Iranian Alert -- August 19, 2003 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST

The Iranian Student Movement Up To The Minute Reports ^ | 8.19.2003 | DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movment in Iran from being reported.

From jamming satellite broadcasts, to prohibiting news reporters from covering any demonstrations to shutting down all cell phones and even hiring foreign security to control the population, the regime is doing everything in its power to keep the popular movement from expressing its demand for an end of the regime.

These efforts by the regime, while successful in the short term, do not resolve the fundamental reasons why this regime is crumbling from within.

Iran is a country ready for a regime change. If you follow this thread you will witness, I believe, the transformation of a nation. This daily thread provides a central place where those interested in the events in Iran can find the best news and commentary.

Please continue to join us here, post your news stories and comments to this thread.

Thanks for all the help.

DoctorZin

[risk]

Let Japan and the United States work together to extract western own oil in ANWAR, off the coast of California, and in the Gulf of Mexico. Besides, if Japan is helping us in Iraq, they can buy oil from the Iraqis.

No Iranian oil for blood. When Iran abandons its nuclear program and transforms itself into a democratic state, we can go back to buying its oil.

[onyx]

For many of us Kalifornians, we are almost totally involved in the re-call election, and as one Kalifornian, I must thank you for posting the news articles which have a far greater impact on all of us as Americans. Much appreciated and please ping me to all articles you post!

Much appreciated and thanks again!

[onyx]

# 20 --- Bump to me for tomorrow morning's first read!

[EGPWS]

Iran will not give in to Western nuclear demands - Khamenei

That sounds like a statement that supports Khamenei's professions of Iranian nuclear power endeavors for peaceful power for his country only....doesn't it?

[F14 Pilot]

Khamenei: Iran Must Not Yield to US Pressure on Nuclear Program

VOA News
19 Aug 2003, 09:53 UTC

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says his country should never yield to U.S. pressure over its nuclear program.

In a speech late Monday, the Ayatollah said Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes and the Islamic Republic's religious principles prevent it from using weapons of mass destruction. He said the United States is treating other countries as if they were indebted to it. He said giving in to U.S. pressure or showing any sign of weakness would be a "grave strategic mistake" for Iran.

Tehran is under strong international pressure to prove that it is not developing nuclear weapons and to sign an Additional Protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that would allow U.N. inspectors to carryout surprise inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities.

Tehran denies developing nuclear weapons and says it is still discussing the inspection issue with representatives of the International Atomic Energy Agency -- the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog body.

Observers say Iran's reformist government led by President Mohammad Khatami favors signing the Additional Protocol but conservatives are strongly against it. Some conservatives say Iran should pull out of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -- a move that would bar U.N. inspectors from visiting Iran's nuclear facilities.

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=46354493-A195-4F53-9DDC3817C8DA6FD0

[F14 Pilot]

Japan vows to proceed with oil deal in Iran
By David Pilling in Tokyo

Published: August 19 2003 9:22

Japan will press ahead with a $2bn (E1.8bn) oil deal in Iran so long as it is commercially viable, despite US pressure to withdraw from the investment, according to a senior Japanese government official.

Japanese companies, which won exclusive negotiating rights to invest in Iran's Azadegan oilfield, failed to conclude an agreement by the initial deadline of June 30, triggering widespread speculation that Tokyo had abandoned the project because of US objections. Washington is discouraging business with Tehran, which it accuses of seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

But a senior Japanese official with close knowledge of the negotiations said: "We have not withdrawn from the deal. We basically think the issues of nuclear and oil are separate."

The official said the Azadegan decision had been held up for purely commercial considerations and that Tokyo was trying to persuade Washington to drop its objections. "We want to sign if the commercial conditions are met," he said.

Jiro Okuyama, foreign ministry spokesman, said: "The nuclear concern is one thing. But Azadegan is another."

However, he added: "Of course we share the concern about possible nuclear development in Iran. That's why we have been putting pressure on the Iranian side to sign the additional
protocol of the International Atomic Energy Agency." Such a protocol would allow the agency to carry out unannounced visits to registered and non-registered nuclear sites.

Some oil executives in Tokyo say a deal cannot be signed if Washington objects, partly because of the threat of sanctions under the 1996 Iran-Libya Sanctions Act.

One diplomat said that, despite Tokyo's bravado, it was unlikely to defy Washington over such a high-profile issue.

Japanese officials are privately furious at Washington's attitude. They say years of patient diplomacy with Tehran, including the provision of $3bn in loans, could be thrown away
because of exaggerated concerns about Iran's nuclear intentions.

The Azadegan oilfield is considered a vital part of Japan's strategy to diversify its oil supply. It could provide 6 per cent of Japan's oil imports, reducing its dependence on Arab oil from 75 per cent to 69 per cent.

"A close and intimate relationship with the US is a sine qua non. We cannot harm this basic relationship," said the government official. "But we are not fully convinced of the US logic and reasoning."

Tokyo is trying to persuade Washington to engage with Iran by encouraging it to sign the "additional protocol" to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. "Our policy towards Iran is
that of engagement, so that is different from the US," the official said.

Japan's sense that it is being victimised by the US is compounded by the fact that several European companies are doing business in Iran with impunity. However, last week, Spencer Abraham, the US energy secretary, warned the Dutch and Italian governments not to allow their companies to invest in Azadegan, which is up for grabs following the expiry of
Japan's exclusive negotiating period.

"This is one of the most difficult decisions we arefacing," the Japanese official said. "What is at stake is the crucially important Japan-US relationship against an obvious case of national interest, not to mention our relations with Iran."

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1059479130505

[F14 Pilot]

Kharrazi, Ivanov discuss Iran's nuclear programs

Moscow, Aug 19, IRNA -- Iran's Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi and hi
Russian counterpart Igor Ivanov discussed Iran's nuclear programs on
Monday.
Russian Foreign Ministry in a statement said that Kharrazi, in a
telephone conversation with Ivanov, outlined Iran's talks with the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Kharrazi stressed Iran's peaceful nuclear programs as well as
Tehran's commitment to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and expressed
Iran's determination to expand cooperation with the IAEA.
According to the statement, Iran and Russia agreed to continue
bilateral talks between the two sides' experts to this effect.
The Iranian and Russian foreign ministers discussed the
Caspian Sea issue and also various avenues to help change the current
situation in Iraq.

http://www.irna.ir/en/head/030819123333.ehe.shtml

[F14 Pilot]

MP: Vivaciousness, continuity of society depend on women's role

Kerman, Aug 19, IRNA -- Tehran Constituency MP Elahe Koulaie said here
on Monday that the vivaciousness and continuity of a society's life
depend on the role played by women in that society.
Koulaie who was speaking for the female managers of Kerman
Province added, "The Constitution (of the Islamic Republic of Iran)
has quite favorable capacities that can be employed at the service
of the flourishing and development of women's talents, but this does
not mean that those potential capacities have also been properly
utilized."
The Foreign Affairs Commission member of the parliament said, "The
only way to eliminate the problems with which the society is entangled
regarding the women's role is to offer proper training and to educate
the society on the issue."
Koulaie said, "Women should not be viewed merely as mothers, or
wives, but rather as equal human beings, who have rights, and must be
able to use and enjoy those rights."
The Tehran Constituency MP added, "When a woman is not energetic,
vivacious, and hopeful, how can he train a vivacious and strong
generation?"
She said, "Proving the potentials of women in the society depends
on proving their positive social capabilities, in addition to their
natural role of mothering children and being good wives for their
husbands."
Describing the unpresentably high divorce rates in various
Iranian cities as "horrendous and quite alarming", the MP said, "We
are faced with a flood that can uproot the foundations of our society
in that regard today."
Referring to the passing of a bill on the Convention on banning
discrimination against women at the parliament, Dr. Koulaie said,
"Many of those who launch serious attacks against that convention have
not even read it, at least once, and their judgments are merely based
on what they have heard about it."
She further reiterated, "The MPs who passed the law regarding the
country's joining to the said convention do care for their religious
beliefs, and do know that there is a Hereafter where they would have
to answer for their deeds."
Koulaie added, "In addition to those serious guarantees, the MPs
have sworn before the Holy Qor'an not to pass any laws to contradict
the Islamic jurisprudence."

http://www.irna.ir/en/tnews/030819003332.etn08.shtml

[F14 Pilot]

Iran: The road not taken
By Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar

Fifty years ago on August 19, 1953, the Americans, with the help of the British, overthrew one of the few democratic governments in the Middle East. The Central Intelligence Agency carried out a coup against premier Mohammad Mossadegh of Iran and brought the Shah, who was in exile at the time, back to power. The success of this subversion emboldened the US for the coming decades to carry out similar actions in Guatemala, Chile, Cuba, Vietnam, and many other countries in the world (The Bay of Pigs fiasco in Cuba and the coup against Salvador Allende in Chile that led to the ascendance of Augusto Pinochet to power are just two examples).

Although the whole operation in Iran cost the US less than US$1 million (including money given to mobs and looters to create chaos in the capital), the coup proved to be much more costly for Washington than anyone could have imagined at the time. Today, it is quite clear that that operation paved the way for the Islamic Revolution of 1979, which in turn inspired fundamentalist movements in the Muslim world for decades.

In its Cold War against communism, the US staunchly supported the Shah for 37 years, a move that allowed him to imprison, torture and kill dissidents and squash any criticism of the government to the point that the opposition had no other way but to overthrow the Shah's regime. He forcefully implemented his selective modernizing and Westernizing policies, which did not include democracy or liberalism. His zero tolerance approach alienated moderate and democratic dissidents and his anti-religious and de-traditionalization prescription caused the emergence of religious fundamentalism in Iran. In such an environment, it was not surprising that the wide variety of opposition groups (from Marxists to nationalists, to Islamists) eventually united behind Ayatollah Khomeini, a religious and revolutionary figure, whose uncompromising attitude appealed to the masses who vividly remembered how 25 years earlier Mossadegh, a moderate lawyer, had failed to peacefully bring about a government independent from foreign interference. Hence, the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

Not having learned from this negative experience, the US continued its destructive policy towards the new regime in Iran by trying to destabilize it. Less than two years after the revolution, in the summer of 1981, Saddam Hussein attacked Iran. Throughout the eight-year war, he enjoyed the strongest support from the US. As the Americans would clearly understand now - as a result of the Americans' "war on terrorism" - the Iran-Iraq war reduced civil liberties in Iran, and gave the government an upper hand to suppress any form of opposition.

After the war, some religious-intellectual circles gradually emerged in Iran. Many of the participants were among those who established the Islamic government in 1979. In these circles, new ideas about the role of religion in politics, and the separation of mosque and state emerged. The climax of this intellectual movement was the election of 1997 when Mohammad Khatami, who ran under the platform of civil society and rule of law, surprised the world by winning the presidency. More than 76 percent of the eligible voters participated in this election, out of which 70 percent voted for him. By comparing this election with the 1980 referendum, (when 88 percent of the people participated, and 98 percent of them said "yes" to the establishment of "Islamic Republic") it was obvious that a new political culture had been born in Iran. But it took the Iranian society almost 50 years to be able to create a semi-democratic condition similar to Mossadegh's era.

Surprised by the emergence of "democratic elements" in Iran, the Bill Clinton administration modified its approach towards Iran and called the US intervention of 1953 "short-sighted". This shift, however, was rather short-lived. With the slow process of the reform movement in Iran and then the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US, the new administration decided to not only follow the old policy again but to do it in the extreme way: the Bush administration branded Iran part of an axis of evil, along with Iraq and North Korea. Some in Congress even talked about regime change in Iran.

Naming Tehran a member of the "axis of evil" in 2001, when even the US State Department is acknowledging that Iran is a kind of democracy, is reminiscent of Jimmy Carter calling it "an island of stability" (just a year before the revolution). The statements are the opposite sides of the same coin. Both ignored the fact that Iran was undertaking a major development. In 1977, Iran was on the verge of major turmoil. Today, Iranian society is experiencing a movement as pivotal for the Muslim world as the Reformation was to Christianity. This movement, if it succeeds, could affect the whole Muslim world and lead them toward democracy, without repeating the same experiences of Iran. Today, the US is investing $4 billion a month, and one American life per day in Iraq to materialize the dream of creating a democratic model for the Middle East. Iran and Iraq could provide a great political laboratory for the US to examine how its involvement or lack of involvement in a country could affect that country's path toward democracy.

Americans who go to Iran are often surprised to see how friendly Iranians are towards them. Many believe that the Iranian people are the most pro-American in the Muslim world. If this is the case, then it certainly has something to do with the absence of the US from Iran for a quarter century. By looking at the rest of the Muslim world, we can see a very strong but negative correlation between Washington's support of the Muslim governments and the popularity of the US among the people of those countries. The overflowing anti-American sentiments in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, all traditional key allies of the White House, are three examples. The same is true in all other 53 Islamic nations.

If in the past, Washington, in the name of "war against communism", was supporting Middle Eastern and South Asian dictators, now in the name of "war against terrorism", it is increasingly backing the brutal governments of Central Asia, whose human rights records are among the worse in the world. Therefore, it's not surprising that according to recent reports, the fundamentalist movements in this region are flourishing and US involvement is only helping these movements to become stronger and more popular. If the US follows its old policy and does not force these evil governments to respect human rights and the rule of law, the moderate elements of the opposition groups will be marginalized by the revolutionaries and "a second Iran" could very well be on its way.

Some policymakers in Washington justify the current policy by arguing that a lack of US support will lead to the establishment of Islamic theocracies in these countries. But both support and lack of support could lead to that end. It would be just a matter of time. However, there is a third way. Through international organizations, including the United Nations, the US should hold these governments responsible for their domestic as well as their foreign policies. The US should abstain from getting involved in political conflicts within these countries and instead, by using multilateral approaches to put pressure on the governments (whether secular or theocratic) and indiscriminately force them to respect human rights and rule of law. This could provide a peaceful environment in which a democratic political culture could take root. Had the US adopted such an approach half a century ago, Iran's path toward democracy could have been shortened, more peaceful, and less costly. It would have undoubtedly been in the interests of the United States too.

Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar is a PhD student in the Department of Government at Georgetown University.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EH20Ak02.html

[AdmSmith]

DISPUTE OVER DATE OF IRANIAN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION.

Deputy Interior Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Seyyed Mahmud Mirlohi has said the Guardians Council wants to hold the next parliamentary election on 26 February, which would coincide with the Muharram mourning period, "Etemad" reported on 18 August.

In contrast, "the Interior Ministry has proposed holding the elections during the Ten Days of Dawn [revolution anniversary celebrations in early February] and coinciding with the Id al-Ghadir [the anniversary of the Prophet Mohammad's designation of Ali as his successor], which is a celebratory occasion, and the people would take part in the elections with enthusiasm and joy," Mirlohi said. Reformist campaigning, which tends to be positive and cheerful by Iranian standards, would seem inappropriate during a somber period like Muharram and could be criticized by conservative forces. BS

Comment: What do you think of the effect of the suggested dates?

[Valin]

Khamenei told visiting Iranian diplomats from abroad that Iran's nuclear projects were peaceful and that the country was not after atomic weapons.


Riiiight. No really I believe him. And if they just HAPPEN to get weapons grade material oh well.

[AdmSmith]

The above article as well as the one below is from RFE/RL NEWSLINE Vol. 7, No. 157, Part III, 19 August 2003

INTIFADA CONFERENCE OPENS IN TEHRAN.

A conference entitled Intifada -- a Step Toward Freedom will open at Tehran University on 19 August, ISNA reported the previous day. It will be hosted by the student committee of the secretariat of the Support for the Palestinian Intifada conference series. Hojatoleslam Ali Akbar Mohtashami-Pur -- who is secretary of the Support for the Palestinian Intifada conference series, a founder of Lebanese Hizballah, President Hojatoleslam Mohammad Khatami's special envoy, and a reformist parliamentarian from Tehran -- and Palestinian scholar and Hamas ideologue Munir Shafiq will give the opening speeches. Conference secretary Ruhollah Owhadi said that "active Palestinian students from numerous Palestinian Jihadi groups" will be there, and "a number of Iranian students from various branches of political parties have also been invited to attend the conference in order to establish cultural and civil ties with the Palestinian students, and to reaffirm their support for the Palestinian nation's resistance against the Zionist regime." BS

Comment: Welcome to the world of terrorism.

[nuconvert]

These are amazing, aren't they?

Just your normal, everyday terrorist conference so all the terrorists can share ideas and learn how to get along.

A real learning experience & "love-fest".

[DoctorZIn]

Axis of Proliferators

August 19, 2003
The Wall Street Journal
Henry Sokolski

On Aug. 27, the U.S. will join China, Russia, North Korea, Japan and South Korea in negotiations over how best to neutralize the North Korean nuclear threat. One country that's sure to be watching is Iran.

Earlier this summer, I attended a meeting in Geneva that included Tehran's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency and several members of Iran's Expediency Council. After the formal session, they pulled me aside. The one question -- the only question -- they pressed me about was what Washington planned to do about North Korea.

Since then, Iranian diplomats have been consulting European officials. Tehran has begun developing a grand negotiated nuclear bargain of its own. The stakes are high. If, like North Korea, Iran succeeds in getting the world to accept its nuclear program and is allowed to finish its nearly completed "peaceful" light water reactor (which after little more than a year of operation can make over 50 bombs worth of near weapons-grade plutonium), its neighbors are sure to follow suit.

Saudi Arabia, which helped bankroll Pakistan's bomb project and has medium-range rockets of its own, has already had officials visit Islamabad's bomb factory in Kahuta. There's even been talk about Pakistan loaning some of its nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia, keeping them under Pakistani control (as the U.S. does with its weapons in Germany). Egypt and Syria, meanwhile, are planning nuclear desalinization plants (i.e., big reactors producing material which could be used for nuclear weapons).


Algeria, which was caught in 1991 covertly developing a reactor that might make bombs, now has it on line. Finally, Turkey, a close friend to Israel, has made it clear that Iran going nuclear would force Ankara to secure new "security assurances." Like Taiwan, South Korea and Japan, which have either tried or considered producing nuclear weapons, all of these nations have or could quickly acquire nuclear-capable missiles.

This is not a world the U.S. and its allies want. They probably could identify adversaries and friends in it. But it would be possible only to form a vague idea of how well-armed they might be. And friends, when called upon, would be more inclined to go their own way. Too much would be reminiscent of 1914 but with one big difference -- an increasing number of conflicts would be spring-loaded to go nuclear.

What must the U.S. do to avoid this? How can it convince Iran and the others that violating their nuclear nonproliferation pledges is a bad idea? First, it would help if Washington were clearer about its own view of North Korea -- the most egregious violator of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Certainly, Undersecretary of State John Bolton was lucid enough when he spoke in Seoul on July 31: "To give in to [Kim Jong Il's] extortionist demands would only encourage him, and perhaps more ominously, other would-be tyrants around the world."

He went on to explain that the best way to bolster upcoming six-way talks, was to have the U.N. Security Council take up the IAEA's six-month-old violation report to the council and identify North Korea as an NPT outlaw. This would at least dispel the fiction Pyongyang is promoting that it should be treated as an equal by the other parties to the negotiations (which the IAEA has not found to have violated the treaty). Mr. Bolton also highlighted President Bush's global strategic weapons technology interdiction effort, the Proliferation Security Initiative. Top on every participating nation's target list for this effort, he noted, were North Korea and Iran.

Mr. Bolton's points angered North Korea, which depicted him as "human scum." The White House, in turn, backed Mr. Bolton, saying he spoke for the administration. This support, however, was soon downgraded. Earlier this month at the U.N. mission in New York, U.S. Ambassador Jack Pritchard met with North Korea's U.N. Ambassador Han Song-ryol and reassured him that Mr. Bolton's comments were strictly his "personal" opinion. Mr. Han notified the Japanese press on Aug. 10 and the following day North Korea all but demanded Mr. Bolton's resignation.

The question now is, how does the administration view Mr. Bolton's comments? Do they have the administration's backing or do they merely reflect, as one official put it, "a point of view held by many Americans"?

Iran and North Korea seem ready to exploit the lack of clarity. This month, U.S. and Japanese newspapers have detailed Iran and North Korea's cooperative efforts to develop nuclear warheads and Taepodong-2 nuclear-capable rockets (designed to fly over 6,000 miles). The number of North Korean weapons experts in Iran is now so large, one paper reported, the North Koreans have a seaside community in Iran of their own. Iranian nuclear experts, meanwhile, have already flown to Pyongyang to consult on how to handle IAEA inspections and the possibility of being found in violation of the NPT. The IAEA Board of Governors is set to address these issues next month in Vienna.

To curb the mischief that might be done here, the White House ought to reiterate its support for what it claimed were administration views on using the Security Council to find North Korea in violation of the NPT. If this is not done, the six-way talks will simply become an excuse for keeping the U.N. from enforcing the NPT. North Korea loathes the NPT and IAEA inspectors (whom they see as biased) and hates the idea of bringing their violations before the U.N. As far as Pyongyang is concerned, it has withdrawn from the NPT and should not be held accountable for what it did while it was a member of the treaty. Count on Iran and other would-be bomb makers to be watching this carefully.

Second, the U.S. can hardly ask others to be firm against North Korea's nuclear nonproliferation violations or to block the start-up of Iran's power station if Washington allows construction of the two large U.S.-designed reactors President Clinton promised Pyongyang under the 1994 Agreed Framework to proceed. Work on these reactors (which like Iran's, are prodigious producers of near weapons-grade plutonium) continues. This should end.

The only way these reactors can be completed is with key U.S. components that President Bush can only approve for export by waiving U.S. legal prohibitions against doing so for NPT violators. Despite all of the Bush administration's tough talk, Japan and South Korea continue to pour concrete in hopes Mr. Bush will waive the law. At any time, President Bush could announce that he has no intention of doing so. The sooner he does so the better.

Finally, it would help if, before the six-way talks begin, the U.S. makes it clear what it believes the talks' minimum objectives are and when these objectives need to be met. If North Korea must disclose and dismantle its nuclear program, when, at a minimum, must this be accomplished? Also, what topics should be off the table? Is the U.S. unwilling to give Pyongyang assurances that it will not attack it militarily? Or is this an open question?

Some (including Iran and North Korea) might see the talks as an end in themselves. So long as we are negotiating, they hope, Washington can hardly risk killing the talks by taking any adverse actions (e.g., terminating the reactors, interdicting weapons-related shipments, identifying Pyongyang at the U.N. as an NPT-violator, etc.). Moreover, the longer the talks go without resolving any of the key issues, the more likely it is that the U.S. will be forced by the others at the table to make concessions, setting additional advantageous precedents for Iran.

Cynics, on the other hand, are already arguing that the talks are simply designed to kick the can on the entire set of axis nuclear headaches until sometime after Mr. Bush wins re-election. The problem here is that they might be right. Iran and North Korea's misbehavior, however, will hardly wait that long. If Washington thinks it can be tough and pull out of the talks after being vague, coy or quiet about its ultimate goals and general time table for 15 months, it certainly knows something that no one -- including the other parties to the negotiations and the world's proliferators -- yet has sound cause to believe. Under these circumstances, Iran's proposed grand bargain and nuclear program should be fully ripe for another crisis by November.

Mr. Sokolski is the executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center in Washington.

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9444

[DoctorZIn]

Axis of Proliferators

August 19, 2003
The Wall Street Journal
Henry Sokolski

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/966448/posts?page=34#34

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”

[DoctorZIn]

US accuses Syria and Iran for interference in Iraq

World News
Aug 19, 2003

TIKRIT, Iraq — The top American official in Iraq accused Syria of allowing "terrorists" to cross the border, and U.S. forces on Tuesday reported another attack, this time from assailants firing from behind an ambulance.

No U.S. soldiers were injured in Monday night's attack in which assailants driving alongside an ambulance for cover fired on U.S. forces in one of Saddam Hussein's palaces, a military official said Tuesday.

The attack came shortly after a bomb blew up along the same road in Tikrit, 120 miles north of Baghdad, Lt. Col. Steve Russell of the 4th Infantry Division said.

"We don't believe that the ambulance itself was engaged" in the firing on the troops, Russell said. "This is not the first time we've seen ambulances used in cross fire."

But Maj. Josslyn Aberle, also of the 4th Infantry, said that while no gunfire came from the ambulance, soldiers found an automatic rifle and ammunition inside. The three occupants, one of whom was wounded, were detained for questioning.

L. Paul Bremer said in remarks published Tuesday that Syria, which opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, was allowing "foreign terrorists" to sneak across the border into Iraq.

"We held talks with the Syrians in this regard, we hope to see better cooperation," Bremer told the London-based Arabic newspaper Al Hayat.

Bremer also said he was "still worried" over Iran's meddling in Iraq's affairs, accusing Iran's Revolutionary Guards and Iranian intelligence of actively working against the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq.

"This is irresponsible conduct and runs counter to Iraq's interests. We believe that a free Iraq must not be subject to any interference by its neighbors," Bremer was quoted as saying.

An audiotape, purportedly from an al-Qaida militant, calls on Muslims around the world to travel to Iraq and fight the U.S.-led occupation.

The speaker on the audiotape, obtained by The Associated Press and aired Monday on Al-Arabiya television, claimed to be Abdur Rahman al-Najdi, a Saudi-born militant sought by the United States.

A wanted poster for al-Najdi was circulated by U.S. forces in Afghanistan earlier this year, alongside others for Osama bin Laden, Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar and other militants. Western intelligence sources believe the Taliban, al-Qaida and fighters loyal to Afghan rebel leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar are working together to oppose U.S.-led forces and the Afghan government.

The tape was thought to be the first public call by bin Laden's al-Qaida terror network for Muslims to join the fight in Iraq.

In Washington, a U.S. official familiar with the audio message could not confirm its authenticity. However, the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said al-Najdi is a known senior al-Qaida propagandist and financier who has released messages in the past to boost the morale within al-Qaida's ranks.

On Tuesday, a suspicious fire continued to rage on Iraq's main northern oil export pipeline into Turkey, the U.S. Army said. Accounts varied over whether the blaze was accidental or an act of sabotage. It would take at least 10 days to repair the damaged pipeline once the fire is extinguished, U.S. military officials said.

Bremer said Monday that the sabotage of water, petroleum and electrical lines was slowing U.S. efforts to rebuild Iraq.

"It's people who do not share the vision of a free Iraq with a vibrant economy the president has set forth and which Iraqis share," Bremer said on CNN. "These are probably people left over from the old regime who are simply fighting a rear guard action."

In the past three months, such attacks have cost billions of dollars in damage, according to Bremer. But he warned that the United States would not be pushed out of Iraq.

"I think these bitter-enders that we are faced with live in a fantasy world, where they think somehow the Baathists are going to come back," Bremer said, referring to members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party. "They are wrong. We'll leave when the job is done. They are not going to chase us out, they are not destined to succeed."

Most people in Baghdad had water service Tuesday after saboteurs blew an enormous hole in a 5-foot-diameter water main in the north of the city.

In other attacks, a U.S. soldier was killed by an explosive device in Baghdad on Monday, but the military said it was not clear if the blast was the result of a hostile act.

In a separate incident Monday, two 4th Infantry soldiers were wounded when their patrol was fired on with rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire in the town of Balad, the army said. Both soldiers were evacuated to an Army support hospital in stable condition.

North of Tikrit, Iraqi police and fire brigades discovered six bodies from an explosion two days earlier at an ammunition storage site. It wasn't clear what caused the blast, which was followed by secondary explosions, but Army officials blamed looters. One other body was recovered at the site Monday.

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1818.shtml

[DoctorZIn]

Judiciary releases officers involved in killing of young Tehrani resident

SMCCDI (Information Service)
Aug 19, 2003

The Islamic republic Judiciary has released 3 officers of the Militia involved in the murder of a young Tehrani resident named "Mohammad-Reza Nikbakht". The victim was shot in the neck by the officers following his escape from a crackdown on an innocent Party Gathering.

The shoot out happened on last Thursday in the Alvand street of Tehran and proves, once again, the brutality of the Islamic regime forces and their suspicion to anyone as "element of distabilizing their popular regime". Twelve bullets have been reported as having been shot by the militiamen against the car of the victim.

The late Nikbakht's only crime was to wish avoid being lashed for presence in a friendly meeting where boys and girls were present under the same roof.

The sentence for attending a party, for fun purpose, can vary anywhere from huge fines to lashing or imprisonment of the participants.

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1822.shtml

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”

[nuconvert]

What's going on in March?

[nuconvert]

"Khamenei told visiting Iranian diplomats from abroad that Iran's nuclear projects were peaceful and that the country was not after atomic weapons"

Hey, I'm convinced

[DoctorZIn]

I believe they are referring to the upcoming parliamentary elections. The hardliners want to retake the parliament and if the people continue to refuse to vote, they will succeed.