Two Iranian Anniversaries

In August, Iranians passed two horrid anniversaries: one well known internationally, and the other not so well known. The internationally (in)famous one was the 55th anniversary of the overthrow of our democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953 by a British-US coup.

The less known one was the 20th anniversary of the wholesale execution/massacre of up to 5,000 political prisoners. These political prisoners were tortured horrendously after being tried in summary sham trials (without any legal representations) and their bodies buried, at times in mass graves, in a cemetery for “unbelievers”, Khavaran Cemetery, or better known as the La’nat-abad (translated as “place of the damned”), in the southern outskirts of Tehran.

Back in 1989, in a piece for The Nation, Alexander Cockburn reported, “The mullahs appear to be cleaning house before February’s celebration of the tenth year of the revolution, hanging prisoners, placing them before firing squads and dynamiting whole prisons. On one account, all political prisoners in the city of Hamadan were shot. In Teheran, Jadeh Khavaran Cemetery, known as the Place of the Damned, is crammed with shallow, unmarked graves.” (“Heart of Darkness Department,” February 6, 1989).

For any references to the 20th anniversary of this wholesale massacre of political prisoners, however, you would have been looking in vain among the Western leftist websites and publications. This is because mentions of human rights violations in Iran, thanks to the efforts of the Islamic Republic’s lobbyists in the West, have come to be viewed as “aiding and abetting the Western imperialists”! It is a strange world. Indeed, to voice any criticism of this theocratic dictatorship is characterized by the detractors as “sowing antagonism against Iran,” as if the Iranian government were identical to the Iranian people!

As reported, just recently the Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives chose to shelve a long-pending Congressional Resolution (HR) 362, “whose passage the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) had made its top legislative priority this year, [and] had been poised to pass virtually by acclamation last summer.” As activists for social justice, we rejoice over this tactical victory.

At the same time, we must assume that “the grassroots Iranian-American, Jewish-American, peace, and church groups,” who lobbied against this House Resolution, support the civil and individual rights of the Iranian people. The same citizens’ groups should therefore be raising the alarms about the attacks the Iranian people suffer daily at the hands of their own government. After all, regular Iranian people, women and student organizations as well as unionists in the country, and even members of clergy regularly protest the conditions of human rights in Iran.

It must be emphasized that we are talking about a theocracy, something no western leftist or liberal would put up with in their countries, yet seem to see fit for us lesser peoples (Edward Said, you are sorely missed!). This is a theocracy in which women are legally half as worthy as men; in which many (up to twenty-something) university subjects remain closed to women (including mining-engineering, management, and other professions considered inappropriate for women); in which women cannot become judges; in which women cannot choose their dress; in which men and women can be stoned to death for the act of making love to another; and in which a good 90% of the population is legally (as dictated in the constitution) barred from running for public office or running for leadership positions.

In today’s Iran, women, socialists, atheists, Sunnis, Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Bahais, and Sufis are legally barred from any of the leadership positions. According to Amnesty International, the Islamist republic in Iran is among a minority of states in which discrimination on the basis of gender, religion, sexual orientation, and even philosophical outlook is LEGAL (Saudi Arabia and Israel are other examples).

* * *

The Iranian government has been manufacturing a completely false case regarding its likenesses to the government of Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh who, as Prime Minister, brought about the nationalization of Iranian oil in 1951, and who was overthrown in a coup organized by the British and the Americans in 1953. The fundamental similarities alluded to by the current government are to reinforce the legitimacy of its right to mastering the full nuclear fuel enrichment cycle and to silence all dissent.

The core likenesses claimed by regime leaders and their supporters are based on nothing except mere assertions, and the historical record glaringly indicates otherwise. So, let us look at the differences.

First, though, one historical note of profound irony. Ayatollah Kashani, mentor to Ayatollah Khomeini, and the leading Shiite clerical leader at the time of Mossadegh’s government, as the Speaker of Majlis (parliament) had great influence and power in the Iranian society back then, especially among the rural population (a majority at the time) and the traditional lower middle classes and the bazaar merchants. He used his enormous power and influence to support the CIA-orchestrated coup against Mossadegh. This is a historical fact.

Much of the “street wisdom” in Iran has traditionally blamed the Tudeh Party (the communists) for abandoning Mossadegh, thus facilitating the coup against him, and considers that act as a big treachery (and their charge is correct). But, the same “wisdom” is very forgetful when it comes to the treachery of the clerics. We must not forget that at least the Tudeh, especially the rank and file and their social base, remained loyal to Mossadegh much longer than did the clergy. This was mainly due to Mossadegh’s attempts at some rural reforms, highly unpopular among the rural landowners, naturally allied with the clerics.

So, for today’s Iranian ruling theocrats to liken themselves to Mossadegh, whom the clerics’ forefathers helped overthrow, is . . . well, what else should we call it other than blasphemous?

This is to remind the readers that the cleric and the Rationalist have never been good friends. The structural differences between the current theocracy in Iran and Mossadegh’s government could not be more glaring than if Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, with their vast network of churches, established a Christian Republic of America, and then some permutation of their regime down the line likened itself to Franklin D. Roosevelt.

During Mossadegh’s government, we had an absolute, guaranteed right of forming political parties, and such parties existed openly and freely, ranging from right wing nationalists to communists. Likewise, hundreds of publications were freely printed and distributed, with no ideological preconditions forced on them by the state. That’s real democracy. During the reign of the theocrats, by contrast, it is illegal to form independent non-religious political parties; additionally, freedom of expression has not only been eradicated for a majority of political persuasions, it has far too often turned into freedom of death for numerous intellectuals.

During Mossadegh’s government, women and men were not stoned to death for the mere act of making love to another human being.

During Mossadegh’s government, we did not have to swear oath to a theocratic (Inquisition style) state formation before being allowed to run as a representative of our community, rendering over 90% of the population ineligible to run for any office, particularly in the executive branch.

During Mossadegh’s government, women’s testimony in a court of law did not count as half as much as that of a man’s, and women’s inheritance would not be automatically half their male siblings’, and they could choose their own clothing and could even wear lip stick (Oh, the horror!) if they so wished, without fear of ‘clothing police’ and lashes.

During Mossadegh’s government, women were not automatically barred from studying certain subjects in the university, based on the “unsuitability” of said subjects for the “female mind.”

Most importantly, under Mossadegh imperialism was barred from the country, while with no oil income there was a balanced budget with no inflation; currently standing at $21 bn of foreign debt and 25% inflation rate (a conservative estimate), we now even import refined oil!

Finally, on the Mossadegh’s likeness to the theocrats, a highly astute observer, whose weblogs from Tehran I was fond of keeping up with, way back in the early twenty-first century, noted that the theocrats had decided the nuclear issue was the most convenient front to engage the western demands on them for change of behavior. Back then, it was argued openly that the nuclear issue, as a singular topic, would galvanize a nationalistic fervor among the Iranian people, much like the nationalization of oil by Mossadegh, which created righteous, nationalistically positive sentiments among the people back in the late 1940s and until the nationalization of oil in 1951.

To paraphrase, it was argued by the clergy that the most effective propaganda arena to engage the west would be the nuclear technology, instead of human rights, women’s rights, political prisoner’s rights or, god forbid, labor rights.

And guess what? They got their wish!

Which brings us back to the less known 20th anniversary of the massacre of nearly 5,000 political prisoners and their dispatch to the Place of the Damned. Gone are the news items about the thousands of political prisoners currently held under bogus charges in Iran, though plenty of them perish in Guantanamo-like conditions. These political prisoners range from student activists to women’s rights activists to unionists. There are women political prisoners held in Iranian prisons, whose only “crime” is gathering signatures petitioning the government to recognize women as legally equal to men.

In the US, some “leftist” publications such as MRZine have become de facto platforms for apologists of this theocratic dictatorship based on the fact that American imperialists are picking on this regime. On the website of MRZine, we regularly see writings by CASMII personnel, who are nothing but lobbyists for the Iranian regime (not the Iranian people, mind you), and readers of the website are treated to regular articles detracting from the human rights atrocities the Iranian people have to suffer. But, on this “socialist” website, the violations of the human rights of the Iranian people find not a single mention; — ever.

So, we must ask: What is the meaning of socialism if it does not even include basic, civil rights of individuals?

Some of the political positions of the rightist “left” (e.g., CASMII) are absurd indeed. In their political thinking, mere talk of human rights is equal to aiding and abetting neo-conservatives. Never mind that Iranian socialists have been talking about these egregious violations for nearly three decades, while standing steadfastly against imperialism. To these gentlemen, to even make a reference to Amnesty International reports would bring charges of being a “neocon”. The reader is, nevertheless, encouraged to read AI’s reports on Iran, especially the report on the 20th anniversary of the mass slaughter of political prisoners in Iran (see here) and inform themselves accordingly.

No mass executions ever took place at any time during Mossadegh’s reign; ironically, such massacres did not even occur during the Shah’s hated dictatorship. Activists for social justice worldwide and socialists in particular should not be derailed by the fact that “Human Rights” is used opportunistically by the neoconservatives and the neoliberals for so-called “humanitarian” (i.e., plain rapist) interventions. Human rights are still human rights, and as such must be held as sacrosanct by anybody fighting for social justice.

The utilitarian view of politics held by opportunists has always mandated downplaying the atrocities committed by “our own SOBs.” This outlook has now seeped well into the American left. It is a variation on the theme of “lesser evil.” And, unfortunately, this is one reason the American rightist “left” — who, for example, cannot stand unambiguously against imperialism AND a theocracy at the same time — is so bereft of any moral vision to show the way out of the turbulence and crises of our times vis-à-vis the American state and Capital in general.

Here is the situation with large segments of the American left: Bush announced that “you are either with us or against us,” and the they bought this line in it’s entirety, switched off their independent principles and lined up behind whomever the Bush administration opposed. As if the solutions to the problems of our time can only come from two sources: one imperialist, one “enemy du jour.” As if socialists don’t have brains of their own. If these “leftists” really believe this line of thinking, why don’t they just fold up their tents? What is the point of keeping up pretenses of “socialism” when not a shred of socialist principles is reflected in our political actions?

This inability to maneuver politically is all the more glaring since, as the old-timers used to say, the objective conditions are over-ripe for socialist forces to organize the subjective agency, and push an effective counter-move to mobilize social forces in the strategic direction of challenging capital in a practical and realistic fashion.

Most of the demands of the Iranian revolution of 1978-79 are still unmet. In that revolution, we were demanding unconditional political freedoms we did not have, such as freedom of assembly and freedom to form political parties; we still don’t have those freedoms. We were demanding unconditional freedom of expression, which we still don’t have. We were demanding freedom from arbitrary state harassment, which we still don’t have. We were demanding freedom from arbitrary arrest and torture for merely holding certain philosophical outlooks; we still don’t have that freedom. We were demanding a government representing a majority of the people, a government that is truly free, not a theocratic dictatorship representing only a small minority (15% according to the regime’s own understanding).

Likewise, we were demanding freedom from imperialists dictating how we should conduct our economic life; this demand is likewise still unmet, since ‘world markets’ for resources and a speculative capitalist system in Iran continue to dictate to a great degree what economic benefits we the Iranian people (not just a few at the top) enjoy from our vast natural and social resources.

The current regime, following one of the key demands of the revolution, has kept up pretences of anti-imperialism, just to keep up a facade. Meanwhile, political and civil freedoms that people demanded through that revolution are still not materialized, and instead the Iranian people are faced with a dictatorship far more thorough than anything the Shah could fathom. The solution for Iranian socialists is clear: No to imperialist interventions in any form, No to theocracy, Viva socialism!

Reza Fiyouzat can be reached at: rfiyouzat@yahoo.com. Read other articles by Reza, or visit Reza's website.

10 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Chris Horton said on September 30th, 2008 at 10:18am #

    This is a difficult and painful issue for American progressives; how to oppose and resist moves by our government to justify and provoke a war with Iran, while at the same time agreeing with many of their accusations against the regime.

    A war with Iran, if we’re very lucky, will “only” result in the deaths of a few million Iranians and a few thousands or tens of thousands of Americans, and “only” cost a few trillion dollars. (It could get much worse!) It will certainly do nothing to advance the cause of democracy and social justice, in Iran or anywhere else. Pointing out the backward and repressive character of the Iranian regime, and the revolution that ended up as mostly a counter-revolution, often feels like collusion with the Empire, the enemy of both our peoples.

    But you are right; there is in the end nothing to be gained by not facing the situation honestly and speaking the truth. There is no hiding from it, and our own credibility and moral clarity are at stake.

  2. cg said on September 30th, 2008 at 8:28pm #

    A very honest and brave article which forces people to confront their own sense of truth and justice.
    That is, if they read it.

  3. cine said on October 1st, 2008 at 3:31am #

    I agree with Reza Fiyouzat and the issues raised.

    However, I think the first priority must be to get the US off the back of the Iranian government.

    Iranian progressives will not be able to gain in power whilst there is such an outside power threatening the nation with invasion.

    Before this nuclear conflict reformers were gaining power. And the theocrats were having to concede power. Now that has all appears to have been lost.

    The first and most important struggle has to be to resist US aggression. Then and only then will Iranians be able to turn to reforming the state.

    But whilst supporting Iran and its international rights we must not forget or make light of the terrible crimes of its leaders against their own people.

    We can not change the Iranian government’s policies. The Iranian people will do that. We can work to get the US out of the frame and give the Iranian people the space they need.

  4. Arman said on October 1st, 2008 at 7:47am #

    Iran is a targeted country for partition to bring its resources under control by the Zionist’s plan to create puppet states such as Kurdistan, Khuzistan, Azarbaijan, Baluchistan and other mini states so enemies of Iran can have access to its oil and natural gas and create puppets for Israel in the region. The Iranian left has made numerous mistakes and were involved in many assassinations within their own organizations to monopolize power and even many “left” organizations cooperated with the Islamic government to identify and sacrifice their own rivals with no shame, examples are many including Tudeh Party, Mujahedin, Fadaian, and other ‘left’ organizations where became ‘opposition’ after the government did not share power with them, instead, simply used them and force them out. Thus, majority of these ‘oppositon’ groups became allies of the Zionist and imperialist forces and have sought refuge with the ‘voice of America’, NED, Freedom house, Open society, and so on and so forth. Mehrangiz Kar, ‘woman activist’ and Ramin Jahanbeglou who received award from NED by Laura Bush are one example. Iranian ‘left’ where majority of them were Stalinist before the revolution became Trotskyite for after the revolution. One of the organization that Reza Fiyouzat is involved with and repeats their reactionary slogan and has been supported by the gatekeepers such as Noam Chomsky is the Trotskyite group based in England in name of ‘Hands off the people of Iran’ where were forced out of CASMII because they preach ‘regime change’. This group has the same position as Zionist on Islamic groups such as Hezbullah and Hamas and finds these groups far more dangerous than Zionist groups. This Trotskyite group has make Islam their number one enemy. Their slogan ‘No to Imperialist war, No to theocracy’ has captured Noam Chomsky’s attention and he signed all their petitions. Other Zionist groups who pose as ‘left’ have identical slogan, which is basically calling for ‘regime change’ identical to the Zionist group in a CLEVER way. The west with the leadership of the US and Israel have contributed large amount of resources to bring down the Iranian government. Majority of the Iranian web sites are funded by the western government. Many Iranian ‘activist’ have been given an award for their activities against the government. Shadi Sadr who ‘internationalizes’ stoning in Iran is totally silent on stoning in Kurdistan. Iran is an ancient country. People in remote areas conduct their rules according to their tribe. Government is trying to prevent this conduct but the slave ‘opposition’ do not inform the Iranian government when there is stoning has been set to go rather they prefer to give these information to the ‘Journalist without border’ without informing the government so they can collect ‘AWARDS’ and may obtain GREEN CARD so they can join the rest of the grown at ‘The voice of America’. Please go to ‘voice of America’ to watch these ‘leftist’ who are analyzing Iranian government while they totally ignore the crime of the Zionist and Imperialist.
    The riot of April 15-17 2005 in the oil rich province of Khuzestan where caused one death and 200 people also were arrested in Ahwaz capital of Khuzestan where soon after all but 10 were released. The riot started by circulation of a fabricated letter revealed a supposed government plan to move ethnic Persians into the region. This fabricated story is very similar to another fabricated story on minority’s dress code where was written by Amir Taheri, a neocon close to Zionist Israelis in Canadian ‘National Post’ a Zionist paper regarding new legislation in Iranian parliament allegedly requiring Jews and other religious minorities to wear distinctive colored badges which ran alongside the story a 1935 photograph of a Jewish businessman in Berlin with a yellow six-pointed star sewn on his overcoat, as required by Nazi legislation at the time. Taheri’s lie was exposed and ‘National Post’ had to apologize. The fabricated letter which caused the riot in Khuzestan has similar story. The letter was first published in English on the website of the newly-founded British Ahwazi Friendship Society (BAFS) and then broadcast into Khuzestan over BAFS-supported Al-Ahwaz TV into Iran. It was also provided to Al-Jazeera. Now please PAY ATTENTION to find out who was behind this Fabricated LETTER where caused a big riot and left one dead. To expose this story we must ask ourselves who is Daniel Brett? And when BAFS was funded? Search in the net reveals: In December 2004 Daniel Brett, journalist and Young Fabian, founded BAFS. The BAFS website goes live in March 2005. Within a couple of weeks BAFS receives an explosive letter which appeared to be from the Tehran leadership proposing ethnic cleansing against the Ahwazi Arabs. Shortly thereafter there are protests, riots, arrests and deaths over in Iran. Daniel Brett then uses his journalistic skills and the BAFS brand to focus human rights groups and media attention on the Iranian government’s repression in the Ahwazi region. Isn’t it funny that a few weeks after BAFS’s website installed all of the sudden the fabricated letter appeared on their site and soon after on 15-17 of April there is a big riot in Ahwaz due to this letter appeared on BAFS’ site? It would be suspicious to me. Searching more about Daniel Brett who is so concern about discrimination of Ahwazi reveals that: Daniel Brett is a UK-based consultant on emerging markets and formerly a freelance journalist. Daniel Brett is a journalist specializing in defense, security, hydrocarbons and the petrochemicals industry in Africa, the Middle East and Asia. He was educated in politics and development economics at Queen Mary and Westfield College and the School of Oriental and African Studies. He is International and Embassy Receptions Officer of the Young Fabians. That’s why many label him as MI6 agent which he denies. We know many people are in denial including the Zionist neocon and their puppets George Bush, dick Cheney and Tony Blair. Daniel Brett claims that: The BAFS does not take any side, but the side of justice, democracy, human rights, secularism and self-determination for the Ahwazi people and indigenous minorities across the world. For someone not taking sides, the BAFS website was heavily attacking Tehran and not acknowledging any of the actions Tehran had taken to calm the peoples in southern Iran following the riots. We should also remember that Mr. Brett’s wife is the secretary and Mansour Silawi-Ahwazi, “the Arab Iranian journalist” who produces most of the content for the Al-Ahwaz TV is the Treasurer of BAFS. The region of Khuzestan has huge undeveloped oil reserves and is conveniently adjacent to Iraqi Kurdistan. Iraqi Kurdistan is where the CIA, tools like Chalabi and agents in Israeli intelligence have operated for the past 20 years and now is the spy network for Israel and US where Kurdish terrorist are trained to be sent to the neighboring countries to destabilize and manufacture crisis so people of the region to turn their anger into riot. Description of Daniel Brett is similar to Chalabi liar who was one of the important enablers of the Zionist plan, the Iraq war.

  5. paola said on October 1st, 2008 at 8:10pm #

    @Arman
    I cannot waste my time to reply your grotesque pack of lies. So, only a few words about the last one.
    Chalabi, as all the world knows, is an IRANIAN double agent. And of course he has still excellent relationships with the Iranian government, that has always supported him. .
    This is one of his last trips to Teheran ( June 29, 2008): http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-22/0806294436011845.htm
    “Chalabi, for his part, felicitated Larijani’s new position as Majlis speaker and said Iraq considers Iran as one of its important friends and added security agreement is one of Iraqi people and officials main problems now.”

  6. Arman said on October 2nd, 2008 at 6:46am #

    Paola:

    You are not only a liar but an ignorant person who knows nothing about Iran and the role of the Zionist and Imperialist in destabilization of Iran. Ahmed Chalabi is an agent of the US and Israel like Kannan Makiya who has recieved PhD as honorary degree in Israel for his services. Chalabi was with the occupational government and still is, thus like other people in the government he goes to neighboring countries for negociation including Iran, but he has not been back for a long time because he does not represent anyone except his masters, the US and Israel, and his own financial interest. He earned only less than 0.5 percent of the votes in the last election, of course with the help of his master the US and Israel. It is better for you to do some research before revealing yourself even further as an ignorant person. There are plenty of papers written about whatever I have presented here, and if you were interested in the well being of the Iranian people you would have done a little bit of research before going after others.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/4/21/74045/1543

  7. Arman said on October 2nd, 2008 at 7:16am #

    Mehrangiz Kar, a ‘democracy activist ‘ in Iran received her award from Laura Bush who supports a war criminal in name of George Bush who is responsible for more than 1.2 m Iraqi and rapes and destruction. The following picture shows Mrs. Kar who has said nothing on rapes and killings of Iraqi and Afghani people standing nest to Laura Bush while holding her award.
    http://www.ned.org/publications/newsletters/summer02.html

  8. paola said on October 2nd, 2008 at 3:14pm #

    Arman,

    as you perfectly know Iran has always supported the US puppets in Iraq, and the Iran-backed sectarian militias (Badr brigades and Mahdi army) ethnic cleansed Baghdad and the south of Iraq and fought agaisnt the iraqi resistance.
    Here is a picture for you: http://www.historiae.org/images/BadrMaysanKhumayniCommittee12June2008.JPG
    Badr members in Maysan at a joint Iranian-Iraqi function celebrating the Khomeini legacy and a Khomeini aid fund, 12 June 2008

    The IRANIAN double agent Chalabi is always in Tehran, where now he barks against his US ex- masters.

    June 30, 2008
    http://aramroston.newsvine.com/_news/2008/06/30/1625583-ahmad-chalabi-in-iran-criticizing-us-iraq-agreement-plans
    According to the Iranian press this weekend, Ahmad Chalabi, who was so influential in Washington, DC, before the Iraq war, was meeting with Iranians in Tehran. Chalabi spoke out against the US security agreement
    with Iraq, which the US wants to have in place because the UN mandate is expiring.

    http://www.metimes.com/Security/2008/09/19/chalabi_us_wants_secret_bases_in_iraq/80be/
    September 19, 2008
    – Former Iraqi Deputy Premier Ahmad Chalabi told Iranian state-owned media Friday the United States is seeking to establish secret military bases in Iraq. In an interview with the Islamic Republic News Agency, Chalabi, once a Washington favorite, said U.S. officials are trying to inject agreements for secret bases in Iraq as part of the long-term security contract slated to govern U.S.-Iraqi relations when the U.N. mandate there expires at the end of this year.
    etc. etc. etc.

    And the DailyKos article you quote didn’t say absolutely anything about Chalabi.

    However here you can read hundreds of thousands of articles about Chalabi’s links with Iran:
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=chalabi+iran&btnG=Search
    Of course i don’t believe the US’ claims that they were fooled by the Iran’s agent Chalabi. The US knew who Chalabi was and de facto the US and Iran worked together to produce false intelligence about the alleged Iraqi WMD.

    By the way on Spetember 24, 2008, Ahmadinejad confirmed that Iran approved the criminal US war against Iraq:
    http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/364292/ahmadinejad_meets_us_peace_movement
    “In response to the questions, Ahmadinejad happily endorsed America’s invasion of Iraq. “Finally, [US leaders] were able to make a good decision for once,” he said, referring to the 2003 war. But now, he said, America has overstayed its welcome, in an effort to dominate the Persian Gulf and secure access to oil. Having eliminated Iran’s enemy, Saddam Hussein, it’s time for the United States to get out. “We have friendly ties with both the government and the people of Iraq,” he declared. “The best help the United States can provide to people in the region is to withdraw troops from the region. Leave the region alone!”

    This is my last reply to you, because i don’t like to discuss with people in bad faith.

  9. Arman said on October 3rd, 2008 at 6:38am #

    Poala

    Ahmed Chalabi was and is an agent of the US and the neocons. The neocons still talk about him in good faith. The US government deceived the world when warned about WMD in Iraq. They also knew were lying about ‘bringing democracy’ to Iraq since the US history on this issue tells us the opposite and in fact the US is against democracy in the region and is dependent on Arab puppet head of states to control the region with its resources.
    What you have pasted here on Chalabi presents nothing except that Chalabi is not a reliable person and could not deliver what he promised to his masters because Iraqi people view him as a war criminal and a thief who uses anything for power and financial gain. Chalabi with less than 0.5 per cent of the votes showed that he has no credibility among Iraqi people. However it is interesting to see even chalabi is against ‘secret bases’ in Iraq.
    There was a division among Iranian ruling circle and their supporters on invasion of Iraq. Khamenaie’s circle was against the war but some of the ‘reformermists’ close to the US who pose as ‘opposition’ now were supporting the invasion including Abdul Karim Soroush, Naser Hadian, Jahanbeglou, Afshari, Atri, Sasegara and those who have become incorporated in the ‘voice of America’, NED, and other American intelligent agencies in addition to those who are active as ‘journalist’ with Internet sites funded by Western governments such as ‘Rouz’ and other journals who have close relation with organization such as ‘Journalists without borders’ or ‘human rights’ organizations.
    It is not surprising, however, to see Ahmadinejad is happy to witness Saddam’s fall since Saddam invaded Iran with the help of the US, western and Arab countries which left more than 700,000 deaths. Many Iranians especially in Khuzestan province feel the same. But you must remember it was the US – Israel – Britain where waged a war in 2003 and have killed over one million of Iraqi people not Iran.
    Iran like other countries seeks its own national interest, therefore, is trying to have a good relationship with its neighboring countries to push the foreign troops out of Iraq and region who have come from the other side of the globe.
    Iraq with shared history and border is next to Iran, thus, it is Iran’s right to be concerned about the stability of Iraq. US, Israel and Britain are trying to keep Iraq unstable to have an excuse to stay permanently in Iraq and the region through act of terrorism and sectarian divide not Iran. If you do a little bit of research you will find out that Iran wants to have a good relation with all neighboring countries regardless of religion or ethnic divide. This point has been said by many people including Iran’s enemies. Iran does not promote sectarian divide and tension in the region because it is against Iran’s interest. Iran has done every thing possible to unite people of the region to neutralize the enemies’ plan to control the region . Thus, the US and the ‘Arab moderate states’ where are involved in act of terrorism are not happy to see people’s unity because unity of the people defeats the empire’s plan to ‘divide and conquer.’

  10. Arman said on October 18th, 2008 at 6:51am #

    If westerners and phony Iranian ‘opposition’ groups who have chosen to work and help zionist and imperialist forces are serious about human rights in Iran, they must organize their activities towards lifting the economic sanction on Iranian workers and children immediately, otherwise people will continue to hold thier opinion against them as agent of zionist and imperalist forces where we have witness so far. We have to prevent another Iraq at any cost. Hungry Iranian workers and other groups are not able to build anything including decmocratic institution which are needed for any meaningful civil society. Iranian opposition group so far have been competing with each other to get the $ and Uro from the western goverment and arrange their activities in such a way so they can receive an ‘award’ to help their ‘career’. Examples are numerous to be mentioned here. Any visit to Iranian women ‘opposition’ groups site will reveal that Iranian women have no fight with atrocities of the zionist and imperialist at all and are willing to do anything to get award from their activities against the Iranian goverment to satisfy their master, the intelligent agency of the western countries. One example is Parvin Ardalan who recieved an ‘award’ for her activities in ‘One million signature’ admired by ‘voice of America’ yet she has never spoken against raping women in Iraq or stoning of women in North of Iraq, Kurdistan. Shame.