran are not clear even to themselves as a whole....

A concerted and firm effort to extend the freedom of speech and the press is the missing loop in Iran's reform movement. People have not gained any effective ways of expressing themselves, have no clear idea of what they want any more and thus have become hopeless. The voiceless popular movement is choking, (has choked?)on itself."

Sound's like the suppression efforts are working.