Friday Sermon from Iran

Cross posted from DeMediacratic Nation:

Provisional Friday Prayer Leader of Tehran Ayatollah Seyyed Ahmad Khatami led the congregation with his usual flair and aplomb; speaking of the recent televised confessions of American-Iranian “spies”:

‘”This policy has worked in some countries, but in Iran, it has faced defeat, just like the other failed US policies on Iran.”’

Khatami’s statement fits perfectly in line with the propaganda of the regime and mullahs, which is according to Amir Taheri in today’s NY Post, “The Conspiracy That Wasn’t.” The use of these hostages is for the fodder they can make of them and the United States and msm should be screaming up a storm about it.

The use of the propaganda unfolds to include statements such as:

‘”During the past fifty years the United States has directly or indirectly interfered in the internal affairs of 25 countries of the world militarily, and the funny thing is that Washington also claims it is after the establishment of democracy throughout the world.”’

Khatami, member in good standing of the Leadership Experts Assembly also highlighted Iran’s role in preserving stability and security in the Middle East region, and added:

“Iran’s policies regarding Iraq have always been aimed at promoting security measures there and serving the oppressed Iraqi nation, and yet the United States has always, resorting to fake pretexts, been accusing Iran of interference in Iraq’s affairs.”

“The US policy in Iraq today is aimed at bringing the Ba’th Party back to power, and fueling the flames of tribal and sectarian wars there.”

This, as well as every Friday Sermon would be very amusing were it not so alarming – These are the people we would negotiate away from their “peaceful nukes?”

Oddly, on that very subject a joint communiqué stated that:

“Iran’s nuclear issue should be solved through dimplomatic channels and negotiations with no strings attached.”

It also stressed and warned of the “danger of the Zionist regime’s nuclear arsenal for the region and called for immediate action by international bodies to foil this threat.”

Condemning “the continued aggressive and oppressive acts of the Zionist regime” it also “underscored the rights of the Syrian people to restore occupied Golan Heights up to the June 1967 borderline.”

Obviously the various “injustices” are part of the pathetic nature of the backward region, where defeat followed by their attacks and instigation are used as pity party talking points. Unfortunately, the pity parties consist of continued death and mayhem.

Futher proof the “peaceful” intentions were underlined in the statement with:

“Iran and Syria in their joint statement invited the Palestinian groups to dialogue and keeping national unity and supported the rights of the Palestinian nation for the return of the refugees to their motherland and establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Ghods city designated as its capital.”

Additional proofs of “peaceful” intentions were noted earlier this week with the following news:

an adviser to the Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei, claimed Iranian ownership of the Gulf Arab state of Bahrain stating:

“The public demand in Bahrain is the reunification of this province with its motherland, the Islamic Iran.”

As well is the announcement of the inclusion of Syria under the Iranian missile umbrella aimed at 600 targets in Israel threatened as retaliation if Iran is attacked.

These are the people we would negotiate away from their “peaceful nukes?” Nice

In Rebuttal to Barack Obama’s Essay – “Renewing American Leadership” – Part II

Cross posted from DeMediacratic Nation:

Revitalizing the Military

“To renew American leadership in the world, we must immediately begin working to revitalize our military. A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace.”

Candidate Obama suggests that:

“We must recruit the very best and invest in their capacity to succeed. That means providing our servicemen and servicewomen with first-rate equipment, armor, incentives, and training — including in foreign languages and other critical skills. Each major defense program should be reevaluated in light of current needs, gaps in the field, and likely future threat scenarios. Our military will have to rebuild some capabilities and transform others.”

This is much like Obama’s and any candidates picture perfect scenario. Most if not all of the dreams require cooperation from all sides; with self-absorbed bureaucracies this is indeed a challenge, forget about foreign cooperation. But again, this is all failing due to the intransigence of Bush. The Bush administration suffers and suffered from the great push back from the military as well as a lack of cooperation from individuals in the State Department and elsewhere that were and are used to doing business a certain way. Senator Obama should not expect more open arms, excepting of course that he is not Bush…anybody but Bush.

Halting the spread of Nuclear Weapons

“In confronting these threats, I will not take the military option off the table. But our first measure must be sustained, direct, and aggressive diplomacy — the kind that the Bush administration has been unable and unwilling to use.”

What is aggressive diplomacy? Sounds decisive, active or action oriented, it certainly doesn’t imply sitting on ones hands. Is the tactic that has been used with regard to Iran, i.e. EU-3, UN, IAEA, what is inferred? Could it be considered “aggressive” to continually return to the same negotiating table over and over; is this forcefully aggressive? Why should Obama or any of the other candidates get a pass, when they bravely proclaim the “military option” will not be taken off the table? Is it only different based upon the reaction or overreaction of the opposition party or media that makes it “war-mongering” and troublesome?

In halting the spread of nuclear weapons, one of the reasons for going into Iraq, is it really wise to use the military? Might that not enflame international sensitivities? “Blood for radiation,” is this really what we want to put our youngest and brightest up against?

The senator writes of rogue regimes developing nuclear know-how (in one instance under the auspices of “peaceful nuclear energy.”) and terrorist groups like al Qaeda that would love to get their hands on the materials or purchase an existing nuclear weapon.

Our present set up is not enough, according to George Shultz, William Perry, Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn; which I do not doubt, but shouldn’t we check with others on this as well? Perhaps in a more bi-partisan fashion?

It is no lie that poorly secured stockpiles of uranium and “approximately 15,000-16,000 nuclear weapons,” in the former Soviet Union exist, but as Obama declares he will immediately begin providing “$50 million to jump-start the creation of an International Atomic Energy Agency-controlled nuclear fuel bank and work to update the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty” be the answer? Isn’t this just looking for more bureaucratic red tape and international bickering going to remain? Is it really wise for a leader offering “aggressive diplomacy,” to invest in the same IAEA that has failed thus far to curtail Iran’s “peaceful nukes.” We’ve done four years of this to date; isn’t it really time for something else? Perhaps not, as 14 plus years was still not enough with regard to Saddam’s Iraq.

Where will these “strong international coalitions to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and eliminate North Korea’s nuclear weapons program,” come from? Our we talking about the same group of nations that are presently on our planet? “Iran and North Korea could trigger regional arms races,” really, hasn’t that already begun in the Middle East with the forward momentum of Iran’s advances prodding them along?

Active cooperation from Russia is a necessity even though we don’t see eye to eye on everything and we “must not shy away from pushing for more democracy and accountability” from them, but the common interest of nuclear weapons and material is something we should strive for. Good idea.

In the interest of thinking it through, where will we put all these stockpiles of “nuclear material,” Yucca Mountain?

End of Part II

“In Rebuttal to Barack Obama’s Essay – “Renewing American Leadership” – Part I“

Never Jump Too Quickly on an Offer from Iran

Cross posted from DeMediacratic Nation:

From The NY Times today:

“BAGHDAD, July 2 — Iranian operatives helped plan a January raid in Karbala in which five American soldiers were killed, an American military spokesman in Iraq said today.”

“Brig. Gen. Kevin J. Bergner, the military spokesman, also said that Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has used operatives from the Lebanese militia group Hezbollah as a “proxy” to train and arm Shiite militants in Iraq.”

“American military officials have long asserted that the Quds Force, an elite unit of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, has trained and equipped Shiite militants in Iraq. The Americans have also cited extensive intelligence that Iran has supplied Shiite militants with the most lethal type of roadside bomb in Iraq, a bomb called the explosively formed penetrator, which is capable of piercing an armored vehicle.”

In response to the news of intelligence gleaned by the U.S. through interrogations that have led to a comfort level by the U.S. of stepping up the accusations, Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Mostafa “Who Loves You Baby?” Mohamad-Najjar blamed the U.S. and CIA:

“Occupation of Iraq followed a big lie, escalation of tension in the occupied regions and resort to terrorist tactics have been the customary methods of the CIA to justify the US presence in the region, cover up Washington’s past failures and mislead public opinion in the US.”

Iran denies any involvement as they have repeatedly said that Iraq security is Iranian security and of the utmost importance to them. However that is antithetical to what would most likely provide the most security to Iran. The U.S. presence in Iraq is not good for Iran and Iraq has a Shia majority.

On June 25^th an opportunity for “jumping on Iran’s latest offer,” in which it was reported that, “Iran has invited an International Atomic Energy Agency team to Tehran to work on clearing up suspicions about its nuclear program, an IAEA spokeswoman said Monday.” Oddly just a little more time will be necessary to make it happen….SURPRISE!!!!!! What was considered, “the latest move in possibly allowing Iran further time to continue with its “peaceful” nuclear research,” is appearing to be just that.

From IRNA this morning:

“Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has said that Tehran is ready to continue its nuclear talks within the next three weeks, it was reported on Monday.”

This was reported in a interview on the “Arab-language news channel Al-Jazeera broadcast Sunday evening.”

Additionally he indicated that all sides of the debate should be supportive of this new initiative. Iran also wishes to get the talk continuing with a new suggestion of taking this from the U.N. Security Council and back into the purview of the U.N.’s IAEA.

Time is all that Iran needs; let’s continue giving it to them.

In the Service of Global Peace and Security – Iran has Your Back

From DeMediacratic Nation:

In a news conference with foreign news entities during the 18^th anniversary celebrations of the “departure of Imam Khomeini,” president of the Islamic Republic of Iran Ahmadinejad said:

“Iran serves international peace and security,” and that ‘”big powers want to retain their monopoly over the nuclear energy and in order to achieve the goal, they sow discord and differences among the developing nations.”’

Asked by an Indian reporter about US claims of Iranian involvement in Iraq, the good leader responded in proper Leftist form (which requires dropping various details and facts):

‘”The US, equipped and supported Saddam Hussein, former Iraqi dictator, during his imposed war on Iran and Kuwait, has occupied Iraq under the pretext of WMD and creating democracy in the country.”’ He added that no WMDs were found and aiming to interfere in regional issues, the U.S. remains in Iraq.

Just to help the Iraqi people, Iran “expressed readiness to establish security in the country,” when “the occupiers raised the plan of negotiation when they were unable to create security, peace and tranquility.”

Further example of Iranian interests in security, peace and tranquility in the region the president spoke of the Zionist regimes and his warning to that nation missing from various Middle Eastern states maps:

‘”In my statement I gave a warning to the Zionist regime not to repeat the crimes it perpetrated in Lebanon last year.”’ Continuing that if the enemy does not refrain from its attempts at sowing discord among Muslim nations; ‘”If they are not after strengthening friendship with regional nations and prefer to continue their crimes, the nations will eliminate their presence in the region.”’

This ‘elimination’ one must presume is with the assistance of Iranian peaceful nukes since he did also reaffirm that Iran has a strategy of “non-interference in Lebanese national affairs and called for unity and success by Lebanese.”

Evidence of this non-interference was offered on March 5 of this year by Israel’s Shin Bet Intelligence Service Director Yuval Diskin in an interview with reporters:

 

‘“Hamas has started to dispatch people to Iran, tens and a promise of hundreds…”’ [1]Cooperation between Iran and Hamas dates back to the early 1990s, but their relationship strengthened significantly after Hamas was elected to lead the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) in January 2006.

Additionally from The Israel Project:

“On March 6, Hamas’ Damascus-based political chief, Khaled Mashaal was in Tehran to discuss financial support for the Hamas-Fatah unity government and the current international monetary embargo on the P.A.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who advocates for Israel to be “wiped off the map,” [2] encouraged Hamas to continue attacks against Israel. “The [Palestinian] government should use its brave and pious forces to continue resistance against the Zionist regime [Israel],” said Ahmadinejad, according to Iranian state-run television. [3]”

Chalk this one up as a misinterpretation of meaning from one society or culture to another I guess. For a timeline of Iranian “non-interference” dating back to 1990 see “Timeline of Hamas-Iran Ties.”

On this the 40^th anniversary of the start of the Six Day War, The NY Times notes:

“In Gaza, fighting between the rival Palestinian factions, Hamas and Fatah, flared up again, two weeks after the sides had declared a cease-fire.” As well as the fact that “Israeli peace advocates protested against four decades of occupation in Hebron, a tense and conservative Palestinian city with a biblical past, and tried to drown out a small counterdemonstration of local Jewish settlers with their chants.”

On this 40^th anniversary, let’s not forget what truly happened by ignoring historical rewrites from fanatics in the region, namely Hamas, Fatah, apologists, and appeasers as well as others.

Please note that in addition to Iran having your back, “a former Israel Broadcasting Authority news editor, Carmela Menashe and Shelly Yechimovich” also have your back Israel, according to The American Israeli Patriot

[1] Erlanger, Steve, “Hamas gets training in Iran, Israeli official says,” The New York Times, March 5, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/world/middleeast/05cnd-mideast.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=sloginhttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-hamas6mar06,1,3249562.story?coll=la-headlines-world

; Boudreaux, Richard, “Israel intelligence chief: Iran training Hamas,” Los Angeles Times, March 6, 2007,

[2] Pryce-Jones, David, “A Particular Madness – Understanding Iran’s Ahmadinejad,” National Review, May 8, 2006.
[3] Daily Star Staff, “Abbas to meet Olmert before cabinet formed,” The Daily Star, March 7, 2007, http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=80230