Posted on 01/26/2006 7:25:04 PM PST by DoctorZIn
Top News Story
A flurry of activity before next week's IAEA showdown.
- The New York Times reported that the foreign ministers of Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will meet in London on Monday in an effort to resolve their differences on how best to punish Iran for its nuclear activities.
- The Financial Times reported that Robert Zoellick, the US Deputy Secretary of State said China has emphasized its support for international efforts to stop Iran’s nuclear program.
- Iran Focus reported that Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator is due to travel to Beijing on Thursday.
- Yahoo News reported that a landmark nuclear deal between India and the United States will "die" in Washington if New Delhi supports Iran.
Sanctions: what may happen?
- Kenneth R. Timmerman, Iran.org is launching an appeal to identify and freeze Iranian government assets around the world.
- International Herald Tribune considered the question: If sanctions are the answer, what economic levers could they safely use? Gasoline imports.
- Ali Nourizadeh, Asharq Al-Awsat reminded us that Iran imports most of its gasoline and has only a 45 day supply.
- Iran Mania reported EU Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs said he doubted that Iran would cut oil exports in response to threatened sanctions.
More calls for Regime Change in Iran.
- The New York Sun in a Staff Editorial called for a regime change in Iran.
- Jeff Jacoby, The Boston Globe argued that the best solution for the Iranian crisis would be a regime change in Iran.
Iranian military being purged?
- Ali Nourizadeh, Asharq Al-Awsat examined Iran's military options and noted that Iranian General Kazemi had recently opposed a military confrontation with the US just prior to his sudden death.
A major strike in Iran scheduled.
- SMCCDI reported that Tehran's Collective Bus drivers issued another notice of strike scheduled for Saturday.
More heated exchanges between Iran and Israel.
- The Jerusalem Post reported that Iran threatened, if were Israel to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, they would respond so strongly that it would put the Jewish state into "an eternal coma."
- Ynet News reported that Israel's Ambassador to the U.N. Dan Gillerman said it is the U.N. Security Council's duty to prevent "another Holocaust."
- The Economist reminded us of the irony that while the Iranian president calls Israel alien to the Middle East, since several of Israel's key leaders have Iranian origins.
One of "America's most wanted" travels with Ahmadinejad?
- Megan Clyne, The New York Sun reported that one of the American government's most wanted terrorists, Imad Mugniyah, visited Syria late last week with Iran's President Ahmadinejad.
Business Developments.
- The Chicago Tribune reported that insurance brokerage firm, Aon Corp., will stop doing business in Iran.
- Reuters reported that German exports to Iran will fall sharply this year as a sweeping purge of officials at Iranian ministries and state companies is causing contracts with German firms to dry up.
- The Financial Times reported that Iran's central bank vice-governor, said on Tuesday Tehran had withdrawn foreign reserves from Italian banks but not elsewhere in Europe.
Here are a few other news items you may have missed.
- News Max reported that former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich says that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is as big a threat to global security as Adolf Hitler.
- FrontPage Magazine published an exchange between Jalal Arani and Michael Rubin over the nature of the Iranian opposition group: the Mujahedin.
- Reuters reported that Iran accused Britain of cooperating with bombers who killed eight people in the southern Iranian city of Ahvaz on Tuesday.
- And finally, The American Enterprise Institute held a panel discussion with the producer of a documentary on human rights violations in Iran: A Few Simple Shots. See the discussion and film here.
More on MEK:
Hitting the Mark on Iran
by Michael Rubin
FrontPageMagazine.com
January 27, 2006
http://www.meforum.org/article/893
Ali Safavi's response is dishonest but useful as a study of Mujahedin-e Khalq (MKO) tactics.
Let there be no mistake: Masud Rajavi's Mujahedin-e Khalq is a terrorist group; Rajavi is as much a Monster of the Left as Yasir Arafat [1] or Robert Mugabe.
Mujahedin-e Khalq members trained with Arafat's Palestinian Liberation Organization and in Qadhafi's Libya. The groups terrorists have assassinated Americans, Iranian civilians, and bombed public buildings. Its members embraced Saddam Hussein and participated in the slaughter of Iraqi Kurdish civilians following their 1991 uprising against Saddam's dictatorial rule.
Safavi's endorsement of violence parallels the logic expressed by supporters of Islamic Jihad, Abu Sayyaf, and al-Qaeda. Comparisons betwen the Mujahedin-e Khalq and either American revolutionaries or French partisans ring hollow: The Mujahedin-e Khalq has no support among Iranians inside their own country. Citing the groups own publications to claim popularity as did Jalal Arani [2]is dishonest.
True, some Iranians did support the Mujahedin-e Khalq in 1972. Many Iranians, chafing under the Shah, accepted the rhetoric of demagogues like Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and groups like the Mujahedin-e Khalq. But Iranian public opinion has changed over the past 34 years. That Mr. Safavi has to return to 1972 to claim public support underlines the fallacies of his argument. Supporters who did not abandon the Mujahedin-e Khalq when it murdered civilians and planted bombs washed their hands of the group after Rajavi allied himself with Saddam Hussein. Many have since fled the Rajavi personality cult.
Mr. Safavi may want to dismiss Ervand Abrahamian's The Iranian Mojahedin.[3] It is a devastating and careful study of the Mujahedin-e Khalq. Abrahamian's books exploring torture in Iran, Khomeinis philosophy, and the history of the Mujahedin-e Khalq are well-reviewed and well-regarded by both left and right.[4] Reviewing a book of Abrahamian's essays, Daniel Pipes (neither a communist sympathizer nor a cheerleader for the Islamic Republic), wrote Abrahamian makes his case the old-fashioned way, through a close reading of texts and study of events.[5] Abrahamian's scholarship rests on archival research and documentary evidence. He is no Rashid Khalidi.[6] He did not cherry-pick his sources or remove context. Rather, he examined the opus of Rajavi's works and charted their development.
Mr. Safavi is likewise dishonest with his dismissal of Islamic Marxism, which was oft-discussed within Mujahedin-e Khalq circles and Iranian society.
Mr. Safavi poses a false choice: Theocracy or Mujahedin-e Khalq. Iranians want neither. They are sophisticated and vocal. They opine openly about various opposition groups, figures, and movements. They do not need to Mujahedin-e Khalq to channel their thoughts; they speak for themselves. They despise the Mujahedin. Safavi should not dismiss seventy million Iranians as agents of Tehran's intelligence ministry.
The only constituency that matters is Iranians residing inside Iran. Getting the signature of European parliamentarians and a few U.S. congressmen on petitions means little. Nor is the Mujahedin-e Khalq honest with its sponsorship. Few politicians make the mistake of signing their petitions twice. The U.S. government chronicles an ever expanding number of Mujahedin-e Khalq front organizations.[7] The group forms short-lived proxies to capitalize upon existing public support for issues ranging from calls for a constitutional referendum to earthquake relief.[8] But the Mujahedin-e Khalq's strategy of deception has undercut the Iranian peoples struggle for liberation by cynicism about and politicians detachment from legitimate opposition movements.
How pervasive is the groups dishonesty? In his letter to Frontpage Magazine, Safavi describes himself as a sociologist who has studied the activities of the Mujahedin-e Khalq for 34 years. Actually, Ali Safavi is a senior member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the Mujahedin-e Khalqs political wing.[9]
Most of Safavi's prose and notes are irrelevant to the argument and obscure or ignore points raised in Monsters of the Left: The Mujahedin al-Khalq. He seeks credibility by citing everything from the Pope to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Cults often use similar strategies. Often Safavi's notes refer to points tangential to the original arguments and, in some cases, even to points Mr. Safavi himself makes. Several look credible, but do not say what Mr. Safavi alleges.
Nor does Mr. Safavi gain credibility for the Mujahedin-e Khalq by cherry-picking statements. Mujahedin-e Khalq publications are infamous in Washington for using ellipses to alter the meanings analysis published elsewhere by policymakers. Citing statements replicated in recent Mujahedin-e Khalq publications brings as much credibility as quoting from Lyndon LaRouche's Executive Intelligence Review. Quality of sourcing always matters: Justin Raimondo is hardly a trustworthy authority.[10] David S. Cloud, having left the Wall Street Journal, has quickly become the New York Times' new Jason Blair.
That the Mujahedin-e Khalq helped expose Tehrans secret nuclear program does not give it a free pass to popular legitimacy. Previous and subsequent Mujahedin-e Khalq revelations proved false. So, too, are Mujahedin-e Khalq pronouncements that they had the support of the Bush administration. It is unfortunate that left-wing bloggers like Laura Rozen and Juan Cole advanced such statements. They substituted accuracy and sourcing with speculation and fabrication. Their statements helped the Mujahedin-e Khalq claim false legitimacy.
Mr. Safavi is right that the Islamic Republic is the antithesis of democracy. The nuclear threat is real. The problem is not political, but rather ideological.[11] Iranian leaders mean what they say. Neither European engagement nor flaccid diplomacy will work. It is an embarrassment that, as the Bush administration enters its sixth year, there remains no policy toward Iran. Bush's rhetoric means little when his administration is unwilling to act in support of the Iranian people. But solidarity with the Iranian people should mean what Solidarity meant to the Polish people. When the Reagan administration debated how to support Poland against the tyranny of the Soviet Empire, career diplomats and European officials counseled a do-nothing approach, for fear that real support for the dockyard workers in Gdansk would cause complicate diplomatic initiatives. President Ronald Reagan dismissed such concerns. So, too, should Bush.
But support for freedom in Iran means listening to the Iranian people. It means funding independent labor unions and unlicensed, truly independent civil society. So that the New York Times no longer accepts Iranian government statistics like voter turn-out at face value, the U.S. government should fund independent Iranian organizations to conduct true surveys. Iranian universities are full of honest sociologists, statisticians, and students who chafe under their governments rule and can participant. Nor, if the Bush administration is serious, should the Los Angeles-based Persian-language media want for funds.
The Mujahedin-e Khalq remains a terrorist group. That its target is not a friend of the U.S. government should be irrelevant. Under no circumstances, though, should Congressmen or Senators be duped into believing the rhetoric of a group like the Mujahedin-e Khalq who may see a cash cow, but whose ideology and actions are out-of-step with the freedom and liberty Iranians desire and deserve.
Notes:
[1] http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=19590
[2] http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21025
[3] New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992.
[4] See reviews, for example, in the Middle East Quarterly: http://www.meforum.org/article/114; and http://www.meforum.org/article/820
[5] Review of Abrahamian. Khomeinism: Essays on the Islamic Republic. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993. http://www.meforum.org/article/820
[6] http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=18419
[7] http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/actions/20030815.shtml; http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2003/23311.htm
[8] For example, see: MKO Organizes Gathering in Washington DC Convention Center. Radio Farda. January 24, 2004. http://www.radiofarda.com/transcripts/topstory/2004/01/20040124_1430_0344_0750_EN.asp
[9] Lisa Bryant. Iranian Resistance Group Seen as Leverage in Nuclear Dispute. Voice of America. January 23, 2006. http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-01-23-voa73.cfm
[10] http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17310
[11] http://www.meforum.org/article/892
EXCELLENT!
Thanks for posting!
Is this the same Ali Safavi?
"Ali Safavi was a Special Forces Commander for Saddam Hussein, training other Special Forces for Saddam's Private Army. Safavi is alleged to have taken part in torture sessions against dissenting MKO members.
Safavi learned English as a student in the USA where he was granted asylum after the 1979 revolution in Iran. After the fall of Saddam, he was brought to the west and used on various occasions as a mouthpiece by known circles to relay second hand intelligence about Iran's nuclear capability. A few weeks ago, Ali Safavi was again used in London as a representative of the NCRI (Mojahedin-e Khalq organization). "
To read today’s thread click here.
Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!
"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”
WOW!! So many Mehdis and so little time! Could the real Mehdi stand up please!
We heard Ahmadinejad has disappeared. Perhaps he has thrown himself down that Well in search of his Mehdi..
Thanks for the links btw.
http://www.geocities.com/hammihanirani/
Here is an interesting site as well; it is opposed to the monarchy as well.
I just found the illustration I posted; I am not really versed in the historic ramifications of all this.
I am finding quite a few organizations around, just by surfing with a search engine. North Carolina of all things as well.
Heavy matters, I wander if any altercation with Iran would be the kind of knock down dragout that Iraq is.
But I'm really not speculating.
(previewed, forgive my grammer slipup in the original post).
I like the design and logic of the slightly altered flag. I think it is more 'pure' Persian. Must admit I never thought about the symbolic meaning of the sword before.
"I wander if any altercation with Iran would be the kind of knock down dragout that Iraq is."
Good question.
IMO, Iraq and Iran are different ball games. But we can learn from Iraq experience.
The short answer is that regardless of whether there is a military altercation or a so-called uprising, there has be a firm interim and long term 'implementation' plan in advance. Another words, we can't just have the fireworks and then play by ear.
At present the choice of a 'democratic opposition' party or group is quite limited. That is what I meant by having an implementation plan for nation building and concensus, prior to any action. Otherwise, my guess is that it may backfire and defeat the purpose of what we and the Iranians want to achieve, which ultimately is a secular democracy.
The above is just one view.
Yes, it's the same Safavi.
Here's more from Professor Paul Sheldon Foote, a man very familiar with Safavi.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/GoPostal/commentdetail.asp?ID=21064&commentID=664838
"Iranian Communist Lies About Iran
Professor Paul Sheldon Foote
California State University, Fullerton
pfoote@fullerton.edu
January 27, 2006
(excerpt)
"In a few minutes, anyone can perform an Internet search for “Ali Safavi”. They will discover that he has been speaking for the NCRI or the MEK for many years. They will discover that many famous American newspapers have quoted him without bothering to check the accuracy of anything he says. Michael Rubin was correct in concluding that the writings of Ali Safavi are dishonest but useful. The real villains in this case are the idiots and dupes in the American media who cannot be troubled to publish truthful, investigative reporting about the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists.
At Traitors USA, you can find my exchanges of emails with Ali Safavi. When he discovered that I graduated, too, from the University of Michigan and am a professor, he found it difficult to attack my academic credentials. While he describes himself as a sociologist, he fails to disclose on which faculty he serves or in any other way he works as a sociologist. His fictional tales about the MEK do not work with me. I have known MEK members for 37 years. While I was a doctoral student at Michigan State University, I attended MEK meetings. I studied Persian at Harvard University and met a Harvard professor who writes truthfully about Iran. Professor Richard N. Frye’s Greater Iran is a truthful story of an American professor who spent 60 years researching Iran and the surrounding areas: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1568591772/qid=1138430187/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-4092926-4396717?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
Relatives of my Iranian wife of 37 years have died fighting for the MEK.
The Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists publish daily large amounts of print, television, and of Internet media lies. Unfortunately, most American journalists are either too stupid or too dishonest to expose America’s communist terrorist enemies.
I am a Professor of Accounting who has graduated from the University of Michigan, Harvard Business School, and from Michigan State University. As a life-long registered Republican and as an elected member of the Los Angeles County Republican Central Committee, I have always been in the right wing of the political spectrum. Ali Safavi’s statements about left-wing attacks on the MEK are misleading. While you can find some progressive Web sites critical of the MEK, you can find communist Web sites supporting the MEK.
During the Vietnam War, I volunteered and served in the Army in Vietnam to fight the communists. If I were young enough to serve in the Army today, I would not join the Army to further the goals of corrupt Democrats and Republicans in Congress who support the communist overthrow of Iran by the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists.
From Lenin to Fidel Castro to Pol Pot, there have been some evil American political and business interests who have supported the communist takeovers of countries. Americans need to cancel subscriptions to any newspapers supporting or publishing lies about the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists. Americans need to vote out of office all Democrats and Republicans who accept campaign contributions from the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists’ supporters."
Thanks, good find.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.