Who will fight for Iran? It is not an easy answer.
Who
At the moment, Seyyeds run Iran, propagating their Empire. Their self-acclaimed moral prerogative, is that they are related to Halabi Qureshi (aka Mohammed), who himself was brought to world attention, thanks to the abdication of the High Priest of Iran in the 7th Century AD to Christianity and then eventually to Halabi Qureshi. Ancient Iranian mythology (referred to by Christian historians as Zoroastrianism), speaks of an Iranian traitor; that creates a new revolution and overthrows the Iranian Empire; but much later is overthrown by a true Iranian.
Will
The next word in the question is "will". The word "will" immediately links ones mind to "will power". The inspiration behind will power has to be Iranian, and there we see the Iranian nation reading Ferdowsi to be inspired with Iranian nationality. This is the will power, that drives an Iranian to be Iranian, and its roots are from a Zoroastrian book called Khodayenamak. There are many other Iranian poets and philosophers that came after Ferdowsi, but it was he who had the will power to resurrect the "Iranian Will Power" as it were.
Fight
The word "fight" immediately brings on the impression of weapons and war. Whilst in today's world people fight with ideas, and the opposition overcomes dictatorship with massive non violent demonstrations and general strikes. That is not war with swords, that is war with words. Just count the number of real Iranians that participated in the latest Seyyed so called "elections" in Iran. Moreover the war of words by Iranian Bloggers is running circles around the Seyyed media in Iran. So real Iranians are winning against the alien Seyyeds in Iran right now.
For
"For" is the hardest word in the question. So many Iranians who are against the Seyyeds end up fighting for Seyyeds if Iran was attacked. They did so in the Iran-Iraq war. Iranians died in that war, not Seyyeds. But if the definition of "For" is Iran, then one can say that real Iranians are fighting in a non violent way for Iran from within Iran right now. Everywhere you go you will find the Seyyeds trying to intervene, but are circumvented by real Iranians. So much of the Iranian way of life has been sabotaged, and the economy is drained by Seyyeds' overspending in the nuclear industry, that real Iranians are openly and overtly criticising the Seyyeds. A massive peace movement "For" Iran to prevent a war for Seyyeds needs to be developed.
Iran
What is Iran? It is called in the Zend-Avesta as Eran-e-Vitch and it sounds Russian doesn't it. And old Iranian culture is much closer to the culture surrounding the Caspian Sea, than the culture around the Persian Gulf. The oldest inhabitants of Iran come from as far back as anywhere in the world. Yes, we in Iran have archaeological roots from what the archaeologists call the Olduwan in Kasharfud. And it is not surprising to find, that our ancient myth talks of our first rulers inventing the tools for civilization like fire and clothing. So the word Iran can be in itself have the meaning of the root of human civilization.
?
The question mark is perhaps the most interesting part of the whole sentence. Are there those of us, who are not focused on Iran properly? Some see Iran politically, religiously, or economically, and at the end lose sight of what it really is. They will raise too many questions and no answers. They are too cynical, because they do not have a belief system based on Iran. Only Iranians that have faith in the story of Iran or the Spirit; that is behind the story of Iran; will see the future of Iran; be part of it; and make a new Iran happen in an Iranian way. Others will remain cynical and lose interest over time.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Thursday, January 18, 2007
A Policy to Topple the Mullahs
A Policy to Topple the Mullahs
By Kenneth R. Timmerman
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 16, 2006
The good news is that the Bush administration has finally understood that talking about freedom is not enough. The United States must devote serious assets to helping pro-democracy forces inside Iran, if there is to be any hope of a long-term resolution to the nuclear crisis with Iran.
The bad news is that after all these years, the administration still has no plan of how to do it.
Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice asked Congress yesterday for an extra $75 million to enhance radio and television broadcasting into Iran and to support pro-democracy forces inside Iran. But she couldn’t say with any precision, either during an open hearing with members of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, or in a private briefing later that day, how she wanted to spend the money.
The new money comes on top of a $3 million appropriation for 2005, mandated by Congress, to help pro-democracy activitists inside Iran.
But State Department bureaucrats last year torpedoed specific grant proposals (including one by the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, which I represent), to help groups inside Iran. They argued that helping such groups would be seen by the Tehran regime as a hostile act and would violate the terms of the 1981 Algiers Accord that ended the 444-day hostage crisis. Mustn’t make Tehran angry.
Since then, of course, the showdown over Iran’s nuclear weapons programs has intensified, as has the regime’s repression of pro-democracy activists, unpaid miners, and striking bus drivers. According to an opposition website, Iran Press News, political prisoners were told by their jailors this week that “each and every one of you will be put to death” if Iran’s nuclear file is taken to the United Nations Security Council.
On Monday, 500 Sufi Muslims were arrested in Qom after they protested the closing of a Sufi religious center. Among them were 250 women and children.
Also this week, Ahmadinejad “wondered out loud” why the regime protects foreign embassies in Tehran, while the commander of the “Lovers of Martyrdom headquarters” in Tehran told supporters that Iran will vanquish the United States, Israel and our supporters through a protected campaign of suicide bombings.
Looks like we’ve made Tehran angry nonetheless. And yet, the United States still doesn’t appear to have a plan.
Senators Sam Brownback, R-KS, and Rick Santorum, R-PA, have proposed increasing funding for pro-democracy groups in Iran to $10 million this year. But until just yesterday, the State Department was opposing the Iran Freedom Support Act because the House version of the bill expanded mandatory U.S. sanctions to include European companies. The State Department argued that we mustn’t make the Europeans angry, especially when we need their votes at the IAEA and at the UN Security Council.
Finally, it appears, Miss Rice got angry. Or just stepped in and took charge. No administration likes Congress to tell it how to craft policy, although that is exactly what’s been happening with Iran since Congress first threatened sanctions in 1995.
“I want to thank the Congress for giving us $10 million to support the cause of freedom and human rights in Iran this year,” she said on Wednesday. So much for lifting the State Department block on the Brownback-Santorum bill.
“We will use this money to develop support networks for Iranian reformers, political dissidents and human rights activists,” she said. “We also plan to request $75 million in supplemental funding for the year 2006 to support democracy in Iran. That money would enable us to increase our support for democracy and improve our radio broadcasting, begin satellite television broadcasts, increase the contacts between our peoples through expanded fellowships and scholarships for Iranian students, and to bolster our public diplomacy efforts.”
All of this sounds encouraging, until you realize that the only part of the program that has any substance are existing Persian language broadcasts by the Voice of America and by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. And these broadcasts are themselves problematic.
First, VOA. While the Voice of America has tremendous talent, and has made serious efforts over the past year to expand its programming in Persian and make it more professional, VOA remains a U.S. government news source.
This can be an advantage, when the U.S. government speaks with one voice to deliver a powerful message. But more frequently it has been a disadvantage, since VOA’s charter does not allow it to actively subvert foreign governments. And that is precisely what we need in Iran.
In addition, VOA is turning away from radio programming to more expensive television broadcasts, which it intends to “simulcast” over its old radio frequencies. VOA will add one hour a day of short wave broadcasting later this year, in an effort to reach a less urban audience, but that is not enough.
The problem here is Iran’s poverty. Despite fabulous oil revenues, the World Bank estimates that Iran’s per capital income is around $2,000 per year. The audiences we need to reach do not all have access to television. And periodically, the regime conducts massive seizures of satellite dishes, which remain illegal.
We need more radio, especially short-wave, and programming that is geared to informing the Iranian people just how corrupt and brutal are their leaders, and that teaches them the mechanics of political organizing and non-violent protest.
In principle, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty could do this. But its Persian service, Radio Farda (“tomorrow”), has become an open object of ridicule to Iranians. Established in 1997, it became known as “Radio Khatami,” because it openly supported the “reformist” regime of the previous Iranian president, Mohammad Khatami. More recently, it has become irrelevant, playing Brittney Spear and other non-entities in hopes of attracting a younger audience, while splicing in just ten minutes of political programming each hour.
To her credit, Miss Rice seems instinctively to grasp the problem. We need to shut down Radio Farda, help VOA to produce quality radio programs in addition to TV talk shows, and hand over more money to Iranian broadcasters in Los Angeles and elsewhere who have their finger on the pulse of the people inside Iran.
Just as Miss Rice was testifying before Congress, a team of State Department officials was visiting Iranian-American broadcasters in Los Angeles to assess which programs might be worthy of U.S. support. My opinion: let a thousand flowers bloom. The Iranian-American broadcasters know how to craft their own programming. What they need is money to buy satellite time to beam into Iran, and short-wave transmitters to reach the broader population. We should give it to them.
The real question remains the one the State Department avoided last year: what type of programs should the U.S. be supporting inside Iran? And are we prepared for Tehran’s angry response, which could come in the form of a large number of small suicide packages?
The pro-democracy groups are out there. And they are chaffing at the bit. They know what to do and can’t wait to get started.
Anyone ready to overthrow a regime?
By Kenneth R. Timmerman
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 16, 2006
The good news is that the Bush administration has finally understood that talking about freedom is not enough. The United States must devote serious assets to helping pro-democracy forces inside Iran, if there is to be any hope of a long-term resolution to the nuclear crisis with Iran.
The bad news is that after all these years, the administration still has no plan of how to do it.
Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice asked Congress yesterday for an extra $75 million to enhance radio and television broadcasting into Iran and to support pro-democracy forces inside Iran. But she couldn’t say with any precision, either during an open hearing with members of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, or in a private briefing later that day, how she wanted to spend the money.
The new money comes on top of a $3 million appropriation for 2005, mandated by Congress, to help pro-democracy activitists inside Iran.
But State Department bureaucrats last year torpedoed specific grant proposals (including one by the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, which I represent), to help groups inside Iran. They argued that helping such groups would be seen by the Tehran regime as a hostile act and would violate the terms of the 1981 Algiers Accord that ended the 444-day hostage crisis. Mustn’t make Tehran angry.
Since then, of course, the showdown over Iran’s nuclear weapons programs has intensified, as has the regime’s repression of pro-democracy activists, unpaid miners, and striking bus drivers. According to an opposition website, Iran Press News, political prisoners were told by their jailors this week that “each and every one of you will be put to death” if Iran’s nuclear file is taken to the United Nations Security Council.
On Monday, 500 Sufi Muslims were arrested in Qom after they protested the closing of a Sufi religious center. Among them were 250 women and children.
Also this week, Ahmadinejad “wondered out loud” why the regime protects foreign embassies in Tehran, while the commander of the “Lovers of Martyrdom headquarters” in Tehran told supporters that Iran will vanquish the United States, Israel and our supporters through a protected campaign of suicide bombings.
Looks like we’ve made Tehran angry nonetheless. And yet, the United States still doesn’t appear to have a plan.
Senators Sam Brownback, R-KS, and Rick Santorum, R-PA, have proposed increasing funding for pro-democracy groups in Iran to $10 million this year. But until just yesterday, the State Department was opposing the Iran Freedom Support Act because the House version of the bill expanded mandatory U.S. sanctions to include European companies. The State Department argued that we mustn’t make the Europeans angry, especially when we need their votes at the IAEA and at the UN Security Council.
Finally, it appears, Miss Rice got angry. Or just stepped in and took charge. No administration likes Congress to tell it how to craft policy, although that is exactly what’s been happening with Iran since Congress first threatened sanctions in 1995.
“I want to thank the Congress for giving us $10 million to support the cause of freedom and human rights in Iran this year,” she said on Wednesday. So much for lifting the State Department block on the Brownback-Santorum bill.
“We will use this money to develop support networks for Iranian reformers, political dissidents and human rights activists,” she said. “We also plan to request $75 million in supplemental funding for the year 2006 to support democracy in Iran. That money would enable us to increase our support for democracy and improve our radio broadcasting, begin satellite television broadcasts, increase the contacts between our peoples through expanded fellowships and scholarships for Iranian students, and to bolster our public diplomacy efforts.”
All of this sounds encouraging, until you realize that the only part of the program that has any substance are existing Persian language broadcasts by the Voice of America and by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. And these broadcasts are themselves problematic.
First, VOA. While the Voice of America has tremendous talent, and has made serious efforts over the past year to expand its programming in Persian and make it more professional, VOA remains a U.S. government news source.
This can be an advantage, when the U.S. government speaks with one voice to deliver a powerful message. But more frequently it has been a disadvantage, since VOA’s charter does not allow it to actively subvert foreign governments. And that is precisely what we need in Iran.
In addition, VOA is turning away from radio programming to more expensive television broadcasts, which it intends to “simulcast” over its old radio frequencies. VOA will add one hour a day of short wave broadcasting later this year, in an effort to reach a less urban audience, but that is not enough.
The problem here is Iran’s poverty. Despite fabulous oil revenues, the World Bank estimates that Iran’s per capital income is around $2,000 per year. The audiences we need to reach do not all have access to television. And periodically, the regime conducts massive seizures of satellite dishes, which remain illegal.
We need more radio, especially short-wave, and programming that is geared to informing the Iranian people just how corrupt and brutal are their leaders, and that teaches them the mechanics of political organizing and non-violent protest.
In principle, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty could do this. But its Persian service, Radio Farda (“tomorrow”), has become an open object of ridicule to Iranians. Established in 1997, it became known as “Radio Khatami,” because it openly supported the “reformist” regime of the previous Iranian president, Mohammad Khatami. More recently, it has become irrelevant, playing Brittney Spear and other non-entities in hopes of attracting a younger audience, while splicing in just ten minutes of political programming each hour.
To her credit, Miss Rice seems instinctively to grasp the problem. We need to shut down Radio Farda, help VOA to produce quality radio programs in addition to TV talk shows, and hand over more money to Iranian broadcasters in Los Angeles and elsewhere who have their finger on the pulse of the people inside Iran.
Just as Miss Rice was testifying before Congress, a team of State Department officials was visiting Iranian-American broadcasters in Los Angeles to assess which programs might be worthy of U.S. support. My opinion: let a thousand flowers bloom. The Iranian-American broadcasters know how to craft their own programming. What they need is money to buy satellite time to beam into Iran, and short-wave transmitters to reach the broader population. We should give it to them.
The real question remains the one the State Department avoided last year: what type of programs should the U.S. be supporting inside Iran? And are we prepared for Tehran’s angry response, which could come in the form of a large number of small suicide packages?
The pro-democracy groups are out there. And they are chaffing at the bit. They know what to do and can’t wait to get started.
Anyone ready to overthrow a regime?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
