Wednesday, February 11, 2009

celebration of 30 years of hate

In 1979, Khomeini masqueraded himself as a freedom fighter and he managed to deceive millions. But that miscreant character had nothing in him but hate, violence and revenge. After thirty years of Islamic rule when there is no blood to shed, the only thing the mullah have left is loathe. The Khomeini’s revenge started with “death to the Shah” and still to this date even in its celebration continues with “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.”

With all the hate and abominate that Joseph Stalin had for the Germans, In 1945 before the Soviet Red Army entered into Berlin, said “the innocents are the ones who are not born yet.” But Khomeini did not even have the decency of Stalin to limit his venomous revenge and hate to those who were living at the time, instead he and his cronies have been taking revenge and exposing their hate to the two generations that have been born after February of 1979 and to this date and continuing to uncertain future.

Therefore sham on those who are dancing on mullah’s celebration of hate and revenge.

Let’s remember from those brave souls who stood in front of the firing squad of Mullahs on February 15, 1979 to those poor women who were stoned to death and all those who only had a different way of thinking who were killed by that bloodsucker mullah.

Dedicate to the memory of all the falling Iranian brave soldiers specially the followings whom this country will not see the light of such patriots:

General MEHDI RAHIMI Military Governor of Tehran ﮋﻨﺮﺍﻞ ﻤھﺪﻯ ﺮﺤﯾﻤﻰ
General KHOSROWDAD Chief of Army Air Command ﮋﻨﺮﺍﻞ ﻤﻨﻮﭼﻬﺮ ﺨﺴﺮﻮﺪﺍﺪ
General REZA NAJEE Military Governor of Isfahan ﮋﻨﺮﺍﻞ ﺮﻀﺍ ﻨﺍﺠﻰ
General NASSIRI Former head of SAVAK ﮋﻨﺮﺍﻞ ﻨﺼﯾﺮﯼ
General AMINAFSHAR chief of Imperial guard ﮋﻨﺮﺍﻞ ﺍﻤﯾﻦﺍﻓﺸﺍﺮ
General MALEK, Military Governor of MASHAD ﮋﻨﺮﺍﻞ ﻤﻨﻮﭼﻬﺮ ﻤﻠﻚ
General MOATHAMEDI Military Governor of Qazvin ﮋﻨﺮﺍﻞ ﻤﻌﺘﻤﺪﻯ
General HAMEDANIAN head of SAVAK southern branch ﮋﻨﺮﺍﻞ ﮪﻤﺪﺍﻨﯾﺍﻥ

Saturday, January 12, 2008

RON PAUL: Who was the Shah of Iran?

Ron Paul mentioned that the Untied States should have stayed away from the event of Middle East and blamed all the terrorism and events of September 11, 2001 on presumption that in 1953 the United States by helping the Shah of Iran created the current problem of the Middle East.

Since American politicians all are suffering from a moral obloquy, they twist the facts in any which way they can to score points. But they do not understand that rhetoric of this nature will portray their sense of ignorance and at the end they will become the butt of international jokes.

The current events of Middle East did not start in 1953. In that year the Shah of Iran prevented the same Islamic radicalism or a communist take over that it surfaced its ugly head later in 1979, by the wrong policies of Jimmy Carter.

Rather than adhering to polices of previous U.S administration, Jimmy Carter and his cronies committed a depravity that the today’s world is still suffering. A mini Mussolini masqueraded himself as democratic freedom lover and Carter created a saint from the very obscure raggedy Mullah named Khomeini.

Khomeini started a very violent Islamic radicalism that gave inspiration to sub-humans like Ben laden. It is a direct quote from Ben laden himself that he said what Khomeini did was the impossible (referring to the take over of Iranian Empire). Ironically this is what Jimmy Carter said in1978 “the Shah of Iran is committed to democracy in Iran and the Iranian people will enjoy the reformation of democracy in Iran.” Since that date, more than a million Iranians have been killed or died in the war, execution in the hand of Islamic republic, tortures, assassinations, supposedly natural death in the prisons, and barbaric acts like stoning to death, cutting limbs and etc.

Reagan Administration did not do any better, they either appeased the Islamic Republic or created Jihadists like Ben Laden to fight the Soviet Union, and the end first Bush administration left the rats rot in their hole.

Every loss of life is tragic either American or non-American, but in occasions unless it does not happen so close, no one can feel the effect of the pain. Since 9/11 more than ten thousand American have been killed, now it is time to feel the effect of death that Iranians felt for the past 28 years.
United States has never honored friendship, every thing is an interest. This is something that at least you might try to change, because loyalty creates more interest, interest will not create any loyalty.

It is not known if you are familiar with the policies of regimes like Islamic Republic in Iran, but for your knowledge their entire foreign policy is set out as crisis with the United States. That is why Moslem radicals enjoy exposing the United States to great odium. It is a policy to humiliate the United States. That is how they score against the mass of people in that region. It is sometimes ridiculous that politicians try for the hearts and minds of the people with bunch of candies or soccer balls.
This country needs more friends and allay like the Shah of Iran, and if there is any form of democracy possible in that region of the world, it can not be resurrected in the heart of the Islam. It must come on basis of nationalism.

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Netanyahu beating the drum of war again

I am an Iranian Jewish living in the United States and I frequently travel to Iran. One striking point is the vast improvement of religious tolerance in Iran. There are Jews, Christians, Moslems, Zoroastrians living in that country and with the exception of few, everyone dreams to get ride of the Islamic regime and be free of any kind of religious apartheid. This Islamic theology has done its best to create enemies either domestically or internationally. The difference is the domestic enemies of the Islamic regime are genuine and the international ones illusory.

Recently, Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu (the leader of Likud Party and former prime minister of Israel) is drumming the beat of war against this regime. It was amazing to hear his analyses about this Islamic Republic regime in a CNN program (Glen Beck), that Mr. Netanyahu compared the Islamic Republic in Iran to Nazi Germany of 1930’s. IN 1930’s Germany, Hitler’s resolve was, to concur the world with his military might, his propaganda was not phony, and he enjoyed from great sense of nationalism from German people, but the Islamic regime in Iran has no support whatsoever from the Iranian people. The atrocities and savagery that this regime has shown toward the Iranian people (ironically most of them Moslems) has eradicated any support from all the classes of the society in Iran. Its entire support has been limited to bunch of raggedy Arabs in south Lebanon and backward regimes like Syria and Cuba. Every show that it put out on international and national news media is staged. Its support has eroded to a point that, it has resorted to hire Arab and Afghan mercenaries to replace its own forces. All the effort of this regime is to create international crisis to confront the people of Iran.
Mr. Netanyahu also calls the theocracy regime in Iran a religious messianic cult of Mehdi seeking to destroy America and Israel. He forgot that the same Israeli government continuously helped the same despotic regime through out the Iran-Iraq war by selling weapons and negotiation of American hostage crisis in 1979-1981 (details are indicated in a book by Ari Ben-Menashe titled “Blood Money”. And the European Union has continuously prevented the demise of this regime and more importantly this fundamentalist ideology throughout its 28-year history.

Although it is true that the mullahs and ayatollahs and their cronies like Ahmadi-Nejad are continuously preaching anti American and Israeli propaganda, but the true nature of this regime is survival. This regime needs Israel and the United States to be its Wag the Dog enemies to eternity. This is the only way of survival and diversion of attention from its economical and social problem inside Iran. This deception has been known to Iranians since the early 1980’s by seizure of U.S. embassy in Iran, holding American Hostages in Iran for more than a year, and the continuation of the senseless and devastating war for eight years.

The deterrent factor is an effective confrontation against this form of fundamentalism as Mr. Netanyahu opposes. Among more than 10,000 suicide bombings that have taken place since September 11, 2001, how many Ayatollahs, mullahs, or cult leaders like Ahmadi-Nejad have participated in any suicide mission? Or among all those suicide bombings in Israel alone, how many of the bombings were done by people like khaled mashael, Yasser Arafat, shiek Yassin, Nassrolah or many more vile and scum like those people? The answer is none. If you are sick of this ideology, what you will have to do, is to cut off its economic aids, and be sincere when the treat of force is used. A simple threat has worked perfectly well against this regime. In two occasions in 1980’s President Ronald Regan kept warning the Islamic regime against the mining of Persian Gulf repeatedly but to no avail. Finally after sinking the ship which it was being used to lay mines and capturing its crew, they ended this practice.

Mr. Netanyahu is trying to distinguish between the so-called peaceful Islam and radical militant Islam. There is no distinction between those two. People in the Islamic countries are unfortunately have succumbed to this religion due to a force of nature known as birth and their fertile imaginations have been set by a violent and zealous ideology. Until a proper education or sense of nationalism prevails, they will all be the same suicide bombers that are landed in Israel, Iraq, and any other place that these cult leaders direct them to.

All the rulers of these monocratic and tyrannical regimes and insane ideology are interested in surviving to spread their venomous idea to other societies (as it can be seen in Europe) and to leech resources of every decent society (both mind and wealth). Their motto of martyrdom is not for themselves; it is for those poor souls that they have become devoid of understanding either by brain washing or heavy medication to conduct their murderous acts. Thus, it is strange that The United States and Britain have been contemplating Islam as a democracy for the entire region and they have loved this type of so-called Islamic democracy!(theology) so much that they have recently installed one in Afghanistan, and are establishing another one in Iraq. George Bush brings the ABULAZIZ HAKIM, a murderous mullah to the white house and poses with him in front of cameras, and even there is the talk of replacing the current prime mister of Iraq with him (the same thing happened in Iran in 1979, when at the beginning of the revolution, one like prime Minster MALIKI-a semi mullah with a tie and a suit and half-shaved beard- came to power and later he was replaced by a mullah).

The demise of Saddam Hussein happened after launching a few missiles toward Israel. Mr. Netanyahu lobbied so hard until finally U.S got involved with a war that has killed so many people that the death toll will surpass the genocide of holocaust in the next few years. And now he has been beating the same drum of war against Iran only to get the Iranian people killed, for to tame this hated Islamic theology. Why does he not lobby to stop those European vultures to stop their economical and military aids to the mullahs, so the Iranian people can once and for all to get themselves and the world ride of such a cancer?
In the case of Iran the solution is not an aerial bombardment or a land invasion. The Iranian society has advanced to a point that one spark, will engulf the entire fundamental Islam to the brink of extinction. It is not known if the west is ready to loose its Ace in that region of the world yet.

It has been a known fact in any modern society that religion is always at odds with democracy. In a democracy there is tolerance of different ideology and thinking, but no religion can tolerate different thinking. This is true especially about Islam. It is the only religion which has the punishment of death for anybody either its own faithful or a non-believer to reject its fundamentalism. Yet The United States and Britain have made a religious division in Iraq since the 2003 invasion and continuously referred to the social structure of Iraq as SUNNI, SHIIA, and Kurds and it then has produced more terrorists and suicide bombers. They have never tried to promote democracy based on the nationalism. It is like to divide the American society as Catholics, Protestants, and Jews to try promote democracy based upon the religious ideology.

any form of invasion of Iran will set back the demise of this regime for decades, because it is what the Islamic Republic is wishing the ALLAH brings about on IRAN.

By: Dr. D. Kohan

Wednesday, December 13, 2006

Why I am ashamed to be Iranian

One of the distinguishing factors among any nation is the national identity. But historically we Iranians have forgotten what our national identity is and frequently during the modern time, we have confused it with the religious identity (religion does not have any identity, it is adopted only by the Islamic terrorists of the 20th century). This has been deliberate; it is all because of devious imposters named “Mullahs and Ayatollahs”. This discussion is not religious and it is out of context to discuss the effect of religion, but the problem lies with the core and mindset of Iranian people. By the passage of almost thirty years, Iranians have not been able to distinguish what their national identity is. After so many atrocities done by this theological regime in Iran, most of the Iranians are still silent as to choose their national identity or their religion. In no country in the world, the identity of a nation has been set on the religion that the people of that country are worshiping, even Israel which its foundation is based on the religion; they still keep a national identity as Israelis.
I always thought at least the new generation is more prune to discover its roots and progress toward a national identity, but to my surprise, one caller from Iran to the Voice of America still defended the so-called religious sanctities rather than the national sanctities.
To understand the depth of our problem, we need to contemplate at the history of other nations. One nation who is vastly important in the modern times is Japan. In 1930’s and 40’s, prime minister Tojo took Japan into a world war. He committed atrocities beyond imagination. The acts of his defiant, caused two nuclear bombs to be exploded over the country, to the tune of more than 200,000 killed and millions of deformed generations sixty years after the war. But when after the war, he and eight other of his collaborators were executed, a Buddhist priest managed to steal and preserve their ashes and some of their hair. At present, there is a shrine made in Japan whose people are still making their respect to it. But in Iran, when Reza Shah Pahlavi the Great ended the British rule in Iran, and dragged the nation from 19th century to the 20th, people were dancing with joy, when British and Russian forces attacked Iran and exiled him. Subsequently, his mausoleum in 1979 turned into a public bathroom in disgrace. On the other hand, they set up and worship a mausoleum for someone like Khomeni who expressed no feelings to return home after 15 years of so-called exile (if he ever considered Iran as a home).

In Burma, there are Karen rebels who have been fighting the military rule of Burma for the past twelve years, and even in Afghanistan there was Ahmad Shah Massoud who single handedly with some ragtag army and old weaponry fought Taliban for four years to bitter end, but after close to thirty years, among Iranian patriots yet to find one to even try to organize one effective force against mullahs.
Still in Burma, when the lady Aung San Suu Kyi is awarded the Nobel Prize, she goes back to Burma and use it effectively to combat her country dictatorship, but in Iran when Shirin Ebadi wins the Nobel Prize, she does not know which mullah’s ass to kiss first.

In Tibet there is Dalai Lama, who goes around the world to speak of the misery of Tibet people under the Chinese rule, but Empress Farah Pahlavi quiet for close 30 years finally decides to go around the world trying to promote her literary detritus book, which has neither any historical value nor any educational value. In spite of the fact that there are more than 100 documents and films sent to her to show what the Iranian women are suffering under the mullah’s regime. Reza Pahlavi her son is not faring any better, instead of using the international media after the September 11, 2001 to show the misery of the people under the theological regime, he has been hiding right in the middle of Virginia surrounded by the U.S. government security. To his own delight, once in a while sends a written sympathy with the Iranian people. He can not even explain what it means and what he is trying to do at the end (end never justifies the means for him).

While UMAL_QULSUM the famous Egyptian singer, took the tour of her concerts around the Arab world to raise money for the Egyptian Army, GOOGOOSH our own beloved! singer first she becomes embedded with Mullah, then she dose not know where and with whom to hold a concert to stuff her own pocket with more money, and to show her so-called patriotism, she decides to sell some flags in her concerts too (what a patriot!). Or MOEIN who sells himself to anyone as longs as the occasion is not political and the sponsors are not opponents of the mullahs.

There were number of European athletes that they were refusing to go to Argentina or Chile in 1970’s, because of the crimes committed against humanity by Pinochet and Galtiery, but we have Khadem brothers (they were in the national wrestling team) that they wrestled each other to see which one to kiss the ayatollah Khamenii’s ass first. Or Ali Dahei who is in fact in bed with the daughter one of the regimes official, who becomes the symbol of theology of the regime in Europe.

In 2003, after the invasion of the Iraq by U.S forces, a new design for the flag of Iraq sparked a riot. In 1980, the national symbol of Iran (Lion and the Sun) was eliminated from the flag, and in Arabic, it was written on the flag in red and green portion of it “the God is great” and in the middle of it a symbol very close to the word Allah (of course, I do not know what and whom the mullah were afraid of, because the Iranian people did not care. They came up with a shape similar to the word of “Allah ﷲ ﺇ ” in Arabic, but they really wanted to write the complete Arabic word of “ALLAH”. This is the reason that for a while some people thought they were using the Indian sicks symbol). To this date, no one single Iranian has even protested this change and in the history of no nation has ever happened that a country without being occupied by a foreign power that it has changed its national symbol and symbolizes its flag with foreign words (Taliban were exception in Afghanistan, they could not be compared to the light of any human being). Yet, the strongest man in the world (our own REZAZADEH, the famous weight lifter) wears this shameful symbol on his chest with pride.

Another national disgrace is the picture of a poor woman being prepared for stoning to death. Most of these women can be spared with money, but the Iranian people instead of getting together to raise money to save them, they come to the place of stoning to throw their own stone on the head of the poor creature. This is a national disgrace. We have to be ashamed of ourselves as a nation.

At the end the exiled Iranians or so called opposition turns two controversial figures Richard Perle (who is known as prince of darkness) and Michael Ledeen into heroes, and suddenly treats them as they have become altruistic figures. They invite them to their so-called think tanks and award them with gifts. They do not realize that the same Michael Ledeen and Richard Perle were the president Regan’s advisor in the 1980’s. While the Iran-Iraq war was prolonged, the Iranians were called barbarians, the Iranian Airliner was shot down by U.S. Navy, they helped Saddam Hussein when he used chemical weapons against Iranians and Kurds (there is joke said by Ted Copple “we knew Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons, because we had the receipt for them), and the secret agreements with mullahs were made to sell them more weapons so to divert the money to fund Nicaraguan guerillas (Nice heroes guys!). The only ones were missing that would have completed our heroes gatherings were Jimmy Carter, and Zbigniew Brzezinski.

We do not realize that figures like “Cyrus the Great”, “Ferdossi”, and “Reza Shah the Great” are rare in our history. They come about once every 1250 years. If we had the audacity to cherish these figures, at least we could have been like our neighbor to the west Turkey, which has created its national identity by one figure alone “Kamal Pasha Attaturk”. This is the reason they have an identity and we do not. There is not only a joy but also a big shame to be Iranian.

By: Dr. Allen Aria

Tuesday, December 5, 2006

economy of nuclear power generation in Iran

Nuclear power generation has been an attractive energy source since 1950s. The economic feasibility of this sort of energy took a turn for worse in the mid 1970s. In order to answer the economic feasibility of nuclear power generation on 21st century especially for a country with the economic situation of Iran, we need to compare the cost and the feasibility of such a project, with the ones already built and operated in the United States today. Because the United States has built the most efficient and safest plant in the world, and the length of experience with such technology is the oldest. There are several facts to be considered that for one the last nuclear power plant was built in the United Stated in 1973(onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)" class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">Rancho Seiko, near Sacramento, California), and the same reactor was decommissioned in 1988. Since then, no nuclear power plant has ever been built or purposed for construction. On the contrary, close to ten power nuclear plants have been shut down and are in the process of decommissioning (the most recent, Zion Nuclear Power plant in Illinois).

A nuclear power plant in design and running is much different and more complex than a fossil or gas power plant. With Nuclear power plants, the cost of electricity is largely determined by capital costs (specifically, the interest charged on the money used to build the plant) and not by the fuel cost. Although this is the biggest advantage of nuclear power plant over other plants, but negligence in the operation of nuclear power plant is catastrophic to people and environment. For this reason, great care and design must be used to operate and maintain nuclear power plants. This in turn calls for placement of more economical restraint on the cost of building a nuclear power plant. Another significant drawback with nuclear power plant is the amount of radioactive waste generated by the plant, which need to be deposited and maintained for generations to come.

Although the exact details of Iran’s new power plant has not been made public, but one assumes that they are in the path of building a light water reactor fueled with natural uranium. Typical nuclear power plant with the index of US economy is at about 1 to 2 billion dollars. Therefore, the cost figure of Iran’s nuclear power plant estimated at 1.5 billion dollars is a figure that could be trusted to complete the reactor and fuel it to put into operations. Every nuclear power plant is divided into systems. A typical light water reactor is consists of almost two hundred systems, which seventy five percent (75%) of the systems are practically are safety systems. This is significant, since we are dealing with prevention of all kinds of accidents from core meltdown to the release of radioactive materials and gas into local water systems and food chains. Therefore, as a rule of thumb it is estimated that the cost of operation to be about 1% of its capital cost per year, which in most conservative estimate, it should cover the cost of routine maintenance, replacement parts, frequent testing of safety systems, payroll, and expert analysis to operate the reactor.

As for the fuel, the total, world-wide requirements for uranium over the years depend on the growth of installed nuclear capacity and on the mix of reactor types and fuel cycles that is adopted with the passage of time. It is impossible; of course; to predict accurately future nuclear electric capacity because so many uncertain factors enter into decision to construct new nuclear power plants (the growth in world population, the state of world economics, the climate of international politics – wars and other political confrontations- the availability of competing energy resources, and so on). Therefore, prediction of installed nuclear capacity made today can appear ludicrous only a few years later. In late 1970’s, several studies of uranium supply and demand have been carried out, specially in connection with the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation exercise. One conclusion was that new resources of production would be needed before the end of century, perhaps as early as the 1990s to keep fueling the current nuclear power plants. Since precise prognostication of nuclear capacity can not be made, it has become a common practice to give projection in terms of high and low capacity projections. Therefore, the future capacity by no means guaranteed, whether sufficient uranium will be available to fuel the expanding world nuclear capacity is an issue of continuing controversy among experts.
Most of the uranium used in nuclear power plants today and up to the year 2025 will undoubtedly come from deposits that are now or could be exploited at a forward cost (forward cost is a specialized term used to describe the economic availability of uranium resources. It includes the estimated costs of developing, building, and operating uranium mines and mills at the sits of established uranium resources. It does not include the cost of exploration, the cost of money (interest charged), marketing costs, profits, and so forth, which contributes to the price of uranium. As a rule of thumb, the actual market price of uranium is twice its forward cost). The forward cost, in 1978 U.S dollars is about one hundred and thirty (130) dollars per kilogram of uranium. In twenty five years span (from 1978-2003) average salaries and prices has increased by 350 percent. Therefore, the forward cost in 2003, is roughly four hundred (450) dollars in 2003. In a light water thermal reactor, the consumption rate of uranium is about 1.23 grams per day per one megawatt of power. Therefore, in order to generate twelve hundred (1200) megawatt of power per day, one and half (1.5) kilograms of uranium per day will be needed.

Radioactive waste disposal is another challenging cost and problem facing nuclear power plants operations. Radioactive waste is classified into four categories. Two major categories are 1) High level waste consists of spent fuel, and 2) Transuranic waste generated by fuel reprocessing, and manufacturing of nuclear weapons. The vast majority of fission products are short lived, but among them there are three isotopes of Strontium (90), Yttrium(90), and Cesium(137), have half-lives of about thirty years. But the problem lies with transuranic waste, although not as much radioactive, but the half-life of its Plutonium (239) is about twenty four thousand (24000) years. In spent fuel of a light water reactor, the transuranic waste radioactivity will exceed the high level waste after approximately seven hundred (700) years. Most of high level waste is stored in liquid form in large tanks. Then the waste (the spent fuel assemblies) is placed in proper containers and buried in some pre-determined geological facilities permanently. This is the case if the fuel is not reprocessed. Reprocessing is a procedure that reduces the volume of the waste, and it will become more manageable, but at greater cost. In terms of the cost, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company which owns number of nuclear power plant had horizontal storage modules designed along with on-site facilities to store their nuclear waste. In 1989, the design and construction of casks estimated at twenty four (24) million dollars, the cost of storage at sixty two (62) million dollars, and the cost of operating and maintenance of the storage at 2.5 million dollars per year. This is not included the cost of reprocessing.

The life expectancy of a nuclear power plant is estimated to be 30-40 years (This is the period that nuclear regulatory Commission issues operating license for nuclear power plants before they go to major overhaul). In average, every nuclear power plant is in operation only 274 days out of 365 days per year ( the plant is inoperable 18 days per year for refueling, 45 days per year for repair to nuclear portion of the plant, and 18 days per year for repair to non-nuclear portion of the plant). As the case with the Iran’s nuclear power plant which is operating at 1200 Megawatt electric per year, it will produce a total of 10-13 million Megawatt during its life span. The total fuel usage for the plant is approximately 12330-16440 kilograms of uranium, the cost of the plant is fixed at 1.5 billion dollars, the cost of operation and maintenance is at best estimate 600 million dollars, the cost of waste treatment is approximately 100 million dollars. Therefore, the cost of generation of electricity per one Megawatt is roughly about 190.16 dollars, which per kilowatt is $ 0.19016.

This cost is a generation cost to utility industry. The generation of electricity in the United States and the world is in the average range of 0.014 dollars per kilowatt (1.4 pennies), which is sold to customers at average price of 0.084 dollars per kilowatt (8.4 pennies). This is in turn, when the cost of electricity in Iran is presently comparable to the world.

With the help of nuclear power, the average price of electrical generation conservatively will be almost fourteen times (14) more than what is normally costing at present time. With the progressive inflation rate in Iran, in five years, this rate will be over twenty five (25) times of the present cost to the average consumer in Iran.

Prepared by: Mehrdad Moin
Education: MS in Nuclear Engineering,

Monday, December 4, 2006

Andy Rooney of 60-minutes please read this

Dear Mr. Rooney;
I wanted to express my opinion regarding your comments of 10/22/06.
The entire classic case of Iraq if it can be put in legal term, it would be “post hoc ergo propter hoc”.
It was shallow to just criticize George W. Busch. The reason is that you are a student of history as I am. You have witnessed a historic event of German surrender. You do not need to go back more that 60 years to remember the events, but the event that I am referring happened in 1978-1979.
This is the era that Carter Administration, helped the demise of a close friend and created an enemy that which has become epidemic in the simplest term. This is Islamic fundamentalism (as President Bush put it Islamic-fascism). It is not only spilling over the entire Middle East but also spreading like a plague across the Europe and America. No U.S policy maker through five administrations has either recognized the deviousness of this ideology, or ever understood how to deal with it. It was created to destroy one enemy, but it turned into a bigger enemy. You need to ask, the president Carter, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, and all others who have appeased and meddled with this Frankenstein monster, to stand up and admit their mistake. To this date Dr. Brzezinski is still promoting this doctrine.
I remember when in the fall of 1978, every night Walter Cronkite jokingly and in jest was ridiculing the Shah of Iran, but I do not think he could have imagined, 28 years later, so many young Americans come back home from the Middle East in coffins as a result of that.

Once one said “if you do not know who your enemy is, you are a fool, but if you do know who your enemy is, but you ignore it, you are a bigger fool, but if you know who your enemy is and you help your enemy, you deserve what is coming to you”.

By: Dr. Allen Shams

Monday, November 20, 2006

in politicians we trust

Twenty five years is an impressive milestone, not only we have tolerated the theological and religious regime of Iran, but also to have got used to exile and false promises by the leader of our host country for freedom.

Contemplating at the last twenty five years, there is one stunning resemblance in all American politicians. Any chosen subject has to have an election issue.

From the beginning, we all remember the famous phrase that president Carter put on the Shah of Iran in new year 1978, which called Iran “the Island of stability”, but less than one year, he sent Senator Bird to persuade the Shah to leave Iran to keep stability.

Then came President Ronald Regan, in spit of the fact that pretended to be Mullahs’ sworn enemy from his campaign trail all the way to the White House, He called Iranians “Barbarians” in number of occasions, sent Oliver North to appease the Mullahs and sell them more arms, so they could get more Iranians killed, and finally sent William Casey to toast a drink to Reza Pahlavi for his future victory while McFarland and North were negotiating arms deal with Islamic Republic in Tehran. Before the end of his term, He honored Admiral Ramsy for shooting down an Iranian passenger airliner.
His running-mate the honorable George Bush Senior (future president), in his appearance at the University of Western Michigan in October of 1980, He condemned Iranians of all sectors, regardless of their participation in hostage crisis of 1979-1981. It further led to more stress on the Iranian students already being crushed under pressure of the propaganda by Jimmy Carter for the American hostages in Iran.

Now time came for another election. The George Bush senior became the next president of the United States. He changed heart and condemned Sadam Hussein in 1990 after he invaded Kuwait. In his speech, President Bush condemned Sadam Hussein for eight years of war with Iran, for killing His Moslem neighbor brothers! It seemed that he forgot that a few years back when Sadam Hussein used chemical weapons on Iranian soldiers, he as the vice-president and the president Reagan moved to block the symbolic condemnation of Sadam Hussein by The U.S. Congress.

So, we started dealing with another president, this time a young energetic president from Arkansas named President William Clinton. In the gathering of the Iranian democrats in Los Angeles, he stood in front of over one thousand Iranians, thanked them for their support and warm reception. He opened his speech with a sentence in Persian and continued in English to indicate that Iranians deserved democracy in to their country, and condemned the mullahs for oppressing Iranian people since their inception of power( by his party predecessor President Jimmy Carter). Once again after so much hope, we became witness to the apology of Madam Secretary to Mullahs for the 1953 CIA coup in Iran (not that the Mullahs were really cared about late Dr. Mossadeq and CIA coup).

Again, we went through another election. But honestly, this time there was no hope. Because Al Gore administration would have been the continuation of Bill Clinton administration all over again. George W. Bush was obviously the follower of his father’s policies. So for the first time we went through an election with apathy, until it came September 11, 2001.

Now the United States became intolerant and tired of its bastard child namely, Islamic ideology. All of sudden, every heart in the Capital Hill and in the White House started bleeding for Iranian people, to live under such a oppressive terrorist regime of Islamic Republic. Therefore, we started watching the parade of Congressmen. Senators, Government officials, and the president demanding freedom for the Middle East and Iranian people.

What are we supposed to learn from all the inconsistencies? One day, Bill Simon (republican candidate for the California gobnatorial race in 2002) said in an interview with an Iranian radio, that he cared about the problems Iranians were facing outside their country and he related to their difficulties. His statement was not that obvious at beginning. A question did arise out of this statement in this context; when, he did not understand his own people and could not relate to the problems they were suffering from, how could he had understood Iranians and related to their problem? One point was obvious and this time the Iranians were a strong minority in California and their vote was crucial for an election.

One can easily see that deceit and hypocrisy is a major part of political election process in this country. The politicians in this country do and say anything to get them elected and make money.

According to the Time magazine, current and Previous Bush administration are so much involved with Saudi Arabia that they are doing anything to divert Saudi’s terrorist connection even in the light of over three thousand casualties of September 11, 2001. This is coming to one conclusion only, “money”. How is the money trailed, let’s see an excerpt from the time magazine:
“In 1997, Saudis donated one million dollars to the George Bush presidential library, and in 1999, Bush officially joined the Carlyle group, a private investment firm staffed by former officials from the Carter, Reagan, and Bush administration. Carlyle maintains ties to U.S. defense contractors, and Saudi Government.” This is in spite the fact that people in this country are threatened by terrorism, and 15 out 19 hijackers of September 11, were Saudi nationals, anti-US feeling is at all time high in Saudi Arabia, and hatred toward Americans are preached in Saudi Arabia daily.

As our friend (a respected journalist) always says that we have to learn the “games”. He is absolutely right. We have to know how to play with the political game machine in this country. Politicians in this country say anything before election. They took after any kind of issue that makes people interested, but after election business is as usual. We all remember the famous universal health insurance purposed by President Clinton in 1992 presidential election. He and his wife printed sample insurance cards for their election showcase, but to forget it shortly after election and not to mention it anymore, even in the next election. The second issue is “money”. It does not matter what one’s idea or need is. As long as one group or business can heavily contribute money either to one candidate or either of the two parties, politicians like Dian Feinstein (U.S. senator from California a sworn Iran and Iranians hater) can turn into “Aunt Betty”.

It has been more than a year, that all Iranian news media circulating petitions to be signed by Iranians for the support of Iranian students inside Iran demanding freedom. It is further requested that these petitions to be sent to American officials. Although it is a very noble gesture, without putting the equation of money and vote together, we will never put a dent on the American political machine with our agenda. We also have to understand that American politicians are neither our allays nor our friends. They are friends as long as money is flowing and ally as long as their interest is served.

So, before you bother yourselves with all those petitions, e-mails, faxes, or any other thing you are sending, there has to be a strong minority formed to have a political voting power. Then appealing to the Iranian community to raise substantial amount of money to hire lobbyist to represent our cause in Washington DC. Afterward, we can claim to be a political power in this vast machine, in order to be heard. Until such time, these politicians will never give us the time of a day to hear even what is good for them. Even with senator Sam Brownback pushing all those resolution against Mullahs, it is interesting to know that U.S. State department is still favoring taming the Islamic republic regardless of what kind of atrocities they are committing inside Iran.

If the history is any lesson, back in 1972, while United States was South Vietnams ally, Henry Kissinger was making deal with North Vietnamese to end the war without the south knowing about it. Does it sound familiar, when in 1978; President Carter was giving his full support to the late Shah of Iran, Ramsey Clark and George Ball working to make concession with Khomeini? Or even better, let’s review a portion of an article that was printed in the Time magazine on May 19, 2003 issue. “After Iran oil industry nationalized in early 1950s, a boycott started led by U.S. and Britain. Operatives paid off Iranian newspaper editors to print pro-shah and anti –Mossadegh stories. They produced their own stories and editorial cartoons and published fabricated interviews. They spread antigovernment rumors. They prepared phony documents to show secret agreement between Mossadegh and the local communist party. They masqueraded communists and threatened conservative Muslim clerics and even staged a sham firebombing of the home of religious leaders”.

Is there any striking resemblance of these events to the events of 1978, with the fire-bombing of a movie theatre, death toll exaggeration of clashes of the army with demonstrators, provocation of Army and police to shoot at demonstrators, printing of pro-Khomeini and anti-Shah stories, rumor of religious leaders being attacked and persecuted by the security forces, fabrication and circulation of a phony tape of the late Shah of Iran calling to start a civil war, and finally the nightly BBC propaganda?

President Bush in his 2003 state of union address said “Iranian people deserve to live in a democratic society”. Is he just wishing a good will for the Iranians or he is committed to do something about it? With another election in Iran and seizing the parliament by hardliners, it will be very interesting to see if The United States government will honor its original policy of democracy in Iran or sacrifice nuclear arms control and security of Iraq by actually dealing with conservative Mullahs.

At the end, it is worth mentioning one unconfirmed phrase from the late Shah of Iran to the late Egyptian president Anwar Sadat that said not to trust Carter administration. But he never realized that he could not trust any American administration. So as Kerry comes and Bush leaves, we do not know who is friend or foe.

BY: Dr. Allen Aria