[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great

[Spenta]

Very disturbing. No wonder so many leave Iran and advise everyone to forget Iran, its lost ...

Iran's tough stance a hit at home

Iranians held pro-nuclear rally in Tehran Wednesday.
By Scott Peterson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
TEHRAN, IRAN – To maximize media impact, Iran's hardline Basiji militia waited hours until the live cameras were rolling to start its pro-nuclear rally Wednesday in front of the British Embassy in Tehran.

Several hundred protesters gathered to declare their support of Iran's controversial nuclear program, and to blast the US and Europeans - who suspect a secret weapons program, and last week voted to refer Iran to the UN Security Council because of reporting violations - with accusations and threats.

But the ready-for-camera vitriol and flag-burning only hints at the breadth of popular support here for Iran's tough nuclear stance, which is complicating Western efforts to convince Iran to give up such technology.

"Our aim is to use this energy, and our nation will not let us forget about it," Mohammad Vadoud Haydari thundered from the podium.

"Confrontation with those bullying Western governments is our legitimate right," added Mr. Haydari, a medical student at Tehran University and a leader of the Basiji, a militia force loyal to the regime. "They should know that not only the interests of the US and Western countries will be jeopardized, but American territory itself shall not be safe from our basijis."

Eggs, tomatoes and stones were thrown at the embassy, and police used tear gas to keep protestors back from the embassy gates. Calling the British embassy a new "den of spies" - the term frequently used to describe the US embassy here, which was taken over in 1979 - the students Wednesday vowed to "repeat" the event.

Uncompromising rhetoric has long been a feature of the Islamic Republic. But while some of the tough talk may echo the bellicose declarations of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, hardliners are not alone in embracing Iran's unbending nuclear view.

Iranians across the political spectrum say they welcome Iran's tougher stance, and argue - just like Mr. Ahmadinejad and the clerical leadership - that the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) gives them the right to peaceful nuclear technology and homemade nuclear fuel.

It is a right, they say, that many Iranians will not give up now, whatever the price. "I may not believe in most of what the Basiji and Hizbullahi [another ideological militia] do, but on this issue, you can't divide the country," Ali Fahrbod, an English literature major at Tehran University with gel in his hair and a strip of goatee.

"We all believe [nuclear technology] is our biggest right," says Mr. Fahrbod. "It is the people who want it, not the government. The people are forcing this, and we will not stop until we reach this step."

"How can North Korea, India, Israel, and your country [the US], all have [nuclear technology], and we can't?" asks Mohammad, a tour guide, who with long hair and black shades perched on his head, could not look less like an Iranian ideologue. "This technology is for our progress, our prosperity - it is our right."

President Ahmadinejad set the tone during an address to the UN 10 days ago. "Peoples in the world are subject to nuclear discrimination," he redeclared on Tuesday. "Only those with bad and evil intentions have managed to raise Iran's nuclear program at the [UN] International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA.]"

"Ahmadinejad's rhetoric at the UN was much harsher than anyone expected, and especially angered the Europeans. It's his presidency that has complicated the situation," says Joseph Cirincione, the head of the nonproliferation project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, who was in Tehran last March for a nuclear conference.

"It looks like we're in a nuclear game of 'chicken,' and both sides are not going to change course," says Mr. Cirincione.

Still, Iranian officials say they are willing to keep talking. So far, Iran has been voluntarily abiding by the terms of the "additional protocol" of the NPT, which it has accepted but not ratified. The protocol enables snap inspections of any site.

But members of the conservative- controlled parliament have already drafted a proposal to suspend Iran's adherence to the protocol.

"We will not take any hasty decision," Ali Larijani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, said Tuesday. "For the time being, nothing has been determined. Of course, our reaction will depend on what the Europeans will do."

[Liberator]

Of course Iran is entitled to nuclear technology but what is it with the REAL students interviewed in this article (NOT BASIJI's) that they cannot understand with ANTARINEJAD and the whole terrorist regime in place it wouldn't only endanger them but Iran's integrity if these filthy arabo-muslims got their hands on NUKES!!!

Sometimes I really wonder...
_________________
JAVID IRAN!



www.anjomane-padeshahi.org
http://aryamehr11.blogspot.com/

[Oppenheimer]

Dear Liberator,

While the IRI plays on "Iranian Pride" to gain support, any thinking Iranian must wonder at the sensibility of even a nuclear power program...let alone military applications in the hands of the IRI.

But there's something even more basic to consider, and that is the geological instability of Iran. Does the average Iranian, knowing this to be a fact of life, consider for a moment what may befall the nation should a major earthquake compromise the integrity of a nuclear reactor?

Do they trust the good folks that brought the world Chernobyl to adapt the nuclear reactor vessel at Bhushir, with total confidence?

Before the average Iranian can say "It is our right!" they must ask themselves if they have a choice in the matter, and very carefully weigh the risks of obtaining what they seek.

Has the IRI published an envioronmental assesment, a geological assesment, or addressed the safety issues in a national referendum?

No.

Beware the pride that blinds....

[Spenta]

Dear Liberator,

The problem is some of the students interviewed were not Basijis, and they even admitted that they hate the Mullah$. And Christian Science Monitor has had a pretty good track record when it comes to its coverage in Iran in the last 4 to 5 years, as many of us have observed and commented. If it was the New York Times, it wouldn't have bothered me as much.

The problem is I'm starting to realise, that this kind of Khariat is common amongst our people. Its the same Khariat that deposed the Shah and hailed Khomeini as the prophet. The same Khariat that turned a blind eye to Khomeini's genocide machine. The same Khariat that thought Rafsanjani's presidenty would rebuild the country economically after the war. The same Khariat that believed Khatami the charlatan and the bogu$ Reform$. And the same khariat that is caught up in some kind of stupid 'Gheyrat' idiocy with the nuclear issue today ... it just pisses me off.

I wish Iran was the glorious epic of a country you envision, but its really a country that chose and continues to choose one of the most brutal, heartless, disgusting totalitarian terrorist regimes imaginable ...

[Liberty Now !]

taking our oil for as long as we can remember and all they get is eggs and tomatos?

I mean, if I were brit politician, I would watch my undertakers take all the rotton eggs in the world with great joy, for all the billions of barrels of oil, and having the ultimate say on IRI's oil deals from my London mansion, too!

afterall, what good is some embassy worker if they don't take the hit for us. Americans did too. that's what gov. workers are suppose to be. taking the hit for their ever more corrupt politicians.

There are talks that this is a collaborative plan btwn. Brits and IRI.

these western politicians play the victim's role so great when they have to. so did the Americans.

they couldn't care less if hundreds of brits or americans were killed or not; to them, that's just the beauty of politics, and part of it.



ok, I'm done. Oppenheimer, be my guest. bring on the bucket of white paint.

you so remind me of the hectic work of hundreds of regime's undertakers white washing the walls after a night of demonstration lol
_________________
Paayande Iran

[Oppenheimer]

Stripping the issue down to essential questions is not exactly covering it over with a coat of paint Liberty...but then Spenta's right, for had the Iranian people bothered to consider what they were supporting....you would not be now blaming the west for all the ills that exist in Iran...and this you poor confused twit, is the biggest whitwash of all. When I need a wall painted sometime...I'll hire you and Antar....well maybe not...because I insist on a professional job....and it's all too easy to see right through your work..

Now maybe you'll start dealing with reality and answer a few simple questions.....nah...don't bother...it wouldn't interest you anyway.

-----------


While the IRI plays on "Iranian Pride" to gain support, any thinking Iranian must wonder at the sensibility of even a nuclear power program...let alone military applications in the hands of the IRI.

But there's something even more basic to consider, and that is the geological instability of Iran. Does the average Iranian, knowing this to be a fact of life, consider for a moment what may befall the nation should a major earthquake compromise the integrity of a nuclear reactor?

Do they trust the good folks that brought the world Chernobyl to adapt the nuclear reactor vessel at Bhushir, with total confidence?

Before the average Iranian can say "It is our right!" they must ask themselves if they have a choice in the matter, and very carefully weigh the risks of obtaining what they seek.

Has the IRI published an envioronmental assesment, a geological assesment, or addressed the safety issues in a national referendum?

No.

Beware the pride that blinds....

[Liberator]

[Oppenheimer]

Dear Liberator,

Well sir, be of good cheer, all is not lost, for just as it seems hopeless, the IRI does something so incredibly stupid as to simply hand the opposition the tools it needs to succeed on a golden platter.

By this I mean that for a long time the opposition has been seeking the economic and political isolation of the regime by EU and others.

Folks thought the EU talks were appeasment, the US along for the ride..

But what has happened since the IAEA voted to refer the IRI to the UN Sec Council?

The IRI has threatened to sanction the west, and other nations that voted in favor, cut off trade, oil, issued retaliatory threats of such a thinly veiled terroristic nature to attack the US...they want to boot out the Brit's ambassador...

If Antar's UN speech hardened the stance taken toward the IRI, this will not only cement it in place, but the opposition has just been given justification and credibility for having asked for sanctions over many year's time.

What you have here my friend is a really twisted cause and effect of reverse psycology....the pride that blinds is a double edged sword....

Folks wondered how the US could possibly let Antar speak at the UN....angered many in the process....Now I wonder if they arn't glad we let him hang himself with his own words.

These are days of circumstance and wonder

When it seems all is lost, remember...what will be is meant to be.

be well.