October 4, 2003
* Nukes only deterrent to
With due respect to Mr. Valibeigi [Easy
does it], if the Iranian
governments has decided to develop nuclear deterrence,
it would be quite natural to keep it hidden and
concealed until completed because exposing it would
only compromise Iran's national security.
government who exposed such matters would be
negligent, to say the least. If I am not mistaken, I
don't remember any popular referendum conducted in
Israel, the USA, China, France or the UK authorizing
their leaders' decisions to build their bombs and
weapons that they now blackmail Iran and the rest of
the world with.
Of course, the question of whether building the bomb
is a good idea or not is a different matter and there
are very good arguments on both sides of the issue.
The bottom line however
is that nuclear weapons are the only deterrent to
nuclear weapons or massive conventional weapons
superiority, and Iran (under any type of government)
cannot afford to play the role of the ostrich with its
head in the sand while it pretends not to notice the
dangers around it.
We all witnessed how the
'international community' with all of their treaties
and laws failed to support Iran when it faced illegal
chemical warfare by US-backed Saddam Hussein,
resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands of
innocent people. Should we have to re-learn this
lesson again when we're attacked with 'mini-nukes'
I therefore find it quite incredible that Mr.
Valibeigi's article totally fails to mention the
security threats to Iran that would more than justify
a weapons program, namely from Israeli and US
agression, as if Iran's alleged decision to build a
nuclear deterrent force has no context or reason but
is merely the decision of crazy hardliner and others
who are fooled by them.
Finally, I would point out that Iran has already
abided by the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and has even
decided to "look favorably" on signing the 93+2
Additional Protocol, insisting only on receiving what
it is entitled to pursuant to those same treaties.
What is being demanded by the US of Iran now is beyond
what the NPT which is merely a pretext. It is quite
obvious that the concern of the USA is not to enforce
the NPT, but to disarm & isolate Iran in preparation
for an eventual war of aggression.
We are being forced to sign a concession on nuclear
issues much in the same way that we were forced by
imperial powers to sign concessions on oil and
tobacco. This will not stand.
* Surrounded by hostility
As an Iranian, I find it nauseating when I see how the world keeps cornering
Iran about everything: be it Iran's nuclear program, being banned
from IEEE, sanctions, or other measures. It seems as if the world
just wants to corner our beloved homeland.
What the world fails
to realize is that, the more a country is cornered, the more vigorous
her people become. We have been dealing with this for thousands
of years... in the old days, foreigners invaded with armies, now it is
by other means...
Many countries in the world have nuclear weapons: America, Russia,
China, France, England, India, Pakistan, Israel, and some of the older
Soveit block countries.... It is always a double standard when
it comes to dealing with Iran....
With regards to the Bushehr plant,
it was the Americans that started it during the Shah's regime... And
if any country should be banned from having nuclear weapons, it is the
one country that used them against another country: the good old U S
of A. In fact it was the American scientists that unleashed this
modern pleague upon humanity...
America has enough weapons to wipe-off the entire human race off the
face of world... and yet they go around the globe telling countries what
they can and cannot have...
gimmie a break....
Many hostile countries (to Iran that is) have nuclear weapons: America,
Isreal, etc.... when their nuclear arsenal has been destroyed
then, the world has a right to put Iran under ths microscope... In fact,
I think a nuclear Iran is just what is needed, after all
Iran is also surrounded by hostile neighbors...
Long live Iran, a nuclear Iran,
* Shahzadeh and Emamzadeh
Dear Mr. Soofi, [Khomeini
a la Pahlavi]
It happened exactly as you predicted. In fact a lot of you(s!)
did. KPUF is official, at least they (Shahzadeh
and Emamzadeh) met
yesterday. Would you please include me to the list of augurs. I
expected the same thing (no lie, beh jooneh khodam!).
I really like your writing style. I also practice the
same style in both English and Persian. Here is a link to
my latest published article in Persian [dogaanegee...].
If you guys stop sending such good articles or Mr. Javid does not ignore
me, I have two articles in line waiting to be published! On a rather
serious matter, this guy is doing a great job, by any standard, managing
Iranian.com. Especially the way he does it. More power to
him. I strongly believe we should appreciate his work.
* Are we done being gullible fools yet?
They fingerprint and cavity-search our little ol' grandmothers visiting
from Iran, but the turban-wearing grandson of the Ayatollah himself has
no problem getting a visa and is treated like royalty [Khomeini
a la Pahlavi]. Hmmm, I wonder
what kind of aash they're cooking for us now? More specifically, is this
an American aash or an Iranian one?
Think about it, it can be either. You hear people say that the neo-cons
are grooming Hossein-jan Khomeini to join hands with Reza-jan Pahlavi
to bring democracy and McDonald's to the beleagered Iranian people.
On the other hand, I
like my own conspiracy theory better; first, the aakhoonds fooled the
Iranian people with Khatami the "reformer" for the last six
years. Now that the "reformers vs. hardliners" ploy doesn't
work anymore, they're going to the next level with President Khomeini
Jr. the (get this) "dissident".
Are we done being gullible fools yet?
* Gone mad
Hossein Khomeini, Hossein Ali Montazeri, Abdollah Nouri, Akbar Ganji,
etc., etc... what sort of madness afflicted these people and others 25
years ago that they were willing to participate in the self-destruction
of their own country and people only to realize 25 years later the magnitude
of the mistakes and crimes they had committed?
* What exactly are you attempting to achieve?
To: American Enterprise Institute
Respectfully I question the value of your decision in regards to your
invitation of Hossein Khomeini and on giving him an audience in the
United States [Khomeini
a la Pahlavi].
What exactly are you attempting to prove or achieve? Are you trying
to give audience to an alternative voice? Well, for 24 years more than
million Iranians in the US and other countries who are among the most
educated people in any standards have been telling the world about
the atrocities committed by the current regime in Iran and as a direct
and consequences of theocracy rule in Iran.
Do you see a shortage of good speakers and political analysts to come
to your forum that you had to go all the way to Iraq and find an opposition
to the regime in Iran? Or are you trying to keep the oven warm for
alternative Shitte leaders for the future of Iran (the same politics
have implemented for more than 2 centuries)?
You may find Hossein Khomeini an important element, but he is no more
than any other average Iranian who has voiced her opposition to Khomeini
and his doctrine and had never been given a forum.
For your organization to ignore or push aside all the other available
voices and to recruit Hossein for a two-hour audience is certainly
not equal to say an audience that one would have given Alexander Sakarov
or Alexander Sulzanitzen in early 70's to symbolize the validity of
western philosophy and free enterprize and to demonstrate the inferiority
of the Soviet mind. Hossein is not a proven opposition voice for the
Iranians by any measure.
Hossein Khomeini is mere a black sheep of his family and if he wants
to be against his grandpa then let him be. On the other hand if the
so called American Enterprise Institute is in dire need of intelligent
educated opposition to the current regime in Iran, please don't go
any further than the Beltway around Washington, DC. I can put you in
with many and they are a phone call away!
Please let Hossein go back to his seminary, we are trying to separate
our political voices from any religious voice and for you to follow
the old British politics in Iran to give voice, audience citizenship
support to the religious side is in a direct violation of the Iranian
dream of separating religion from politics.
Let Hossein go back to his seminary today. We sympathize with his cause
too, but he is not offering anything new that has not already been told.
Farrokh A. Ashtiani
Santa Barbara, CA.
* What the hell was she doing there?
I truly empathize with the murder of Ms. Kazemi [Far
from causal brutality]. Her family
has my most sincere condolences. Having said that, it behooves
logic why a middle aged women, that was not a real photojournalist or
for that matter, would go and take pictures in front of a building
with signs explicitly stating photography is prohibited. I can't
imagine going in front of a government facility in any country, and taking
photographs in front of arm guards standing under big signs saying, "NO
Granted death may have been a harsh punishment,
but the fact is, no one knows who she worked for, what magazine or news
organization contracted her work, or what the hell was she doing in front
of Evin of all places taking pictures.
I challenge you or any of
your readers, to at least show us who she worked for, and why that "news" organization
has not been in the forefront defending the person that died working
* What's that?
It's so funny about weblogs [The
real Iran]. A few weeks ago, I met this guy at a
dinner party who was visiting from Iran. He was in the heart of student
during which Zahra Kazemi died and he showed me the scars on his arms
from the attack by vigilantes. I asked him about the weblogs from Iran
and he said :"what's that?"
* Wedding customs
Hammihanan e Gerami,
I am researching about the wedding customs and ceremonies (including
khaastegari) in different parts of Iran. I am particularly interested
in the ceremonies that are different from weddings in large cities like
For instance, in Shiraz, the bride should wear green, and in modern
days they usually wear white with a piece of green of some sort. I will
greatly appreciate any information anyone could send me.
If I use the information publicly, I will name the persons if they don't
mind. I thank you in advance. Please contact me.
letters (October 4, 2003)