CAIR’s Grievance Theater, the Flying Imams and 9/11

By Patrick PooleFrontPageMagazine.com April 18, 2007It’s a tale of two Novembers with the horror of September 11th sandwiched in between.

In November 2006, six imams on a US Airways Minneapolis to Phoenix flight begin engaging in bizarre behaviors eerily similar to those used by the 9/11 hijackers to takeover the planes used on that terrible day: shouting slogans in Arabic; leaving assigned seats to position themselves much like the 9/11 attackers; requesting seat belt extenders that they positioned on the floor, rather than used to secure themselves. Responding to the reasonable concerns of passengers and the flight crew, the imams were removed from the plane by authorities.

Seven years earlier in November 1999, two Saudi students on an America West flight from Phoenix to Columbus were detained after landing because they had made repeated attempts to enter the cockpit area of the plane during the flight.

In both cases, CAIR rose up to defend the offenders in question and engaged in their now standard grievance theater protest politics. In the most recent case, CAIR has tried to capitalize on the publicity surrounding the incident by backing the "Flying Imams" and supporting their lawsuit against the airlines and passengers for responding to their bizarre behavior. The lawsuit is being handled by a Muslim attorney associated with CAIR.

When it comes to the November 1999 incident, any mention of CAIR’s involvement or defense of the Saudi students has been scrubbed from the organization’s website. It’s no wonder, as the 9/11 Commission Report (page 521, footnote 60) explains that the FBI now considers the incident as a “dry run” for the 9/11 hijackings. And the two men involved? As the 9/11 Commission Report explains, Hamdan al-Shalawi was in Afghanistan in November 2000 training at an Al-Qaeda camp to launch “Khobar Tower”-type attacks against the US in Saudi Arabia, and Mohammad Al-Qadhaieen was arrested in June 2003 as a material witness in the 9/11 attacks. Both men were friends of Al-Qaeda recruiter, Zakaria Mustapha Soubra, who drove them to the airport that day in Qadhaieen’s car. Another friend of Shalawi is Ghassan al-Sharbi, another Al-Qaeda operative that would later be captured in Pakistan with high-level Al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubaida.

There is a connection between these two incidents, as the leader of the six “Flying Imams” this past November is none other than Omar Shahin, the former imam of the Islamic Center of Tucson, where the two Saudi students from the November 1999 incident attended. Counterterrorism expert Rita Katz told the Washington Post in September 2002 that the mosque served as “basically the first cell of Al-Qaeda in the United States; that is where it all started”. (Len Sherman’s Arizona Monthly November 2004 article, “Al Qaeda among Us”, provides greater detail about the connections between the Saudi pair involved in the November 1999 event and the Al-Qaeda cell that operated in Tucson and Phoenix.)

Their current silence and website purge notwithstanding, immediately after the November 1999 “dry run”, CAIR was not shy about publicly speaking on the incident. “It seems like they single out some individuals because of their name, the way they look or their national origin,” huffed current CAIR National Vice Chairman Ahmad Al-Akhras (who was then president of the CAIR Ohio chapter) in an interview with the Egyptian daily, Al-Ahram. That same article quoted Nihad Awad, Executive Director and Co-Founder of CAIR, who explained, “the hysteria around [the crash of] EgyptAir [Flight 990] has created a negative atmosphere that leads to such incidents.”

CAIR not only gave indirect support to the 9/11 “dry run” hijackers by launching an aggressive media defense and circulating their woeful tale of innocents victimized by the bigotry of non-Muslims, but as Katherine Kersten of the Minneapolis Star Tribune reminds us, in 2000 CAIR fronted a lawsuit for Shalawi and Qadhaieen against America West by hiring attorneys and calling for a boycott of the airline as a result of the incident. Again, two identical events eight years apart with CAIR playing the exact same role.

CAIR was unsuccessful in the lawsuit stemming from the November 1999 9/11 “dry run”, as the judge quickly dismissed the case, but they did succeed in creating an atmosphere of intimidation that was certainly aimed at stopping airline passengers from speaking up about suspicious behavior. Did CAIR’s campaign of intimidation silence any of the passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 175, American Airlines Flight 11, American Airlines Flight 77, or United Airlines Flight 93 who might have witnessed suspicious behavior of the 9/11 hijackers that day? Since all the passengers of those flights were silenced forever, we will never know.

But the horrific consequences of their previous defense of the 9/11 “dry run” has not prevented CAIR from using the exact same tactics and rhetoric in the current “Flying Imams” case. As Janet Levy recently explained in an article here at FrontPage (“The Minneapolis Six Sabotage Airline Security”), the CAIR-backed lawsuit by the six imams is being used as a propaganda device to advance CAIR’s legislative agenda for the passage of a bill through Congress that would prevent authorities from acting on suspicious behavior, much like what was seen in the November 1999 and November 2006 incidents, as well as 9/11.

As their current protest politics in the “Flying Imams” case demonstrates, CAIR shows no remorse for their complicity in providing cover for the 9/11 “dry run” operatives, though the purge of their website of any mention of their participation was clearly an attempt to try to wipe the public record clean of their involvement. But in light of their past actions and with their pursuit of the current lawsuit, it seems fair to ask: will thousands more Americans need to be murdered before CAIR brings the curtain down on their grievance theater road show? Tragically, we might have the opportunity to find out.

Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.

Documentry about Iran

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-KdFMuo3vo&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fmihanyar%2Eblogspot%2Ecom%2F

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-cqr7dMEP4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKN-gZuSH2o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkC-PYnm9lA

Canada needs to reconsider its position on the IRI

Dear Right Honorable Prime Minister Stephen HARPER:

The below are weblinks to two documentry video clips which illustrates kidnapping by the IRI and Iranian people are demanding justice.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5510072894320301873


http://azadibayan.ning.com/video/video/show?id=665135%3AVideo%3A242

Now, a person begins to wonder why Canada is willing to have an amicable relation with the IRI? This IRI from one hand is attacking at Canadian Arm Forces in Afghanistan, and from another hand the IRI is murdering innocent people in Iran. How can anyone justify the IRI's burtality? How can anyone shake hand with evil in Iran and for a second would think that Canada will be safe from harm? No one is safe.

Thank you,

Kind regards

Iran-made weapons for Taliban are seized

It's the first sign that the nation has a role in Afghan war
By PETER SPIEGELLos Angeles Times


ATTACK A powerful remote-controlled bomb destroyed a U.N. vehicle in southern Afghanistan's main city on Tuesday, killing four Nepalese guards and an Afghan driver, officials said.

The attack on a three-vehicle U.N. convoy in Kandahar was the bloodiest in Afghanistan for the world body since the Taliban's 2001 ouster.

Associated Press -->
WASHINGTON — U.S.-led coalition forces in southern Afghanistan recently intercepted Iranian-made weapons that were being shipped to fighters for the Taliban, historically regional rivals of Tehran, the Pentagon's top general said Tuesday.

Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the munitions, which included mortars and C-4 explosives, were captured within the past month near Kandahar, which serves as the military and administrative capital for the restive south. That region has been under renewed Taliban assault in recent months.

The Bush administration repeatedly has accused Iran of supplying insurgents in Iraq with sophisticated weaponry. Pace's remarks were the first by a senior U.S. official to indicate similar activities in Afghani-stan.

Exact source unclearPace said it remained unclear who shipped the arms, but that markings on the explosives enabled U.S. intelligence to identify them as Iranian-made. "It is not as clear in Afghani-stan which Iranian entity is responsible," Pace said. In Iraq, U.S. officials have accused the Quds Force, the international arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, but have said it remained unclear whether Quds operatives were acting at the behest of senior Iranian officials in Tehran.
The Bush administration has acknowledged that Iran has been active inside Afghanistan, but officials have described the influence as benign.

Historically, the Shiite Muslim government in Tehran has viewed the Taliban as archrivals and nearly went to war with the Sunni-dominated Taliban in 1998, when the Kabul government captured and killed dozens of Iranians in the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif during a rebellion.

Israel's Next War

By P. David HornikFrontPageMagazine.com April 17, 2007

Ze’ev Schiff—left-of-center, not a hawk, and considered by many to be Israel’s foremost military analyst—cites security sources as saying those Qassams that Islamic Jihad has been raining on Gaza-bordering communities during the “ceasefire” with Hamas are in fact supplied by Hamas.

Hamas, the sources said, while “maintaining a front of abiding by the ceasefire,” is actually “emerging as the lynchpin of Palestinian terrorist activities against Israel.” That is believed to include providing Islamic Jihad with Russian-made 16-kilometer-range Grad rockets, already used last year to target the town of Ashkelon with its strategic facilities.

An analysis last month already warned that Hamas is “improving its rocket capabilities” while “seeking to build anti-tank and anti-aircraft systems that will neutralize Israel’s current ability to easily penetrate Gaza.”

The deteriorating situation in the south led Brig.-Gen. (ret.) Tzvika Fogel, formerly chief of staff for Southern Command, to warn on Israel’s Channel 10 that Israel faces two choices: to “continue its ostrich-like stance” until the Gaza terror forces mount a surprise attack, or to launch a full-scale preemptive attack of its own.

Meanwhile, shifting the lens to the north, last week the head of Israeli Military Intelligence, Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin, reported to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that Syria is “purchasing massive amounts of ground-to-ground and anti-tank missiles from Russia”—a country whose name tends to turn up in these contexts—and that, while “there is a low probability that Syria will initiate a war against Israel,” Syria could launch attacks in the Golan Heights even though it could lead to war.

Another report gave an even more ominous picture of an “unprecedented military buildup in Syria,” including the deployment of 300 home-manufactured Scud missiles just north of the Golan Heights, the establishment of new commando units, and a spike in training for urban and guerrilla warfare.

A source in IDF Northern Command said that “Syria saw the difficulty the IDF had during the fighting inside the southern Lebanese villages [last summer] and now . . . wants to draw us—in the event of a war—into battles in built-up areas where they think they will have the upper hand.”

And over in Lebanon itself, the fallout from last summer’s war is just as negative and the prognosis no better. In his same testimony to the Knesset committee last week, Maj.-Gen. Yadlin noted that up to several hundred Al Qaeda members have arrived in Lebanon with the aim of attacking UNIFIL and other Western targets; and that Hezbollah remains entrenched in southern Lebanon and keeps amassing large quantities of arms from Syria and Iran.

Rounding out the circle by returning to the south, Yadlin also said some Al Qaeda operatives have infiltrated Gaza as well, and that Hamas is gaining financial and political strength while its members receive training in Syria and Iran.

Overall, “the MI chief stressed that Iran continues to provide funding and weapons to Syria, Hamas, and Hezbollah, and has close military and intelligence coordination with Syria.” Add Russia to the mix and the picture is complete: a Shiite-Sunni-Russian terror-military axis seeking to surround, pressure, and harass Israel and ultimately eradicate it.

Tragically, this is happening at a time when Israel has a government hobbled by incompetence, unpopularity, scandals, infighting, and delusory dovishness, and that, apart from stepped-up training for some IDF units, is essentially doing nothing about the growing threats. It does not help that Israel’s U.S. ally keeps obsessively choreographing diplomatic dances with the likes of PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas, the Saudis, and the Arab League with which Israel dutifully complies—achieving nothing except to further project weakness to Israel’s enemies and lull the parts of the Israeli public that are eager to be lulled.

As Schiff points out in another analysis, it was the reluctance to enter a two-front war that led Israel to allow Hezbollah’s major military buildup in southern Lebanon in the first place. After Israel pulled out of southern Lebanon in 2000 against the advice of most of the IDF top brass, Prime Minister Ehud Barak and then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon found themselves facing a Palestinian terror onslaught mounted from the West Bank and Gaza and did not want to further complicate matters by doing something about Hezbollah in Lebanon.

So Israel, Schiff notes, “never once struck at the convoys transferring the missiles to Lebanon, and never struck even one Hezbollah missile warehouse, or even the short-range rockets near the border.” The end result was that Israel found itself at war on two fronts anyway—when Hamas attacked from Gaza and kidnapped a soldier last June, and Hezbollah followed suit the next month with an attack and kidnapping from Lebanon; and now faces the prospect of a further two-front war against enemies with enhanced capabilities.

Hope resides mainly in the interim report later this month of the Winograd Committee, set up to investigate the failures in last summer’s war and also expected to address the whole period of 2000-2006. Sufficiently harsh conclusions against Prime Minister Ehud Olmert could lead him to resign or cause other political ferment leading to new elections. As time goes on and Israel, aside from antiterror policing work in the West Bank, remains almost entirely passive against the growing threats, it does not appear that Olmert’s government has the will or ability to do anything about them, and its continued tenure appears to spell disaster.

If there is a chance—apart from a strike on Iran that would alter the region’s strategic balance—for Israel to avoid another two-front entanglement, it lies mainly in regaining its deterrence by making an effective move in Gaza. A hard-enough blow to Hamas and its friends there could make Hezbollah and Syria think twice about starting more trouble in the north. But there may be little time left, and such an outcome requires a functioning government in Jerusalem. It also calls for a Washington able to look past short-term diplomatic concerns and give Israel the backing it needs.

Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.

It's The Oil, Stupid

By Victor Davis HansonThe Washington Times April 16, 2007

It is usually silly to offer a single solution to complex problems. But it's hard not to when looking at the serial savagery in Iran and the Arab world.
Oil -- the huge profits it provides and the insidious influence it gives those selling it -- explains most of the world's worries over the Middle East.

No, that does not mean the United States is fighting in Iraq to get control of its petroleum. For all the charges of "No blood for oil," the American occupation has neither been able to reverse a decline in oil production in Iraq nor alleviate skyrocketing oil prices worldwide. And, recently, the first new contracts of the now-transparent Iraqi oil ministry went to non-American companies.

What it does mean, though, is that the vast, imported petroleum needs of the West, India and China, and the resulting huge profits that pour into oil-exporting states, have super-sized the Middle East's problems.

Much of the Islamic world is struggling to come to grips with modernity and globalization. While the West pays little attention to disenchanted Muslims in India, Indochina or Malaysia, we focus our attention on Iranian and Arab radicals. They alone, thanks to oil, have the cash to fund jihadists and hate-filled madrassas.

The Palestinian problem is illustrative. Since Israel's occupation of land taken after the 1967 war, much of the world has seen this issue as a threat to regional and global peace.

Such old territorial disputes are, of course, common -- and go relatively unnoticed -- throughout the world. Japan's Kurile Islands are still held by Russia. Tibet has been absorbed by China. Nuclear Pakistan and nuclear India fight over Kashmir. The list goes on.

Yet it's the anger over the tiny West Bank that in the past caused the Arab patrons of the Palestinians to embargo oil to the West and create long gas lines in Europe and America. As a result, a single suicide bomber from Jericho earns more press than anonymous thousands slaughtered in Darfur.

Today, terrorists operate from East Timor to Peru. But global anxiety has been continually focused on Middle Eastern terrorists, from the Palestinian assassins and hijackers of the 1970s to al Qaeda's suicide bombers. These killers alone have had the means to disrupt the Western way of life. Take away Hezbollah's Iranian petrodollars and it could never afford weapons and foot soldiers to slaughter Westerners in the Middle East and beyond.

An oil-rich Saddam Hussein was a threat only because he had purchased more military hardware than most European powers own -- and used it to attack oil-exporting neighbors in a bid to control more of the world's petroleum reserves.

In Iran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is confident that powerful nations abroad will overlook his thuggery in hopes of getting a chance to buy his country's oil -- or in worry that any tension would send world prices even higher. Mr. Ahmadinejad also knows -- and fears -- that without supporting terrorists or trying to acquire a nuclear bomb he would be just another tinhorn loudmouth like Cuba's Fidel Castro or Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe.

Yet vast oil profits do little to help -- and probably much to harm -- Middle Eastern countries. Unlike in places where economic achievement is the result of savvy business leaders, a hardworking labor force and a literate public, tribal hierarchies in the Middle East simply metamorphosed into billion-dollar nations by virtue of sitting atop crude oil.

One result is a big inferiority complex in the Middle East. There is always the fear the gas and oil reserves will dry up, leaving a Libya, Iran or Saudi Arabia with as much global attention as a Chad or Bulgaria.

Another result is unstable societies. When nations acquire collective wealth gradually through their own industry, a middle class can arise. But in the Middle East, a few tribal and religious sects with oil are fabulously wealthy; almost everyone else is abjectly poor. Illegitimate monarchies and jittery dictatorships -- always in fear of coups, terrorists and revolutions -- depend upon oil-needy foreigners, trading scarce oil and endless petrodollars for export goods and protection.

If the U.S. could curb its voracious foreign oil purchases by using conservation, additional petroleum production, nuclear power, alternate fuels, coal gasification and new technologies, the world price might return to below $40 a barrel.

That decline would dry up the oil profits of those in the Middle East who now so desperately use them to ensure that their own problems must also be the world's.
Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.

Iran’s Oil Mafia

By Hassan DaioleslamFrontPageMagazine.com April 16, 2007
Robert William (Bob) Ney is a current federal prisoner and a former Ohio Congressman from 1995 until November 3, 2006. On October 13, 2006 Ney pled guilty to charges of conspiracy and making false statements in relation to the Jack Abramoff lobbying and bribery scandal. Ney reportedly received bribes from Abramoff, other lobbyists, and two foreign businessmen - a felon and an arms dealer - in exchange for using his position to advance their interests.
Conspicuously missing from this dossier of disservice to the country was Ney’s assistance in the creation of a Washington-based lobbying enterprise for the Iranian theocratic regime, The National Iranian-American Council (NIAC). NIAC is part of an extensive US lobbying web that objectively furthers the interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran. This article will address the creation of NIAC, Tehran’s role, NIAC’s connection to Iran’s oil mafia, and NIAC attempts to penetrate US political system.

Creation of NIAC

The National Iranian-American Council (NIAC) was founded thanks to the efforts of four non Iranian-Americans: Roy Coffee, Dave DiStefano, Rep. Bob Ney, and Trita Parsi. Coffee and DiStefano, both Washington lobbyists, were investigated by the Justice Department for arranging a trip to London for Bob Ney, where he met a Syrian arms dealer and convicted felon involved in a conspiracy to circumvent sanctions to sell US-made aircraft parts to Tehran.
Roy Coffee sent a letter to the Dallas Morning News in February 2006 to justify his relationship with the two London-based felons. Part of the letter discussed the founding of NIAC:
“Back in the spring or summer of 2002, a good friend of mine from law school, Darius Baghai, had just returned from visiting relatives in Iran for the first time since his family left before the revolution. He spoke with me about how the economy of Iran was humming …….From this, I took Darius in to visit with Mr. Ney. What was to be a 15 minute meeting became a 1 1/2 hour meeting as they spoke passionately about their hopes for the Iranian people. They also spoke in Farsi a great deal - I'm sure talking smack about me. From that meeting, Darius, Dave and I began to work with Trita Parsi, another Iranian-American to try to form a political action committee of Iranian-Americans to pursue a strategy of normalization of relations between the two countries…. The 4 of us worked very hard for about 9 months to form this committee.”
At the time, Trita Parsi was a Swedish-Iranian graduate student in his early twenties, best known for ties to Iran’s ambassador in Sweden. A successful self-promoter, he soon attached himself as a part-time aide to Congressman Ney before he was appointed president of NIAC.
The New Lobby
NIAC’s predecessor, the American-Iranian Council (AIC), was established in the 1990s with backing from multinational oil companies. For many years, it spear-headed pro-Tehran lobbying effort in the US.
AIC president Houshang Amirahmadi had been an active pro-Tehran player since early 1980s. While residing in US, he was also a presidential candidate in Iran’s elections, and officially collaborated with different Iranian institutions and notably the foreign ministry. In 1999 and 2000 Trita Parsi was helping Amirahmadi to organize lobbying events in Washington.
In 2001, the pro-Iran lobby in the United States became intensely active to prevent the renewal of the Iran Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA), and to lift U.S. sanctions on Iran. Despite extraordinary pressure from the lobby, ILSA passed overwhelmingly.
Prior to his imprisonment in March 2007, Bob Ney led Congressional efforts to defeat ILSA and initiate Tehran-friendly policies in concert with AIC. Disappointed and angered by the ILSA vote, Ney began to plan for the next battle of the war.
“The ILSA vote doesn’t look very promising, but that doesn’t mean the struggle should stop on this entire issue. It is a matter of education and re-education and people getting together and forming a citizen’s lobby to make sure that members of Congress and their offices are educated on this issue,” Ney told AIC in a June 2001 speech.
While Ney was hard at work “forming a citizen’s lobby,” Trita Parsi claimed that the majority of lawmakers voted against their true wills. In a tone apologetic to Tehran, he expressed his hope that the Iranian regime understood that he and his colleagues had worked hard to prevent this result:
“Hopefully, Tehran will recognize that an honest attempt was made to defeat or at least weaken the sanctions. The call for a review and Speaker Hastert's pledge to insist on Congressional action based on the review must also be interpreted by Tehran as a step in the right direction” (Iran Analysis July 2001 Peyvand Iran News)
This failure to block the renewal of ILSA in 2001 marked the start of a new era for the pro-Iran lobby in the United States. The lobbyists recognized that they must broadly reach out to Iranian-Americans.NIAC was created to put those plans in motion.

Trita Parsi was the regime’s trusted man within the new network. Tehran’s faith in Parsi was so profound that in 2003 when Iran decided to send a highly secret proposal for negotiations to the White House, Parsi was called on to arrange the delivery of the message through Bob Ney to Karl Rove. Parsi, moreover, was among the few chosen men (along with Mahallati, Iran’s former ambassador to UN) to present the results of a shady Tehran-friendly poll of the Iranian population which indicated the popularity of Iran’s nuclear program.
Trita Parsi and the Regime’s Inner Circle
During the eight years of Rafsanjani’s presidency, which ended in 1997, the Iranian regime had attempted without success to attract the Iranian Diaspora to its cause. Khatami’s presidency recharged Tehran’s efforts. With the Supreme Leader’s direct involvement, the High Council for Iranian Compatriots Overseas was created in 2000. The President heads the Council, and the Foreign Minister serves as its deputy director. The Ministry of Intelligence and the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance collaborate to implement the decisions of the council.
The objective was to create a network of organizations to infiltrate and seemingly represent the Iranian community abroad, and promote policies favorable to the Iranian government. Tehran anticipated that this strategy would neutralize opposition activities abroad and legitimize the new lobby.
State-sanctioned Iranian newspapers started a campaign to promote Trita Parsi and NIAC. Pro-government publications outside Iran followed suit. The former head of the Iran interest in Washington, Ambassador Faramarze Fathnejad, was thrilled with the efforts of Trita Parsi and NIAC, and underlined “the importance of relation with Iranian organizations in the U.S. and specially pointed to NIAC and his young leader who is a consultant to CNN and has been very successful in his efforts.” The Iran Ambassador even claimed 20,000 strong membership for NIAC (while only 150 is claimed by NIAC itself)!
But token rhetorical support would not alone turn an inexperienced graduate student and a corrupt Washington politician into a lobbying enterprise. Entities with ample financial resources and direct access to Iran’s top leaders had to enter the scene. This is where Siamak Namazi, an important figures of this new lobbying enterprise and a prominent member of the Iranian oil Mafia, enters the scene.
Trita Parsi and Namazi worked closely on developing the details of a grand plan to create an Iranian-American “Citizen’s Lobby.” They traveled to Iran together They organized joint conferences and meetings. In 1999, they co-authored a seminal paper, that provided the roadmap for the organization that later became NIAC. 24
Namazi, along with his sister Pari and brother Babak, control the Atieh enterprise in Iran and its three sister companies Atieh Roshan, Atieh Bahar and Atieh Associates, as well as numerous other direct and indirect partnerships, including Azar Energy, Menas companies in England, Atieh Dadeh Pardaz, FTZ Corporate services and MES Middle East Strategies.. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that Baquer Namazi (their father) is the Chairman of Hamyaran, identified by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars as a “resource center” in Tehran for Iranian non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
Atieh claims to be a “fully private strategic consulting firm that assists companies better understand the Iranian market, develop business and stay ahead of [the] competition.” People familiar with the oil industry in Iran understand the coded language, After all, rulers in every country in the Middle East use outside consultants to negotiate the discrete terms of lucrative oil contracts.
Atieh’s customers include the foreign corporations who wish to do business in Iran. One Atieh Bahar customer, Norway’s Statoil, has been publicly identified as a participant in a scheme to bribe Iranian government officials by the US Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice. A number of high officials in the company were fired and the company had to pay tens of millions of dollars in penalties to the US and Norwegian governments for “payments to an Iranian official in 2002 and 2003 in order to induce him to use his influence to obtain the award to Statoil of a contract to develop phases 6, 7 and 8 of the Iranian South Pars gas field.”
The most recent debacle of Atieh enterprise was in March 2007 when the CEO of the French oil company Total SA was charged with having bribed senior Iranian officials to secure contracts. Total is a major customer of the Namazi’s Atieh enterprise.
Tehran’s trust in Namazi is further evidenced by the fact that his company provides the network and computer services for almost all Iranian banks, the Majles (parliament), and other important institutions. Namazi’s groups monitor nearly all Iranian economic or political activities and have access to the country’s most sensitive data. This is a clear indication of his prominent place inside the inner circle of power in Tehran.
While representing Tehran, Namazi, disguised as a scholar travels to the US to seemingly pursue academic activities . He succeeded so well that the Congressionally-funded National Endowment for Democracy awarded him a Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellowship in 2005.
This link between the Iranian oil Mafia and “scholarly” pursuits in the US is hardly isolated. Three former Iranian deputy foreign ministers currently live in Boston posing as “scholars”: Mohammad Mahallati who was also the Iranian ambassador to the UN in the late 1980s, Farhad Atai and, Abbas Maleki. In addition to his diplomatic past, Maleki has been one of the most important figures within the Iranian oil Mafia.
The Roadmap
In 1999, Parsi and Namazi presented a joint paper titled “Iranian-Americans: The bridge between two nations” at a conference organized by the Iranian government in Cypress. This report contains the manifesto and the roadmap for the new Iranian lobby in the US. The authors argue that “an Iranian-American lobby is needed in order to create a balance between the competing Middle Eastern lobbies. Without it, Iran-bashing may become popular in Congress again.”
The “competing lobby” was AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee). The pillars of the road map were:
· To have the appearance of a citizen’s lobby
· To mimic the Jewish lobby in the US
· To impede Iranian opposition activities
· To infiltrate the US political system
· To break the taboo of working with the Iran’s cleric rulers for the Iranian Diaspora
· To improve the image of the Iran’s government abroad24.
In their report, Namazi and Parsi acknowledged that problems of organizing a pro-regime lobby within the Iranian-American community:
“This group’s role has not been utilized any where close to its potential, however, for several reasons: A good portion of them were against the IRI [Islamic Republic of Iran], therefore would not do anything to help.”

“The point is, [Iranian Americans] were not about to form a lobby group that would benefit the establishment in Tehran, or benefit the Iranian-Americans themselves as a community, nor was it for the most part interested in forming a pressure group against the Islamic Republic.”
This was also underlined by Roy Coffee, one of the NIAC’s founders:
“We [NIAC’s founders] found that most Iranians do not want to get involved in politics because of their experiences in Iran during and after the revolution. They have come to this country to make a better life for themselves and their children and don't want to get involved.”
The lack of participation by the Iranian American community in this lobby has been overcome with a sophisticated machine of professional lobbyists and “friendly” circles who favor a rapprochement with the Iranian regime.
Tehran’s Advice: Mimic Jewish Lobby in Washington
One of the hallmarks of the new lobby was its desire to rival the “Israeli Lobby” in the United States. This aspiration led to the creation of the Iranian American Political Action Committee (IAPAC), loosely modeled after similar organizations created by AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee). Three of IAPAC’s board members came from the AIC’s leadership.
In their 1999 paper, Parsi and Namazi analyzed at length the techniques used by AIPAC, and suggested that the same approach should be taken to create an Iranian lobby in Washington:
“Creating similar types of seminars and intern opportunities to Iranian-American youth may not improve Iran-US relations in the short run, but it will help integrate the Iranian-American community into the political life of America. In the long run, a strong and active Iranian- American lobby, partly established through these seminars and by the participants of these programs, may serve to ensure that the US and Iran never find themselves in violent opposition to each other again.”
Trita Parsi has been reciting this comparison to the Israeli lobby since the late 1990’s, about the time that the High Council was formed in Tehran. At the beginning his tone was more contentious and resembled the mullah’s usual rhetoric, but more recently he has toned down his anti-Israeli remarks, at least in English.
The government-owned newspaper Aftab published an interview with Trita Parsi on December 28, 2006 that underscores Parsi’s efforts on behalf of the Iranian regime..
Translation: “The conflict between Iran and the West on Iran’s nuclear file has entered a critical state. The government must now utilize all the possible resources to defend the national interest. In this, we have not paid enough attention to the potentially significant influence of the Iranian American society in moderating the extremist policies of the White House. In comparison of this untouched potential to the influence of the Jewish lobby in directing the policies of Washington in supporting Israel, we see the difference between what is and what could be.”
Siamak Namazi began sounding similar themes.:
“I propose that we should start showing up to the leadership training seminars and other events organized by the American-Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC) for their youth. Not only will this create an opportunity to learn the fine skills of community organization and grassroots lobbying, but it also takes away from AIPAC's ability to spread misinformation about Iran through a deliberate campaign to further its own political agenda.”
Not Lobbyists?
As Ney’s criminal bribery and lobbying fiasco became more public, NIAC’s president Trita Parsi began to downplay NIAC’s lobbying activities. (NIAC is registered as a 501 c3, to which certain legal restrictions apply.) Furthermore, being lobbied by a former aid would have added to Ney’s already complicated situation. Asked in 2005 whether his group lobbied the US Congress, Trita Parsi told an interviewer:
“Our group does not do any lobbying at all. We do not contact the Congressmen to support or oppose a bill.”
Since its creation, however, NIAC has strived to penetrate the US political system in accordance with the roadmap Namazi and Parsi established in 1999. As the Washington Post reported on June 25, 2006:
“The NIAC helped persuade a dozen conservative House members to sign a letter to President Bush earlier this month calling for unconditional negotiations with Iran's regime.”
The external communications of Parsi and other NIAC leaders shed further light on NIAC’s lobbying activities.
“The NIAC members have educational and experimental knowledge on the lobbying process and politics in America.”
“.. we must establish connections on Capitol Hill to establish early-warning systems about proposed votes or bills that may oppose the best interests of Iranian-Americans.”
Bob Ney, Roy Coffee, and Dave DiStefano arranged numerous workshops, training classes, seminars and speeches in which they themselves and others with experience prepared members and affiliates of NIAC to lobby and influence Congress. Parsi, Namazi and Ney organized public gatherings and discrete and exclusive $1,000 per plate fundraiser events. They even developed a training manual for lobbyists, a copy of which was sent to this writer by a former NIAC member.
NIAC itself admits that “In 2002, Congressman Ney benefited from letters sent by Iranian-Americans through NIAC's Legislative Action Center in support of his resolution on US-Iran relations.”
Infiltrating Congress
Trita Parsi, Namazi and their backers fully intended to infiltrate the US Congress. One of the methods they boast of involves recruiting young Iranian Americans to serve as Congressional interns or pages by offering room, board and financial incentives. NIAC’s website brags of success stories in this venture.
NIAC claims to have drafted the young Iranian American Press Secretary for Rep. Marcy Kaptur to help in improving the lobbying skills of NIAC members and affiliates. Similarly, an Iranian American student in the University of Minnesota received a financial scholarship in his senior year and becomes an intern in Senator Norm Coleman’s (R-MN) Washington office. Another intern, a graduate of University of South Florida, was placed in Congressman Jim Davis’ (D-FL) Washington, D.C. office. Expanding the operation to penetrate the US political system, NIAC has now formally implemented a paid trainee program and is actively in search for unwary Iranian American youth.
Conclusion
Since the early 1990’s, Tehran has embarked on developing a sophisticated lobbying enterprise in the United States. Iran’s government has devoted significant manpower and financial resources to this cause. This lobbying enterprise consists of a complex, intermingled web of entities and organizations with significant overlap of leadership, and heavy involvement of the notoriously mafia-like inner circles of the Iranian regime. Disguised as scholars, many of the former Iranian government officials reside in the US and constitute an important piece of the lobby machine. NIAC and its major figures, such as Bob Ney and Trita Parsi are effective nodes of Tehran’s efforts to manipulate US policy toward self-serving ends.
Hassan Daioleslam is an independent researcher and writer who has worked closely with two experienced investigative reporters inside Iran to explore and expose Iran lobbying enterprise in the United States.

Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.

In Iran , Feeling the Heat

By Jim Hoagland
Sunday, April 15, 2007; Page B07

Dying from cancer a quarter-century ago, the deposed shah of Iran pressed on me a fundamental point about his nation that has become even more vivid over the past two weeks. What the shah said, and almost said, then sheds light on the confrontation occurring between Iran and the world's great powers. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi died weeks after our 1980 conversation in Cairo . It has taken the ayatollahs and other Islamic radicals who followed him to reveal how far backward, and forward, stretched the deeper meanings of the words he spoke, which had to be condensed into a conventional news story on that May day. Iran is after all a place where reality usually comes not in words but in meaningful details that underlie -- and often belie -- the words. Fooling foreigners and adversaries is an ancient Persian art form. Saying exactly what you mean is a crude and dangerous way to talk, or to negotiate. Such a telling detail lay beneath the shah's descriptions to me of how the British and American governments deliberately helped Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini bring down his regime in 1979. His bitter Anglophobia came to mind again the other day as I watched film of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad blustering his way through the histrionic release of 15 British military captives and then, in the days that followed, defying the world anew over Iran 's nuclear ambitions. The detail was that the shah blamed London much more than he blamed Washington for his fate. The Americans had been children playing at complicated games of power and espionage, while imperial Britain purposely mounted the plot to win favor with the ayatollahs. Or so the shah asserted. The 15 captives grabbed by Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Iraqi waters on March 23 simply may have been targets of opportunity. But I doubt it. They were almost certainly seized as bargaining chips. In any event, Ahmadinejad played up their nationality in ways that suggest the imprint of the colonial era has not faded much from the Iranian political subconscious since the days of the shah. It still pays to twist the British lion's tail, even in nations where imperial control was largely indirect and economic. Cultural history also plays an important role in the confrontation over Iran 's determination to control uranium enrichment on its own soil despite international fears that Iran 's secret goal is to develop nuclear weapons. Every discussion I have had with Iranian officials on the nuclear program has included a pointed reminder that it was the shah -- with American and French encouragement -- who started the nuclear energy program that Ahmadinejad and the ayatollahs are carrying forward. These officials leave hanging unspoken this political fact of Iranian life: Their giving up control of the enrichment of uranium would open them to charges of being less nationalistic than was the shah. The historical force of past intervention in Iran 's affairs is obviously no justification for kidnapping British sailors and marines, for pursuing nuclear weapons, or for supporting terrorism in Iraq , Israel and elsewhere. But it is important for Americans to recognize how deep is the imprint of the past and how demagogues exploit it when they are in trouble. It will take broad and sustained campaigns of political and economic pressures to force change in the behavior of any Iranian regime. Consider the bombast of Ahmadinejad and his aides in grabbing hostages again, in threatening to pull out of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and in saying they will cut off negotiations if the United Nations continues to condemn Iran 's nuclear program. The meaningful detail in Iranian threats not to talk to the West is that the Iranians are still talking to the West, however theatrically and unconvincingly. They stall, but they remain engaged, trying to fend off impending isolation. This demonstrates that the financial and diplomatic pressures orchestrated by the Treasury and State departments are taking their toll on Ahmadinejad's regime. They should be continued and intensified where possible. Among those voting against Tehran on the latest Security Council censure were South Africa, which often breaks with the West on political issues to bolster its nonaligned credentials, and Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation. Those votes were body blows to Tehran 's pretense that the nuclear dispute reflects a continuing victimization of Third World peoples and resources by the rapacious British and other Westerners. So is the visible irritation of Russia 's Vladimir Putin with Iran 's refusal to consider his offers to guarantee Iran access to peaceful nuclear energy. The diplomatic effort to assemble a united international front against Iran is paying off. One sign: President Bush displays no sense of urgency about having to decide on military action against Iran , recent visitors to the White House report. History, ancient and recent, shows that his best option is to continue on the high road of multilateral, peaceful pressures. jimhoagland@washpost.com

Be Aware of Islamic Republic of Iran Territorial Expansion.

On Wednesday April 11th, 2007 Canada.com reported that US Major-General William Caldwell made a public statement and accused the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a culprit for providing military training to Iraqi insurgents on Iran’s soil, and forming death squads with deadly mission. Once, these death squads are ready and acquired knowledge on how to murder US soldiers and/or innocent Iraqi civilians, the death squads are deployed and supplied to Iraq territory with deadly agendas, as well as, ammunitions to carry out their atrocities in Iraq[1].

On Thursday April 12th, 2007 Canada.com reported that in Iraq there was an explosion which occurred close by Iraqi parliament and claimed 8 civilian lives. This explosion made head line because this particular suicide bomber was able pass through on heavy US security force and walked in secure zone and the suicide bomber carried his deadly agenda. Consequently, the suicide bomber proved that no where was safe any more to anyone[2]. Most likely this type of act of undermining authority’s rule, it has psychological effect on authority itself because as the authority observers before their own eyes that their rulers are under mind by others and authority is in progress of losing battle ground to other party.

According to Iran’s history, there was a ruler in Iran with name of Hassan Sabbah, who had well train assassins with only one intention which was to eliminate Iran’s enemy, and the assailants would carry their deadly assaults on their targets and these targets were powerful entities in Iran, and once, the perpetrators eliminated their targets with their knives in close range, the perpetrators would try to flee the scene of crime. In case, the perpetrators failed to flee the scene of crime, the perpetrators would execute plan b that they already had one high concentrate of opium capsule in their mouths and would crack the opium capsule with their teeth, once the opium was release in their mouth, the perpetrators would eliminate themselves too. Thus, no one could apprehend the perpetrators. Learning from someone’s history is important because history illustrates that the clerics in Iran will do anything to oust the US force in Iraq as well as Canadian Arm Forces in Afghanistan.

On Thursday April 12th, 2007 CTV reported that Canadian Arm Forces have begun to face increase insurgent assaults from Taliban, and CTV stated that Taliban is trying to capture Kandahar, and Canadian Army Forces strategist are contemplating to launch preemptive military strike on Taliban headquarter which is located at Helman[3]. The good news for Taliban that now the Taliban knows that Canadian Arm Forces are coming to Helman and the Taliban is going to evict the Helman. The bad news, Canadian Arm Forces will face deadly assault and not knowing what is hitting the Canadian Arm Forces.

At last, it is crystal and clear that the IRI is supporting insurgents in Iraq and causing turmoil in Iraq. There is a question that who is supporting Taliban in Afghanistan? There is no doubt that the IRI is assisting the Taliban to combat Canadian Arm Forces because when Afghan people were at war with Russia, the IRI was assisting Afghan people to wage war against Russia, and now the IRI is providing means to Taliban to wage war against Canadian Arm Forces. Furthermore, the IRI is using this golden opportunity of causing war in Iraq and Afghanistan to keep US and Canada off their back on matter of nuclear issues, and occasionally the IRI is introducing idea of dialogue of civilization to the West and the IRI is on fishing expedition when it says dialogue of civilization which is paying off because people are caught on their hook like Nancy Polise who travel to terrorist states and rely messages on their own behalf to terrorist leaders and while everyone is occupied with the IRI deception the IRI is building their nuclear bombs.

Predicting near future, the IRI will raise flag of Islam in Iraq and Afghanistan and at this time Khameini is ready to pass away. Khameini won’t die because Michael Ledeen wants to.

President of US George W. BUSH and Right Honorable Prime Minister of Canada Stephen HARPER, please in future do not say that we did not know and made a mistake for making a backroom deal with the IRI and/or had to listen to Iranian dissident otherwise we would win the war on terror.

Thank you,

Kind regards

Signed


c.c. Crown Prince Reza PAHALVI Heir to Throne of Iran.
c.c. To other citizens.

End Note
[1] http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=cbb96fa7-4a3f-419c-9d2b-271202fa4d71&k=95744
[2] http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=2014b399-cd21-42cf-aba4-5b088a556226&k=58338
[3]http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070412/spring_offensive_070412/20070412/

What ordinary American like Mr. Caesar Warrington think about Shah of Iran.

As I said, I think the book is in dire need of editing. I also noticed that Mossadegh get's hardly any mention, that should never be when discussing the problems of modern-day Iran. However, the meat of the book is excellent, and the author's delivery and writing is strong with exposition and incite.

Americans are too ignorant of the origins and history of Iran. This author shows the reader that there was Iran/Persia way before there was a Muhammed, or even a Caesar. I admire this man and all Iranians who who will never surrender their heritage. Furthermore, very few books are out there which discuss the positive work that was being done by the Shah. And the Rafsanjani family investments in Canada should be big news. That Rafsanjani is one of the most corrupt and hypocritical mullahs in iran today. He and his son and daughter (this daughter who, by the way, gave an interview in a London apartment wearing stiletto-high heels and sheer stockings when innocent Iranian omen were being harassed and beaten by the morals police for their dress code...See what I mean by hypocrites?) have been taking money out of Iran for years. Yet the Western media loves posing Rafsanjani as a "moderate."

I'll be leaving a review for this book on Amazon.

Although the book is in dire need of an editor I am still enjoying and learning from it. The author writes with an urgent passion and a slick sense of humor. What he is saying are many of the things I noticed myself about what Iran used to be and what it has become; what the Shah wanted for his nation and the things he did and the exaggerations and lies that have been told about him since 1979. this man was no despot or evil tyrant. Rather if anything he considered hitting back too harshly. I remember hearing that Saddam offered to have Khomeini killed and the Shah refused it. Another example was when his generals wanted to step up the crack down on dissidents and other anti-government factions, again the Shah wouldn't allow any increased actions against these people. Mohammed Reza Shah has had quite an injustice done to him by the historians. It's a shame. One other thing I noticed is hardly any mention of Mossadegh (by the way thanks for the CIA/Iran Connection email) in this book.

as you say about God... i couldn't agree with you more! i always felt here we are all believing in the basics: In One All-Loving God (Be He called Yahweh, Jesus, Allah, Ahura Mazda/Ormazd) and pray and swear to fight the Evil one (Satan, Iblis, Angra Manyu/Ahriman) and what do we do? We instead insult, hurt and kill each other in the Name of God and foolishly do what the Evil one desires from us. Do you understand what I mean?

How Iranian responded to Honorable MacKay.

Person one:

Dear Mr. Mackay

Thank you very much for answering Mr. Peyman Dousti on behalf of The Office of the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister . As an Iranian I can assure you that this letter concerns me as well.
The fact that "Canada believes it is up to the Iranian people to choose for themselves" is duty of Canada not only to Canadian but also to people of the world.
And the fact that Canada believe in "The Government of Canada does not support a policy of regime change in Iran and, therefore, does not support any movement to overthrow the regime or to see parts of Iran secede" is respectable.
However please understand that between " regime change policy " which it is not your business and will of Iranian people which is again not your business, "including its nuclear program and human rights situation" and again not your business!!!, Zahra Kazemi, A Canadian citizen who was murdered in Iran , which it was not your business, I have to ask you questions.
Of course it is in your benefit and your business to allow Iranian Capitol to flourish in Canada. Such as Mr. Rafsanjanis money and capitol does not show herself only in the form of money. Example: Iranians who had to leave their country because their lives was in danger in IRAN but they turn out to be among the most successful immigrants in the world and history specially in North America.
They were Iranian capitol.
But again when it comes to Canadian benefit they should think of Canada first. here is my questions.
Do you realize that there are a lot of those fanatic Muslims and supporters of terrorists that are living in Canada? Do you think you can stand safe on side and watch? And you are imagining that Canadians are safe?
And
Do you really think that we, IRANIANS, are willing to forget which Governments had economic ties with Islamic regime of terrorists or set quiet and benefited while IRANIANS suffered inside of IRAN?
Government of Canada should know this: To day cause of IRANIANS are as same as the peaceful people of the world. You are either with us, IRANIANS or with Islamic regime of terrorists. There is no middle ground and no gray area.
Pbehmand.

Person two:

The Honorable Peter Mackay,
The Foreign Minister –
Ottawa- Canada


Your reply to Mr. Peyman Dousti, was carbon copied to me and a few other Iranians living around the world. Every word you said concerns every Iranian that has family members living (Suffering) in Iran .

If one thinks that absolute peace is possible on the planet earth it is a huge mistaken, each country, each individual, specie has its own agenda and goal therefore even a tree in your backyard is in war with you, “survival of the fittest”. Even the mildew in your bathroom is fighting against you, it is growing fungus because wants to live takes over your bathroom. If it is not fought the fungus will take over your house. Have you ever thought about it… its weapon is Winger spray after every shower, it makes Acidic environment so the mildew is not growing. That is life.

Every business, including nuclear, territorial integrity, sovereignty, building a road or buying a jet fighter or creating Canada Arm for peaceful or aggressive mean, as it is sole decision of Canadians it remains for the Iranian to choose themselves or change their government or topple the regime.

But, when it comes to the security of Canadian citizens, allowing immigrants bringing their home issues to the Canadian Home, growing their issues like of that Mildew /Fungus in the Canadian House suddenly becomes Canadian affair.

For last 28 years Canada and many other countries in order to benefit from the “brain drain” following “Mass Mess” created by the same international community (they have interfered in the internal affairs of Iran – all documented and proven) also allowed many thousands other immigrants from Palestine, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Africa, Lebanon etc.. Every new immigrant brought their own culture and “religion” willing to practice their culture in the Canadian sole dishonoring the Canadian law and values. That includes but not limited to the veil wearing, erecting nest of growing terrorism in the name of religion, asking for the “Sharia Law” overriding the Canadian Family Law. Unless Canada abandons its law of the land, such practice in the sovereign countries like of USA , Germany as well as Canada should not be permitted. If these people want to live under such law and regulation they should not have became immigrant in the first place.

Mr. Mackay, I live in Canada , I have written similar letters to my MP and told to the local councilors and other authorities, the sanctuary that good immigrants have chosen by living in this country has been invaded because Canadian Government is after New Immigrants/ Money closing eyes on their activities… Canada is growing its own mildew in the every Canadian Bathroom. (please contact my MP for the details I have suggested)

Truly the line between defeat and victory has been erased, and the western governments do not have any clue what “Extremist Islam” is going to do in their backyard.

Mr. Mackay, please not; Our children are playing in this backyard; its safety is a must.

HC.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=776145451814705142&q=islam+what+the+west+needs+to+know&hl=en

Person three:

Author of the blog Responses to Canada.

Remember when Nazis went before International Tribunal after World War Two. The Nazis claimed that they followed order from high ranking officers and could not disobey direct order from high ranking officers and were not aware of atrocity which was committed by the Nazis. Nobody bought their defense. The same story can be applied to Canadian Politicians. One day will come, and that day will be ours.

Canada's respond on matter of IRI

The Office of the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister, hasforwarded to me your email and attached articles concerning the Iraniangovernment. I regret the delay in replying to you.The Government of Canada does not support a policy of regime change inIran and, therefore, does not support any movement to overthrow theregime or to see parts of Iran secede. Canada believes it is up to theIranian people to choose for themselves, through democratic means, howthey wish to be governed. However, you may be assured that the Canadiangovernment will continue its diplomatic efforts until all concerns aboutIran, including its nuclear program and human rights situation, havebeen satisfactorily addressed.

Thank you for taking the time to write.

Sincerely,

Peter G. MacKayMinister of Foreign Affairs

Dr. Ramin JAHANBEGLOO

Honorable MP Peter Gordon MacKayMinister of Foreign AffairsHouse of CommonsOttawa, ON K1A 06A
Via: E-Mail: Mackay.P@parl.gc.ca

Dear Honorable MP MacKay:

Sometimes in late April 2006 news began to circulate, in this global village, that Dr. Ramin JAHANBEGLOO, who holds Iranian, as well as, Canadian citizenships that he was apprehended by secret police of the theology state in Iran. The theology state charged Dr. JAHANABEGLOO for espionage, and according to the clerics in Iran, Dr. JAHANBEGLOO confessed to his crimes {also 15 Britain sailors confessed to their crimes, and trespassing Persian Gulf boundary of water on Iranian territory}.

Certainly, there are individuals who are concern about well being of Dr. JAHANBEGLOO and would like to know what has happen to Dr. JAHANBEGLOO’s legal preceding? And what Canada has done so far for Dr. JAHANBEGLOO?

Kindly, in your convenient time to respond to above questions and I am looking forward to read your respond.


Thank you,

Kind regards

Crown Prince Reza PAHLAVI and CNN

BECK: Now for perspective of what`s going on inside the country of Iran, who`s pulling the strings, this is the former crown prince of Iran, Reza Pahlavi. Reza, this has got to be perceived as a victory for our enemies in the region, but the average person on the street of Iran, it`s my understanding, they like us. They hate their own government as much as we hate their government. Is this something today that if you were in your home in Iran thinking, oh, boy, this guy is even more powerful now? REZA PAHLAVI, FORMER CROWN PRINCE OF IRAN: Glenn, let`s first understand that when you have a regime that`s losing its legitimacy day by day even more, the only way it can compensate for that is to create a constant atmosphere of crisis, whether it is domestically or abroad. Also, let`s understand that, in order to keep the glue that gells their security apparatus together, it has to show its manhood somehow. This is a classic case of playing to that audience within the regime itself. But I don`t think it is fazing any of my compatriots on the streets, because for them it`s a matter of rejoining this world, having the better life, having the freedom to travel and the only obstacle between them and the free world is this regime. So... BECK: But this regime, you know better than I do, I don`t think that they really care about people at all. They use -- I mean, they`ll throw them into -- into the gear shaft to keep that thing moving at the drop of a hat. And you`ve got to believe, watching what`s happening in the Middle East with everybody going soft, Pelosi over in Syria, of all places, meeting with them. You`ve got to think that the dissidents are going, "Oh, come on, we thought we had a glimmer of hope here." Is nobody going to stand up to these guys? PAHLAVI: The point is absolutely correct and indeed. The question that has to be asked all along is for a regime that has had a track record of criminal behavior from day one, is any rewarding of that behavior in the interest of Iranians or, for that matter, the free world? How long are we going to go on about this game? Is it any time for the world to decide once and for all that the only solution that remains, because we don`t want to go the road of conflict and war and that kind of things. But instead, empowerment of the Iranian people who are the best ally of the free world ready to fight that fight, except for they feel abandoned, they feel ignored, and that perception certainly doesn`t help the people of Iran. It perhaps helps the regime, the regime that is creating all these problems in the first place. BECK: You have had to have spent time at night, because I know I have, and I`m not an Iranian, you must have spent time and thought what is it going to take for the mainstream media to start saying, "Wait a minute. These guys are torturing people. They`re slaughtering people. They`re stoning women." Have you come up with any kind of answer that makes any sense? PAHLAVI: Well, Glenn, some people like yourself who pick up the right arguments and understand, beyond whatever theatrics or facade that this regime is putting to the world, that the real people that are concerned here, the majority of my compatriots, are suffering under this system, and they can`t wait to come out. BECK: Yes.PAHLAVI: However, let me say what the good news is. I think, well beyond this little incidents here and there, I think overall the world has reacted in a better way than ever before. BECK: Yes. PAHLAVI: For instance, we have more and more targeted sanctions. BECK: Yes. PAHLAVI: We have a certain initiative taken, for instance, from the state of California. BECK: Right. PAHLAVI: And divestment of tension (ph) from businesses doing -- operating in Iran, namely something that ends up in the region. BECK: Reza, I`ve got to cut you off. But you`re exactly right. And we are going to cover some of the good news. There is good news, but a lot more needs to be done. Reza, thank you very much. PAHLAVI: Sure. Thank you.

Message from Crown Prince Reza PAHLAVI Heir to Throne of Iran

Hudson Institute Briefing SeriesIran, Regime Change or Behavior Change: A false choiceLadies and gentlemen, distinguished guests good afternoon. Allow me to express my gratitude for the invitation to be with you today. To many of you whom I know personally, I extend my admiration and respect for the great work you have done over the years. To those I meet for the first time, thank you for letting me have the privilege of getting to know you.The Hudson Institute’s proud tradition of service to world peace includes the great work of those, like Herman Kahn, who dared to “think the unthinkable.” You can imagine the depth of my sorrow that today, the “unthinkable” concerns my homeland.The latest Presidential National Security Directive names the Islamic Republic of Iran as the greatest threat to international peace, security and stability. That is principally because permitting the foremost state-sponsor of terrorism to acquire nuclear weapons is unthinkable. What has changed from Herman Kahn’s era is that mutual assured destruction (MAD) worked against a rival that defined its interests in this material world. Messrs. Khamenei, Ahmadinejad and many of their cohorts do not. How can assured destruction deter those who glorify self-destruction and call it martyrdom? Just as suicide bombing has changed domestic security policies, dealing with the nuclearization of this new kind of “other-worldly” state requires a different approach in international relations. Far from acting to avoid assured destruction, they invite it with tireless exaltation of martyrdom! Which brings us to the question, what could be done?The current debate on Iran seems to have reduced the question to a choice between regime change and behavior change. That is a false choice. It is also a formulation preferred by those who do not mind loading the dice in favor of longer life for Iran’s clerical regime. This is because short memories equate regime change with the use of force in Iraq. The unique mistakes in Iraq, however, should not sully regime change, which wasn’t such a bad phrase during the Cold War era, just two decades ago: President Reagan knew that he would not get behavior change from the Soviet regime unless he seemed serious about changing it. The actual change was a happy byproduct, which spelled the end of the Marxist mystique. East-European youth backpacked their way to the West to tell fellow students about the wide chasm between the deceptive promise of Marxism and its wretched reality. Long lines to take Marxist courses disappeared in Universities, from Buenos Aires to Paris. Similarly, I am convinced once the people bring down the clerical regime, with Iranian journalists, intellectuals and students free to travel, they will have the same shattering impact on the appeal of Islamist theocracy throughout the Moslem world.Ah, but Russia was more modern than the Middle East, riper for democracy – some say. They are perhaps unaware that Iran had a democratic “Constitutional Revolution,” fully 100 years ago, when Russia was still Czarist. They would be much surprised to learn that, in 1914, the Times of London wrote that British Parliamentarians would be well served to emulate democratic practices from their counterparts, in Iran’s Majles (parliament)! They know even less about the differences between Iran, which was never colonized, and Iraq, whose constituent parts were governed separately under Ottoman rule, which decapitated its independent political institutions and postponed our Iraqi brethren’s opportunity to develop a sense of nationhood.Still, it was easier to talk favorably about regime change in 2004 or 2005, when Iraqis were celebrating free elections and the Cedar Revolution was gaining steam in Lebanon. That is when Tehran’s theocrats and Syria’s Assad sensed the danger and set out to kill the hope for democracy in the region. They exploited religious and ethnic divisions to create a quagmire as a no-trespass sign to the rest of the world: Shelve any plans for democracy in the region, from the subcontinent to the Mediterranean, and from the Caspian to the Persian Gulf – read the sign. The Baker-Hamilton Report is a tacit acceptance of that no-trespass sign. Unfortunately, the report does not indicate how one can reach an agreement with the Islamic Republic, whose primary purpose is to humiliate the US in the theater of the Moslem world. There is method to their madness: The theocracy’s anachronistic life is mortgaged on proving to regional governments, and non-governmental forces, that those who oppose America will defeat those who cooperate with her.The State Department’s policy on Iran relies on diplomatic isolation and economic pressure. It is more hard-nosed than Baker-Hamilton, but it still suffers from the flaws of realpolitik when facing an irrational actor. Isolation? What isolation, demands President Ahmadinejad! The day he was squaring off against President Bush at the UN General Assembly, last fall, 118 out of the 192 nations present, more than 60%, were with him. He had just come from Cuba, where he had secured the support of the non-aligned movement. He had been received like a rock star by radical students in Indonesia, applauded by Castro in Cuba, and bear-hugged by Chavez in Venezuela. Those in Foggy Bottom who think they can make Ahmadinejad feel isolated simply cannot see the world through his eyes. Even if he felt isolated, it is doubtful he would change his behavior. Even the threat of force is not enough to sway someone whose deepest beliefs welcome Armageddon – to expedite the return of the twelfth Imam, his messiah!As for economic pressures, recent history should have convinced us that they are not enough to change the behavior of a regime that does not care about the welfare of its people. In more than two years of negotiations, Iran’s major European trade partners, Germany, France and Britain played with numerous combinations of economic threats and incentives, before they threw in the towel. The International Atomic Energy Agency reported Iran to the UN Security Council shortly thereafter. Backed by the Russians and the Chinese, last June the US joined the Europeans to offer a very generous incentive package, should the regime suspend enrichment of uranium. Two deadlines came and passed, with the Islamic Republic dancing around the proposal, but not addressing its substance. Just as Presidents Bush, Putin and Chirac, Prime Minister Blair, and Chancellor Merkel were about to discuss what to do, Hizbullah crossed the Israeli border and took two hostages. Thus, the war precipitated by the Islamic Republic’s client washed discussions of pressuring Iran off the agenda at the St. Petersburg G8 Summit, late July of last year.It should not come as a surprise any longer that, three more deadlines and three UN Security Council resolutions later, we are back at the same old dance; except it has become more deadly, considering the regime’s plan for three thousand centrifuges and new restrictions placed on international inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities; begging the question: To what level could unilateral US sanctions be expanded to, or what other UN sanctions could be acceptable to Russia and China? In short, US foreign policy and international pressure are reaching their limit, while the government whose head denies the Holocaust and wants an entire nation wiped off the map, is inching ever closer to the bomb!Having removed the Taliban and Saddam - two walls of Iran’s containment - having approached the limits of diplomatic and economic pressures, many discussions of US options now teeter between war and surrender. Surrender, by the way, has a fascinating new name: Engage and Deter! We engaged China to get out of Vietnam, why can’t we do the same with Iran to exit Iraq? That was the question put to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee by a Council of Foreign Relations fellow, who seemed to put some Senators in deep thought. We deterred the Soviet Union, why can’t we deter Iran, is more music to the ears of the Islamic Republic, playing in Washington these days. Perhaps, it is the current mood of desperation on Iraq, but few policymakers seem to peel these thin disguises of surrender and see through the false parallels and specious arguments:A cursory review of history will demonstrate that Henry Kissinger’s deal with China was possible because the latter saw the Soviets as the principal threat to her security. He knew how real that threat was when Leonid Brezhnev asked President Nixon to give him a free hand with China and stay out of a potential Sino-Soviet nuclear conflict. There is today, no such parallel with the Islamic Republic, which does not see a third party as the principal threat, let alone seeing the US as a possible savior!In this new disguise for surrender, mention of deterrence is even less valid, but requires more insight to expose. During the cold war, nuclear deterrence gave the West an advantage: the Warsaw Pact’s conventional forces were quantitatively superior and nuclear arms acted as an equalizer in the European theater. In the Persian Gulf today, it is the US that has overwhelming conventional superiority. Should the Islamic Republic get the bomb, it will equalize that superiority and deter a high-intensity conventional attack. The nuclear shield will, thus, open the hands of the Islamic Republic to expand low intensity violence -- a.k.a. terrorism -- in furtherance of its constitutional mission of exporting Islamic Revolution. Hamas, Hizbullah, the Mahdi Army, the Badr Brigade and the like will then look ten feet taller than their intimidated moderate rivals.As one witness after another comforts Congressional leaders that the Islamic Republic can be deterred, I do not hear the riposte that even their best scenario means unshackling terrorism, let alone their worst! Nor does the administration seem to be able to lead Congress away from such harmful and deceptive advice, because it is ill-equipped to deal with unconventional states. Washington’s foreign policy is shaped by the State Department that understands diplomacy and the Defense Department that understands war. Both institutions are legacies of the state-centric view of the world which was consistent with the reality of international politics right after World War II – but not today, not after the Cold War. The Departments of State and Defense were not structured to help “velvet” revolutions, which have been the most significant patterns of positive change in the world since the Cold War. The problem is that the US does not have a third foreign policy department; one that understands, and can deal, with the peoples of the transitional world, not just their failed states.Is it all lost then? Are we back to war or surrender? Far from it! We haven’t focused on the greatest ally of the Free World in the Moslem World: the people of Iran. Three Iranian social groups, the women, youth and ethnic groups, as well as four professional and working groups, educators, lawyers, journalists and industrial labor, have been at the forefront of protests against and defiance of the Islamic Republic. Two of the top three Iranian cities, Tabriz and Mashhad, as well as other major cities, such as Sanandaj, have been out of government control, for days at a time. The principal reason why the vast majority of Iranians who want to reclaim peace and prosperity have not succeeded against the Islamic Republic is because they are prevented from communicating – with each other, and with the free world.Inside Iran, the government controls mass media with an iron fist. Even “Bloggers” with a limited audience are arrested, let alone published journalists – and there are more of them in jail than anywhere in the world. A must have for Iran’s pro-democracy movement is media that can connect Iranian activists inside Iran with each other. As I have mentioned before, there are a thousand circles of protest in Iran, but no nationwide medium to connect them. Since the government will not tolerate such a medium inside Iran, it has to be done from outside.As some of you may know, there are a few under-funded amateur-video type satellite television stations, beaming into Iran from the West. But they cannot even afford decent old movies, let alone produce meaningful programming. Then there is the Voice of America Radio and Television, and a forthcoming TV channel by the BBC. Although much improved, their governmental mission statements and cautious bureaucracies have not, and are not likely to, make a serious impact in Iran.What is needed is engaging programming that builds audience share by truly reflecting the needs, grievances and resistance of Iranian women, youth, ethnic groups and the professional groups. Given needed resources, modern technology makes it quite possible to have two-way communication between the politically active audience inside Iran and a medium outside which can connect them to each other. That is what it takes to mobilize the Iranian people – without whom, we are back to war or surrender. I never miss a chance to reject military action against my homeland. I am against war. I hope you are too, and I can not believe that you would be for surrender. Thus, we are left with regime change vs. behavior change. And as indicated earlier, that is a false choice. So what is the right choice?Like most totalitarian leaders, Iran’s Supreme Islamist leader wakes up every morning wondering if the morale and ideological glue of his security forces will hold. To strengthen their spine, he feels he has to take tough, uncompromising stands against his ideological adversaries – liberal democracies in general, and the United States and Israel in particular.The reckless self-righteousness of his “other-worldly” ideology will continue this course, until a final collision. This behavior will not change unless he wakes up one morning with an even greater fear: seeing the Iranian people joining hands and rising up against his theocratic tyranny. Unlike forgetful analysts in the West, he knows the Iranian people have changed their regimes many times before, when they had far less reasons to do so. He watches carefully for the signs of history repeating itself. Once he sees those signs, and only then, will he change his behavior. That is why idealism and realism, behavior change and regime change do not require different policies but the same: empowering the Iranian people. This is my political mission in life. I ask for your support, and thank you sincerely for sharing some of your valuable time with me.

Iran's game, Canada's move

Ottawa, Canada, April 4, 2007 -- The Iranian hostage drama is a test that the West must not fail. Iran has two strategic reasons for this outrage. First, Iran is testing the West to see if it is capable of any meaningful response to a clear escalation. If Iran's rulers feel little or no pain as a consequence of this crime, increasingly dangerous escalations will follow. Iran has reliably followed this pattern since the West reacted with weakness and disunity to the seizure of American hostages in 1979.Second, Iran is ratcheting up tensions so that it can, at a time of its choosing, release the hostages. The West will then breath a sigh of relief and a feeling of 'Peace in our Time' will make the West less willing to confront the real crisis, which is a nuclear Iran threatening the annihilation of other nations and exporting terror around the world.For Canada, this international crime is of particular significance. Canadian sailors in the same region have been boarding merchant vessels since 1991. If there is a muted response to the abduction and abuse of the British sailors, then Canadians could easily be next.

Since 1979, provoke-and-escalate has been Iran's game. At little cost to itself, Iran has created the racist-supremacist Hezbollah, a proxy that has killed Americans, Europeans, Argentineans, Iranian exiles, Iraqis, Lebanese, Israelis and others, and has carried out targeting reconnaissance in Canada. Through Hezbollah, Iran is the enabler in Syria's destruction and occupation of Lebanon. If Iran is allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, the pattern of the past 28 years guarantees that the escalation will be unstoppable.The Stephen Harper government has adopted leadership positions before in foreign affairs, and it is in our interests to do so again. The weak response of Europe, even in the face of 15 Europeans being abducted, coerced and paraded before the media in contravention of the Geneva Convention, can be offset by a strong response from Canada, Great Britain, Australia and the United States. As a leader in dealing with the most significant threat to our future, Canada can undertake some practical steps:- End Canada's $300 million in imports from Iran; - Prohibit Canadian investment in Iran, especially in its oil and gas sector;- Ban Iranian banks and investors from Canada's financial markets; - Encourage Canadian investors and public sector fund managers to divest from companies doing business with Iran; - Freeze all Canadian assets of Iranian officials including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, former Iranian president Hashemi Rafsanjani, and their families;
- Impose a travel ban on all Iranian officials and their families;- Provide material and financial support for those seeking to free Iranian political prisoners by assisting in publicizing their names and the abuses of the regime; - Continue to provide sanctuary to those Iranians fleeing the regime's abuses.
- Identify and deport any remaining Iranian diplomats in Canada who spy on local Iranians in order to threaten their families in Iran, a charge frequently made by Iranian students and dissidents in Canada. Prime Minister Harper will be meeting on Monday April 9th at Vimy Ridge with world leaders, including Queen Elizabeth II, to commemorate the 90th anniversary of that battle. It is an opportunity for Canada to let the people of Britain know that we stand behind them in deed as well as word, as we would hope they would do for us if those sailors had been Canadian.Unless Iran is finally made to understand that it will pay a price for its crimes, the escalation will continue and we will have many more Vimy Ridges to commemorate.


For more information, please contact Naresh Raghubeer, Executive Director, CCD

How Dirty is The IRI?

The Honorable Fabian Núñez
Speaker
California State Assembly
Sacramento, CA
Dear Mr. Speaker,
As an Iranian, it was with pride and admiration that I witnessed the
courage my countrymen spontaneously demonstrated upon learning of the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 on America. On that day, thousands
of Iranians took to the streets of Tehran, marching and holding candle
light vigils through the night in sympathy and solidarity with the
American people. While many around the world also showed their support on
that terrible day, doing so in Iran was in direct defiance of the
clerical oppressors of the Iranian people who continue to deny freedom, human
rights and basic dignity in my homeland.
It is, of course, no secret that Iran’s clerical regime has long been
one of the major state sponsors of global terror. While its fanaticism
and support for global militancy makes this regime a threat to all, it
is my compatriots who are the first real victims of the regime’s
violence and terror as evident in the regime’s consistent top ranking
among the most flagrant violators of human rights.
Just a few weeks ago, the regime brutally crushed a peaceful
demonstration by striking teachers seeking back pay and better wages. Their thugs
used clubs to break up the protest and attack the demonstrators, most
of whom were women. Earlier this month, the regime violently dispersed
another peaceful demonstration in Tehran, slashing the bodies and
breaking the skulls of Iranian woman, young and old, who were simply marking
the international day for women’s rights. Sadly, such ruthless
brutality is not isolated in Iran today. Several months earlier, the world
watched in horror as the regime used an iron fist to bust, arrest,
torture and slash the tongue of union leaders as Tehran bus drivers went on
strike for better wages.
These cycles of bloody repression are all too common in Iran, and
indeed have been since the advent of the clerical regime in 1979. While the
United Nations is now ready to stand together against the regime’s
pursuit of nuclear weapons, I continue to call upon the good-hearted and
freedom loving people of the world to pay a higher measure of attention
to the viciousness of this regime against its own people. For if it
were not for domestic oppression, Iranians would rise up against this
theocracy and the world would no longer have to worry about terrorism or
weapons of mass destructions from Iran.
Mr. Speaker, I am writing you in support of the Iran divestment
legislation (AB 221) calling for the divesting of your state’s public
retirement funds from businesses benefiting the suppressive militant clerical
regime of Iran. This act will hearten Iranians by demonstrating
Californian’s solidarity with their plight and national struggle against
tyranny, injustice and suppression. Just as men and women of conscience
around the world employed similar tactics and stood arm-in-arm against
South Africa’s evil apartheid in the 1980s, I am asking the good people
of your great state to set a moral example and fuel the hopes of my
compatriots about the good that can come from such acts of conscience.
As an advocate of a campaign of non-violent defiance against the
clerical regime, I have repeatedly rejected the option of violence and war
against my homeland. Instead, I have called on the international
community to side with the Iranian people as they strive to bring about a
democratic alternative to the current autocracy ruling them. The Iran
Divestment Legislation will be a shining example and a great way to
demonstrate solidarity with 70 million Iranians seeking freedom, democracy and a
better life. Through the democratic institutions with which your great
state is blessed, please send a powerful message to my compatriots
about freedom and justice.
Respectfully,
Reza Pahlavi
--

Letter to Honorable Peter G. MacKay

Honorable MP Peter Gordon MacKay
Minister of Foreign Affairs
House of Commons
Ottawa, ON K1A 06A
Via: E-Mail: Mackay.P@parl.gc.ca

Dear Honorable Peter Gordon MacKay:

In 1993, the Liberal Party was dominate political party in Canada and was elected to office as a majority Government and was representing the Canadian Government. In 1998, the Federal Government gave permission to the Islamic Republic of Iran {IRI} to come to Canada and to make investment in Canada and knowingly that the IRI has been sponsoring terrorism on global scale and was violating Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Iran. The Canadian Government allowed Mullah Rafsanjani, who is a key player of Hezbollah Terrorist Entity to come to Canada, that he has several serious criminal convictions in Iran due to his terrorist activities in Iran, as well as, in other countries. As a result, Canada has made regrettable decision and disappointing decision for itself.

In 2006, the Progressive Party of Canada gained confidence of its citizens because the Liberal Party betrayed confidence of its citizens. The Progressive Party of Canada promised to be firm on crime, and to be accountable as well as responsible to Canadian and so far this minority Government has failed to fulfill its promise.

Canadian Law:
According to Criminal Code of Canada 83.02 Providing or collecting property for certain activities-Everyone who directly or indirectly, willfully and without lawful justification or excuse provides or collects property intending that it be used or knowing that it will be used in whole or in part in order to carry out an act or omission that constitutes an offence referred …of the definition of “terrorist activity”…”

Why has Canadian Government decided to violate above law and other conventions?
I would like to know ALL Rafsanjani’s property, his children as well as the IRI investments in Canada?
I would like to know is Rafsanjani a Canadian Citizen?
I would like to know is Rafsanjani residing in Canada?
I would like to know Rafsanjani and his family’s legal status in Canada?
I would like to know how many Revolutionary Guards and Besijis are in Canada and their legal status in Canada?
I would like to know why Hezbollah terrorists are allowed to come to Canada?

{I am asking above questions because I fear for my own safety and security. I want to live in Canada in peace of mind. I care about my future.}
Reminding Canada, regardless of political afflation for forming a government in Canada, for providing shelter for Rafsanjani, his children, Revolutionary Guard and Basijis itself is a criminal offence, and punishable by law. Indeed, in free future of Iran, Canada will be hold responsible, as well as, accountable for all its offences against Iranian people.

Last, Iranian-Canadian must not vote, must not making political campaign contribution to any political party, or assist any political party in Canada until the party to regain confidence of its citizens. Trust is not given, and it is earned.

Thank you,

Kind regards

Signed

c.c.Crown Prince Reza PAHLAVI Heir to Throne of Iran pressinquiries@rezapahlavi.org
c.c. http://iranzamin2529.blogspot.com/

Conspiracy Theory of 1953 Coup in Iran

There is a conspiracy theory that in 1953 the United State of America carried a military coup in Iran, and as a result, Iran’s Prime Minister His Excellency Dr. Mohammad MUSADDIQ was removed from his office. Interestingly, in 2003, one American author with name of Stephen KINZER published a book with title of “All The Shah’s Men: An American Coup And The Roots of Middle East Terror”. This book was going to explain how the US military coup which lead to removal of His Excellency Dr. Mohammad MUSADDIQ from his office which has lead to terror in the region. Also, Dr. Homa KATOUZIAN published a book with title “MUSSADIQ and the struggle for power in Iran”.

Author Setphen KINZER did not present any kind of legal evidence that how Americans orchestra the coup in Iran. For example, the author made claimed that one American gave $60,000.00 US to Iranian people in order to seize the streets in Tehron. The author did not present any kind of legal evidence that where and how this $60,000.00 US was distributed among Iranian people because at the end of the day he had to write done that where and how this $60, 000.00 US was distributed among Iranian people. The author simply published memoir books of some individuals without legal evidences. In reality, this type of statement has no credibility.

Author Stephen KINZER stated in his above book because His Excellency Dr. MUSSADIQ was removed from his office, the Middle East is in chaos. In fact, Mr. Stephen KINZER needs to back track the time, and write another book on Iran that how during World War Two Britain and Russia needed free oil from Iran and His Majesty, Just and Benevolent, King of Kings Reza PAHLAVI the Great was not caving in to the Britain and Russia’s demand for free oil. Britain and Russia ganged up against Iran and Iranian people and decided to fabricate false information against Iran and Iranian people and under pretext of Iran was assisting Nazi in Iran, Britain and Russia justified their military strike against Iran and Iranian people and murdering innocent Iranian people, and forcing Him to abdicate from His Throne.

There is a mind bugling question that why Stephen KINZER decided to write above book in 2003? Because timing of the book is very important here. This book never was published during democrat party was in the White House, after the Republican Party formed majority government in the US and wanted to alter the US’s policy in the Middle East and wanted to change the political dynamic in the Middle East. The Democrat Party was reluctant to approve change in the Middle East. However, the Republican Party proceeded with their agenda.

During early 2002 Iranian people came to conclusion that the US was serious to oust the theology state in Iran and there was sense of reconciliation among political factions, and they were thinking about Iran and Iranian people seriously. There was a good mood among Iranian people. However, the Democrat Party did not want the theology state in Iran to be oust because the Democrat Party brought Khomeini in power in Iran and today Hilary Clinton who is receiving political campaign contribution from the mouthpiece of the cleric in the US which is American-Iranian-Council. Also, Hilary Clinton is an immoral person because of her husband’s pervert behavior with Monica Lewinski and inserting a cigar scandal. Still, Ms. Clinton remained with her husband so one day she will become president of the US.

Reality check. The 1953 coup occurred because His Excellency Dr. Mohammad MUSSADIQ deiced to curtail His Majesty, Just and Benevolent, King of Kings Mohammad Reza PHALVI position in parliament. As a result, He organized a military coup, which failed. Then, Imperial Army finished the job with help of Iranian people. There are countless footages which illustrated that how Iranian people were seizing the street with help of Imperial Army to overthrowing MUSSADIQ from his office.

Now, the point is this that any Iranian person who thinks this book is non-fiction, it means that Iranian people are unpatriotic individuals, and someone must give Iranian people money to defend their country or take part against someone, this book is an insult to Iranian people. This book is illustrating Iranian people as an incompetent people who cannot decide for themselves and cannot be self-determine people and others are making decision for Iranian people.

Last, today Iranian people need to decide for their own future and need to support Crown Prince Reza Pahalvi’s cause in order to liberate Iran and Iranian people from yoke of Mullah.

Ahura Mazda is with you.

Friendship with Aunty Bear, or with Dr. Michael LEDEEN

There is a Parsi/Persian expression which says; “friendship with aunty bear”, which means aunty bear is unwise friend, and, at some point in close future, aunty bear is going to kill her good friends unintentionally, which is in this case with Dr. Michael LEDEEN.

Dr. Michael LEDEEN is working closely with Iranian dissident to oust the theology state in Iran. However, Dr. LEDEEN’s approach for ousting the theology state in Iran has been wrong because he is promoting disunity among Iranian people. As a matter of fact, he needs to allocate all resources on unifying Iranian people for one common cause which is to oust the theology state in Iran.

Dr. LEDEEN is assisting Iranian dissidents who had elusive dreams for centuries of tearing apart Iran into small pieces and handing over Iran to super powers as their colonies. Dr. LEDEEN is assisting the above Iranian dissident because he wants to illustrate the theology state in Iran as an illegitimate state in Iran which does not have consent of Iranian people to govern Iranian people. However, Dr. LEDEEN is now acting like an aunty bear that he is going to kill his friends. There are countless Iranian people who would not want to see a day that Iran is going to be cut into small pieces. Thus, this main stream will become silent and shut down their critical voice against the theology state. Consequently, the theology state remains in power for long period of time, and Dr. LEDEEN won’t be able to achieve his final goal which is toppling the theology state in Iran.

Last point, Iranian people need to be very cautious about Dr. LEDEEN, perhaps there is a possibility which is base on experience that Dr. LEDEEN is implanting next Khomeini or Saddam HUSSEIN in the Middle East.