Wake up!


by Fred

For the longest time it was asked of America to meet face to face with IRR, the Islamist Rapist Republic, she did as asked.

For the longest time it was asked of America to start talking and stop threatening, she did as asked.

For the longest time it was asked of America to cut funding to the organizations IRR deemed unfriendly, she did as asked.

For the longest time it was asked of America to not set a deadline with IRR, she did as asked.

For the longest time it was asked of America to be open to negotiating about everything, she did as asked.

For the longest time Islamist lobbies, individual international gofers, clueless peace and Anti-war activists who were being played demanded the above which they got and then some.  A series of unsolicited letters from U.S. President to Head Rapist Khamenei asking for friendly relations were sent, at least one of which at the height of “election” fiasco.

The fact that such letter was sent while Islamist Rapists had sharpshooters on the rooftops randomly picking off peaceful Iranian demonstrators, men, women and children detainees were being tortured and  raped in rape centers like Kahrizak,  is way more than what was asked of America and still she did it.

Now that IRR has unmistakably thumbed its nose at IAEA, and

Now that IRR has unmistakably thumbed its nose at United Nation Security Council and

Now that IRR has unmistakably thumbed its nose at President Obama’s stretched out hand of friendship,

Would the usual friends mind revealing their next bright idea on how to tame the Islamist monster? 

A lot of time has been wasted on foolishness and plying into IRR’s hand, before it is too late and the nuke acquiring IRR imposes a devastating war on Iranians and the entire region the sane world has to wake up. Impose airtight sanctions; openly help enslaved Iranians with moral and material support to overthrow the unreformable messianic Islamist usurpers. Time is running out, for peace sake wake up! 


Recently by FredCommentsDate
ادا اطوار اسلامی
Dec 05, 2012
مسجد همجنسگرایان
Dec 05, 2012
Iranians are legitimate target
Dec 04, 2012
more from Fred


by AMIR1973 on

The peaceloving US government should start withdrawing its military forces from other peoples' countries, rather than sending more troops to Afghanistan. (Can you believe that Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize?) Who do you think the U.S. is supporting in Afghanistan? A bunch of fanatics (including Shia fundamentalists), drug traffickers, thieves, and warlords--similar garbage as the Taliban.  

It's the right thing to do. September 11 happened because the U.S. government interferes in Muslim countries. The U.S. opposes some Islamists and supports others, like the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia (the biggest source of Islamist extremism in the world). Part of the U.S. strategy is to support Sunni fundamentalists in countries like Lebanon in order to oppose Shia fundamentalists, like Hezbollah.

Bijan A M

AMIR, Pleeeeeeez

by Bijan A M on

Would you please be rational? How are you going to un-entangle yourself from something that was forced on you? I have known you as a reasonable person, but, what do you suggest for peace loving U S to do? Keep her tail in between her legs and get out? be prepared for 4/12 or 5/18 or 8/13....? Pleeeez, be a little more understanding of what the world is facing.

The extremism has to stop even if the whole human race is to be evaporated. There is no room in humanity for IRR or Taliban, Period.


US government: such peaceful intent

by AMIR1973 on

When I look at the actions of the US government (my government, since I'm a US citizen), I see an entity that is truly averse to war and coercion. In just a couple days, the peaceloving Obama will announce that he is sending about 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan. In other words, the Nobel Peace Prize Winner will increase the number of U.S. troops there to far higher levels than the previous peaceloving leader before him. Oh yes, this is the US government's way of dialogue, negotiations, and diplomacy.

Bijan A M

Thanks benross

by Bijan A M on

I certainly appreciate your take, and will ponder.... In my life time I have seen many pre-emptive actions by Israel which have been successful. I only hope they don't get too presumptuous to try it again because you never know.  After all it is all one human's decision.....

Thanks for your post

Sargord Pirouz

the world arrogance

by Sargord Pirouz on

"For the longest time it was asked of America to start talking and stop threatening, she did as asked."

Fred, the threats have not ceased. Take-it-or-leave-it nuclear demands, military options on the table, sanction talk, renewed US sanctions, moves against the Alawi foundation- US animosity and arrogance has scarcely missed a beat with Obama (supposedly) in charge. The reason? Look at all the pro-Zionists on his staff. How were we to expect differently? Well, some us were not fooled.

And talking? President Ahmadinejad has written public letters to two US Presidents now. He's received nothing in return. You call that talking?

As to your own talk of political subversion, well, there's worse things- you could have found yourself at Camp Ashraf!



Dear Bijan

by benross on

You may think, as Robert Baer has suggested, that Israel will eventually attack Iran if no progress in nuclear issue is being made. The aftermath of such attack is essentially your preoccupation. U.S may attack first, to prevent a regional face-off.

Facing such devastating perspective, it may sound irresponsible of me, that even with a one percent eventuality of such scenario, not to advocate international policies that may speed-up the end of IRI, even if the participation of Iranian people in this process may be secondary.

I don't discuss the eventuality of the matter, which to me is none. As I said it would be irresponsible to totally ignore such eventuality considering its devastating aftermath.

I see the popular movement inside Iran in tandem with what happens with Iranians abroad. Even if it's too hard to look at your 30 odd years fruitless opposition abroad with an optimistic expectation, look what happens to current dissidents of IRI. They all end-up abroad (figuratively speaking).

So yes, I believe we have time to organize. But we won't have time to watch and wait what happens inside Iran. They are waiting for us.

Now look at it at a different angle. If we have the power of persuasion to convince U.S and international community to take a different approach, don't you think that we can use that power to organize ourselves and persuade our own people to take action for their own country?

The fact is that I just don't see it any other way. 

Bijan A M


by Bijan A M on

I have always appreciated your sensible posts. I maybe wrong, but I never sensed that Fred has ever opposed negotiation or direct engagement. I believe he is (as I am) extremely skeptical that diplomacy and direct engagement will produce the desired results. However, you bring up a debatable point, and that is the optimism of having indefinite time for those who strive for a secular democracy to organize.  Do you sincerely believe that negotiation has enough time for a democratic movement from within to take hold? I really doubt it, because, we are dealing with two entirely different motives and initiatives. The rest of the world could care less about a secular democracy in Iran. That movement is completely divorced from the movement to stop nuclear IRR. While the two movements may have some interactions but they move totally independent of each other.

 We, as people who care about a secular democratic Iran, should do anything in power to stop a provoked devastation that will threaten our independence for generations to come.


Fred, I admire your passion

by pedro on

and dislike for the IRI "IRR". I enjoy reading your articles. The " kahrizak rape center " is very interesting.



impose airtight sanctions now!


and enslave the iranian people further!


I generally support the

by benross on

I generally support the global policy of current U.S administration. That policy -in global stage- includes negotiation with IRI. But I also believe U.S policy toward IRI -whatever it is- has nothing to do with us. We have to focus on organizing ourselves, with specific plan. The rest is semantics.

But as part of my general support for this policy, I would argue that you Fred, could not put forward this message, not to U.S administration but to Iranian people, and to have a convincing message as much as you do now.

This policy, beyond green and anti green and expatriates, had a powerful message for Iranian PEOPLE which should not be underestimated. And as long as the opposition is not organized, I see the continuation of this policy -with adjustments that we are witnessing- more beneficial than harmful to the cause of secular democracy.