High on Hate. Threats to Iran. Repost from 2007

Iran-U.S.

High on hate? Bush administration finds itself in a position where it needs to prepare the world opinion for mass genocide with a compelling reason Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich & Nader Bagherzadeh June 13, 2007 iranian.com While the poppy fields in Afghanistan are thriving in supplying the demands of millions, this White House and their neo-cons accomplices are cultivating their own fix - hate. But in order for them to get their high, their hate must be transferred into people’s fear -- A fear they plan to turn into another bloodbath. Pushing forward with their latest warmongering idea that Iran is planning to extend the reach of its Shahab 3 missiles from 1200 to more than 2500 kilometers in order to reach Rome, the media beats the war drums, hoping the fearful sound will drown out reason and logic. This White House and its foreign policy architects, Dick Cheney and National Security Council (NSC) boss Stephen Hadley accuse Iran of planning to extend its strike ability to one of the major countries that has billions of dollars of commerce with it, Italy. Not only are the Italians involved in oil exploration in defiance of US sanctions, but they also sell Iran high tech equipment and technology [1]. What makes these groundless accusations even more preposterous is that the head of the Roman Catholic Church seated in the Vatican, Pope Benedict XVI supports Iran's right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. [2] Lies and deception come easily to an administration which ‘cooked up’ intelligence in order to invade a sovereign country and cause the death of more than 655,000 people in order to further its agenda. The US, finding itself unable to pressure Iran into abandoning its enrichment program, which is nothing short of a pretext for a regime change, has opted for military strike as sanctions are not delivering the desired outcome, and Iran is making progress towards a full enrichment capability. Had John Bolton been successful in his quest to push Iran out of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), perhaps the American people would hear less lies. John Bolton had purposefully attempted to have Iran leave NPT by making unreasonable demands. In an address to AIPAC, he was dismayed at not having succeeded in compelling Iran to leave the international treaty thus ‘justifying’ a reaction from the United States, presumably, militarily. [3] Left without a pretext for a military assault on Iran, the Bush administration finds itself in a position where it needs to prepare the world opinion for mass genocide with a compelling reason. With its control over the media, it is accomplishing this by denouncing Iran as the killer of American troops while causing civil unrest in Iraq. Tragically, the majority of the public has been paralyzed by fear and believes that the letting of blood is the only cure that will rid them of their unfounded panic. Iran’s woes are not limited to the ambitions of the neo-cons. Reza Pahlavi who thinks that he can in turn dupe Iranians, and peoples of other nations, has sent out a statement to the world from a conference in Prague asking for “solidarity for the people of Iran,”. At this conference he was in good company where he conferred with U.S. hawks, including an all-star contingent from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) consisting of Richard Perle, Michael Rubin, Michael Novak, Joshua Muravchik, and Reuel Marc Gerecht; Herb London, John O’Sullivan, and Bruce Jackson a former director of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). Names of the Iraq war planners must be noted among the aforementioned. [4] No doubt Reza Pahlavi’s friends had innovative ideas for giving him the ruins of Iran, but none were as original as Senator Lieberman who 4 days after the Prague conference announced that the U.S. should use military force against Iran based on false allegations. The presence of the group in the conference is a telling sign, for many were the same disingenuous politicians that were accusing Iran of the Khobar Tower bombing in 1993; an accusation rejected last week by William Perry, Clinton’s Secretary Defense at the time, with the assertion that the bombings had been the work of al-Qaeda all along. It seems that the tragedy of Iran goes beyond the treason of the MEK, all the ‘Chelabis’, and the dangerous ambitions of Reza Pahlavi; she is equally abandoned by Iranian-Americans. While the Iranians take pride in their history, they shun away from defending her from the imminent danger she is in, or contributing to the future in a meaningful way. The movie ‘300’ caused an uproar among the Iranians -- rightly so. The affront caused by this movie, a movie that insulted the history of Iran of 2000 years ago, united Iranian-Americans and caused them to take action. Yet they are insensitive to the threat of war, death of millions of fellow Iranians, and destruction of their country. If Iran is attacked under false pretense, all those who defend her history have no reason to celebrate their heritage. Making a movie is easy, maintaining a legacy - that takes character, national character. Comment Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich has lived and studied in Iran, the UK, France, and the US. She obtained her Bachelors Degree in International Relations from the University of Southern California, Los Angeles. She is currently pursuing her education in Middle East studies and Public Diplomacy. Soraya has done extensive research on US foreign policy towards Iran and Iran’s nuclear program. Nader Bagherzadeh, is a Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at the University of California, Irvine. He has been following Iran’s nuclear issues, and given talks and written articles on that subject.

Reza Pahlavi - a Repost from Iranian.com 2006

Iran-U.S. Blind ambition Reza Pahlavi is so eager to have a place in history and in Persia that he pleads with warmongers to make the innocent Iranian people suffer Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich December 6, 2006 iranian.com In response to Reza Pahlavi's "Talking to Iran": Mr. Pahlavi, Perhaps the only merit I see in your letter is the fact that you have found yourself a better  writer; your letter reflects improved articulation and clarity of style, something lacking in your previous addresses.  However, the message you convey remains the same: ambition and betrayal. You write “I have repeatedly opposed any form of military action against  my country as unjust and counterproductive”.  I assume you mean Iran?  In which case, you either have a short memory, or you delibertately lie hoping that the rest of us have a short memory.   After the 9/11 terrorist attacks when the Unites States was bombing Afghanistan in retaliation for the tragedy that had befallen it, you had this to say: “[T]errorism is like an octopus whose weakness is the eyes –in Tehran.  [I]f the U.S. wants to kill this octopus, it should start in Tehran.” You must have been very disappointed when the US chose to invade Iraq instead of Iran; the Peacock throne must have seemed just a bomb away to you at that time.  But you must have also read that Patrick Clawson and other like minded people thought that the road to Iran was through Baghdad.  Perhaps now that your chances seem so close, you are threatened by the competition, above all, the MEK.     You speak of ‘self-preservation’ - this is something that you should be familiar with.  After all, it is no secret that you received C.I.A. funding for a number of years until the Iran-Contra scandal put an end to it.  This is the same CIA who trained  your father’s SAVAK on  how to torture Iranians --  the same Iranians you feign to have compassion for – and who held your strings once you acceded to become their kept boy. Of late, their rendition practices around the world with at least 600 flights through Europe to torture destinations have come to light.  You, Mr. Pahlavi, have been on their pay roll, ready for the string to be pulled, just like your father who was a master torturer. Do you really think that you are in a position to speak compassionately of  “prisoners of conscience” in Iran and “dissidents who were murdered in their homes or forced to flee”? As for Mr. Bush’s promise of promoting democracy in Iraq – it was never his intention to promote democracy.  If you recall, he lied to the American people.  The reason for invading sovereign Iraq was the threat of WMD and the link to al-Qaeda;  something that YOU tried to convince the Americans to do after 9/11 by categorically stating that Iran is the master of all terrorism.  If your words were a true reflection of your concern for Iranians, you would encourage dialogue, the only alternative to sanctions and military action.  But you are so blinded by ambition, so eager to have a place in history and in Persia that you plead with warmongers to make the innocent Iranian people suffer. You write: “George W Bush has repeatedly pledged to support Iranians in their struggle for freedom and democracy.”  It should come as no surprise that a man whose father’s reign was imposed by a CIA coup should now grovel to a warmonger to ‘bring democracy and freedom’ to Iran.  What an irony that your father held his coronation at Persepolis – the hypocrisy of it.  Mr. Pahlavi, Iranians can gain their own freedom and democracy once they weed out traitors within them and enemies without. All the Iranians in exile and indeed those within her boarders who fight for Iran’s integrity, do so not because their ideology is compatible with the regime’s (although indeed some may be), but because they are patriots.  You on the other hand, are keener on your self preservation, and you have realized that by stroking Israeli’s interest, you may find your way back to Tehran.  While you are surrounded by a few loyal well-wishers, I must remind you that Iran’s population is 70 million.   On average, they are far more educated than you are.  After all the hardship they have been through, do you really think they will accept someone who has sold them out? Comment Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich Salt Lake City - Utah

Brief interview with Tasnim News on December 21 on the UNGA vote.

UNGA Jerusalem Vote

Q#1 : More than 100 countries defied President Donald Trump on Thursday and voted in favor of a United Nations General Assembly resolution calling for the United States to withdraw its decision to recognize Jerusalem (al-Quds) as Israel’s capital. What’s your take on this?

The vote is a political success for the Palestinians, and as importantly, for the rule of rule of law.   It was clear that a majority number of countries would support the UNGA Resolution rejecting Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem (al-Quds) as Israel’s capital. The United Nations considers East Jerusalem to be occupied Palestinian territory.   Aside from threats by the Trump administration, prior to the UNGA vote Trump officials stated that they could not envision any situation under which the Western Wall would not be part of Israel.

The Western Wall (or the Wailing Wall) is situated in occupied East Jerusalem.  Since 1967, the majority of nations and organization refused to recognize Israel’s ‘ownership’ of East Jerusalem.   This is why the UNGA vote was also a vote for international law.

Q #2: Trump had threatened to cut off financial aid to countries that voted in favor. His warning did appear to have some impact with nine countries voting against the resolution and 35 abstaining. A total of 128 countries voted for the resolution. In your opinion, which courtiers abstained from the vote?  What’s your take about Trump’s threats?

I personally believe that the world owes Trump a great deal of gratitude for openly revealing what the US had been doing for decades in secret.  For example, in 2005, Newt Gingrich spoke at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a pro-Israeli think tank that heavily influenced George W. Bush decisions (When George W. Bush visited and spoke at AEI on 15 February 2007, he stated: “I admire AEI a lot – I’m sure you know that. After  all, I have been consistently borrowing some of your best people. More than 20 AEI scholars have worked in my administration.”

In his 2005 AEI speech, Gingrich discussed “AN EXAMPLE OF A U.N. REFORM SCORECARD” ways in which the US should influence votes at the UNGA.  Saying that “Israel is a country that manifests the values that the U.N. should defend and embrace, not condemn.”  Gingrich then stated clearly ““A key first test for a concerted effort by the U.S. to win U.N. votes should be an upcoming vote in the [GA Assembly] concerning the abolishment of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and of the Division of Palestinian Rights.”  “This should be not just a matter of high importance of U.S. Ambassadors around the world, but also of every member of Congress, who can play an influential role with foreign Ambassadors assigned to Washington or with high-ranking foreign government officials whom they know. Members of Congress should take every opportunity to relay the message to these foreign representatives that we are paying attention to their vote, that their vote matters, and that we will remember how they vote.”   He further suggested that the United States should promote the ‘naming of names’.

So the bullying and threats is not new.  What is refreshing new is the fact that Trump has brought it out in the open.   And became very transparent with this recent UNGA vote is who was actually bought, including those who abstained.  Those who abstained in fact refused to rule out violation of international law.  In other words, their actions indicate that when it comes to international law, they support money and power.  

It is therefore vital that these countries go get called out.  That we should “name names”, especially since some of these countries have hypocritically called out states for ‘violation of international law’.  

The votes against and those countries that abstained are an unpleasant reminder of George W. Bush’s “coalition of the willing” – 46 countries that contributed to the illegal invasion of Iraq, although most of these countries’ contribution was in name only – as with the UNGA vote.  The 7 countries that voted against (plus Israel and the United States) are virtually insignificant, poor countries with little bearing on the international stage.   Of the 35 abstentions , Those that abstained, only a few have political leverage, but they must all be named.

These countries are: Antigua-Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Bahamas, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia-Herzegovinian, Cameroon, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic,  Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Haiti, Hungary, Jamaica, Kiribati, Latvia, Lesotho, Malawi, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Solomon Islands, South Sudan, Trinidad-Tobago, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu.    They should all be shamed.

Q #3: What might the future hold about the situation in the occupied territories?

To some extent, Trump’s threats pushed many countries to vote in favor of Palestine and international law if for naught else but to save face.  But although many countries did vote against Trump’s decision, they will continue to do business with Israeli entities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.   My only hope is that the world will finally open its eyes to the real threat that faces them. As humans we are only as strong as the weakest link in the chain.   If we allow people and countries to be destroyed without an attempt to but a stop it, then truly we set ourselves up for being the next victim. 

Additionally, Israel only thrives when it plays the victim card.  The world has been forced to recognize Israel and the United States as aggressors. I have little doubt that we will witness false flags and every effort will be made to provoke the Palestinians in order to portray them as violent and Israel as ‘innocent victims’. 

Trump’s Doomsday Jerusalem Speech

In 1995, a few short years after the official end of the Cold War when hope-filled nations were focusing on peace and prosperity, the United States Congress unanimously passed the “Jerusalem Embassy Act” into law.   The law recognized “Jerusalem” as the official capital of Israel. The passage of this law was left unnoticed by most.  Few objected to a law passed by the preeminent power of the new unilateral world order. Fewer still understood the consequences of the law. 

On December 6, Donald Trump reminded the world of the decision made years ago.  There was outrage, but the true implications of this decision were not discussed.  Predictably, stories centered on Palestinians  - and Jews.  Some justified the decision while others condemned it. Many reasoned that the Palestinians had to be defended.  While others thought that it was up to the Arabs and Moslems to challenge America’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

The Jerusalem question raised legal challenges to religious claims.   The cacophony of protests and cheers obscured the approaching doomsday scenario that had been in the making for decades.  Few understood.  None listened.  Others are in denial, believing religious zealotry to be a geopolitical game.  But what has been taking place under our noses is not a fight over real estate, or international law.  It is the power of madness, or the mad in power, that is enabling religious fanaticism to prevail at a cost to our collective humanity.

How could we not have seen this coming? Perhaps our logic challenged it; or our sense of decency denied the reality of what was happening.  It would seem too improbable, simply too far-fetched that we should denounce God with our science and yet usher in rupture to bring back the God science had disproved (Big Bang).   But how do we ignore Senator Broxon telling a cheering crowd “Now, I don’t know about you, but when I heard about Jerusalem — where the King of Kings where our soon coming King is coming back to Jerusalem, it is because President Trump declared Jerusalem to be capital of Israel”.

And how do we ignore Benjamin Netanyahu taking ownership of Jerusalem stating that the Bible, the holy book for Jews and Christians, had justified it.    Should we then be surprised that rabbis sent a letter of gratitude to Trump, praising him for “fulfilling prophecies”.   Prophecies do not sit well with modernity; nonetheless, they exist.  And attempts to fulfill them are not new.

In 1990, there was an attempt by the 'Temple Mount Faithful' to bring a cornerstone for a reconstructed Third Temple to the Temple Mount.  In 2000, Ariel Sharon staged a provocative visit to the Temple Mount and said: "The Temple Mount is in our hands and will remain in our hands. It is the holiest site in Judaism and it is the right of every Jew to visit the Temple Mount,".

In 2006, the Israeli government began work on an exact replica of the Hurva synagogue on its original site. The story of the Hurva has received little attention other than coinciding with Joe Biden's visit to Israel and that government's insistence on building more illegal settlements.  But Hurva is the beginning of the end.  Rabbis have been tailored for the special kind of garments they will be wearing in a "rebuilt temple".[i]

Tragically for the world, such fanaticism is coupled with deadly weapons, thanks to the United States government. In 1999, Warner D. Farr, LTC, U.S. Army presented his findings in the Counterproliferation papers, Future Warfare Series No. 2, USAF Counterproliferation Center.  This fascinating report, among other things, sounded the alarm over the probability of Gush Emunim, a right wing religious organization, or others, hijacking a nuclear device to “liberate” the Temple Mount for the building of the third temple.  

America continued to fund Israel’s activities and shielded it from criticism.

So while the Western media paints a doomsday picture triggered by Moslems, and Mr. Trump, on cue from his Israeli boss points the accusatory finger at Moslems, there are far more precarious scenarios that are kept hidden from the public.   The irony being that the Moslems are the only ones safeguarding the world from a Doomsday scenario by refusing to abandon the one city where both Christian and Jewish Zionists want to bring the world to an end.

What is incomprehensible is why is it that the rest of the world is following this pied piper into Armageddon?   Surely is it not cowardice that prompts them to have Palestinians fight their battle.  Or perhaps they believe they can avert this religious zealotry in time to save their skins while continuing to make a prophet by shedding the blood of the innocent in Jerusalem.   How to explain their complicity and their madness other than to remind them to heed the words of Alexander the Great: “Remember upon the conduct of each depends the fate of all”. 

---

[i] Tom Mountain.  Preparing for the Third Temple Jewish Advocate.  Boston:Aug 22, 2008.  Vol. 199,  Iss. 34,  p. 9 (1 pp.)

The Fate of Jerusalem

Donald Trump is a threat to peace and a bigger threat to humanity.  True.  But let us not ignore history.  When addressing AIPAC in 2007, Obama declared:  "And Jerusalem will be the undivided capital of Israel". 

Russia's claim in April 2017 which did not get media attention had far more serious consequences.   They recognized West Jerusalem as Israel's capital and East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestine.

Seriously, Russia?!

6 April 201710:40

Foreign Ministry statement regarding Palestinian-Israeli settlement

682-06-04-2017

·         

·       de-DE1  en-GB1  es-ES1  ru-RU1  fr-FR1 

Moscow is deeply concerned about the situation in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Palestine and Israel have not held political negotiations for nearly three years, and the situation on the ground has been deteriorating.

The stalling of the Middle East peace process has created conditions for unilateral moves that undermine the potential for an internationally accepted solution to the Palestinian problem, under which two states – Israel and Palestine – could live in peace and security with each other and with their neighbours.

Moscow reaffirms its support for the two-state solution as an optimal option that meets the national interests of the Palestinian and Israeli people, both of whom have friendly relations with Russia, and the interests of all other countries in the region and the international community as a whole.

We reaffirm our commitment to the UN-approved principles for a Palestinian-Israeli settlement, which include the status of East Jerusalem as the capital of the future Palestinian state. At the same time, we must state that in this context we view West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

The concrete parameters of a solution for the entire range of issues regarding the status of Palestinian territories, including Jerusalem, should be coordinated at the direct talks between the parties involved. Using its opportunities as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a co-sponsor of the peace process and an active member of the Middle East Quartet of international intermediaries, Russia will continue to provide assistance to the achievement of Israeli-Palestinian agreements. We will focus on ensuring free access to Jerusalem’s holy places for all believers.

http://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/2717182