Iran 2

So you say so, but clearly outside influence, and especially US and Israeli belligerence, has impacted Iranian politics from nuclear power, to missile development, to ending dependence on the US dollar, to seeking allies beyond the mid-East. Certainly you would not argue that the 10 year US backed Iraq war against Iran had no influence? And we can only guess what influence the US has inside Iran today. Interestingly, Afghan insurgent attacks have focused on a USAID contractor deemed to be a CIA front group also operating in Venezuela and Cuba. Is it in Iran?

Link

What a pathetic joke. Iran's modern history is the history of Western Imperialism. Iranian self-determination has not been a failure of the Iranian people, as you might prefer us to believe, but a matter of US and British interference. From whence came the Islamic Revolution? Is it not a root of the tree planted in 1953 when the British and Americans conspired to abort Iranian democracy? What was the state of Iranian self-determination prior to 1953?

Don't insult me with the pretense of some sort of offense. How dare you. If you can't argue the facts then simply admit as much. Are you going to argue we can't debate Afghanistan because we aren't Afghani or China because we aren't Chinese? Am I limited by your ethnic purity laws to only debate the history of Southern Ontario from the point of confederation on-ward?

You have not addressed a single relevant point. Rather you retreat to this pathetic tactic.

That doesn't matter. Again, read history. Can every Iranian govern? Of course not. The point of the US involvement is to undermine stability. Instability hurts the economy, it distracts the government from governing and addressing other critical issues (energy? border? security?), and it can quickly spiral out of control. It is impossible to ensure how any revolution will unwind. From the perspective of the US, it doesn't even matter who is eventually successful. A revolution in Iran would weaken the state, cement Israeli and US domination of the region,  and whatever government eventually emerges can't be worse, from the US perspective, than the current one.

You asked if there is any popular movement supported on this board besides the Bolshevik revolution of 1917? Yes, every indigenous peoples movement, and mass civil society movement, and most worker based movements, all of which have been opposed by the US and often violently in the case of indigenous movements.

I support the right of Iranians to determine their own method of government. But I think they can only do so free of foreign interference by states only too eager, willing, and able to spill blood for cheap oil and gas--the very basis of not only the Western economy, but Western Imperialism. There is a lot at stake and, like it or not, the Iranians are pawns on "The Grand Chessboard", a term coined by Zbigniew Brzezinski. I suppose everyone remembers him. Where was he in 1979? And what did he mean by 'The Grand Chessboard"?

Bump!

That doesn't matter. Again, read history. Can every Iranian govern? Of course not. The point of the US involvement is to undermine stability. Instability hurts the economy, it distracts the government from governing and addressing other critical issues (energy? border? security?), and it can quickly spiral out of control. It is impossible to ensure how any revolution will unwind. From the perspective of the US, it doesn't even matter who is eventually successful. A revolution in Iran would weaken the state, cement Israeli and US domination of the region,  and whatever government eventually emerges can't be worse, from the US perspective, than the current one.

When do believe it will be safe for a revolution to take place?

It strikes me that regardless of when the Clerics are overthrown, chaos will result, so should the Iranian people not oppose the theocrats at all? 

I support the right of Iranians to determine their own method of government. But I think they can only do so free of foreign interference by states only too eager, willing, and able to spill blood for cheap oil and gas--the very basis of not only the Western economy, but Western Imperialism. There is a lot at stake and, like it or not, the Iranians are pawns on "The Grand Chessboard", a term coined by Zbigniew Brzezinski. I suppose everyone remembers him. Where was he in 1979? And what did he mean by 'The Grand Chessboard"?

Ultimatley I think this Chess Board stuff masks a very sutble Leftish racism. It says that majority worlders can't sneeze whithout western intelligence agencies being responsable. It also portrays the people involved in this struggle as being nieve at best, and evil at worst. You cannot say the goals of the movement do not matter, of course they do.

Happy New Year by the way.

Israel Kamakawiwo'Ole 'IZ' 'Somewhere Over The Rainbow' HQ

You're expressinmg an ignorance. There is a racism and it's not at all covert. It says, quite clearly, our, that is Western, economic and energy interests are more important than their (anyone in the global south) lives and right to self-determination. We will happily kill hundreds of thousands of them without even requiring tough fuel standards for our obese vehicles carting around our obese consumers (we no longer have citizens).

You tell me, what has been the history of Iran over the past fifty years and over that period what has been the role of the West? So you would have me believe, that this one time, just this once, despite not a thing having changed, there is no Western involvement in Iranian affairs or what is happening there despite, DESPITE, the US openly acknowledging that they are engaged in destablilizing Iran, that they have effectively surrounded Iran, that Iran has been designated as part of the "Axis of Evil", and that both the US and Israel have been engaged in belligerence against Iran since prior to the Iraq invasion, including threasts of war, and Secretary of State Clinton threatening to obliterate Iran. Do you at all see the parallels with Iraq?

At what point do you remove the rose colored glasses and acknowledge that, indeed, the US may, in fact, be responsible for fomenting anti-state violence and revolt in Iran in pursuit of its own interests?

You can argue about Afgan or Chiense issues as much as you want, but if on an issue you have the whole spectrum of Afghan progressive voices (particulaly those on the ground) agree on one issue, you south ontarian view would become of little credibility and your persistent criticism and accusations against them becomes a point of arrogance, especially considering your total ignorance of the history and facts of the region (in case of Iran, obvious by your continued reference to the 50 year history of Iran).Imagine you taking a view opposite of every native Canadian on this forum on an issue related to native Canadians. I doubt the forum moderators would have let you do that. But naturally on middle east, every South Ontarian is automatically an expert!

Of course one has the right to voice his views even if ignorant, however your attitude is not: "This is my view". your attitude is: "This is my view and the rest of you are ignorant (or have their heads in the sand). No dear, those who oppose your view have their feet on the ground, not their heads in the sands.

So answer this one question, can you quote from any well known progressive Iranian figures inside or outside Iran that agrees with your view and speculations? ( I have already directed you to Hamid Dabashi, Hamid Rahnama and several others who fully support this movement).

As for your reference to the "grand chessboard", you have been spoon fed your side's propaganda and swallowed it happily. The great architect of that chessboard had the board and pieces crashed on his head once so badly he had to pretend it was all part of the plan! But of course it must really hurt your sense of western superiority to see people of the south, whom you consider so inferior and merely "pawns in the game", trying to take control of their destiny.

I am assuming no one can question Hamid Dabashi's leftist credentials. here are some of his articles on the issue:

  "The crisis of an Islamic Republic"

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2009/964/op22.htm

"Left is wrong on Iran"

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2009/956/op5.htm [8]

"Commentary: Middle East is changed forever"

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/07/20/dabashi.iran.domino/index.html [9]

and if you can read Persion, here is his great assessments of the achievments of the movement:

http://www.mardomak.ws/news/hamid_dabashi/ [10] and "on green movement in Iran" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngcjoKqErZ8 [11]

At what point do you remove the rose colored glasses and acknowledge that, indeed, the US may, in fact, be responsible for fomenting anti-state violence and revolt in Iran in pursuit of its own interests?

Like how? Care to give some examples of how my people are being forced or tricked to go to streets, risk their lives or risk tortures and rapes in jails, and fight govenment security forces on the streets?

Sure. It is never safe for a revolution to take place because every revolution takes on a life of its own. Perhaps what you mean, is when it safe for a people to rise up and attempt to seize power? Never as an such action will likely result in loss of life and could represent a step backwards. Does that mean people should not rise up? Keep reading, I will get there.

The ignorance, superiourity, arrogance and possibly racism is yours. We are speaking of modern Iranian history, not ancient history. You dispute that the last 50 years of Iranian history has been dominated by Western intervention? Really? And you accuse me of arrogance. Maybe I am, but at least my arrogance is grounded in reality.

Further, your arrogance is incapable of even basic comprehension. If you actually paid attention to what I have argued with an interest in open dialogue rather than propagating some bullshit, you may have understood what I've been saying. To answer the question above, if you're still here CMOT, yes, people should rise up seeking true democracy whenever the opportunity arises as that is the only way progress will be won. But democracy movements must develop their own leadership, goals, and objectives. The failure of popular revolutions, almost always, has been the absence of popular movements and institutions to rise to power when a vacuum is created.

So, to be clear, I have never argued popular protest in Iran is wrong, or is wholly the product of Western influence. What I have argued, consistently, is that we, in the West, must be aware, before we take up the banner of the Iranian opposition, that US influence is at work and is not supportive of true Iranian self-determination.

And no one, despite all the hostility and all the back-biting, has been able to contradict me on the history or on the facts, and with all due respect, you'd have to be foolish to disagree with me on my last point as, again, all the facts support my contention.

As for ignorance and propaganda, my dear sanizadeh, you are full of both. As for the Grand Chess Board, maybe you've failed to notice that US occupies Iraq, has circled Iran, occupies Afghanistan, has neutralized Pakistan in civil war, has flanked Russia, and has allied India. Only Iran, Syria, and a couple of non-state actors prevent full US/Israeli hegemony in the middle-east. If that's having the chess board smashed I bet they can't wait to see it thrown across the room.

CMOT, yes, people should rise up seeking true democracy whenever the opportunity arises as that is the only way progress will be won. But democracy movements must develop their own leadership, goals, and objectives. The failure of popular revolutions, almost always, has been the absence of popular movements and institutions to rise to power when a vacuum is created.

Then how will we know when a uprising is legitimate? When will this happen and do you believe the Iranian opposition is malevolent, or nieve?

I didn't know that Afghanistan and Pakistan were in the bag, FM. - a fracturing Iraq about to dissolve into three parts, too, for that matter. (And are we favouring theocracy this week, or criticizing ? Or how does that fact/prospect  play out in sorting good guys from bad?  Or should that question not come into play as the old empire struggles to retain a bit of turf ? ) It all can't be so simple for Iranians struggling toward a legitimate (not theocratic) democracy, either.

The Islamic republic has been in power in the past 31 years of those 50 years. and while its external affairs were dominated by issues related to foreign powers (most importantly, the Iran-iraq war, which you watched from the comfort of your house and I had to be in the forefront of it), the foreign intervention at its internal affair has been largely ineffective (even though they tried). Which one of the following events were determined by foreign intervention: The 1979 revolution? Declaration of Islamic republic? Fall of Banisadr? Mass execution of political prisoners in 1988? Selection of Khamanei? Rafsanjani years? Khatami's surprise election in 1997? the reform movement? Ahmadinejad's election? The new movement in Iran is simply the continuation of those events.

Obviously every progressive Iranian must have been foolish, as you have still failed to find a single one who would support you. nevertheless don't try to evade the question: which fact on the ground supports your contention? What element has brought the Iranian people to the streets in a protest that s now far beyond Ahmadinejad, and has targetted the core of the regime? How did the US foment this revolution? Give specific examples instead of generic, vague points.

Those who haven't just become interested in the middle east recall that a little more than 30 years ago, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey and most of the Arab world were all fully owned by the US (and the rest by the other main player);  No Al-Qaida or insurgents; Israel was the most dominant player in the middle east with no one hearing any news from Palestinians; Arab nationalism was already dead; Turkey was a force of secularism; and oil was at a lovely price. You guys must have been one hell of a chess player that now you are proud of "circling" the countries that you owned 30 years ago!

I enjoy this picture

 FM: Who makes up the Iranian resistance.  Be specific.   Please don't tell me it dosen't matter.

So, to be clear, I have never argued popular protest in Iran is wrong, or is wholly the product of Western influence. What I have argued, consistently, is that we, in the West, must be aware, before we take up the banner of the Iranian opposition, that US influence is at work and is not supportive of true Iranian self-determination.

Neither half of  the bipartisan party of warmongering plutocrats in Warshington will allow a "peace scare" to cause another downturn in the stock market. And our two mirror image parties in Ottawa await further instructions from their bosses in the imperial-master nation. Fear and a fanatical devotion to warfiteering are their main weaponry. No country wants to be pulled into what is a liquid state of perpetual war around the world, and especially so since 1991.

with all the rhetoric in this thread, does no one care to find Iran's statement made yesterday on its nuclear option?

pundits, even at babble, like to hear their own voices i guess.

the NYT, Al Jazeera, guardian, CBC, no one seems to have a link to the actual statement made.

What business is it of ours?

Neither half of  the bipartisan party of warmongering plutocrats in Warshington will allow a "peace scare" to cause another downturn in the stock market. And our two mirror image parties in Ottawa await further instructions from their bosses in the imperial-master nation. Fear and a fanatical devotion to warfiteering are their main weaponry. No country wants to be pulled into what is a liquid state of perpetual war around the world, and especially so since 1991.

What does Iran's national energy policy have to do with Canada and Canadians? How much Yanqui bullshit about sovereign oil-rich countries on the other side of the world can people possibly absorb? 

Obama and this new round of warmongering plutocrats, and instructing our stooges in Ottawa, are all full of shit, too. They could lay them al down in a pile of manure and grow duplicates.

Here it is:

http://tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=211169

A lot

Do you know that in 2008 when there was all that coverage of the anti Tibet protests surrounding the Olympic Torch relay, and I decided to say something in favour of that?  I was told very patronizingly that I should pay attention to Iran rather than China.  Now that I am paying attention to Iran, babblers want me to switch my focus from the Islamic republic to human rights abuses in Egypt.  Good god, but you people like to bait and switch.    

Wow. A white Westerner calling an Iranian ignorant, superior, arrogant and "possibly racist" in a thread about Iran. Really? Perhaps you should give things a little bit more thought before you type, FM and recognize that there are people in the majority world with experience and knowledge that the rest of us could not have gained from our comfortable seats behind keyboards. 

My-my the company's been busy. And some of us follow them around the world in lock-step with newzpaper headlines. Their concerns are our concerns, or so it would seem.

Fidel, I don't like you very much, but you do have a point.  The number of nations talked about on Babble is very small.  We discuss Iran, Israel, China and Cuba.  That's it.  Why isn't there a discussion of the pro democracy struggle in Jordan or Syria, Swaziland Or Bahrain?  Damn but this place is dull.       

What business is it of ours?

Do you believe Iran's leaders want to nuke Israel and America?  

No.  But still.  It's an interesting country with  an ancient history.

Yes it is an interesting country with an ancient culture. Almost as old and interesting as the civilization that sprang out from that country now known as Iraq. Or at least, it used to be a sovereign country unto its own before 2003.

I think we have to be really careful about what we read in newspapers about Iran. I'm not saying I know everything about current events in Iran, because that would be ridiculous of me to claim it. What I do believe is that our largest trade partners have a tendency to put out disinformation about a country and treat is as truth in all subsequent news diddies and official government statements about the same country we find interesting, and, which they, too, find interesting at or around the exact same time we do, but in a bizarre kind of way. And when enough people around the world believe the lie, then the number of people who believe it is presented as proof that it's true.

I think we have to be really careful about what we read in newspapers about Iran. I'm not saying I know everything about current events in Iran, because that would be ridiculous of me to claim it. 

Yes, and since that is the case(for most people in the West, anyway) it's silly to claim that student protesters will contribute to the destruction of Iran.  It's bedtime for yours truly.  Goodnight

PS: When do you sleep?  It must be late as hell in Ontario.

Not the destruction of Iran, no. And after Tiananmen, the CIA could maybe only expect to make further contacts with dissidents, the country's scientific and technical leaders etc and arrange for US citizenship papers for them. Or some plan with a goal that doesnt necessarily aim for regime change. They could merely want to establish ties with dissidents on left, right or whatever their political banner. And those people may be paid handsomely for the information they provide western newzies and intel agencies. Sometimes the juicier the information that can be attached to their foreign sounding names from an interesting country, the more they are paid and rewarded. Money can be a good thing to have. But like the end results for torture, money doesn't guarantee truth either.

Aren't you sleepy?

No, but I'm suddenly interested in Iran for some reason. You?

Not the destruction of Iran, no.

Hang on, now. FM said that the student protests would weaken Iran, which would allow Israel to get the upper hand, which would allow the IDF to bomb Iranian cities flat which would cause the downfall of the republic.

So according to his reasoning they would be contributing to, if not the destruction, the near destuction of the Iranian state.

No, but I'm suddenly interested in Iran for some reason. You?

FM could be exactly right about it, too. Many of the same psychotics who were there in crazy George's regime are still there calling the shots. I don't think FM or I can be blamed for not knowing the minds of these megalomanical psychopaths inside out. They are crazy like foxes, but FM and I are at least aware of the psychopathy involved in this brinkmanship in general. Whereas, some babblers seem to think Iran is this terrible threat looming over the democratic western world and Israel. I'm just saying that I don't think that cold war era mentality produces a very clear picture of things in general.

Is it really any of your business?  What about Iran and imposing American style democracy on them? Is Iran's national energy policy anyone else's business but Iran's? We know that a succession of stooges in Ottawa don't mind our national energy policy dictating to us from corporate board rooms in America. But maybe Iranians don't see things the same way, you know?

Which Iranians are you referring to, Fidel?  Or do you rule out a complexity that might make incessant, generalized statements about yanquis, etc., seem sort of silly?

Overthrow Inc.

What do you make of this Peter Ackerman fellow, George?

I don't know about anyone else here, and I don't know if I would ever want to live in Iran, but my intuition and gut feeling on the matter makes me think I would  tend to want to side with the vast majority of peasants and working class Iranians who elected Ahmadinejad. I'm pretty sure I would not find common cause with more affluent Iranians, and many who were educated in the west and voted for Mousavi, a pro-west neoliberal stooge. 

Just for a break from your "big picture" view of the land, Fidel, try to imagine the folks up in the Appalachians and their love for simple things, like Sarah, as "dumb as a bag of hair" (Deer Hunting with Jesus).  And imagine those Iranian peasants loving Allah to the exclusion of all else...as they have been programmed to do by the current administration of (what else) Mullahs. You know, the clerics that you have admired throughout our own history. Just imagine that situation for a mo', Fidel. 

Think. Isn't it just possible that you might be leading a revolt, here, someday, if Sarah is anointed?  In all her borno-again, moose hunting finery? :D

But George,  would any other country have the right to interfere with the democratic process in Sarah's country? Would neoliberal stoogery be an improvement over what they have now? Iran's Health Houses Provide Model For Mississippi Delta

What if Russia or China or Cuba were to fund "NGOs" and maybe even Cuba-AID groups  in the US for "non-violent" struggle? How can USAID and IRI and IDI and Optor possibly claim they are politically neutral when the money comes from the US Government and both bipartisan war parties, which in turn are funded by rich people, corporations and US capitalists? 

What we have here, George, is one group of whacko rightwing fundamentalists in the US who are at odds and even cross purposes with other fundamentalist whackos in Asia and Middle East . Except that they dont own Ahmadinejad nearly like they own the Saudi and Kuwaiti and Pakistani elite and their whacko Pashtun relatives running the ISI, and extension of the CIA. There is no "Al Qa'eda" running around Iran and attacking the anti-US insurgents as has been the case in Iraq according to Seymour Hersh. But that all could change with a few bombing runs and military invasions of Iran, couldnt it? First comes the medieval siege for some number of years though in order to unite Iranians under Ahamdinejad against the great satan. Clear as mud, George?

You started off well enough Fidel, but soon resorted to speculation.. "a few bomging runs" etc. Really works at the imagination.

But the "fundamentalist whackos" over there "don't own" Ahmadinejad like the Saudi and Kuwaiti whackos.  And he doesn't play the role  of Sarah for the folks out on the hustings...different setting.     

Same function.

I wonder if Sarah will be able to see a doctor when she needs to? The equivalent of half of Iran's population are food insecure in Sarah's country.

I'm afraid the fundamentalists are going to pauperize America and make Sarah and her kin and her kin's kin pick up the tab for generations, George. The Persians and Egyptians at least believed in debt jubilees every generation or two. Not so in the western world's most fundamentalist country. They need electrical power alternatives in Iran. According to the UN, every country has a right to develop electrification technologies in order to increase standard of living for people, pump water and sewage, lower disease and mortality rates etc. I'm not freaking out over Iran. The US is friendly with some perpetually developing countries resembling shitholes that aren't worth mentioning by any of us or our corporate sponsored newzies at the aame time. 

I believe that Iran is doing the right thing in developing nuclear power to meets its burgeoning need for electricity. And I truly hope that a means can be found to verify its development for that purpose.  The scientists and technicians at work on the project, graduates of Iranian schools, must certainly want that. Hopefully, that nation can show the way forward for many people in the middle east. A middle way.

Is it really any of your business?

It's a shame that the voice of sanizadeh has been drowned out. I really hope he's out there still and can return to contribute to this thread.

Frustrated Mess, you need to dial it back and debate the content not the person. Both of you engaged in personal attacks and need to desist.

A reminder that such discussions are merely discussions for some of us. For others of us it is a depiction of lives and people who are our communities and countries of origin. In such discussions, richness and complexities are often lost when only those speaking from the "detached" position are allowed agency and validity of content.

While much of the mess in Iran, and the Middle East as a whole, is the responsibility of the US and leaders in strategically selected nations, there are always home-grown oppressors and opportunists. And, on the ground resistance always occurs and has always occurred. Ongoing struggle against tyranny and oppression should not be minimized.

indeed.. their is tyranny and oppression in many areas..  in an interesting twist sometimes those who suffer from the same end up being the worst offenders of the same....

Thirty years ago was 1980. The Iranian revolution was almost complete and violence against opponents was reaching a cresendo; Iraq was a US ally and engaged Iran in a long and bloody war as a US proxy; the US retreated from Lebanon following the bombing of the US barracks; the USSR was in Afghanistan, etc ... For those who follow world politics and history, one could argue that US hegemony is close to consolidation (although by no means assured). But, more importantly, your statement above only supports my argument that modern mid-east history has been shaped over the period primarily by external influences and in particular western imperialism and its thirst for energy. Thanks.

What is in the bag in the age of permanent, contracted war, George? Recent history tells us a state need not be stable nor at peace to pillage its resources. Iraq, in a state of civil war and beset with vilolence, but with a permanent US military presence, including mercenaries, is now producing what? Upwards of 2 million barrels per day? As well, partittion of Iraq was a favoured option of neo-cons (and they are now speaking of such for Pakistan). In Afghanistan progress is made on the pipeline and in Pakistan, once a regional power and potential site of alternative energy transit routes, is now a basket case with a government, beset on all sides, allied with US interests. Read on:

For those interested in more details of US involvement:

I did not say that.

thank you sanizadeh for the link. i am still finding it does not actually quote the full text of the message however.  all media are reporting that Iran wants sale or swap in batches.  the spin elsewhere is that the 'west' wants the swap all at once to make sure Iran hands it all over- so they can't retain some to make a bomb in the meanwhile.  some media have pointed out that it takes years to enrich uranium, so this is a fake concern of western countries.  all the uranium would be transferred. 

i was wondering if there was any more detail in what was said that could explain why there is such a standoff.  it kind of seems like two cowboys facing off across a dusty street.  just macho behaviour.

the other question i had was regarding the transfer of Iran's uranium with Russia or France for enrichment.  Cameco here does business with Russia as per their website, and has a stated mission of becoming the world's pre-eminent processor.  Also, if Canadian nuclear assets are sold off by Harper, Areva of France/North America could be involved in as its buyer.  Areva was interested in bidding earlier, as was GE based in the US. 

the point is that, whether Canada is directly involved or not at present, it could be, and it's looking like other companies/countries are simply pressuring Iran to give them profits by forcing Iran to use their facilities for the processing. 

_

and Fidel, your flippant comments around mental health conditions are offensive, as is your belligerent tone.

And I am deeply offended by your anti-Cowboy, Russophobic, and thinly-veiled pro-NATO warmongering commentary. Because I happen to respect cowboys and Russians while harboring great disdain for war criminals and bad history telling in general.

there is nothing Russophobic about stating the fact that proposals were to go through Russia, or France, while stating the fact that Canadian companies do business with uranium processors there, our CANDU wing is about to be sold off, possibly to those who are also bidding for Iranian processing, and thus we could be very directly involved in the transport of hazardous uranium around the planet.  I am concerned about a) powerful leaders' blame game to cover for their real motive of corporate profits, which needs to be discussed, b) the fact that all of the actual words of Iran's option have not yet been made public, that events and statements are escalating when de-escalation of any nuclear conflict, anywhere, needs to happen, and c) the lack of the actual text of the statement contributes to a picture of conflict between cowboys which simply feeds stereotypes and one-upmanship.  Perhaps I should have noted that real cowboys spend more time working together than facing off with guns.  so the media presentation is entirely false.

Agreed, thanks. And Zane Grey's cowboys (the only kind I ever identified with, very early on) were "straight shooters".  But I am so afraid of what will happen if the straight goods are not laid out on those bargaining tables. It's beginning to look like our own CANDU heavy water technology was doomed from the start - too vulnerable to system failure - and we'll fall back on someone else's manufacturing (what else is new). But it would be wonderful to have Iran in the nuclear power club and the creation of a world nuclear power club as part of a movement toward a nuclear weapon free world.

what are you talking about a "world nuclear power club"?? very scary.

I came to the thread here to say that Cameco, from it's own website states,

"The Port Hope facility is also the world's only commercial supplier of natural uranium dioxide (UO2) conversion services needed to produce fuel for Candu nuclear reactors." http://www.cameco.com/fuel_and_power/

They also do conversion with different uranium inputs creating other products with materials from trading partners around the world.

Whether or not CANDU reactors continue to be used per se, or replaced with whatever the new private owners want, the residents of this country will be subject to hazardous uranium transfers over which they have no control.  The more uranium and reactors are privately owned and trade,  the more they fall under the trade agreement provisions governing corporate and investor rights- which to date have trumped environmental regulation.  Appointed, unelected WTO and NAFTA tribunals have consistently ruled in favour of polluting corporations.  Its completely undemocratic, as well as sickeningly unhealthy.

The people of Northumberland County, including Indigenous Councils who are very concerned, now have to face the building of a new nuclear waste disposal site, right near highway 401, with a flimsy liner whose half-life is far surpassed by the longevity of the radioactive waste it purports to 'cover'.

The leakage from Cameco's processing plant right on Lake Ontario continues to be a hazard for the lake and the historic waste continues to be a hazard for residents, and for groundwater, wherever it is dumped.  The last thing we need is more radioactive carcinogenic uranium products transferred around, between any countries.  More of it is sure to end up in our backyard, in some form or other, with current business practices and trade law.

Harper should never be allowed to privatize the nuclear industry, nor to expand the power of financiers in trade or banking regulation or procurement.  He has to be voted out of office.

Nuclear power in Canada amounts to a huge taxpayer-funded subsidy for an unsustainable old world economy as well as being totally unnecessary. Canada is a net exporter of massive amounts of hydro-electric power to corporate America dictating our national energy policy and like they want to do with Iran. Canada's vast energy reserves are siphoned off to that giant terrawatt lightbulb south of us, and our stooges have nothing to show for it but bottomless nuclear money pits in Ontario.

You folks  have not heard about the threat of atmospheric CO2. Everything on Earth and in political discourse in its neat little, historically irrelevant  compartment, of course. Events from 1917 to 1945 are clearly the most meaningful for life on Earth today.

Iran, of course, is on the right course...if they can just place someone in charge who is not also concerned only with a narrow view of history (and Islam).

We should be working to roll back the nuclear industry as a whole.  The money from the civilian nuclear industry could go to clean alternative energy and conservation programs.  Without the civilian nuclear industry providing the waste materials and conversion products for DU ammunition and nuclear weapons produced by the US and other countries, there wouldn't be any nuclear weapons.

The civilian nuclear industry, in its hazardous mining, processing, and waste disposal practices, and accidents, is becoming as much as threat to domestic and global health as nuclear bombs.  Civilian nuclear production itself, in Canada and elsewhere, is a weapon against people and planet.

We should be limiting our own production, certainly not privatizing it.

Further, neither we nor our media should be promoting a situation where other countries are forced into expanded partnerships with private corporate uranium traders.   The trade deal provisions- giving undemocratic power to a few private profiteers- get locked in with public-private-partnerships and cross-border trade.  At least the people of Iran have a chance to keep their own nuclear industry under some kind of domestic control if they do their own processing.

As for oil issues, the uranium should be kept in the ground as much as oil should be kept in the ground. 

Both are hazardous to the planet's health.

There are many alternatives, less costly to all.

But Uncle Sam loves Islam and especially militant Islam according to US whistleblower Sibel Edmonds and a number of US,  Canadian and commentators from Pakistan and Afghanistan. I think Iran has been forced between a rock and the CIA&Pentagon capitalists ever since they toppled Iran's democracy in the 1950's. The idea is to keep as many countries as backward and undemocratic and as under-developed and divided as possible. And there are many more examples than just Iran. It's become an established pattern.  

Your position may turn out to be the correct one, thanks.

Your love for Uncle Sam has been duly noted, Fidel.

I like to think of it as love for history. I am not a professional, I admit. I only repeat what historians  have written and people who've lived recent history in various countries have to say. I find there are sometiems glaring differences in history as recorded in text books published in Texas and NYC compared to the rest of the world, and often the largest differences are with countries where certain historical events are recounted. 9/11 is a good example where nationals of several countries were involved, and there is no real consensus as to exactly what happened.

That would make you a student.

Doug Saunders, the Globe's man in Europe and the Middle East appeared on Saturday's op-ed with the best-reasoned piece that I have come across. With the regime's killing of protesters on the holy day of Ashura - something which even the late much-hated Shah avoided doing - "everything has changed"..."And the excalating cycle of protests and repressions, very likely to reach a new plateau on the Jan. 16 anniversary of the 1979 revolution, has become something separae from the election unrest of last year.

"Before, people including me were trying to say that it's just a limited election dispute," says Ali Ansari, a respected historian of Iranian politics. The election no longer matters..."

Saunders points out that "This is not the Iran of 1979. It is thoroughly middle-class, with one of the east's highest university-education rates. There are 25.5 million registered Internet users in a country of 75 million; there are 50 million cellphone users. Iranians know very well what the alternatives are."

In summation he says"Iran has come close to a major transformation several times: In the mid-1980s, and then at the beginning of the last decade. Those movements were only halted by outside forces: Saddam Hussein's attack and the war that followed; George W.Bush's 'axis of evil,' which brought Mr. Ahmadinejad to power. To throw a bunker-buster bomb in the middle of democratic change now would be a historically wasted opportunity." 

Iran's problem isn't unique. The US is another country where a billionaire oligarchy prevent democratic alternative presidential candidates access to ballots. Obama fully understood that he would owe political favours to some of the same superrich Americans who guided dubya and hawks to power before him. The CIA should get the hell out of Iran and stop meddling.

Clearly the work of CIA agents provocateurs, potting the rioters and fomenting real revolutionary spirit.  Thanks, Fidel.

Our trade partners also assisted one of those 'outside forces' Saunders identifies. Saddam was armed to the eye teeth by various western countries and their private enterprising weapons dealers including Canadian companies. There was some flap about Canadian Gerald Bull in the 1980s, a pawn of the CIA and weapons dealing sponsored by US hawk Barry Goldwater his bad self. Maggie and GHW Bush lied to their respective houses of parliament concerning who dealt with and supplied Saddam with high tech weaponry, chemical and biological WMD, military satellite information to step-up the organized murder of Iranians to a frenzied pace. I wouldn't trust the jackals. I don't think anyone does.

What do you think is going to happen in Iran on the anniversary of the revolution, Jan. 16, Fidel?  And, just for fun, what SHOULD happen?

Iran Diplomat Says Was Tortured in US Custody

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=115897&sectionid=351020101

"An Iranian diplomat who was detained by the US military  in Iraq and held for more than two years, says that he was tortured while in American custody.."

During the cold war it was said that if the red menace didn't exist as a threat to the west, then the CIA and US Military would have to invent it. Militant Islam was the perfect replacement enemy. Our warmongers prefer political reactionaries to revolutionaries. US and British fundamentalists prefer working with other fundamentalists and have worked hard to create it where there isn't any as a deterrent to social democracy. They love Ahmadinejad, and this is why US hawks will wage genocidal sanctions against Iran in order to unite Iranians under Ahmadinejad's rule and against the great satan. Iranians must also learn to love to hate, or do anything but rebel against the miltary-industrial complexers' valuable and irreplaceable enemies in Tehran.

A physicis professor and (it's believed) supporter of the movement for change is killed by a bomb on his way to his university office this morning in Tehran.  It would seem the forces of reaction are indeed serious.  And Jan. 16 is shaping up to perhaps be a very interesting day.  Just hope that they do more than rap the knuckles of the President's supporter who was judged guilty of killing some protesters by locking them into a present-day version of the Black Hole.

Why is it this thread reads like two groups who refuse to listen to the actual arguments being proffered. Seems to me there are two undeniable sets of facts that are not mutually exclusive. The Americans are doing everything they can to destabilize the Iranian government and the Iranian people don't trust either the current government or the Americans and are out in the streets on their own.

Arguing that one or the other of these scenarios is right is missing the point.  The real question to me is how are these realities playing out because it seems to me they are both happening in lock step.

That's a fair assessment of the situation IMV. Although I am not sure whether they really want to completely destabilize (as opposed to a farce show) and how much the Ahmadinejad government has really hurt US or Israel, recalling that Daniel Pipes (and many other Israeli commentators) had stated before election that Ahmadinejad's re-election would be greatly to Israel's benefit.

George, do you think the USA - our largest trade partner in crime - does not have excecutive death squads running around the world bumping people off?  Secret prisons for torture? Who advised the Shah to create the dreaded SAVAK? BRAC in Havana? Tonton macoutes in Port Au Prince? DINA in Santiago? Etcetera?

George, we're talkin' ruthless mofos at this level of politics. Gangsters with nukes actually. And right brutal bloody bastards they have been.

Pipeline Geopolitics: Major Turnaround, Russia, China, Iran Redraw Energy Map

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16932

"The inauguration of the Dauletabad-Sarakhs-Khangiran pipeline in early January connecting Iran's northern Caspian region with Turkmenistan's vast gas field may go unnoticed amind the Western media cacaphony that it is 'apocalpys now' for the Islamic rgime in Tehran.

We are witnessing a new pattern of energy cooperation that dispenses with Big Oil.."

"The semi-official ISNA news agency quoted Tehran prosecutor Abbas Jafari Dolatabadi as claiming foreign spy agencies were involved" in the bombing death of the Iranian physicist Masoud Ali Mohammadi on Tuesday. Although everyone else said  that Ali Mohammadi had no known ties to Iran's nuclear program, and whose work was entirely theoretical, Iran's state TV said "since Ali Mohammadi was one of the scientists of physics and nuclear energy, most probably intelligence services and elements of the Mossad and CIA had a hand in this association. Iran's Foreigh Ministry also accused Israel and the U.S. of involvement.

According to the story by Brian Murphy and Nasser Karimi, out of  Tehran, "Iran also directed suspicion at the People's Mujahedeen Organization of Iran," the exiled opposition group living in isolation in the desert of eastern Iraq. "Tabnak, a conservative website close to Iran's ruling extablishment, said the group carried out the attack under direction of Isreli agents."

The physics progessor had publicly backed Iran's opposition leader, Mir Hossein Moysavi before the June, 2009 presidential election.

A cut and dried case against the CIA and Mossad, obviously.  :D

A few things are known for sure.

Both the US and the Iranian governments have spy agencies that are willing to kill to further their states objectives and all spies lie if it is too their advantage. Good luck in figuring out from the other side of the world whose nasty operatives committed this murder.

Who in their right minds would send a covert death squad to murder Iranian scientists, or dozens and dozens of Iraqi scientists, Hussein's former bureaucrats, academics and doctors for that matter?  If the Russians were involved, we would know exactly who did it, we can be sure. In this case, it's a total caper.

This is a most bizarre case. Even inside Iran most have a hard time coming up with a motive for his murder by any side. Not an amateur job either, based on the reports by Iranian media.

Let's see now...these guys are looking pretty good for it. $50 billion for black ops, or what they admit to anyway. The Pentagon still won't submit to a federal audit because the books are so cooked. Or at least, not until 2016 they've said. McChrystal was promoted from his role as head of JSOC, Bush's excecutive death squad, to heading up the military.

Fidel while America is the leading suspect in my mind as well, I also still believe in the legal principle that just because we know they have murdered others doesn't necessarily mean they committed this specific murder.  On a jury I would likely in a civil suit say that the balance of probabilities favours the Yanks and thus rule against them but in a criminal case I don't see any beyond a reasonable doubt type of evidence.

Principles, sminciples...you understand what you are undermining here, k'51?    :D

I think US taxpayer funded hitmen did it to help out Ahmadinejad. They really do admire him and wanna protect him from democratic forces in Iran. Pentagon capitalists want to see more 'death to America' protests broadcast around the world. They love it when that happens. And the energy companies and speculators love Ahmadinejad, too. cha-ching big time. It's all about free markets.

Canada to Push G8 For More Iran Sanctions

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=118368&sectionid=351020104

Iran Summons Canada Over Ex-Ambassador's CIA Links

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=118360&sectionid=351020101 [94]

Remarkable paucity of news and comment on events in Iran, today. I doubt that condition will prevail, unfortunately.

Perhaps this BBC story partly explains the phenom:

Three major international broadcasters have strongly condemned Iran for its "deliberate electronic interference" in their broadcasts.

The BBC, Deutsche Welle and Voice of America said the jamming began on Thursday as Iran marked the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution.

They said Iran was broadcasting freely around the world while denying its own people programmes coming from outside.

Earlier, the US accused Iran of using a "near-total information blockade".

A state department spokesman said there were strong indications that the telephone network had been taken down, SMS messages blocked, and internet communication "throttled".

"Iran has attempted a near total information blockade," PJ Crowley said.

" We will not stop broadcasting accurate and impartial news and current affairs into Iran "
Joint statement by the BBC, Deutsche Welle and Voice of America

"It is clear that the Iranian government fears its own people."

White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs meanwhile said that the web giant, Google, and other internet service providers had been "unplugged" in Iran.

Reporters Without Borders says the blocking of Google's Gmail e-mail system takes the drive to control cyber-space to a new stage.

But the organisation claims that most Iranian internet users know how to sidestep censorship and access blocked websites.

Correspondents say a number of governments - notably China and Burma, as well as Iran - make strenuous efforts to block modern internet communications among their opponents.

'Accurate and impartial'

The BBC, Deutsche Welle and Voice of America said the Iranian authorities' jamming was affecting services on the Hotbird satellite, which covers audiences across Europe and the Middle East.

These include BBC Persian Television, the Voice of America Television Channel in Persian and Radio Farda; and Deutsche Welle's Television and Radio services. BBC World News - the English-language channel - was also jammed.

"We condemn any jamming of these channels. It contravenes international agreements and is interfering with the free and open flow of international transmissions that are protected by international treaties," the broadcasters said in a joint statement.

"The Iranian authorities are using the same satellite services to broadcast freely around the world including broadcasts in English and Arabic; at the same time they are denying their own people programmes coming from the same satellites from the rest of the world," they added.

On Thursday, a day-long security clampdown in the Iranian capital Tehran succeeded in preventing large-scale opposition protests as the nation commemorated the Islamic Revolution.

The opposition turnout was dwarfed by huge crowds at the state-run celebrations in the centre of Tehran.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the rally, saying Iran was now a "nuclear state" ...

'Referendum, Referendum', this is the People's Slogan

http://palestinethinktank.com/2010/02/12/nonviolent-protest-continues-ac...

"The coup d'etat government of Iran must step down as the constitution must be rewritten according to the wishes of the people. That is what the people of Iran are demanding on the 31st anniversary of their 1979 revolution.."

Again, all (relatively) quiet on the Iranian front, but could we "use up" this thread for some kind of sporadic attempts at continuity in postings, NDPP?

Will US-NATO Start WWIII By Attacking Iran? (vid)

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17720

"What Iran says hardly matters because the US is planning for war.."

Excellent analysis of the "Orientalism and Imperialism" of the forces supporting "democracy" in Iran while pushing regime change. Edward Herman scores again

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/hp200210.html

re: Peterson and Herman

An Iranian Socialist Replies to Ed Herman and David Peterson:

http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2010/02/22/an-iranian-socialist-replie...

Iran and Cultural Imperialism

http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/iran-and-cultural-imperiali... [101]

Jundallah arrest proves timely for Iran

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LB26Ak01.html [102]

"The fact is that Tehran has put Washington on the back foot at a critical juncture. Rigi is bound to spill the beans - he may already have begun - and much is going to surface about the covert activities by the US forces based in Afghanistan to subvert Iran by hobnobbing with Jundallah, which, incidentally, is also known to have links with al-Qaeda.."

Iran's Natural Gas Riches: US Knife to the Throat of World Future Energy

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=18176

"In this context of a major realignment in the world's energy economy - once where there will be a continguing diminshed role for the US - Washington's blustering rhetoric about democracy and peace and war on terror or alleged Iranian can be seen as a desperate attmpt to conceal its fear that it stands to be a big loser.

Encircling Iran with wars and threatening gas to poison  the world's top future gas customer - China - is the real deal. US actions are more accurately seen as putting a knife to the energy arteries of a world economy that it will no longer be able to dominate.."

Father of Iran's Turkmen Carpeting Dies

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=121801&sectionid=351020105

"The veteran carpet designer, researcher and father of Turkmen carpetry in Iran, Niazjan Niazi passed away at the age of 86. Niazi revived some 800 different Turkmen patterns. The intricate and unique designs of these rugs derive mainly from various Turkmen tribes, such as the Yomut, Ersari, Saryk, Salor and Tekke.."

Turkmen Carpets:

http://www.turkishculture.org/pages.php?ParentID=64 [105]

Niazjan Niazi RIP

An Iranian Socialist Replies to Yoshie Furuhashi

http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/mina-khanlarzadeh-replies-t...

"It's time to stand firmly behind Iranian people and support them in their struggle against both international and domestic aggression and atrocities, instead of portraying them as powerless puppets of US/Israel or masochistic senseless ones who enjoy or are numb to domestic human rights abuses. It's time to stop taking away the history of the socio-political struggle of Iranian people and stop portraying them as a blank canvas on which the imperialists can write their wishes.."

Iran Slams US as 'World's Only Atomic Criminal'

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/04/17-5

"Only the US government has committed an atomic crime. The world's only atomic criminal lies and presents itself as being against nuclear weapons proliferation, while it has not taken any serious measures in this regard.."

Yea, when even the uncle-Sam-bootlicking-for-profit-press states something like this, it becomes patently obvious that what US imperialism wants is to exterminate anyone who disagrees with them. The US is a rogue state and should be expelled from the community of nations. Pronto.

The US admitted to having around 5,000 active nuclear weapons and many thousands more on the block for dismantling.

Ahmadinejad is a right-wing demagogue whom all freedom loving Iranians would like to see out of office. But the "liberal" President of the US refuses to rule out the use of nuclear weapons against other people. Which one is the lunatic??!!

______________________________________________

USA! USA! How many kids did you kill today!!

US Threatens to Nuke Iran and Anyone Else it Feels like Nuking. 
Iran and the NPT

by Shirin Ebad

Obama threatens to nuke Iran? [110] WW4Report.com

Cartoon by Carlos Latuff

UK Vows to Back US Against Iran

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=126537&sectionid=351020101

"Days after the establishment of a new British government, Foreign Secretary William Hague vows to work with the US against Iran, going so far as to consider military action against Tehran. Iran says any punitive measures against its nuclear work would be legally baseless and unfair as the country's nuclear program is being fully monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency.."

Iran confirms six new death sentences for opposition activists:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/100515/world/iran_opposition_trial_1

Meanwhile, the French national arrested after the protests gets a $285,000 fine and freed:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/100516/world/iran_france_diplomacy_1 [114]

Incredible silences, hereabouts, after announcements of the number of people sentenced to hanging, following their incarceration, gentle inquiries into their activities, and their eventual confessions as enemies of Islam.  Anything, of course, for  solidarity with the Mullahs. God is Great.

We're kinda tied up at the moment George with trying to prevent a theocracy from running the affairs of the nation here at home. I don't know, but that shot about everyone here being in cahoots with religious fanatics...really, it's beneath even you.

As for your preoccupation with matters theocratic here at home...I have not followed your part in the "Book bombshell" thread in the Canadian politics forum.  You are probably saving your contribution for the 100th posting, a kind of summary of all sides on the question.

But your interpretation of my "silence" comment in this thread was predictable. Bet you know how to bring folks onside in class discussions. Not had your coffee yet, Sj?

Closing for length.

I haven't read the whole thread, but George, this bullshit....

...is on wafer thin ice.