![[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index](http://www.activistchat.com/images/ActivistChatStandsLogo.jpg) |
[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Views expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Iranian Boy
![](http://mk23.image.pbase.com/u11/hsf/small/2400177.mreza.jpg)
Joined: 13 May 2004 Posts: 379
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:47 am Post subject: STOP KHATAMI´s VISIT TO USA |
|
|
Dear all
The worst man of IRI, the evil Khatami is going to USA and Jimmy Carter has invited him and will be his host. This is a big danger for every Iranian. I think it is the duty of every Iranian in USA, especially in Washington to protest and demonstrate against the evils Khatami&Carter.
Exile Iranians in Usa MUST arrange a big demonstration against these 2 bastards! Or this may be the start of a new USA policy supporting mullahs _________________ Long live the memory of Shahanshah Aryamehr.
Long live Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi
Long live Reza Shah II
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
cyrus Site Admin
![](http://www.activistchat.com/WTC/images/icyruswithclynder.gif)
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 4993
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:56 am Post subject: Carter Agrees to Hold Talks With Khatami |
|
|
Carter Agrees to Hold Talks With Khatami
August 30, 2006
The Washington Post
Robin Wright
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/29/AR2006082901412.html?sub=AR
For an event that would turn a page in American history, former president Jimmy Carter has agreed in principle to host former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami for talks during his visit to the United States starting this week. Carter's term as president was dominated by the rupture in relations after the 1979 Iranian revolution and the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, where 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days until the day he left office.
Iranians made the overture for the meeting, and the Carter Center in Atlanta is working on the possible timing, said Phil Wise, the former president's aide.
"President Carter, in his role since leaving the White House, has made his office and services and center available to basically anybody who wants to talk. He believes that it is much better to be talking to people who you have problems with than not to, and that's the approach he takes now," Wise said. "I can confirm that President Carter is open to a meeting if the former president of Iran would like to have one."
Despite mounting tensions between Washington and Tehran over the latter's nuclear program, the Bush administration issued a visa for Khatami yesterday, as well as for about a dozen family and staff members, for a visit lasting about two weeks, the State Department confirmed. Khatami is expected to arrive in the United States tomorrow.
Khatami, a reformer who served as president from 1997 to 2005, is scheduled to speak at the Washington National Cathedral on Sept. 7. His schedule may include speeches at the University of Virginia and to an Islamic group in Chicago. He may also pay a private visit to Thomas Jefferson's home at Monticello, according to sources familiar with his trip. He will begin his visit in New York at a U.N. conference on the dialogue of civilizations.
The White House said yesterday that Khatami had been invited by private organizations and is not part of the current Iranian government.
"Mr. Khatami is free to meet with who he chooses and is able to speak freely in the United States -- the very freedoms that do not exist in Iran," a White House official said on the condition of anonymity.
"We expect that Khatami will face tough questions from his audience in the United States about the past and present behavior of the Iranian regime, especially with respect to human rights violations that occurred during his presidency," the official added.
Talks between Carter and Khatami, if they materialize, would be politically poignant.
"Carter, who has every reason to be angry about the way in which the Iranian revolution undid his presidency over the hostage affair, is willing to meet, with no hesitation, a person who was president of the Islamic republic and who has never disavowed Ayatollah Khomeini's actions when he was supreme leader," said William Quandt, a national security staffer in charge of the Middle East during the Carter administration. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
cyrus Site Admin
![](http://www.activistchat.com/WTC/images/icyruswithclynder.gif)
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 4993
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:02 am Post subject: To protest Mohammad Khatami’s trip to USA |
|
|
To protest Mohammad Khatami’s trip to USA :
Please Contact Jean F. Duff, Director of Center for Global Justice and Reconciliation at jduff@cathedral.org or
202-537-2178 to protest Khatami's visit.
This is the least we can do.
Do not forget the September 7th press conference at the National Press Club to reveal Khatami's crimes to the press and our demonstration at 6:00 PM in front of the Cathedral. Please forward this e-mail to the people on your list.
Thanks;
SG
_______________________________________________________
محمد خاتمي به روايت ملا نصرالدين !
پيش از آنكه روايت نقل شود، اين پرسش مطرح ميشود كه محمد خاتمي، اين مارخوش خط و خال، اين شارلاتان سياسي، اين عنصر پليد آفتاب پرست گون، و اين فاحشه تمام عيار سياسي براي چه منظوري راهي آمريكا است ؟ ايا براستي هنوز هم غربيها، خصوصا آمريكائي ها نسبت به ماهيت اين رژيم جهنمي و اعوان وانصار خونخوار آن دراوهام و ابهامند ؟ شايد هنوزهم معتقدند كه محمد خاتمي تافته اي جدا بافته است؟ چه كه اگر غيراز اين ميبود، هرگز به چنبن عنصري كه دستش در تمامي خيانتها وجنايات رژيم آلوده است، مجال نميدادند تا وارد خاك آمريكا بشود ودرمراكزعلمي آن كشوروهمچنين دريكي از معتبرترين كليساهاي مسيحيت سخنراني بنمايد.
براستي خاتمي ميخواهد چه بگويد؟ شايد ميخواهد بيايد تا نقشه گنجي وحجاريان و... را تكميل نمايد . شايد ميخواهد بيايد تا چرنديات اسلام صلح طلب، و اسلاميون صلح دوست اكبر گنجي را كامل نمايد . وشايد دارد مي آيد تا بگويد، دارو دسته من ((اصلاح طلبان )) ازدارودسته خامنه اي و احمدي نژادوديگر آدمخواران بهتر وبرترند . شايد درآدمخواري وچپاول بهترو برتر باشند، اما درزمينه صلح دوستي وانسان دوستي هيچ تفاوت ووجه تمايزي ميانشان وجود ندارد. بيست وهفت سال است كه ملت ايران داردفرياد ميزند، سگ زرد برادرشغال است، وضجه ميزند كه مجموعه اين قوم وقبيله سروته يك كرباسند وآزموده را آزمودن خطاست.
حال به روايت ملا توجه كنيد كه درعين سادگي داراي مفاهيم بسياري است : چنين است كه مادر ملا نصرالدين مصمم بود تا پسرش همسري اختيار كند. ملا معتقد بود كه زن خوب وجود ندارد وهمه آنها مثل هم هستند . اين بي اعتمادي عميق ملانصرالدين كه حالادر مورد ملايان حاكم بر ايران صدق ميكند وملت ايران بدان دچار شده اند، موجب شده بود تا ملا نتواند زن مورد اعتمادش را بيابد . روزي مادرملا نصرالدين به نزد فرزند آمد و گفت پسرم دختري را يافته ام كه آفتاب ومهتاب هم روي اورا نديده است . ملا با نا با وري گفت مگرممكن است ؟ مادرگفت آري ممكن است، بالاخره درميان آنهمه آدم نا باب يكي را يافته ام . ملا با اكراه پذيرفت تا به خواستگاري برود. اسباب خواستگاري مهيا وجلسه بعله برون تشكيل شد. ملانصرا لد ين مثل هميشه همه بي اعتمادي را بيان نمود، درمقابل پدرومادر دخترو خود دخترهم ادعا نمودند كه او تافته اي جدا بافته است كه درميان تمامي هم نوعان وهمجنسا نش چون اوجود ندارد . خواستگاري صورت پذيرفت و بقول خودمان شب حجله فرارسيد . ملا مصمم بود تا دخترآفتاب ومهتاب نديده را محك بزند و ثابت كند كه اوهم دروغ ميگويد. بهمين دليل قبل ازآنكه وارد حجله شود، بدون اينكه كسي متوجه باشد بگوشه اي خزيد تا ابزارمحك را مهيا نمايد . آنچه كه درآنزمان بعقل ملارسيد اين بود كه آلت تناسلي خودرا به چند رنگ مزين نمايد . چنين كرد ووارد حجله شد . پس ازاندگي كه دركنار دخترآفتاب ومهتاب نديده نشست وخوش وبشي كرد، درفرصتي مناسب آلت تناسلي الوان گونه خودرا نمايان نمود، همان محجبه آفتاب و مهتاب نديده به محض مشاهده فرياد برآورد كه آي ايها الناس به فرياد برسيد كه ... ! همراهان هجوم آوردند تا ببينند چه اتفاقي افتاده است كه اين چنين فرياد عروس به آسمان برخواسته ومشغول دادوقال است .وقتي آمدند واوضاع را جويا شدند، محجبه خطاب به اطرافيان فرياد برآورد كه من همه جورش راديده بودم ولي اين رنگي اش را نديده بودم .
ايران—تهران الف—بيقرار 7/6/85
خاتمی؛ سید محمد خاتمی قاتل پدرم است
دادنامه من سایه سیرجانی به جهانیان این است:
خاتمی؛ سید محمد خاتمی قاتل پدرم است. به قصد کشتن قلم او سالها جنایت و ظلم را بر او و خانواده اش رقم زد. حضور او در آمریکا یا هر کشوری که طبق قانون محاکمه جنایتکار سیستم قضایی اش استوار گشته امری است حتمی. من هم شاکی خصوصی چنین جنایتکاری هستم. نامه های پدر و آثار او گواهی دهنده در این دادگاه خواهد بود.
کیفر خواستی علیه سید محمد خاتمی
سید محمد خاتمی، در آغازین روزهای هجوم جمهوری اسلامی به سرزمین ایران به انتخاب ولی فقیه "خمینی" به مقام مسوولیت سرپرستی موسسه کیهان رسید. همان موسسه ای که طی بیست و هفت سال با برنامه نابودی فرهنگ ایران به ترور آزادگان ایران پرداخت.
نخستین سنگر اتهام زنی پرونده سازی و ترور شخصیت. ایجاد خفقان و کانالیزه کردن اخباربه منظور جاانداختن گام نخست انقلاب فرهنگی اشان. برای دست یابی به قدرت به اعدام ها پرداختند. این اعدام ها را تنها به وسیله تسلط بر افکار عمومی آن هم در محیط خفقان زده می توان به انجام رسانید. رادیو تلویزیون نابود گشته در دست ویرانگران ایران افتاد؛ دفاتر مجلات و روزنامه ها به آتش کشانیده شد تا تنها یک روزنامه کیهان دولتی و به تبعش اطلاعات دولت اسلامی گشته وظیفه پرونده سازی و مسموم کردن افکار عمومی را به عهده گیرند.
دستگیری ها، اعدام ها و کشتاری که بیست و هفت سال است با استفاده از این ابزار حاکم گشته در محیط خفقان اجرا گشته و می شود. آقای خاتمی در دو زمینه بسیار مهم برای نظام جمهوری اسلامی به فعالیت پرداخت: نخست با به کنترل گرفتن موسسه کیهان و سپس با مقام وزارت ارشاد! یعنی نابودی نویسنده و هنرمند. محصول این هر دو دوره نابودی و کشتن آزادگان بود. آنانی که به بله قربان گویی این غارتگران و قاتلان نیافتادند. کافی است به کیهان سالهای پنجاه و هفت تا همین امروز روز نگاه کنید و نمونه پرونده سازی ها را برای ثبت در تاریخ هولوکاست ایرانی عبرت دنیا قرار دهید. نمونه تهمت زنی های تلویزیون جمهوری اسلامی ،کیهان هوایی و زمینی و البته دست آخر وزارت ارشاد اسلامی را نسبت به سعیدی سیرجانی ، از آغاز پرونده سازی تا رساندن خبر دروغ مرگ و دست درازی و نابودی کتابهایش را می توانید از بهمن پنجاه و هفت تا به همین امروز روز تعقیب نمایید.
از آغازین روز این سیستم جمهوری اسلامی؛ بازوی پرونده سازی و اعتراف تراشی راه افتاد تا مجریان قتل به آسانی به نابودی آزادگان ایران بپردازند. سید محمد خاتمی این رسالت جمهوری اسلامی را تا بدین لحظه به انجام می رساند.
خاتمی پس از موسسه کیهان و ایجاد سنتی سیستم پسند به مقام وزارت ارشاد نشست. یعنی کنترل افکار نویسندگان و هنرمندان. دوره ممنوع القلمی ممنوع التصویری ممنوع الصوت بودن و ممنوع الخروج و ممنوع القلم بودن رقم زده شد. مرز هم میان خودی و ناخودی با اعترافی قلمی و تصویری مشخص می گشت. نمونه ها بسیارند از قتل ایران دوستانی که به جوخه مرگ رفتند و ضعیف النفسانی چون طبری که به خدمت سیستم شکنجه گر و قاتل اندیشه در آمدند. وزارت ارشاد و معارف اسلامی که پس از انقلاب فرهنگی سرپرستی توسعه جو خفقان و یک رنگ کردن قلم ها و گفته ها را داشت به فعالیت پرداخت. در لباس یک وزارتخانه و به سرپرستی سید محمد خاتمی.
خمیر کردن کتابهای سیرجانی و سهمیه بندی کاغذ و اختصاص آن به نشر
گناه های کبیره در این دوره صورت پذیرفت. سیرجانی نویسنده ای که نوک تیز قلم را با بیان تاریخ و فرهنگ ایران بر جماعت دست دراز بر ایران و ایرانی نشانه رفته بود. او که شور درس دادن را با هجوم جمهوری اسلامی به کنار نهاد؛ دانشگاهی که چکمه پوشان ریشو به سیلی زدن اساتید پرداخته اند و دانشجویان سوای خط امامی را به شلاق و اعدام کشانیدند و دست آخر به تصفیه دانشگاه ها و چتر سمی اختناق مرسوم به انقلاب فرهنگی. سیرجانی که راه ایستادن در مقابل این انسان ستیزان غارتگر را در نوشتن و بیان تاریخ ایران برای جوانان می دید. این وزارت ارشاد سید محمد خاتمی بود که با سیاست خمیر کردن کتابهایش و سهمیه بندی کاغذ نویسنده را با مرگ آثارش روبرو کرد. سیاستی که یا بایست خود دست به سانسور بزنی و با لعابی از تقیه سر ارادت به آستان جمهوری اسلامی بسایی یا اینکه قلم را ببوسی و بگذاری کنار.
سیرجانی به نشر آثارش پرداخت. بیشتر و سریعتر نوشت. نگران بود کار امروز را فکر امروز را به فردا بسپارد. یادم است به تشویق دکتر محمد محمدی که کار تحقیقی بر تاریخ ایران را بایست به انجام می رسانید پرداخت: که زودتر به چاپ برسان اجل فرصت نخواهد داد.
آخرین تیر ترکش سیرجانی دست یابی به ماشین چاپ بود. در مدت چهار ماه هفت کتاب را به تجدید چاپ و نشرش پرداخت. با گذاردن نامه ای به عنوان وصیت نامه در آغاز هر کتاب و با آوردن نامه های سرگشاده سالهای ایستادگی اش در آخر هر کتاب. نسخه ها برای فروش نبود و دوست ناشری: سعید نیاز کرمانی مسوول جلد کوبی این کتاب ها گشت. جرمی که در جمهوری اسلامی به زندان افتادن و دست آخر فلج گشتن او را رقم زد.
ماه ها قبل از دستگیری سیرجانی؛ روش جالبی را دادگستری دیگر جا افتاده جمهوری اسلامی اجرا نمود. سیرجانی که علیه توهین ها عدم امکان چاپ و خمیر کردن آثار و آزار این سیستم که تنه ا به خود او و نوشته هایش محدود نمی شود و نیز دامن خانواده را نیز گرفته، کوتاه نیامده بارها و بارها نامه های سرگشاده پخش نموده می بایست به جزای این کارهایش می رسید. آخرین دعوی او که به روشن نمودن دست چاپخانه حوزه علمیه قم نیز می رسید با گسیل گشتن زنجیر بدستان شعار ده: سیرجانی سلمان رشدی ثانی مواجه شد. روش تهدیدها و نا دادگستری جمهوری اسلامی را در آخرین نامه سرگشاده او بخوانید. اینک دیگر تنها دادگاه انقلاب نبود دادگستری و حوزه علمیه قم هم به کار تخریب ارزش ها جا افتاده شده بودند. انتشارات حوزه البته علمیه که با نظارت و جواز وزارت ارشاد همراه و همدم است دست به انتشار " سیمای دو زن " و " ضحاک ماردوش" پرداخته بود . منتها نه کتاب اصلی! هر جا که دلشان خواسته بود حذف کرده بودند و تغییر داده بودند که بگویند این بیخودی می گوید کتابهایش ممنوع النشر است بفرما این هم کتابهایش در بازار!
نکته ای که سیرجانی را به داشتن دستگاه چاپ در خانه و تایپ و صفحه بندی بیست ساعته در روز انداخته بود تهدید با لعاب خنده کذای سید محمد خاتمی بود. توبه و اعتراف نمودن و به سراط جمهوری اسلامی مستقیم شدن را می خواست با دیداری آن هم بدون عبا و عمامه رقم زند. جوابش تفی بود که با دیدن چهره سید محمد خاتمی ؛ سعیدی سیرجانی بر زمین انداخت که پدر مردک را دیدی؟ می خواهد مذاکره کند! تف به رویش، تف.
نامه آخرین پدر به سخره گرفتن این نا نظام دست دراز به هر پایه و نهادی است و اینکه در حکومت البته عدل اسلامی شکایت به دادگستری دیگر معنی ندارد!
چند ماه نگذشت. به خانه ریختند. کتابها را هر چه کم و کسر داشتند بردند. فیشهای فرهنگ فارسی که آماده چاپ گشته بود را بردند. نوارهای صحبت به دکتر خانلری؛ دکتر بقایی و علی دشتی را بردند. هر چه سیرجانی دست نوشته داشت بردند. یک هفته نگذشت که آمدند و دنبال نسخه اول تاریخ بیداری ایرانیان بودند.
می دانید چه شد؟ سیرجانی " مسلمان " اینان نشد. کشتندش. سید محمد خاتمی را رییس جمهور اعلام کردند. همان خود فروختگان قلمی جواز مجله گرفته را که به اعتراف گیری از دیگر نویسندگان آمده بودند روانه دنیای غرب کردند. این مرحله آخر انقلاب فرهنگی شان را دارند رقم می زنند. شش سال پس از کشتار سیرجانی البته مهاجرانی به یاد آبرو خریدن برای بازی دیگر سید محمد خاتمی افتاد. اگر در زمان حیات سیرجانی او را به راه خودمان نیاوردیم هنوز هم دیر نشده. می دانید چه کردند؟ کتابها را چاپ کردند بدون استفاده از آن آخرین نسخه ها. بدون در نظر گرفتن وصیت نامه چاپ گشته سیرجانی که از این به بعد هر کتابی هر نوشته ای از من چاپ شود بایست همراه این وصیت نامه باشد. همزمان به بزرگداشت گرفتن مردگان افتادند. دکتر محمد محمدی و کتابش که تیشه به ریشه این جماعت می زند را صبر کردند از دنیا رفت، بعد آمدند جایزه خاتمی برایش بدهند. چه تزویری از این بالاتر برای نابودی اندیشه و فکر ایرانی و جمهوری اسلامی ستیز. داشتند همین بساط را هم برای سیرجانی می چیدند. هر قطره خون او اشک دل من است. تا زنده ام جلوی این ریا خاتمی و خاتمی چیان ایستاده ام.
تقلب اصلاحات به منظور بزک جنایتکار صورت گرفت و بس. پذیرش جنایتکاری که با دزدی طرح و عنوان گفتگوی تمدنها از دفتر اشغال شده شهبانوی ایران به بازی ادامه می دهد خواب دولتمردان را نشان می دهد. خاتمی به قصد نابود کردن فرهنگ و تمدن ایران به قتل نویسنده پرداخت. در مقابل به تولید انبوده مجیز گویان پرداخت تا ضربه نهایی را بر فرهنگ ایران بزند. دنیا بایست در مقابل این جنایتکار بایستد و او را به محاکمه کشاند.
این کیفرخواستی است به دولتهایی که جنایت و محاکمه جنایتکار را سنگ بنای نظام خود می داند.
این کیفرخواستی است که از دولتهای مدعو خاتمی می خواهد او را به محاکمه کشانند.
این کیفرخواستی است که نادیده انگاشتن مسوولیت خاتمی در قتل سیرجانی؛ دستگیری های سالهای در قدرت بودن او را و کشتن آزادگان را شکست قاعده آمره حقوق می داند. سرزمین ایران تشنه اجرای عدالت است و جز این به آزادی نخواهد رسید.
سایه سعیدی سیرجانی
Khatami is an ordinary Iranian citizen, He should be finger printed just like anyone else!
Khatami was the one who ordered the American travelers going to Iran to be finger printed.
نگرانی آخوند خاتمی از انگشت نگاری در آمریکا
سایت حکومتی آفتاب از نگرانی آخوند خاتمی از انجام انگشت نگاری در سفر به آمریکا خبر داد و نوشت "سفر به آمریکا، سفری است که گفته می شود ممکن است مشکلاتی چون انگشت نگاری را برای او و هیات همراهش به دنبال داشته باشد."
آخوند خاتمی خود در این باره گفته است "از ميان 40 – 50 دعوتي كه داشتم، چند دعوت در شرق و چند دعوت در غرب از جانب ايرانيان و غيرايرانيان بود، همچنين دعوت آقاي «كوفي عنان» براي گروه عاليرتبه بررسي ائتلاف تمدنها در همين ماه سپتامبر به دستم رسيد كه بر اساس آن ترجيح دادم سفر به آمريكا را جلوتر بيندازم، اما از آنجا كه مجال كم بود، بيشتر به شرق آمريكا اكتفا شد. سخنراني در مجم&[/siz |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
cyrus Site Admin
![](http://www.activistchat.com/WTC/images/icyruswithclynder.gif)
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 4993
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:10 am Post subject: Saayeh Saeedi Sirjaani: "Mohammad Khatami is my father' |
|
|
Saayeh Saeedi Sirjaani: "Mohammad Khatami is my father's murderer" - Reform, a makeup to beautify murderers
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 02:58:07 -0700
Mr. Mehdi Amini wrote his pro-reform article in 2001 supporting Khatami very strongly and insulting the intellect of opposition for not trusting Khatami. Mr. Mehdi Amini proudly voted for Khatami in 2001 because, he said, he did not trust the opposition. We always knew that Khatami was a murderer, but Mr. Amini ridiculed us, questioned our intelligence publicly and while voted for the murderer. Mr. Amini also wrote an anti-Monarchist article in 2002 criticizing Reza Pahlavi. Additionally, Mr. Amini was a spokesman for the ad hoc committee arranging Mr. Akbar Ganji's recent visit to America (read here).
As good and comfortable as Mr. Amini is in writing articles in iranian.com, I think this would be a very good time for him to author another article. I hope he has the decency and fairness to publish an article in the same media apologizing to all opposition members for insulting their intellect and for electing a murderer to come to power and causing 4 more years of pain and suffering for countrymen.
I believe, Mr. Amini owes such article to Iranian people and to victims' family members such as Saayeh Saeedi Sirjaani. Mr. Amini could also use this opportunity to let Khatami have it and oppose his travel to America. Unless of course, Mr. Amini still does not believe that Khatmi is a criminal.
Will Mr. Amini do what is right and will he publish such article? All I can do is to copy him in this posting and keep our fingers crossed.
Siavash
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.iranpressnews.com/source/015777.htm
سه شنبه، 7 شهریور ماه 1385 برابر با 2006 Tuesday 29 August
خاتمی؛ سید محمد خاتمی قاتل پدرم است
دادنامه من سایه سیرجانی به جهانیان این است:
سایه سعیدی سیرجانی
دوم شهریور ماه
برای مطالعه نامه ها و وصیت نامه سیرجانی به این آدرس مراجعه فرمایید:
http://www.saidisirjani.com
http://www.saidisirjani.com/OpenLetters.html
http://www.saidisirjani.com/Books.html |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
cyrus Site Admin
![](http://www.activistchat.com/WTC/images/icyruswithclynder.gif)
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 4993
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 12:04 pm Post subject: Protest USA Visit Of Khatami As Islamofascist Reformist |
|
|
If You Approve This Petition Please Sign Online With Your Comments ....
Petition 36: Reject Invitations to Khatami and Ebadi
Sign the Petition -
View Current Signatures
http://www.petitiononline.com/achat7/petition.html
If You Approve This Open Letter Sample Please Send Email With Your Comments or Your Own Letter
To: jduff@cathedral.org, dkutlow@sandiego.edu
CC: activistchat@yahoo.com
___________________________________________________________
Saayeh Saeedi Sirjaani: "Mohammad Khatami is my father's murderer"
To protest Mohammad Khatami’s trip to USA :
Please Contact Jean F. Duff, Director of Center for Global Justice and Reconciliation at jduff@cathedral.org or
202-537-2178 to protest Khatami's visit.
This is the least we can do.
Do not forget the September 7th press conference at the National Press Club to reveal Khatami's crimes to the press and our demonstration at 6:00 PM in front of the Cathedral. Please forward this e-mail to the people on your list.
Quote: |
[size=18]
Open Letter: Protest USA Visit Of Khatami As Islamofascist Reformist Servant and Shirin Ebadi As “Muslim Woman” . Are We Iranians or Muslims?
If You Approve This Petition Please Sign Online With Your Comments ....
Petition 36: Reject Invitations to Khatami and Ebadi
Sign the Petition -
View Current Signatures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: U.S. Congress, Joan B. Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice, Center for Global Justice and Reconciliation , Universities, All Institutes for Human Rights, Free Societies and Secular Democracy
The ethics of life are the pursuit of awareness about truth for ourselves and others. The ultimate goal is total awareness by increasing public awareness about the truth .
The biggest surprise of 2003 was when an Iranian female lawyer, Ms. Shirin Ebadi, became the first Iranian ever to win a Nobel prize. Yet, the Nobel committee referred to her as the first Muslim woman, completely denying her nationality. Due to the fact that Ms. Ebadi clearly declared that she is “Muslim Woman” and many historical facts in past 1400 years indicate that Islam is based on violence and creating Fear Society therefore she has no basis for “non-violent” means within the context of Islam. Islam as defined by Prophet Mohammad the Prophet of War and invasion with nine wives and his marriage with 9 year old girl (child) is rejecting all basic rights within Free Society as we all freedom-loving people agree and respect. Due to the fact that respect for Women Rights and Human Rights within the context of Islam does not exist therefore these are just empty slogan by Ms. Ebadi and others to deceive public and appease Pro Hezbollah Islamofascist Occupiers of Iran for hidden agenda.
Mr. Khatami, former President of regime and Islamofascist Servant who can not even capable of having dialogue and engage with Iranian people as their hostage for over 27 years, is asking for dialogue between civilizations and cultures. We should not forget and forgive during his term, so called reformist and EU3 appeasers dialogue era the Pro Hezbollah Islamofascist occupiers of Iran savagely tortured and killed Ms. Zahra Kazemi, a Canadian-Iranian photojournalist, execution of the 16-year-old girl, Ms. Atefeh Rajabi and 1000s of students arrested ……
Iranian-American Writer and Poet Mr. Amil Imani stated:
“The terror and death inflicted on humanity is not the work of radical Islam, neither the political Islam, nor the militant Islam. It is Islam, period. Get it? …
How could people calling themselves sincere God-fearing religionists bring themselves to even think of acts of such barbarity, yet plan them methodically and cold-bloodedly proceed to execute them?
The answer is Islam. The life manual of Islam, the Quran, is a document of exclusion, hatred and violence that shapes the Muslims’ thinking and behaving. This stone-age document is optimally suited for people of stunted development. People who prefer to follow than to think for themselves, to hate than to love, and to seek death rather than to celebrate life.
All the excuses, grievances and reasons given for savagery of the jihadists and Islamofascists are side issues. It is Islam, dummy. It is Islam itself. Get it?” Source URL for detail:
http://activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=8208
Imam Ali the first leader of Shiite Islam:
Ali ordered to massacre the Iranians in Azerbaijan, Sisstan, Fars, Estakhr, Daylaman, Ghazvin, Rey, Hamadan. Khorasan and killed 1000s of innocent Arabs and Jews by his own sword. Source URL for detail:
http://www.derafsh-kaviyani.com/english/ali666.html
Reject Islam and Become Iranian:
Top Harvard University Scholar Professor Richard Nelson Frye stated “ Iranian Is a Culture” Source URL for detail:
http://activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=29407#29407
Our Secular Prayer:
By Bahman Aghai Diba PhD International Law - Persian Journal
Source URL:
http://activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7957
WE, the undersigned agree with the above statements, and as members of the civilized freedom-loving people of the world demanding :
1- Reject any invitation to Mr. Khatami and condemn any dialogue with the regime.
2- Not to invite Ms. Shirin Ebadi for lecture as long as she consider herself as “Muslim Woman” and has not rejected Islam. Or if you wish to invite her for research, education, increasing public awareness and dialogue please consider to allow other Iranian human rights Activist and Scholars who are opposed to Ms. Ebadi ‘s views, to have equal time to speak to your audience before or after Ms. Ebadi .
3- Not to appease Mullahs with vast Terror Networks and stolen oil money from Iran and support freedom-loving Iranian people without Terror Network and minimum resources to free their homeland.
4- Let us work together to support freedom-loving Iranian people against Pro Hezbollah Islamofascist occupiers of Iran.
5- Let us work together to help Iranian Women to win their true freedom .
6- No "dialogue" and "engagement" with Pro Hezbollah Islamofascist occupiers of Iran who can not even capable of having dialogue and engage with Iranian people as their hostage for over 27 years.
"To sin by silence, when we should protest, Makes cowards out of men." Ella Wheeler Wilcox (November 5, 1850 -- October 30, 1919)
"Human beings are all members of one body.
They are created from the same essence.
When one member is in pain,
The others cannot rest.
If you do not care about the pain of others,
You do not deserve to be called a human being."
A Quote from Famous Persian Poet Saadi Shirazi
( 13th century Persian poet, from Shiraz the birthplace of Ms. Zahra Kazemi)
Sincerely, |
____________________________________________
Azadegan Organization wrote: |
Azadegan Organization
August 24, 2006
Jean F. Duff, M.A., M.P.H.
Managing Director of the Center
The Center for Global Justice and Reconciliation
Subject: The Center’s Invitation of Mr. Khatami
Dear Ms. Duff:
First of all, I must commend the CGJR for its admirable and worthy goals. Global justice would alleviate some of the pains of the downtrodden and help reduce, if not eradicate, poverty. And interfaith dialogue would certainly be a positive step in the direction of reconciliation and, God willing, world peace. I am certain that in order to achieve these results, CGJR seeks and engages the cooperation of honest and dedicated partners who sincerely share its goals and ideals. This is precisely the reason why my colleagues and I were shocked to learn that CGJR had extended the hand of friendship to Mr. Khatami, under whose 8 years tenure as the President of the Islamic Republic, state sponsored atrocities were committed on national and international scale.
Mr. Khatami has a likable smile, and unlike most of his cohorts, is pleasant and seemingly rational. But the gentle demeanor is but a facade hiding a dedicated fundamentalist Islamist who has always been true to his mentor’s, i.e. Ayatollah Khomeini’s brand of uncompromising fundamentalism and enmity with the “Great Satan”. Mr. Khatami has been one of the stalwarts of the Islamic Republic from its inception.
It is universally known that the former President has declared himself a proponent of “dialogue between civilizations”. But it is not commonly known that in a number of speeches and pronouncements he has consistently characterized Israel as “a cancer on the body of nations”, and on numerous occasions when officiating at Friday prayers in Tehran, he has led the congregation with slogans of death to the Great Satan.
Mr. Khatami’s first high post was as the Minister of Culture and Guidance in 1984. His greatest achievement at the time was the creation of Hezballah in Lebanon. His lesser achievement was the brutal enforcement of Islamic attire and public behavior. Flogging of young girls and women for wearing lipstick or not covering their hair adequately became commonplace. And men were accosted for wearing short sleeved shirts.
As the President of the Islamic Republic, by all documented accounts, his tenure was rife with corruption, brutal suppression, illegal incarceration, torture and murder of students and other dissidents, murder of prominent members of the opposition both inside Iran and abroad, continued plunder of national wealth, rampant increase in drug use by the youth, and prostitution becoming a thriving export industry. But of course, there were some achievements as well: The secret development of Iran’s nuclear capabilities, the development of short and medium range missile systems in Iran, and the financing of international terrorist organizations.
Without a doubt, CGJR believes fervently in basic human rights, and abhors atrocities. The question is how can CGJR explain its invitation to a person who has been an active part of the leadership of the murderous regime for almost 30 years? Of course we say yes to dialogue, but with whom and at what cost? People should be held accountable for their deeds. Of the atrocities committed on Mr. Khatami’s watch, the following actually made international headlines. Barely one year into his first term, a series of government sanctioned murders, that came to known as the “chain murders”, were carried out both within Iran and in Europe:
--The leader of the Iranian Nation’s Party, Dariush Forouhar, a prominent and well respected opposition leader, and his wife Parvaneh, a well known author, were butchered to death in their apartment. The government’s own investigation identified the assassins as members of the regime’s intelligence service. They were detained to quell the outcry, and released when things quieted down.
--A number of Kurdish-Iranian opposition leaders, among them Mr. Abdolrahman Ghasemlou, were assassinated in Germany. Investigation by German authorities linked the killings to agents of the Islamic Republic.
--Mr. Khatami talks of ‘openness’ and ‘dialogue’, but when the Tehran University students rose to demand openness, fairness and freedom, Mr. Khatami quashed their nascent aspirations with an iron fist. Mr. Batebi, one of the students arrested at the time is still languishing in jail, nearing death because of a hunger strike protesting the dire conditions of his incarceration.
--Another incident that caught the attention of the international press, albeit for a brief moment, was the murder of a Canadian-Iranian photo journalist in 2003. Zahra Kazemi was visiting her aged mother in Iran and at the same time researching women’s conditions there. She was apprehended, tortured, and beaten to death. Once again one of the regime’s ‘intelligence’ officers was arrested, tried and exonerated!
All cases recounted here are documented. In fact, a Google search will pull up most of these reports. Azadegan has always advocated peaceful change for Iran, but sincerely believes that dialogue should not translate to appeasement of a vile, murderous and corrupt regime. Mr. Khatami is not a private individual, but is still very much a part of the nomenclature and is an active member of the Expediency Council.
We respectfully recommend that in the spirit of supporting the Iranian people’s struggle for freedom, and affirmation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the CGJR withdraw its invitation to Mr. Khatami, the official public relations representatives of the Islamic Republic.
Assad Homayoun, Ph. D.
President, Azadegan Foundation
PO Box 40152, Washington, D.C. 20016
Email: Azadegan@aol.com
URL: www.AzadeganIran.com, Azadegan@Iran.net |
Senator Santorum wrote: |
Senator Santorum Expresses Outrage that Khatami's Visit to the United States Permitted By Administration
http://santorum.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseActionfiltered=PressOffice.Print&ContentRecord_id=1987&Region_id=0&Issue_id=0&CFID=32849182&CFTOKEN=38515795
August 29, 2006
Alum Bank, PA - U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, today made the following statement regarding former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami’s request for a visa to visit the United States.
“I am outraged to learn that former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami’s request for a visa to visit the United States has been approved by the Bush Administration. Mohammed Khatami is one of the chief propagandists of the Islamic Fascist regime. He was elected as a so-called reformer, but he presided over a dramatic worsening in the material and political conditions of the Iranian people. During his presidency, the suppression of free speech was so great that the organization ‘Reporters Without Frontiers’ branded Iran “the greatest predator of free press in the Middle East.” When Iranian students demonstrated against the regime in 1999, Khatami’s government arrested thousands of people, some of whom remain in prison to this day.
“I believe that granting a visa to Khatami so that he can travel around the United States and mislead the American people is a mistake. The U.S. government should insist, at a minimum, that authoritative Americans be given equivalent opportunities to speak to the Iranian people. Iran is frightened of freedom, as we can see from their frantic jamming of our radio and television broadcasts. A simple reciprocal agreement with the government of Iran will allow millions of Iranians to hear a message of freedom and hope – this is the least we should demand to allow Khatami into our nation.”
### |
If You Approve This Petition Please Sign Online With Your Comments ....
Petition 36: Reject Invitations to Khatami and Ebadi
Sign the Petition -
View Current Signatures
If You Approve These Open Letter / Petition Please Send Email With Your Comments or Your Own Letter
To: jduff@cathedral.org, dkutlow@sandiego.edu
CC: activistchat@yahoo.com
Protest Ms. Ebadi Invitaton Please Send email to
dkuTo protest Mohammad Khatami’s trip to USA :
Please Contact Jean F. Duff, Director of Center for Global Justice and Reconciliation at jduff@cathedral.org
To tlow@sandiego.edu
Diana Kutlow
Program Officer
Joan B . Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice
University of San Diego
Last edited by cyrus on Fri Sep 01, 2006 8:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
cyrus Site Admin
![](http://www.activistchat.com/WTC/images/icyruswithclynder.gif)
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 4993
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:16 pm Post subject: Senator Santorum Expresses Outrage that Khatami's Visit USA |
|
|
Senator Santorum wrote: |
Senator Santorum Expresses Outrage that Khatami's Visit to the United States Permitted By Administration
http://santorum.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseActionfiltered=PressOffice.Print&ContentRecord_id=1987&Region_id=0&Issue_id=0&CFID=32849182&CFTOKEN=38515795
August 29, 2006
Alum Bank, PA - U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, today made the following statement regarding former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami’s request for a visa to visit the United States.
“I am outraged to learn that former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami’s request for a visa to visit the United States has been approved by the Bush Administration. Mohammed Khatami is one of the chief propagandists of the Islamic Fascist regime. He was elected as a so-called reformer, but he presided over a dramatic worsening in the material and political conditions of the Iranian people. During his presidency, the suppression of free speech was so great that the organization ‘Reporters Without Frontiers’ branded Iran “the greatest predator of free press in the Middle East.” When Iranian students demonstrated against the regime in 1999, Khatami’s government arrested thousands of people, some of whom remain in prison to this day.
“I believe that granting a visa to Khatami so that he can travel around the United States and mislead the American people is a mistake. The U.S. government should insist, at a minimum, that authoritative Americans be given equivalent opportunities to speak to the Iranian people. Iran is frightened of freedom, as we can see from their frantic jamming of our radio and television broadcasts. A simple reciprocal agreement with the government of Iran will allow millions of Iranians to hear a message of freedom and hope – this is the least we should demand to allow Khatami into our nation.”
### |
Please Submit Your Thanks Email With Your Word Of Support For Senator Santorum By Clicking The Following URL:
To: http://santorum.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInformation.ContactForm&CFID=13470682&CFTOKEN=61613026
CC: activistchat@yahoo.com
![](http://activistchat.com/images/EbadiPetition.jpg) |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
cyrus Site Admin
![](http://www.activistchat.com/WTC/images/icyruswithclynder.gif)
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 4993
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:28 pm Post subject: US urges people to grill visiting former Iran president 24 m |
|
|
US urges people to grill visiting former Taazi IslamoFascist President
The US State Department encouraged Americans to confront former Iran president Mohammad Khatami, seen here 25 August 2006, with "hard" questions over his country's behaviour when he arrives in the country to attend several conferences.(AFP/File/Yoshikazu Tsuno)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060830/pl_afp/usiranpoliticskhatami_060830225849
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US State Department encouraged Americans to confront former Iran president Mohammad Khatami with "hard" questions over his country's behaviour when he arrives in the country to attend several conferences.
US government officials will not meet with Khatami during his visit, which the Washington Post said will begin on Thursday.
But State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that people Khatami meets should challenge him with questions about Iran and its regime, which the US officially brands a supporter of terrorism.
"He accepted invitations from UN-sponsored meetings and private US organizations," McCormack said.
"I would encourage those organizations and the individuals attending those events to ask him some hard questions, ask him some pointed questions, ask him the kind of questions that if asked in Iran would get the questioner thrown in jail," he said.
Khatami, a reformist cleric who was Iran's president from 1997 to 2005, is the most senior Iranian to visit the United States since Washington broke off diplomatic relations following the 1979 takeover of the US embassy in Tehran.
Khatami's arrival comes just as Tehran and global powers in the UN Security Council head for a showdown over Iran's nuclear energy program, which is suspected of masking an effort to develop atomic weapons.
Thursday is the deadline set by the Security Council for Iran to halt uranium enrichment activities.
McCormack said Wednesday the major powers will meet in Europe early next week to begin discussing sanctions against Iran if Tehran fails to meet the deadline.
Washington on Tuesday issued a visa for Khatami's visit even though he was president at a time when the United States declared that Tehran was behind terror activities.
But the State Department said that because Khatami is not currently in government there are no restrictions on his travel.
"We didn't invite him. He was granted a visa by the US government," McCormack said.
"I would think this is an opportunity to ask him the kind of questions that might be on the mind of the American people.
"The fact of the matter is, Iran is and was a state sponsor of terror. Iran is now, and was, seeking nuclear weapons in contravention of its international obligations."
"He's free to come clean about Iran's terrorist activities. We would certainly encourage him to be as open and realistic about Iran's current and past behavior as possible."
Khatami is scheduled to speak September 7 to an invitation-only audience at the Washington National Cathedral on "the role the three Abrahamic faiths -- Judaism, Christianity and Islam -- can play in shaping the peace process," according to an announcement of the event.
On September 8 he will attend a UN conference in New York billed as a dialogue among civilizations five years after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.
The Washington Post also reported that he might meet with former US president Jimmy Carter, whose presidency was bedevilled by the embassy takeover more than a quarter century ago.
Meanwhile the Jewish human rights group the Simon Wiesenthal Center protested Tuesday in a letter to President George W. Bush against Khatami's being permitted to visit the country |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Oppenheimer
Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 1166 Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To: Iranian Boy
Dorood! Must have been way back in the good 'ol SMCCDI forum days that I last saw a post from you...hope you are well!
Quote: | Exile Iranians in Usa MUST arrange a big demonstration against these 2 bastards! Or this may be the start of a new USA policy supporting mullahs |
You are most welcome to review a few of my posts on this topic on the thread:
http://activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=29537#29537
And I would not worry about any "new US policy of supporting mullahs". Following this post to you will be posted today's State Dept press briefing which I think will put light on the matter.
There are two forwards to the following letter to US VP Cheney, one to former President Carter, one to RP....
Quote: | ----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Jette
To: cjsylve@emory.edu
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 4:19 PM
Subject: Re: of Nuclear Giants and Ethical Infants
Dear President Carter,
As a life-long Democrat, what I include herein is not partisan. For the test we face today as Americans is an age old one in times of crisis, not as a test between partisan values, but one of American principals in standing together in the face of threats and adversity.
I hope the following perspective included here will serve you well in any future discussion with former Iranian President Katami.
And pray that you will not allow yourself to be perceived as one to drive a partisan wedge in the fabric of American society, nor allow this individual granted freedom of speech in this country as a guest, to do so on behalf of the current Islamic Republic of Iran and use your gracious hospitality to create such division.
Respectfully yours,
Eric Jette |
Quote: | ----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Jette
To: rpsec@rezapahlavi.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 5:56 AM
Subject: Re: Of Nuclear Giants and Ethical Infants
To: The Honorable Reza Pahlavi, c/o RP secretariat
Dear Sir,
Over the years, I have done my best to be as "a bridge between cultures" in support of people's freedom, knowing the hard choices that must be made to secure global peace and security.
I do not believe that the regime that controls your nation will give the family of nations a choice between peace and war. The time has come, the catalyst for change is at hand. Neccesity may be the mother of invention, but desperation is its father. And between the two is survival, for as long as man has been sentient. It is time the Iranian people wake up, rise up, and stand up, to conquer fear and those who impose it. I can only offer the following in the hopes that the perspective will help your people achieve the task before them, and you as well in leading them to that 'undiscovered country' , an Iran whole, free, and at peace.
Ba Sepaas,
Eric Jette |
Quote: | ----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Jette
To: vice_president@whitehouse.gov
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: Of Nuclear Giants and Ethical Infants
Dear Vice President Cheney,
Today I read your address to the VFW, in which you stated the following:
"This enemy also has a set of clear objectives. The terrorists want to end all American and Western influence in the Middle East. Their goal in that region is to seize control of a country so they have a base from which to launch attacks and to wage war against governments that do not meet their demands. The terrorists believe that by controlling one country, they will be able to target and overthrow other governments in the region, and ultimately to establish a totalitarian empire that encompasses a region from Spain, across North Africa, through the Middle East and South Asia, all the way around to Indonesia.
They have made clear, as well, their ultimate ambitions: to arm themselves with chemical, biological and even nuclear weapons, to destroy Israel, to intimidate all western countries, and to cause mass death in the United States. Some might look at these ambitions and wave them off as extreme and mad. Well, these ambitions are extreme and they are mad. They are also real, and we must not wave them off. We must take them seriously. We must oppose them. And we must defeat them. (Applause.) "
Sir, I have a strait up question I hope you'll give me a strait up answer to in return...Have the terrorists not already taken control of "a country" (Iran), the "leading state sponsor of terrorism", as base of operations and safe haven, providing financing, training and arming of terrorists world-wide?
Guess I should provide you with some context in this follow-up:
Some would argue that Tehran needs nuclear weapons....
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/hossein_derakhshan/2006/08/nuclear_iran_needed_for_defens.htm
Here is my reply to the author of the above premis:
Dorood "Hoder",
Please allow this American Bhuddist "infidel" who's granddad helped build the very first atomic bomb clue you in to why the premis of several aspects of your thinking two years ago is still valid, and why various premis behind statements made in the above article are badly in need of reexamination, from a logical and non-emotional mindset.
1. The environmental aspects of nuclear energy:
Traffic patterns have no bearing on the geographical probability of a major earthquake occuring in Iran. Lack of transparent environmental and geological study including public imput on these issues alone should give any rational Iranian pause for thought as to the logical environmental concequences of the future start-up of Bushear (or any other proposed facility) may ultimately become manifest in the region. And this is not simply an Iranian issue, many Gulf nations have expressed exactly this concern, officially.
I just list one environmental aspect here, as my time is limited, but there are many others that need to be factored in.
2. "Political" considerations as you call them, boil down to a question of regime intent, both in regards towards nations in the region, and the international community. As well as its intent towards the people of Iran.
Intent can be redily assesesed in word and deed of the regime itself over a long period of time, and over multiple presidencies, of which the latest selected is on record of stated intent to wipe nations off the map, including the USA.
You talk of the situation in Iraq, but not of the regime's intent to destabilize a soverign government that exists there today, which with more than enough evidence shows the non-peaceful intent of the regime toward its neigbors, via proxi groups it supports with arms and propaganda. (I'll be kind to you here and simply make the initial assesment that you are also a victim of "spin").
If anything, the abysmal human rights practices of the regime are worse that they've ever been in the entire 27 year history of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
By way of proof from their own lips, the regime just recently stated that they will kill each and every political prisoner now in custody, should the UN Sec. Council impose sanctions over the nuclear issue.
Again, I don't have time to write a hundred pages covering all the human rights aspects that remain valid premis to your original thinking, but I would point out that the people of Iran have no say in nuclear matters at present, and that is in itself a violation of their civil liberties, being slaves to the intent of the regime.
A regime which by the way, has over the last two years, recruited by public advertizment in a regime-run publication, some 52,000 Martyrs willing to blow themselves up in suicide opperations against US and allied government's interests in the region, including Iraq and other Gulf nations.
A regime who's selected president has gone on record as saying that Martyrdom is the highest order of individual achievment, and who's Iranian Hizbollai supporters of the 12th imman have declared EVERY Iranian to be potential martyrs of the revolution.
3. Nuclear weapons assesment:
I'm probably among a dozen or so people in the world still living who has held a piece of "trinitite" in my hands. This is the fused sand from the first atomic explosion, bubbled green glass, encased in leaded crystal, given to the department heads and leading scientists at Los Alamos at the end of WW2, including my granddad. The rest has been bulldozed underground at the Trinity test site in White Sands. It is the most concrete example I can show any one of the risk of nuclear war, or the results of it.
Any leader holding this potential future in hand will have something to remember, and think about.
It took America just about 27 months, from 1942-45 to build an industry from scratch, based on designs from scratch, building a city from scratch to build a bomb from scratch, with only theories to go on, in the middle of the largest and most costly war in history. Yet we did this and ended that war that had cost 50 million lives up to that point with the weapon that no one knew would even work at the time it was being produced.
Everyone who worked on the first bomb, being as uncivilized a weapon as it is, believed it would cause mankind to forever choose peace instead of war after it ended WW2. Unfortunately, that direction was not taken, at the expense of the environment, and to the continued threat to all life on this planet.
I stress here the biggest "what if?" is what we might have accomplished as the Human species had we chosen to live in peace, instead of fear after WW2.
Anyone who has witnessed the birth of one's child can tell you that yes indeed you create your own reality, the question is what do we wish to create for ourselves as reality on this planet, now and for our children's, and their children's future? Not just in this country, but the world as a whole, as an international vision.
Inherently, change is viewed with suspicion, as a threat to culture and ways of tradition and ethical belief systems. As it applies to developing countries in this nuclear age, the post-cold war aftermath presents a vast paradox that present no easy solutions, and has culminated in the reality of the war on terrorism as it exists today.
We in America share a concept, united we stand, divided we fall, 9/11 has forced the world to grasp this concept. Ready or not, globalization is at hand, a global response to chaos in the form of potential nuclear terrorism.
So it is now out of a sense of duty to my grandfather's memory I hereby state this for the record, knowing that I am of sound mind, and good heart, and do my best to remain objective. Objectivity can be hard to come by where it concerns family, or politics, as we are all human beings, and of a species prone to emotions, at the expense of logic.
If there is one thing about people that's a given, it's that they can only change themselves. You can try to understand them, change their circumstances, try to point the roads to peace, but in the end, they must want it for themselves, knowing what the alternatives are.
There is a situation soon to be pressed regarding Iran, over multiple issues outstanding, both acute and systemic, with far reaching ramifications for non-proliferation, counter-terrorism, human rights, and the general stability of the Mideast.
The IRI is fast pushing the free world to another alternative that could be far worse, if the IRI does produce a nuclear weapon before the people decide their own fate, and remove the threat both to them and the international community.
Now I hear a fair amount of talk that the US is just using this as an excuse to promote "regime change". But the reality is if the regime isn't changed soon, the mullahs who are willing to martyr 10 million recruits (as also noted in IRI statements), and is on record of having an agenda of obliterating nations off the map, would certainly be willing to use such a weapon on their own people to make it look for all intents and purposes as if the Israeli's or the US had just attacked them, thereby creating the needed justification for holy war (or un-holy war depending on one's mindset), and thereby create the apocalyptic conditions of prophesy to hasten the mahdi's return.
Now Iran has had at least 18 years, lots of help from other nations, black market smugglers, and their scientists have had proven designs to work with, and in all probability now has in its possesion, a handful of nuclear devices smuggled in after being bought on the black market.
My conclusion is this,... and I hope you will all consider very carefully what you wish for, because one of the basic flawed premis in modern political mythology is that having a nuclear weapon buys national security.
Regardless of flaws in US policy that one may perceive, the risk the Islamic Republic poses to the Iranian people far outweighs by orders of magnitude, the risk the US government poses to you.
Why is that?
Because for the last 60 years since we dropped 2 atomic bombs to end a war that took over 50 million lives, my government has done everything in its power to make sure not another one gets dropped....by anyone.
However, given the Iranian government's intent and actions, it is apparent to many globally that in order to maintain global peace and security, the current government of Iran must go....either quietly into the night, voluntarily returning to their mosques never to participate in politics again. Or by removal at the hands of the people themselves and/or be removed by the will of nations and force of arms.
At present, the US government has still a policy of "behavior change" in effect, has made a generous offer to resolve the "nuclear problem" diplomaticly in concurrance with other nations and a UN resolution mandating compliamce with international norms.
The regime has turned it down, and is apparently unwilling to be a functional member of the family of nations.
Don't blame the US for the choices the regime makes, nor the results that the consequences will ultimately manifest.
Those of the Muslim faith, as well as those Iranians who read this have my great sympathy for the choice that you must now make as individuals, to preserve your nation and the umma itself from those who lead a great nation and people over oblivion's cliff.
"Hoder" I trust you will also reflect on what has been written here with utmost sincerity.
ba sepaas....
EJ
Posted by: Eric Jette | August 25, 2006 02:34 AM
-------------------------
Let me offer some additional thoughts...and an essential question to be posed to all in the free world:
----- Original Message -----
From: webmaster@fco.gov.uk
To: Eric Jette
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 3:57 AM
Subject: RE: Comment from Eric Jette - Other
Dear Mr Jette,
Thank you for your e-mail. Your views have been noted.
Yours ever,
FCO Webmaster
www.fco.gov.uk
www.i-uk.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Jette
Sent: 19 August 2006 15:28
To: nm9@psilink.co.uk
Subject: Comment from Eric Jette - Other
In wishing Madam Beckett godspeed in efforts of diplomacy:
It is my opinion that diplomacy without teeth is a toothless beggar, and that all the op-ed’s ever written don’t hold a candle to a single essential question asked at the right moment of the right people.
We the people must ask the hard questions and provide perspective to those with the burden of responsibility for the future of mankind, having a vested interest in the matter.
Mine is but one small voice in the global constituancy trying to help others find their’s.
Although...(chuckle)..I have been known on occasion to thoughtfully mangle the English language in the process;
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/ask/69001.htm
Eric from Sante Fe, New Mexico writes:
Dear Under Secretary Joseph,
General Omar Bradley once said, "Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants, we know more about war than we do about peace, more about killing than about living."
Mine is a philosophical question:
At what point does the international community determine that the ethical infant’s diapers need changing, as the smell of ill intent has become all too overwhelming and noxious to Humanity? Or will ethical infants like the leaders of Iran and North Korea be allowed to remain in power to "dump" on civilization at a time of their choosing?
I’ve noted that the diplomatic attempts at "behavior change" have only resulted in temper-tantrums, at the expense of global peace and security. But as my granddad worked with Oppenhiemer on the Manhattan project, and these issues are thus quite personal to me, I’d like to personally thank everyone involved globally seeking solutions to these problems, as well as the building of consensus among nations to address these issues in concrete terms.
Under Secretary Joseph:
As in Omar Bradley’s time, the United States continues to offer the world ethical leadership, dedicated to partnerships that lead to lasting international peace and security, as well as to the development of democratic governments and the rule of law. The Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism will build on Secretary Rice’s vision of transformational diplomacy by building consensus among partner nations regarding our most serious international security threat, and galvanize them to take concrete and sustained steps to defeat it.
---------------------------------------
Mr. Vice President,
I personally do not think talk will deter those who only listen to their warped and twisted interpretation of "God's will". Let not the world go the way of Theo Van Ghoh who as he was being killed said, "Can't we talk about this?" Appeasement never stopped those who wanted war.
Hope you'll pass my thoughts on to your boss, with my best wishes.
Best regards,
Eric Jette |
-------------------------end letter----------
IB,
I welcome your comments and perspective....this is a free country, one where you may protest, speak your mind, and one in which with persistance the common citizen may be heard by the "powers that be" in government.
The Iranian people now have the opportunity through those of you that call America home to ask the hard questions of one who has oppressed your people....an opportunity that does not exist for those inside Iran.
Be of good cheer, and serve them well my friend.
Best Regards,
Eric Jette |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Oppenheimer
Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 1166 Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Daily Press Briefing
Sean McCormack, Spokesman
Washington, DC
August 30, 2006
TRANSCRIPT:
12:45 p.m. EDT
MR. MCCORMACK: Good afternoon, everybody. How are you? Good. Well, we don't
have any opening statements. I don't have any opening statements, so we can get
right into your questions.
QUESTION: Do you have any indications possibly from the European Union, Mr.
Solana, whether or what Iran might say as the deadline comes down on them
tomorrow?
MR. MCCORMACK: We'll see, Barry. Thus far, they haven't given any indication
that they are going to meet the just demands of the UN Security Council, the
IAEA Board of Governors. In fact, they've gone off in the other direction. It
seems as though they have made it a point to try to defy the international
community up to this point. We'll see what happens in the run-up to the
deadline which is tomorrow and we'll also take a look at what the IAEA report
has to say about their compliance.
We don't expect it to say at this point anything other than that they have not
lived up to what the UN Security Council has demanded that they do, required
them to do. And if they do not meet the requirements of the UN Security Council
resolution then we would expect that the parties would immediately begin formal
discussions about a resolution that would call for sanctions. That is what was
agreed to as a passage of 1696 as well as what was agreed to in Paris, among
the P-5+1 and we would expect that process to begin. It would be triggered if
we don't get the kind of answer from Iran saying that they are going to comply
with what 1696 has asked them to do.
QUESTION: Small question.
MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah.
QUESTION: Clarification -- UN sanctions?
MR. MCCORMACK: Yes.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah.
QUESTION: Because there are other ways to apply sanctions.
MR. MCCORMACK: Right. You can go through -- we talked about that --
QUESTION: Sure, many --
MR. MCCORMACK: -- the individual countries can take actions on their own. But
no, this would be -- well, you know, what the agreement, if you look back at
Paris what the Security Council resolution talks about, it talks about Chapter
7 under Article 41.
Yeah.
QUESTION: What then are Ambassador Bolton's marching orders at the UN tomorrow,
should there be a Security Council meeting?
MR. MCCORMACK: I think what you'll see first, Anne, is that you'll see probably
a political directors meetings of the P-5+1. Nick Burns, Under Secretary for
Political Affairs, is going to be traveling to Europe, I believe next week,
early next week. That would probably be the first convocation of that group
looking at specific language for a resolution. We, of course, have some of our
own ideas in terms of language and what would be in the resolution. But of
course, we have to begin those discussions. So early next week, Nick will
probably travel to Europe, then I would expect you'll really see the focus
shift to New York with John Bolton negotiating specific language of the
resolution. I'm sure that John will probably start consultations among his
counterparts up in New York after the 31st, but the first formal meeting I
think will probably be Nick Burns with P-5+1.
QUESTION: Is there a fixed date and place for that meeting?
MR. MCCORMACK: I'll check for you. I think it's early next week.
QUESTION: And where?
QUESTION: But it's a place, it's not a tour?
MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah, place, yeah. It's a meeting. He's not doing a circuit.
QUESTION: Is this meeting going to take place regardless of whether Iran
complies
with the demands of the UN or not? Or is this just sort of the worst case
scenario?
MR. MCCORMACK: I think this -- well, I think everybody's reasonable
expectation, based upon their actions up to this point that they don't intend
to comply. They have said that they don't intend to comply. And we'll see if
they pull a rabbit out of the hat before the 31st. I don't expect -- I don't
think anybody expects that at the moment. But look, we remain hopeful that they
will take up the Security Council, the P-5+1, on its offer for negotiations.
They have to meet the conditions for those negotiations. It addresses the
this approach addresses Iran's stated concerns and we'll see what their
reaction is.
QUESTION: Before the deadline, is the U.S. privy to any meetings leading up to
it among the Europeans perhaps a last minute back channel discussions to get
them to do something before the deadline?
MR. MCCORMACK: You can talk to various countries involved, whether or not --
QUESTION: I mean, we would be monitoring that, I'm thinking of --
MR. MCCORMACK: Monitoring -- we're certainly in touch with the P-5+1, of course
we are. As for what contacts they may be having with Iran, you can talk to
them. Many of these states have diplomatic relations with Iran, so I would
imagine that they probably are encouraging Iran to respond positively. But thus
far we have not seen any result of those entreaties.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Sean, are U.S. officials in possession of the upcoming IAEA report?
MR. MCCORMACK: I'll check for you, James. I don't know. I don't know when it's
-- if it's been distributed or not.
QUESTION: Does the U.S. have any reason to believe, regardless of what that
report finds, that Iran has continued to enrich uranium at whatever levels --
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I know that there have been news reports out there about
Iranian activities concerning enrichment of uranium. That, I think, would be a
topic addressed by the IAEA report. I'm going to let that report come out and
then -- because they would be the ones on the ground actually doing the
observations and inspections there, so I'm going to let that rest until we see
the report out in public.
QUESTION: So you have no idea what's in the report, aside from the press
reports --
MR. MCCORMACK: James, we're going to wait to see and withhold any public
comment until we have the IAEA report publicly released.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Do you see the release of the dissident today in Tehran as in any way
related to the nuclear case or attempt to -- you know, improve the public face?
MR. MCCORMACK: I don't know. He should have never been there in the first
place, but I -- you know, I don't know. I can't divine for you the motivations
of this regime. Certainly, their decision-making processes are somewhat opaque,
not being a open, democratic style of government. So I don't know what their
motivations might be. Certainly, we welcome the release, as I would just stand
by pointing out what I started with, that he shouldn't have been there in the
first place. It's not the behavior of a -- it's not the way a government should
treat its citizens.
Yeah.
QUESTION: If we can go back to the meeting of Mr. Solana with Mr. Larijani next
week, do you see that as useful since it will be after the deadline?
MR. MCCORMACK: One thing about the deadline; what it is, it's a trigger for the
Security Council to begin discussions about sanctions resolutions. It doesn't
mean, at any point along the line here, even while those discussions are
ongoing, that Iran can't come to the P-5+1 and say: We are going to meet the
conditions of the Security Council Resolution 1696. We are going to suspend all
enrichment and reprocessing-related activities. And if that is, in fact,
confirmed and verified, then there can be negotiations. So the 31st deadline
doesn't mean that those things can't happen.
Our approach all along has been to try to increase diplomatic pressure, other
kinds of pressure on the Iranian regime to get it to change its behavior. We've
been doing this over the course of working with the P-5+1 and the Europeans
over the past year, year and a half. So the idea is to try to get them to
change their behavior. That's what we want to happen.
And we are now at the next step where we believe that sanctions are merited and
we hope that sanctions will send a clear, strong signal to the Iranian regime
that this is a matter of utmost concern and serious concern to the
international community and that they need to change their behavior, and that
if they don't change their behavior that they are going to become more and more
isolated, which is not something certainly that we would want to see for the
Iranian people. But again, it would be their government, the unelected few, who
would be leading them down that pathway. We don't want to see that, but that is
the pathway that the Iranian regime is now choosing for their own regime as
well as for their own people.
Yeah, James.
QUESTION: How aggressive does the Secretary believe the first round of
sanctions should be?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, we talked -- again, I talked a little bit about the fact
that we want to increase pressure. We think that the first resolution should
send a substantial signal to the Iranian regime that this is serious business
and that the international community means what it says.
As for the specific list of what might be included in that resolution, I'm not
going to prejudge what might be in there. That will be a matter of some
discussion, I would expect intensive discussion, in the coming month among the
P-5+1 as well as the Security Council. The agreement among the P-5+1 was that
there was an agreed upon list -- menu -- of sanctions that they would consider
employing but what was left for further discussion and negotiation was at which
point -- which sanctions at what point would be implemented and included in the
resolution. So that's going to be really the focus of discussion, James, you
know, what exactly is in that resolution. But we think that this should be a
real resolution sending a substantial signal to them.
QUESTION: Do you sense any backpedaling on the part of any other P-5 members in
terms of their willingness to review that menu and select some items at all?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, James, you've seen -- there are all sorts of public
comments out there. In terms of formal discussions, I wouldn't say that formal
discussions had begun on this. Let's wait to see. Let's wait the extra day to
see what the, I guess, final answer for this phase of the diplomacy is from the
Iranian regime, then we can talk about who stands where with respect to what
sanctions.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) a strong statement but containing no specific sanctions.
MR. MCCORMACK: No, I said sending a substantial signal. But --
QUESTION: With action in it, not just another call --
MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah, this has to be a real resolution. Yeah. What we're talking
about, Barry, and again what the agreement was -- Chapter 7 Resolution -- under
Article 41 of Chapter 7. And that's the article that governs economic sanctions
kind of activities. But this -- you know, this does. It has to be a real
action, Barry. I mean this is serious business. I mean, we are talking here
about a regime that has, we believe, broached its international obligations
under the Nonproliferation Treaty.
They made a deal that they would get assistance from the international
community with their civilian nuclear power program in exchange for not seeking
nuclear weapons. Well, we believe that they broke that bargain. And let's just
think about for a second an Iranian -- this Iranian regime in possession of
nuclear weapons. That is a terrifically destabilizing of -- that would be a
terrifically destabilizing event in the Middle East. I don't think anybody
wants to see that happen, certainly not among the P-5+1 and members of the
Security Council. I think there is unanimity among the P-5+1 that nobody
believes that Iran can be allowed to develop and possess nuclear weapons.
Everybody agrees that that is a destabilizing event. We're working the
diplomacy to make sure that that does not happen.
And we believe that at this point we have reached a point that there needs to
be a real action by the Security Council, Barry. I'm not saying that this would
be the final steps or actions with regard to sanctions. There could be further
steps. We would hope that there wouldn't be. We would hope that the Iranian
regime would get the message, get the signal and change its behavior because
that would be in the interest of the Iranian people. And if they're truly there
to act in the best interests of the Iranian people, they would take up the
offer of the international community and they would meet the demands of the
international community.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Are you looking at a range of action outside of sanctions when you
say that there could be further steps? What are you referring to there?
MR. MCCORMACK: What I was talking about there -- I'm not saying -- I'm not
trying to lay out for you that this resolution would employ all the possible
sanctions that are on that menu. Again, the approach has been to increase the
pressure on the Iranian regime. So there could be -- if we do get -- look down
the road -- if you do get to the point where let's say tomorrow they don't meet
the demands of the international community and there is passage of a sanctions
resolution, those sanctions are applied and you still have continued defiance,
again, you could go back again for more sanctions. So I was just trying to lay
out a process for you.
QUESTION: So --
MR. MCCORMACK: Now in terms of we've always talked about the fact that there
can also be other tracks where individual states or individual states banding
together to take other individual actions that might increase pressure on the
Iranian regime. There's been certainly a lot of reporting done, and the
Department of Treasury has talked about the fact that they are looking at what
the possibilities are with respect to the international financial system and
how you might use some of those levers to get the Iranian regime to try to
change its behavior. And I would expect that those -- again, if we continue to
see this kind of Iranian behavior, I would expect that those discussions among
individual states would probably progress. You'd probably see more of those
discussions.
QUESTION: Do you see this likely scenario as being you have one load of
sanctions to begin with and then there's another deadline set, but if you don't
do so, so then these sanctions would be imposed? That it's a sort of turntable
of ratcheting up the pressure?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I don't want to get into whether or not there would be a
deadline in this resolution and what might follow it. I'm just trying to lay
out the process for you that it is a process of increasing, building the
pressure. I'm trying to set it out for you so you don't expect to see that
whole list of sanctions that was on that menu agreed upon by the P-5+1 all in
this resolution. I don't expect that that's what you'll see.
QUESTION: But taking a step back, I mean, you have been, as you say, pursuing
this graduated approach, increasing the pressure. So far, apparently, to
utterly no avail. I mean, they haven't stopped doing any of the things you've
asked them to stop doing. What gives you any confidence that this next stage in
that graduated approach will have any different effect?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I guess I would differ in the way the question is posed.
There has been a lot accomplished in the past year and a half. Let's look at
where we began when back in, what, 2005, winter of 2005, or January 2005,
February 2005. We had a position where you had politically and on the
diplomatic scene you had the United States on one hand, you had Iran on the
other hand, and there was this sense among the Europeans that they were somehow
interposed between the U.S. and Iran. You know, we've talked a lot about how we
changed that -- the decisions that President Bush took, Secretary Rice and her
diplomatic activity -- and how we now have a coherent approach among the
European powers and now including Russia and China. And what you have is a
coherent international group that is speaking with one voice to the Iranian
regime, "You need to change your behavior."
We also now have the Security Council on record demanding, requiring Iran to
change its behavior. Now at some point we hope and we believe that that
approach will work, that that diplomatic approach will work. Clearly we have
not reached that point yet and the Iranian regime has done everything that it
possibly could over that period of time to try to break off individual states
from that group, from the P-5+1, from the Security Council, to try to convince
them, try to peel people away. They have engaged in, you know, a really
extraordinary road show in which their officials have been traveling around the
globe trying to gin up support for their position, one of continued defiance of
the international community.
And frankly, if you look at the results of what they have been trying to do on
the diplomatic front, they have failed. They failed on the Board of Governors,
they failed on the Security Council, and they now find themselves very, very
isolated. So we are -- we believe we're working the right track in terms of
working diplomacy. We are fully aware of what the stakes are here. I think the
other countries involved in this are fully aware of what the stakes are and we
take it very seriously. But we think we're following the right approach right
now.
QUESTION: Can you, at this point, say what you think the tipping point would
be? I mean, you said if we were on the right path and eventually, now that
everyone is arm in arm pursuing the same goal, that will work. Well, when? I
mean, what is it that makes the --
MR. MCCORMACK: You know, again, you have to get inside of the decision-making
processes of the Iranian regime and that is not somewhere where I am at this
point. I couldn't tell you what it is that would do it for them. But I think
that if the Iranian people had a clear sense of the cost/benefit -- the
opportunity costs involved here of what is being offered to them, I think that
they might have a different opinion. But I'm pretty sure that they don't have a
clear view of what exactly has been offered to them.
Yeah.
QUESTION: You said that you're expecting intensive discussions in the coming
month. Does it mean that any sanction wouldn't be applicable for a month?
MR. MCCORMACK: No. What I'm trying to -- what I was trying to hint at in saying
that is that we have all seen the diplomatic sausage-making process in putting
together these resolutions. It's hard-fought, tough diplomacy because the
issues are important and people want to take them seriously, so I'm not trying
to predict how long discussions might take in the Security Council. We would
certainly be ready to do something very quickly and we would hope that the
Security Council would be ready to act very, very quickly.
But I think that if you look at the history of these kinds of things and these
kind of topics and even just the history of negotiations over this particular
topic in the Security Council, it takes some time. But like I said, we're
prepared to move immediately. That doesn't -- you know, that reality certainly,
in no way, diminishes our sense of urgency in taking up this matter and coming
to closure on a resolution.
Yeah.
QUESTION: On a related issue --
MR. MCCORMACK: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: President Khatami -- former President Khatami is coming into town
tomorrow. He's meant to arrive in Washington. Do you have any --
MR. MCCORMACK: No.
QUESTION: -- plans to meet with him? It's sort of --
MR. MCCORMACK: No.
QUESTION: -- coincidental that it's in August -- on August 31st that he's
coming.
MR. MCCORMACK: Right.
QUESTION: Also, do you have any details on the planned meeting between
President Carter and Khatami? Did he ask for your -- for the State Department's
permission to meet him? Has there been any sort of correspondence backwards and
forwards on that?
MR. MCCORMACK: He doesn't need our permission. I don't know what, if any,
contact there has been with former President Carter. He's a private citizen and
he is free to meet with whomever he pleases.
QUESTION: Do you think it's a good idea for him to --
MR. MCCORMACK: You know, he is a former president and he can make his own
decisions about whom he meets with.
Yeah.
QUESTION: I asked this question of Tom yesterday and --
MR. MCCORMACK: Well -- and you have an answer, so you don't need to ask the
question again. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Well, I'm just -- I'm prompted to ask it again because I think that
it strikes me as sane, but maybe not other people as sane, but here is a man
who was a president --
MR. MCCORMACK: Do you frequently find yourself in that position, James?
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: All too often. Here is a person who was president of a country that
we have identified as the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism and
president of that country at a time during which we have alleged those -- that
leadership to have been exerted. And yet, here he is, coming to our country and
we're not going to do anything to pick his brain about those terrorist
activities or about this nuclear program, all of which he was probably as
president of the country, an integral player in. And so my question is, once
again, why are we not detaining and interrogating this man?
MR. MCCORMACK: Look, James, you know, he's free to come clean about Iran's
terrorist activities. We would certainly encourage him to be as open and
realistic about Iran's current and past behavior as possible.
Look, he was invited here at first to attend I think a UN activity. He's given
a G visa, which is the appropriate kind of visa to attend those kinds of
activities. And then there are also other private U.S. organizations who
invited him to visit other U.S. cities. The decision was made that he would be
granted a visa and that he could travel to other U.S. cities, specific U.S.
cities. He will be able to speak his mind and, you know, that may include
criticism of the United States.
That's -- excuse me.
QUESTION: I was going to ask something related to that.
MR. MCCORMACK: Okay. Well, hold on. Let me finish. You can ask afterwards.
Yeah, that is not something that people in his country are allowed to do. And
we would hope that these organizations and the individuals attending these
events might take the opportunity to ask him hard questions about Iran's role
in the world, how it treats its own people, and why it continues to be the
world's most significant state sponsor of terror -- whether it is -- why they
view that as a useful constructive behavior. I know President Khatami is --
former President Khatami has said he wanted to start a dialogue of
civilizations. Well, you know, certainly sponsorship of terror is not a
hallmark of a civilized kind of behavior.
QUESTION: Has President Khatami made an official request to meet officials from
the U.S.?
MR. MCCORMACK: Not that I'm aware of. I'll check for you.
QUESTION: And you have still not requested to meet with him? And you're
encouraging him to speak to America about Iran, but yet --
MR. MCCORMACK: I don't -- look, you know, he -- the U.S. Government didn't
invite him here. I wouldn't say that we are encouraging him to do one thing or
another. He accepted invitations from UN-sponsored meetings and private U.S.
organizations, so you can speak to them about what they might be encouraging
him or not encouraging him to do.
I would encourage those organizations and the individuals attending those
events to ask him some hard questions, ask him some pointed questions, ask him
the kind of questions that if asked in Iran would get the questioner thrown in
jail. Those are the kind of questions that should be asked.
QUESTION: Is that reasonable though as an invited guest to expect their host to
ask such pointed questions? Wouldn't the State Department miss an opportunity
to do so itself while he's here?
MR. MCCORMACK: Look, we didn't invite him. He was granted a visa by the U.S.
Government. I would think this is an opportunity to ask him the kind of
questions that might be on the mind of the American people.
QUESTION: One more crack at this just purely for rhetorical sake. You tell us
you're engaged in a war on terror. You tell us that this man was president of a
country that was the leading state sponsor of terror for several years. And you
tell us when you have him in your midst and on our soil, you have no intention
of interrogating him for the intelligence value that would provide in this war
on terror. Does that make sense?
MR. MCCORMACK: James, I answered the question.
Yeah, Farah.
QUESTION: I want to clarify some earlier points made. You were talking about
the menu of possible punishments and sanctions. It's my understanding that that
menu was shown to Iran when the incentives were shown; when the package of
incentives was shown, the package of disincentives was also shown. Is that
correct?
MR. MCCORMACK: You can check with Mr. Solana. He was authorized to, within the
bounds of what he thought was appropriate, and he's had a couple of meetings
with them, to talk about the incentive side and the disincentive side. I'll
check for you, Farah, to see in what level of detail he went through. There's
been plenty of reporting on the possible sanctions in there, but I'll check for
you to see what exactly he discussed with them.
QUESTION: Okay. And going then, you're -- there's a lot of talk about sort of
assembling a coalition of the willing outside of the Security Council to --
MR. MCCORMACK: That's your term, not mine.
QUESTION: Sure. To impose sanctions outside the Security Council.
MR. MCCORMACK: Right.
QUESTION: That's always been talked about, in my understanding, in the case --
in the event that the Security Council wouldn't pass a resolution. But you seem
to be saying today that that might be in addition, that states individually
could impose additional sanctions or would be encouraged to impose additional
sanctions outside of the framework of the --
MR. MCCORMACK: We've -- all throughout this process, if you go back -- I can't
even -- months, when we started talking about the P-5+1, the U.S. joining this
effort, we always talked about the fact that there were different tracks. There
was the IAEA track, there was the UN Security Council track, there was also the
track of individual states. And that has -- that remains open and viable
regardless of what may be going on on the Security Council track or the IAEA
track.
QUESTION: And then my final question is about the Iranian counterproposal. It
doesn't seem like there's going to be an official response to them, but there
are a lot of sort of analysts who say that there might be a third solution in
that proposal, the door might -- you know, that the Iranians might have some
kind of door open in that proposal and that the fact that the U.S. and everyone
is examining it might, you know, prove that some are still interested in
whether or not the Iranians --
MR. MCCORMACK: It's real simple. It's very simple. The conditions for them. You
know, we're not going to start negotiating about negotiating. The conditions
are very clear, laid out for them. And I have made the point repeatedly this is
not -- what is being asked of the Iranian regime is not a final answer on the
package, a yes or no, yes we accept this package, no we don't accept this
package.
What is being asked of them is to suspend their uranium and reprocessing --
plutonium-based reprocessing activities and in exchange you can have a
negotiation in which Iran could realize all those things that it has publicly
stated it is seeking -- the peaceful civilian nuclear energy program -- and to
start to rebuild the level of trust with the international community. That is
what is being asked of them. It is only: suspend those activities and get into
negotiations. And that the P-5+1, the international community, will not -- will
suspend activities in the Security Council, will not seek further action on
sanctions or any further measures while those negotiations are going on. That's
what's being asked of them.
So you know, they're going to want to try to -- repeatedly you've seen this --
they're going to want to try to game this out, try to give very clever
responses that may appear to respond to what the international community has
asked them to do, but when you actually look at it and read it, it doesn't. And
you know, that's -- you know, again, that's what we've seen again. What we need
is for them to we, the international community, needs for them to do is to
meet the demands very clearly outlined by the Security Council in order to
begin that negotiation process. Otherwise, they're going to go down the pathway
of further isolation.
QUESTION: Why not make their counter-proposal public then?
MR. MCCORMACK: I think they have.
QUESTION: I don't think it's been out there.
MR. MCCORMACK: Okay. I'll check for you. I'll check to see if it's been made
public.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Change of subject?
QUESTION: I'd like to stay on this.
MR. MCCORMACK: Sure. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Khatami, you know, you wouldn't mind the fact it might be good for
him to be asked some tough questions by non-official Americans while he's here.
MR. MCCORMACK: Right.
QUESTION: Does the State Department currently subscribe to the notion that he's
distinctly different in view, more moderate from the people running -- now you
may not know, but there were people in this building who really thought just a
few years ago and throughout the city and throughout the country and in think
tanks that there were two Irans really. There's a moderate personified by
Khatami, particularly, and then there's a hardline Iran. Is --
MR. MCCORMACK: Well --
QUESTION: I'm not saying -- I don't want you to -- I'm not asking you to debate
that all over again.
MR. MCCORMACK: Right.
QUESTION: I'm saying is he -- maybe it's too far in advance to ask this, but is
a response by Khatami going to be taken as a statement by the Iranian
Government, or is it a statement by somebody who's not in power anymore and
probably isn't as hardline as the current people?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, a couple of things, Barry. Maybe you shouldn't take the
fact that there was a decision to issue his visa as that we have any illusions
about the nature of the Iranian regime. Now you -- there are plenty of people
who study Iran up-close and spend their lives doing that who will, you know,
have debates about where along the political spectrum that, you know, various
Iranian public officials might be. You know, how far off to the right, how
close to the Ayatollahs and the Revolutionary Guard and all those kinds of
discussions, Barry. I'm not going to get into those kinds of discussions. You
know, the fact of the matter is Iran is, and was, a state sponsor of terror.
Iran is now, and was, seeking nuclear weapons in contravention of its
international obligations. So I'm not going to try to draw distinctions among
former or current officials.
QUESTION: But in his time as well as now?
MR. MCCORMACK: Correct.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. MCCORMACK: It was a matter of record they were on the State Sponsors of
Terror list when he was President.
QUESTION: You probably (inaudible) Senator Santorum late yesterday, issued a
statement of outrage that he had been granted a visa and said Khatami is
responsible for one thing: for the arrest in 1999 of thousands of demonstrators
many of whom remain in prison. He, for one, sees no distinction, I think,
between Khatami's rule and current rule.
MR. MCCORMACK: Barry, as I said, I don't think anybody should take the decision
about issuance of his visa to indicate that we are under any illusions about
the nature of that regime.
---------end excerpt-----------
See http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/ for all daily press briefings |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
espandyar
![](http://marzeporgohar.org/images/mpgarm.gif)
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 Posts: 236
|
Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Greetings folks!
I for one dont buy the way he argue. I could do buy is Iranian people gave rats ass about what is said by Bush and VOA and Radio Farda.
By grating Khatami visa all the entities connected to the Bush admin is discredited, thank to the repeated wrong decisions.
I would argue that Bush is trying to save face as it can stop IR to due admins and bush ignorant policies.
to make my point more abvious:
Read the Bullshit by Bush and pay attention to democratic reformers
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20060831.html
If you ask me this is the end of US as a super power .....
We have and we will only rely on Iranian nation to free Iran and one must be a fool to believe that Bush and Co actually care for democracy!
my personal 2 cents on this!
Payande Iran _________________ Marze Por Gohar Party
Iranians for a Secuar Republic
ttp://www.marzeporgohar.org/ |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
cyrus Site Admin
![](http://www.activistchat.com/WTC/images/icyruswithclynder.gif)
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 4993
|
Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
espandyar wrote: | Greetings folks!
I for one dont buy the way he argue. I could do buy is Iranian people gave rats ass about what is said by Bush and VOA and Radio Farda.
By grating Khatami visa all the entities connected to the Bush admin is discredited, thank to the repeated wrong decisions.
I would argue that Bush is trying to save face as it can stop IR to due admins and bush ignorant policies.
to make my point more abvious:
Read the Bullshit by Bush and pay attention to democratic reformers
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20060831.html
If you ask me this is the end of US as a super power .....
We have and we will only rely on Iranian nation to free Iran and one must be a fool to believe that Bush and Co actually care for democracy!
my personal 2 cents on this!
Payande Iran |
Dear Espandyar,
Your posted URL is not correct.
Are you referring to the following or someting else, please clarify.?
Quote: | So America has committed its influence in the world to advancing freedom and democracy as the great alternatives to repression and radicalism. We will take the side of democratic leaders and reformers across the Middle East. We will support the voices of tolerance and moderation in the Muslim world. We stand with the mothers and fathers in every culture who want to see their children grow up in a caring and peaceful world. And by supporting the cause of freedom in a vital region, we'll make our children and our grandchildren more secure. (Applause.) |
http://activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=29571#29571
Regards,
Cyrus |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Oppenheimer
Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 1166 Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|
Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dorood espandyar,
It has been said that language is the worst form of communication ever invented by man...
Well then, if that's the case, don't you think Bush's understanding and usage of the word "reformer" may be quite different than the way you, as an Iranian understand its meaning?
He speaks of a global village of democratic nations, all living in peace. (as "democracies do not go to war with each other" and has stated many times his intent to rid the world of tyrany and oppresive governments that fail their people and threaten global peace and security)
The US gov did not invite Khatami, the UN and other private entities did....I think it's clearly stated that the State dept. hopes folks will "get in his face" as it were, with some very pointed questions.
Thus the opposition has the opportunity to do just that, and do so on behalf of those in Iran who would be jailed for the attempt.
In my book, life is 2% what happens to me, and 98% how I choose to deal with it....
I also tend to try and look at all possibilities, other than the absurd...and even then fiction sometimes becomes fact.
So I had an odd thought last night, and in wondering about the fact that Katami brought family with him, as well as a question in my mind as to why he would wish to visit Monticello...Thomas Jefferson's home...plus Carter....lot of old Karma there between ex-presidents....I'm wondering something that may strike you as totally absurd...so fair warning.
It's about what's on Khatami's mind.....I wonder if he's come to a personal realization that the current regime is more of a threat to the people of Iran's existance than the US is, that the regime is hell bent on starting a war that it cannot win and millions could die in the process.
If that be the case, would he "Roll-Over" on the regime, defect w/ family in tow, and provide the goods on the regime to Carter personally, by way of making amends....???
I guess we'll find out soon enough.
Say hello to Roozbeh for me.
-Oppie
Last edited by Oppenheimer on Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
cyrus Site Admin
![](http://www.activistchat.com/WTC/images/icyruswithclynder.gif)
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 4993
|
Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 6:27 pm Post subject: Snuggling up to tyrants |
|
|
Snuggling up to tyrants
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060902/COLUMNIST14/609020368/-1/NEWS17
THE STATE Department has granted a visa to Mohammad Khatami, the former president of Iran, to visit the United States.
Mr. Khatami is coming this week chiefly to attend meetings at the United Nations. He also will speak at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, at a function sponsored by the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Arlington, Va., and at the National Cathedral in Washington. And he will meet with former president Jimmy Carter.
Mr. Khatami requested the meeting with Mr. Carter. Perhaps to say "thank you."
For those with short historical memories, when the Ayatollah Khomeini began making trouble for the autocratic, but pro-American, Shah of Iran, Mr. Carter essentially pushed the Shah from the Peacock Throne.
Mr. Khomeini repaid Mr. Carter by authorizing the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran, where Islamic radicals (among them Iran's current president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
After a rescue attempt went awry, Ayatollah Khomeini reportedly sneered: "Neither does Carter have the guts for military action, nor does anyone listen to him."
The hostages were released on the day Ronald Reagan was inaugurated. Ayatollah Khomeini recognized Mr. Reagan was made of sterner stuff than the man who flinched from the attack of a "killer rabbit."
Thanks to James Buchanan, Pennsylvania's unfortunate contribution to the presidency, Jimmy Carter can claim not to have been the worst president in U.S. history.
But he is unquestionably the worst ex-president, snuggling up to every tyrant who will allow his buttocks to be smooched.
Before Jimmy Carter, no former president had ever criticized an incumbent president before a foreign audience. But Mr. Carter rarely misses an opportunity to run down his country.
"Less an elder statesman than a soft cushion who bears the impress of whoever sits on him, the 39th president is the last person Khatami should meet," declared the British journalist Oliver Kamm in the Times Thursday.
Those like Mr. Carter who delude themselves that more appeasement can prevent a confrontation with Iran describe Mr. Khatami as a "moderate."
Intelligent people make distinctions. But they also know when those distinctions are important, and when they are not.
As Islamofascists go, Mr. Khatami is more like Gregor Strasser than Heinrich Himmler or Reinhard Heydrich. But the important thing about Strasser, Himmler, and Heydrich is that they were all Nazis. As president, Mr. Khatami was an enthusiastic backer of Iran's nuclear weapons program and its sponsorship of terror, and among those howling for the destruction of Israel.
Mr. Khatami's visit comes a few days after his successor formally defied the U.N. Security Council resolution calling upon Iran to halt its nuclear weapons program, and as Iran, by rearming Hezbollah, stepped up its defiance of the U.N. Security Council cease-fire resolution in Lebanon.
Many conservatives fear granting the visa to Mr. Khatami indicates President Bush's approach to Iran is more like Mr. Carter's than Mr. Reagan's. Of 13 experts consulted for a symposium on National Review Online last week, only one didn't think granting the visa was a terrible idea.
"Mohammad Khatami is one of the chief propagandists of the Islamic fascist regime," said Sen. Rick Santorum, who, for a politician, has been saying some remarkably forceful and clear-headed things about the war on terror lately. "I am opposed to granting a visa to such a man so that he can travel around the United States and mislead the American people."
"Giving Khatami prestigious platforms all over America is a dumb move, and it will enormously discourage the Iranian people," said Michael Ledeen, an Iran expert who works for the American Enterprise Institute. "For those who believed Bush was serious about regime change, this is a numbing blow."
The one participant in NRO's symposium who didn't think granting the visa was a bad idea was Iranian exile Amir Taheri. Mr. Taheri also didn't mind that Jimmy Carter was having a meeting with Mr. Khatami.
"By begging to meet the head of one of the most repressive regimes in the world, Carter would simply show which side he is on," Mr. Taheri said. "Having refused to meet Iranian dissidents, and rejected repeated calls for statements of support of Iranian trade unionists, student leaders, persecuted minorities, and political prisoners, Carter is precisely the person who should hang around with people like Khatami."
Jack Kelly is a member of The Blade’s national bureau.
» E-mail him at jkelly@post-gazette.com
» Read more Jack Kelly columns at www.toledoblade.com/jackkelly |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
espandyar
![](http://marzeporgohar.org/images/mpgarm.gif)
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 Posts: 236
|
Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
cyrus wrote: | espandyar wrote: | Greetings folks!
I for one dont buy the way he argue. I could do buy is Iranian people gave rats ass about what is said by Bush and VOA and Radio Farda.
By grating Khatami visa all the entities connected to the Bush admin is discredited, thank to the repeated wrong decisions.
I would argue that Bush is trying to save face as it can stop IR to due admins and bush ignorant policies.
to make my point more abvious:
Read the Bullshit by Bush and pay attention to democratic reformers
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20060831.html
If you ask me this is the end of US as a super power .....
We have and we will only rely on Iranian nation to free Iran and one must be a fool to believe that Bush and Co actually care for democracy!
my personal 2 cents on this!
Payande Iran |
Dear Espandyar,
Your posted URL is not correct.
Are you referring to the following or someting else, please clarify.?
Quote: | So America has committed its influence in the world to advancing freedom and democracy as the great alternatives to repression and radicalism. We will take the side of democratic leaders and reformers across the Middle East. We will support the voices of tolerance and moderation in the Muslim world. We stand with the mothers and fathers in every culture who want to see their children grow up in a caring and peaceful world. And by supporting the cause of freedom in a vital region, we'll make our children and our grandchildren more secure. (Applause.) |
http://activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=29571#29571
Regards,
Cyrus |
Cyrus jan sorry about that
here you go:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/08/20060831.html _________________ Marze Por Gohar Party
Iranians for a Secuar Republic
ttp://www.marzeporgohar.org/ |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
espandyar
![](http://marzeporgohar.org/images/mpgarm.gif)
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 Posts: 236
|
Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oppenheimer wrote: | Dorood espandyar,
It has been said that language is the worst form of communication ever invented by man...
Well then, if that's the case, don't you think Bush's understanding and usage of the word "reformer" may be quite different than the way you, as an Iranian understand its meaning?
He speaks of a global village of democratic nations, all living in peace. (as "democracies do not go to war with each other" and has stated many times his intent to rid the world of tyrany and oppresive governments that fail their people and threaten global peace and security)
The US gov did not invite Khatami, the UN and other private entities did....I think it's clearly stated that the State dept. hopes folks will "get in his face" as it were, with some very pointed questions.
Thus the opposition has the opportunity to do just that, and do so on behalf of those in Iran who would be jailed for the attempt.
In my book, life is 2% what happens to me, and 98% how I choose to deal with it....
I also tend to try and look at all possibilities, other than the absurd...and even then fiction sometimes becomes fact.
So I had an odd thought last night, and in wondering about the fact that Katami brought family with him, as well as a question in my mind as to why he would wish to visit Monticello...Thomas Jefferson's home...plus Carter....lot of old Karma there between ex-presidents....I'm wondering something that may strike you as totally absurd...so fair warning.
It's about what's on Khatami's mind.....I wonder if he's come to a personal realization that the current regime is more of a threat to the people of Iran's existance than the US is, that the regime is hell bent on starting a war that it cannot win and millions could die in the process.
If that be the case, would he "Roll-Over" on the regime, defect w/ family in tow, and provide the goods on the regime to Carter personally, by way of making amends....???
I guess we'll find out soon enough.
Say hello to Roozbeh for me.
-Oppie |
Dorood oppie jan
I just made a extensive reply but it did not register so I have to make a brife one.
As long as Bush admin and amricans think that IR can be negociated with or that some u turn may take place or that defection, fraction or reforms can end the situation the advantage will be Isamic republics.
Unfortunaly we are the victims of IR and we are not under any dilusions at all in regards to this regime.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/03/khatami.us.ap/index.html
Khatami and IR use their resources to reach their goal while US use its resources to undermine it self and make its allies to non-allies.
I will say hello take care buddy! _________________ Marze Por Gohar Party
Iranians for a Secuar Republic
ttp://www.marzeporgohar.org/ |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|