Iranian Alert -- September 18, 2003 -- IRAN LIVE THREAD PING LIST

IAEA Chooses New Governing Board, Iran No Longer a Member

September 18, 2003
Ample
AFX News

VIENNA -- The UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chose a new governing board Thursday, and the regular rotation of countries represented meant that Iran, a country accused of breaching the body's rules, is no longer a member, a spokesman for the watchdog agency said.

Spain is to take over from Kuwait as chairman of the 35-nation board, which makes key decisions such as deciding last week to impose an October 31 deadline on Iran to prove it is not secretly developing atomic weapons.

Spain is to be chosen as chair when the new board meets for the first time in Vienna on Monday.

AFP reported Iran's ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Akbar Salehi, as saying: "It's better to be on the board but we can still raise our voice and defend our position" since Iran can be present at meetings as an observer.

IAEA spokesman Mark Gwozdecky said the appointment Thursday of the new board at a general conference of the 137-member IAEA was an "annual rotation of board members."

He said the board's composition was a "formula with certain seats allocated to each region so that the balance more or less stays the same."

Iran is replaced for the Middle East and South Asia region by Pakistan, a country which possesses nuclear weapons.

Key nuclear powers Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States are permanent members of the board.

http://www.iii.co.uk/shares/?type=news&articleid=4748814&action=article

Soldier Opens Fire on His Fellow Guards

September 18, 2003
AFP
IranMania

TEHRAN -- A soldier guarding Tehran's law courts on Thursday opened fire on his fellow guards, killing one and wounding several others, the student news agency ISNA reported.

The director of political and security affairs in Tehran, Ali Taala, said five or six shots were fired in the incident, adding that an investigation was underway into the cause of the shooting.

No further details were given.

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=18113&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs

Guard kills superior and wound several militiamen

SMCCDI (Information Service)
Sep 18, 2003

An officer of the LEF was killed and several militiamen were wounded, today, in the Justice palace located in the Nasser Khosrow avenue of Tehran.

A guard exasperated by witnessing the persistent repression of Iranians shoot out on his superior and colleagues and then escaped from the premises located in the nearby busy 15 Khordad (former Ark) circle.

Most neighboring avenues were closed and a successful man hunt took place, then, in the area by resulting in the capture of the rebellious soldier in the Davar avenue.

The rebellion of Iranian draftees is nothing new and has had several precedents. Sons of people, many of them are looking for the day that they can use of their guns in order to help their compatriots gaining freedom.

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_2419.shtml

US Will Target States Backing Terror

September 17, 2003
Dow Jones Newswires
Alex Keto

A Dow Jones Newswires Analysis

U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney Wednesday reiterated the Bush administration's policy of using preemptive attacks to destroy threats to the U.S.'s security by saying the U.S. and its allies have a moral duty to target states that back and support terrorism.

However, coincidentally or not, Cheney's tough talk backing preemptive attacks comes amid escalating rhetoric and accusations from White House officials about Syria.

"Prior to 9/11, too many nations tended to draw a distinction between terrorist groups and the states that provided these groups with support, sanctuary and safe harbor. They were unwilling to hold these terror-sponsoring states accountable for their actions," Cheney told the Air Force Association National Convention.

Given the grave threat posed by terrorists groups armed with weapons of mass destruction, Cheney said the U.S. can no longer afford to wait for a threat to emerge and an enemy to strike.

"So in addition to going after the terrorists, we are also taking on states that sponsor terror," Cheney said.

The vice president said that Bush has already ordered the U.S. military to topple two regimes that backed terrorists - Afghanistan and Iraq.

While Cheney made no mention of any other countries that back terrorism, other administration officials haven't been reluctant to provide a list of states sponsoring terrorism and building weapons of mass destruction.

Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton pointed a finger at four countries in a hearing on Capitol Hill Tuesday when he said that Iran , North Korea, Syria and Libya are all building weapons and helping terrorists.

Getting more specific, Bolton said Syria has stockpiled thousands of chemical-weapons munitions, including artillery shells and bombs, in addition to backing Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas.

Bolton acknowledged Syria has not supplied any terrorist groups with these weapons or used the weapons itself, but he said the nexus of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction causes great "anxiety" within policy-making circles.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan backed up this assessment by saying Syria's current course of actions is unacceptable, and added that the regime of Bashir Assad needs to amend his ways.

"We're making it very clear that any support or harboring of terrorists is unacceptable, and you will be held accountable. That's why we are continuing to pressure Syria to reverse course, to change its behavior," McClellan said.

McClellan added that it is not just Syria's support for terrorism and its pursuit of chemical and biological weapons that are bothering the U.S.

In addition, the U.S. has demanded Syria seal its borders with Iraq to prevent the infiltration of foreign terrorists, he said.

"These are very real and serious concerns that we have," he added.

Cheney didn't say military action against terror states is inevitable, but he did note that several past strategies the U.S. has employed to defend itself simply don't work against terrorists and their sponsors.

While the U.S. was able to hold the Soviet Union at bay during the Cold War with the threat of massive retaliation, this strategy of deterrence is now on the ash heap of history, Cheney said.

"There is nothing they (the terrorists) value highly enough that we can put at risk to keep them from launching an attack against the United States. So no treaty or arms control agreement or strategy of deterrence will end this conflict," Cheney said.

Another strategy, raising ever thicker and more formidable defenses against a terror strike, likewise will not succeed in the end, Cheney said.

"The problem with terrorist organizations is that even if you build defenses that are 99% successful, the 1% that gets through can still kill you," he said.

Given these realities, Cheney said the only realistic action is a strategy aimed at hitting terrorists where they gather and where they are helped.

"We will be much more secure if we aggressively go after the terrorists - and after the nations and the mechanisms that support them - than if we lay back and wait for them to strike us again here in the United States," the vice president said.

Cheney acknowledged that some key allies are not comfortable with a policy of destroying regimes that back terrorism, but he derided these critics as out of touch with the new strategic reality created by the Sept. 11th attacks in which a small number of terrorists killed thousands.

"Some people - both in this nation and abroad - have questions about that strategy. They suggest that somehow it's wrong for us to strike before an enemy strikes us. But as President Bush said, 'If the threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations, would come too late'," Cheney said.

In any case, Cheney said the U.S. has a moral obligation to pursue the war on terrorism "well into the foreseeable future."

"It is a struggle against evil - against an enemy that rejoices in the murder of innocent, unsuspecting human beings," Cheney said.

http://www.iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2003&m=09&d=18&a=8

Iran's nuclear diplomacy

It's all gone dreadfully wrong

Sep 18th 2003 | TEHRAN
From The Economist print edition

Even the European Union has lost patience with Iran

WHEN confronted with difficult questions about its nuclear programme, Iran's strategy has been to play for time. That approach backfired badly last week when the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) expressed its collective exasperation with Iran's evasive attitude. Instead of buying more time, Iran now faces a deadline of October 31st to dispel doubts about its nuclear ambitions.

When the 34 other members of the IAEA's governing board adopted a strongly-worded resolution, Iran's representative, Ali Akbar Salehi, walked out of the proceedings in anger. He should not have been surprised. Concern over Iran's nuclear activities has been mounting on both sides of the Atlantic. France and Germany share American suspicions about the nature of Iran's programme, and the European Union has presented a united front to the government in Tehran. But Iran mistakenly pinned its hopes on non-aligned governments blocking an American-backed resolution.

The result was a diplomatic disaster for a country that has made a priority of courting Europe as a buffer against America. Muhammad Khatami's reformist government counted the improved relations with European governments as one of its few successes. But the nuclear issue has exposed the limits of its authority.

Mr Khatami's supporters pleaded with the EU to tread softly to avoid giving ammunition to their hardline opponents in the theocratic system. But there is little sign that the reformists have the final say on the issues that matter to the rest of the world, and the gap between Iran's words and actions could no longer be overlooked.

Even the staunchest advocates of talking to Iran, such as Jack Straw, Britain's foreign secretary, are forced to question the fruits of “constructive engagement”. Mr Straw has an extra little difficulty: the four successive sets of pot-shots at the British embassy in Tehran. Nobody was injured in the attacks and nobody has been arrested. The government calls them “isolated incidents”, though in every case the shots were fired from a passing motorcycle.

Iran has played its cards badly. Some reformists in parliament point out that it would have been much easier to defuse the nuclear issue months ago, simply by taking the initiative and signing up for short-notice inspections. Now, saving face will be much harder. With France standing side-by-side with the Bush administration, Iran has managed to produce the seemingly unattainable: transatlantic unity.

http://www.economist.com/World/africa/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2076874

washingtonpost.com
Saudi Arabia Says It Does Not Want an Atomic Bomb

Reuters
Thursday, September 18, 2003; 11:45 AM

LONDON (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia said Thursday it had no intention of developing a nuclear weapon.

Citing a "strategy paper" of unclear origin, London's Guardian newspaper reported Thursday that oil-rich Saudi Arabia was mulling the option of acquiring a nuclear weapon.

"The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is not considering acquiring a nuclear bomb or nuclear weapons of any kind," the embassy in London said in a statement. "There is no atomic energy program in any part of the kingdom and neither is one being considered."

A diplomat familiar with the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) told Reuters in Vienna the IAEA had no information that would back up the Guardian article.

Diplomats there also said it would be highly unusual for a country to permit any such plans to be leaked to a newspaper.

Separately, the IAEA said Thursday it had no information to indicate Syria was violating its nuclear non-proliferation obligations, as U.S. officials have suggested.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A29442-2003Sep18?language=printer

"Carter says U.S. needs to push harder for peace"

Does anyone really care what he has to say?

source: RFE/RL NEWSLINE Vol. 7, No. 178, Part III, 18 September 2003:

IRANIAN OFFICIAL PUTS NUCLEAR PURSUITS IN RELIGIOUS, REGIONAL CONTEXT.

Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting director Ali Larijani defended his country's nuclear pursuits during a 17 September speech at the two-day International Conference for Arab and Islamic Media in Support of the Palestinian People, which is being held at the Crown Plaza Hotel in Beirut, the official Radio Lebanon reported. He said Iran obtained nuclear technology for peaceful purposes but that the unspecified "they" do not want regional states, "particularly the Islamic countries," to make more progress in this area. Nevertheless, he said, "We publicly announce today that we will not abandon our right to obtain nuclear technology, and that, pursuant to the Prophet's saying, we believe that defending the Palestinian people is an Islamic and human duty." Larijani added, "We will not be scared by the childish threats by the American president to launch a crusade." BS

HIZBALLAH DEFENDS IRAN'S NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES.

Hizballah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah also gave a speech in Beirut at the International Conference for Arab and Islamic Media in Support of the Palestinian People, Al-Manar television reported on 17 September. Nasrallah defended Iran's nuclear pursuits in terms similar to those of Larijani, contrasting "their" treatment of Israel with "their" treatment of Iran. "Iran seeks to obtain nuclear power for peaceful purposes, but preparations are made to besiege it internationally. This may reach the point of declaring war on it," he said. "This happens while Israel, which possesses lethal nuclear weapons, is protected and is given easy loans and annual aid on all levels." BS

Comment: Is he expecting new devices?

"Islamic Democracy", indeed!

Keep an eye on France in November when the UN Security Council will likely vote on Iran's non-compliance with the IAEA. -- DoctorZin

Our War With France

NY Times
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
September 18, 2003

It's time we Americans came to terms with something: France is not just our annoying ally. It is not just our jealous rival. France is becoming our enemy.

If you add up how France behaved in the run-up to the Iraq war (making it impossible for the Security Council to put a real ultimatum to Saddam Hussein that might have avoided a war), and if you look at how France behaved during the war (when its foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, refused to answer the question of whether he wanted Saddam or America to win in Iraq), and if you watch how France is behaving today (demanding some kind of loopy symbolic transfer of Iraqi sovereignty to some kind of hastily thrown together Iraqi provisional government, with the rest of Iraq's transition to democracy to be overseen more by a divided U.N. than by America), then there is only one conclusion one can draw: France wants America to fail in Iraq.

France wants America to sink in a quagmire there in the crazy hope that a weakened U.S. will pave the way for France to assume its "rightful" place as America's equal, if not superior, in shaping world affairs.

Yes, the Bush team's arrogance has sharpened French hostility. Had President Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld not been so full of themselves right after America's military victory in Iraq — and instead used that moment, when the French were feeling that maybe they should have taken part, to magnanimously reach out to Paris to join in reconstruction — it might have softened French attitudes. But even that I have doubts about.

What I have no doubts about, though, is that there is no coherent, legitimate Iraqi authority able to assume power in the near term, and trying to force one now would lead to a dangerous internal struggle and delay the building of the democratic institutions Iraq so badly needs. Iraqis know this. France knows this, which is why its original proposal (which it now seems to be backtracking on a bit) could only be malicious.

What is so amazing to me about the French campaign — "Operation America Must Fail" — is that France seems to have given no thought as to how this would affect France. Let me spell it out in simple English: if America is defeated in Iraq by a coalition of Saddamists and Islamists, radical Muslim groups — from Baghdad to the Muslim slums of Paris — will all be energized, and the forces of modernism and tolerance within these Muslim communities will be on the run. To think that France, with its large Muslim minority, where radicals are already gaining strength, would not see its own social fabric affected by this is fanciful.

If France were serious, it would be using its influence within the European Union to assemble an army of 25,000 Eurotroops, and a $5 billion reconstruction package, and then saying to the Bush team: Here, we're sincere about helping to rebuild Iraq, but now we want a real seat at the management table. Instead, the French have put out an ill-conceived proposal, just to show that they can be different, without any promise that even if America said yes Paris would make a meaningful contribution.

But then France has never been interested in promoting democracy in the modern Arab world, which is why its pose as the new protector of Iraqi representative government — after being so content with Saddam's one-man rule — is so patently cynical.

Clearly, not all E.U. countries are comfortable with this French mischief, yet many are going along for the ride. It's stunning to me that the E.U., misled by France, could let itself be written out of the most important political development project in modern Middle East history. The whole tone and direction of the Arab-Muslim world, which is right on Europe's doorstep, will be affected by the outcome in Iraq. It would be as if America said it did not care what happened in Mexico because it was mad at Spain.

Says John Chipman, director of the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies: "What the Europeans are saying about Iraq is that this is our backyard, we're not going to let you meddle in it, but we're not going to tend it ourselves."

But what's most sad is that France is right — America will not be as effective or legitimate in its efforts to rebuild Iraq without French help. Having France working with us in Iraq, rather than against us in the world, would be so beneficial for both nations and for the Arabs' future. Too bad this French government has other priorities.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/18/opinion/18FRIE.html?pagewanted=print&position=

BELARUS SAID TO HAVE SUPPLIED SYRIA WITH ANTIAIRCRAFT WEAPONRY.

Belarus has provided Syria with hundreds of shoulder-fired, SA-18 antiaircraft missiles and launchers in a deal estimated to be worth more than $30 million, "Middle East Newsline" (http://www.menewsline.com) reported on 17 September, quoting "Western intelligence sources." The supply was reportedly sent in three shipments -- one in March on the eve of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, the next in early summer, and the last in August. JM

Source: RFE/RL NEWSLINE Vol. 7, No. 178, Part II, 18 September 2003

"the French campaign — "Operation America Must Fail" — France seems to have given no thought as to how this would affect France."

As they gave no thought to preparing and warning their own citizens about the heat wave this summer.

it needs Britain on its side in the face of unprecedented American attempts to isolate and demonize the country internationally.

Iran is doing a perfectly fine job of that without U.S. assistance.

Robert Baer, See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism, Crown, 2002, page 79 places the blame for the kidnapping and murder of Buckley and the Beirut Embassy bombing on IJO which on page 264 he says the CIA knew "was merely a front for the Iranians."

The current nuclear weapons violation indicates the evidence of Bill Gertz re Iranian-Russian proliferation (Year of the Rat, Betrayal) was the tip of the iceberg.

TEHRAN TAKES CENTER STAGE

Amid mounting international scrutiny of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, officials in Washington are expressing fresh worries about the growing missile threat from the Islamic Republic. In his June 25th testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, General John Abizaid, the incoming commander of the United States Central Command, stressed that “Iran has the largest ballistic missile inventory in the Central Command region -- to include long-range weapons of mass destruction and delivery systems capable of reaching deployed U.S. forces in the theater.” Iran, according to Abizaid, “casts a shadow on security and stability in the Gulf region” and “poses a potential threat to neighboring countries.”

These concerns are sure to be compounded by news that Iran has successfully tested its medium-range “Shahab-3” missile. Israel's Ha’aretz newspaper (July 4) reports that the latest flight test of the rocket, conducted in late June, is the most successful trial to date, showcasing an expanded range for the “Shahab-3” above and beyond its previously-projected 1,300-kilometer range.

~~~

September 11:

MOSCOW MOVES TOWARD ACCOUNTABILITY ON IRAN. A source in Russia's Atomic Energy Ministry has told Agence France-Presse that Moscow will support a draft resolution at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) setting an October 31st deadline for Iran to prove it is not secretly developing nuclear weapons. According to the source, the draft softens a previous version by giving the Iranians "room to maneuver, so they are not pushed into a corner like North Korea" and into withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Moscow is demanding that Tehran sign an agreement to send back spent nuclear fuel from the Bushehr nuclear facility, which Russia is help building, once the facility becomes operational.

Russia Reform Monitor No. 1076, September 12, 2003
American Foreign Policy Council, Washington, DC
http://www.afpc.org

~~~

PYONGYANG, TEHRAN TIGHTEN MISSILE TIES

Even as plans for multilateral talks over its nuclear program move forward, North Korea is intensifying its missile and WMD cooperation with Iran. According to the Sankei Shimbun (August 6), Pyongyang is currently in talks with Tehran to export components of its long-range “Taepo-Dong 2” missile to the Islamic Republic, as well as to jointly develop nuclear weapons. According to the conservative Japanese daily, the plan -- in the works for about a year -- could be finalized as early as this October. If it materializes, this export arrangement would provide North Korea with much-needed hard currency, and would dramatically expand the range of Iran’s ballistic missiles, making the Islamic Republic capable of striking targets in Europe.

MISSILE DEFENSE BRIEFING REPORT NO. 115, August 15, 2003
American Foreign Policy Council, Washington, DC

~~~

The agency of certain UK journalists to apologize for jihadists has come to the fore of late with the Andrew Gilligan smear and the petition to cancel the royal charter of the BBC, altogether with Israel's breaking relations with that agency.

To suggest as the author does that Israel shapes U.S. policy toward anything let alone Iran is a default to knee-jerk anti-Zionism and ignorance of reality.

Iran is working very hard to maintain membership in the Axis of Evil, an even more exclusive club since May.

"Iran Can Arm Missiles with Biological Warheads"

September 19, 2003
Ha'aretz
Nathan Guttman

WASHINGTON - Iran has the capability of arming ballistic missiles with biological warheads, Paula DeSutter, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance, told Congress on Wednesday.

This is the first time that an official claim of Iran's ability to launch biological warheads has been made.

Intelligence sources said that such an ability indicates sophisticated technological capabilities, since biological warheads are considered much harder to use than other types. Among other problems, the structure of the warhead differs from that of a conventional one, to facilitate the dispersal of the biological material.

DeSutter's testimony was delivered at a joint session that included Israeli Knesset members as well as members of both houses of Congress. The meeting, part of an ongoing initiative to hold periodic joint sessions of the Congress and Knesset, was attended by Senators Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Congressmen Jane Harman (D-CA) and Curt Weldon (R-PA). The Israeli representatives were four members of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee: Chairman Yuval Steinitz (Likud), Omri Sharon (Likud), Haim Ramon (Labor) and Ephraim Sneh (Labor).

DeSutter told the committee that Iran is in violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and has been working to acquire secretly nonconventional weapons of all kinds. She said that Iran's nuclear program is a genuine threat to both the Middle East and the U.S., since the Iranians are constantly working to expand the range of their missiles. America's current strategy for dealing with the problem is to push for a decision by the International Atomic Energy Agency, formally declaring Iran in violation of the NPT, she added.

Other experts warned the meeting that if Iran's efforts continue unchecked, its nuclear capabilities could outstrip those of North Korea.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia yesterday denied a report in Britain's Guardian newspaper stating that the kingdom was considering acquiring nuclear weapons. "The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is not considering acquiring a nuclear bomb or nuclear weapons of any kind," the Saudi Embassy in London said in a statement. "There is no atomic energy program in any part of the kingdom and neither is one being considered."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=341947&contrassID=1&subContrassID=5&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

Iran Accused of Role in Iraq Bombings

September 19, 2003
Telegraph
Patrick Bishop

America's pro-consul in Baghdad gave warning yesterday that Iran should halt its plots to destabilise Iraq, in a further hardening of American attitudes towards its long-time adversary.

Ambassador Paul Bremer, head of the Coalition Provisional Authority and effectively Iraq's civilian ruler, said that Iran, which has been watching the American occupation of its neighbour with mounting alarm, "continues to meddle in various ways in Iraq's internal affairs".

In an interview with The Telegraph he claimed that Iranian intelligence agents and government officials were working to destabilise the reconstruction process. Their activities included "support for various people, some of whom have taken violent action against both Iraqis and against the coalition".

Asked whether Iranians were suspected of possible involvement in shooting and bomb attacks, he replied: "There's certainly some indication of that, yes."

Three American soldiers were killed yesterday in an ambush on a busy road near Khaldiya, west of Baghdad. Their vehicles were damaged by a mine and then gunmen fired on survivors. As well as daily attacks on coalition forces a devastating series of bombings aimed at civilians have rocked Iraq in recent weeks and killed about 150 people.

Teheran is already under pressure because of evidence that it may be developing nuclear weapons and has until the end of October to prove its innocence to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Mr Bremer's accusations against Iran will dismay President Mohammed Khatami, whose attempts at reform have been hobbled by the Shia religious conservative establishment.

Mr Khatami recently told King Abdullah of Jordan that he was alarmed at the prospect of conflict between Shias and Sunnis in Iraq and willing to do what he could to prevent trouble.

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/09/19/wirq19.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/09/19/ixnewstop.html

I am shocked. -- DoctorZin

There is something going on between the US and Iran - re the Iraq situation. Obviously, there had been some sort of secret diplomacy, and an "understanding", before the invasion, there would have had to have been.

But since then, something has come unstuck. The death of Ayatollah Hakim is one symptom of that. These complaints are another.

Let send Jimmy Carter over there, he'll know what to say to
those pesky Iranians.

"In an interview with The Telegraph he claimed that Iranian intelligence agents and government officials were working to destabilise the reconstruction process. Their activities included "support for various people, some of whom have taken violent action against both Iraqis and against the coalition"."

Yes, this is quite a revelation.
A conspiracy, no doubt.

Indeed there is no democracy in communism.

Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea is a case in point.

Per The Black Book of Communism, the price of the illusion has been 100 million murdered to date.

Russian Communism was Stalinism; Chinese, Maoism; each devolving through subsequent rulers--but never to the people.

The dictatorship of the proletariat always means a tiny clique of the most murderous.

In this there seems as much affinity between Iran's leftists and Islamists, as Eric Hoffer found between Nazis and Communists.

Current developments in Iraq may help assure Sam Ghandchi that he will live to see a "Futurist, Federal, Democratic, and Secular Republic in Iran".

Nathan Hale dittos.

Blood of tyrants bump.