Israel Seeks All Clear for Iran Air Strike

Welsh

I am so so happy you posted that article! It is a perfect example of the paper thin accusations that iran is a terrorist country.
The article you posted has absolutely no references to support it and I have no idea where it is from. But I can guarantee you that dozens of articles were released describing Sadam hussein's government supporting al-qaeda prior. WE now know that isnt true. This article is in the same vain....

Although evidence is lacking, past behavior suggests that Hezbollah wouldn't conduct an operation as significant as the July 12 kidnappings without Tehran's approval. Indeed, the close ties between Hezbollah and Iran's theocrats have probably emboldened the former.
Accusations by way of association???!
The article merely associates Iran with terrorism by way of "support" which it never once clarifies. At the very worst, if we wanted to start associating countries with regional guerillas and activist groups, a hell of a lot more names should be on the list of "axis of evil".

While Iran's backing of anti-Israel violence has grown in recent years, it has cut back its interference in other parts of the world.
The extent and nature of Iran's contacts with Sunni jihadist groups linked to al-Qaida is unclear. Immediately after 9/11, Iran appeared to be cooperating with the United States and its allies, transferring many jihadists to their home countries to face justice.
These are daming accusations!!>>?
Every Iranian knows there is no link with al-Qaida because we were at war with the taliban before you guys stepped in.
We were at war with Iraq before you guys stepped in.


Your article tries to be damning of iran, but I am sure that even with its unsupported claims, an diligent person can see right through it.

There is no hard evidence here...
and most of its harshest offerings had to do with past decades.

You can dig up as much dirt you want on a country to suit your cause... Google the most damming article you can find, and even go back to the days of pirates... but dont kid yourself when forcing the pieces together to instigate war.

As it stands, iran directly had no hand in any terrorist act.
And has not been responsible for the death of any american\british. Linking it to factions with no substantial evidence is preposterous.


I will come back to the idea of Iran's government being toppled. you know some days I wake up and think... go ahead and do it.. blow it sky high, rid the country of its poisons, its tyrrany... so I can at least go outside and NOT feel ashamed of being iranian. But then I see the state of Iraq now, and its mishandling... and I think that isnt right. Sure its a mess now for the west but in time they will take from it what they will... and the iraqi people will probably still suffer (if not too much already).

This is what keeps the hands of good people tied in Iran. They want change, but they dont know if the west, (which is so furiously alienating and dogging them) is on their side. To be freed of handcuffs and still be locked in a cage, makes no difference for them.And I dont see how the people of Iran can succumb to the idea of being exposed to the brutality we see happening in iraq.


If the west honestly stood up tomorrow and said they want to free Iran's people, first and foremost... that would open up a whole new avenue. But Israeli threats and bogus claims of terrorism, plus the hypocritical nuclear intolerance...wont bring about the tranquility that the people of the west have been promised.

Make no mistake I support the disarming of iran.
 
Since a quarter of my genes are jewish, I say Israel should bomb Iran back to the Stone Age.

Oh wait... they're still in the Stone Age... bummer... :roll:
 
Ashley- no terrorism?

Are you kidding?
Yes, Iran was involved in the war against the Taliban and supported Mossuad against Mullah Omar. But do you think this means that Iran's hands are free from terrorism?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3245641.stm

Which Iran denied.

And how many Iranian dissidents have been murdered?
Rome: Trial begins for Iran official in dissident assassination
Wed. 11 May 2005

Rome, May 11 - Rome’s Criminal Court started this morning the trial in absentia of an official of the Iranian government accused of taking part in the killing of the representative of the opposition National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) in Italy.

Mohammad Hossein Naghdi, who defected to the NCRI when he was the Iranian charge d'affaires in Italy in 1981, was murdered by a gunmen allegedly working for Iran's notorious Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS), on March 16, 1993.

Western intelligence services say MOIS agents routinely work under diplomatic cover as members of Iran’s diplomatic community. The NCRI revealed in the mid-1990s secret information it had obtained from inside the Iranian regime regarding the role of the Iranian embassy in Italy in the assassination of Naghdi. It also revealed information about the assassination of Professor Kazem Rajavi, the NCRI representative in Switzerland and the United Nations’ Human Rights Commission, the murder of four Iranian dissidents in Berlin, and a string of assassinations against Iranian dissidents abroad during the same period, which showed that they were carried out on the direct orders of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and ex-President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani.

NCRI President-elect Maryam Rajavi said in a message to the Italian judiciary as the trial opened, “The Iranian people have been waiting for 13 years for the day when the masterminds and perpetrators of Mohammad Hossein Naghdi's assassination would be brought to justice. Today, the Italian justice is facing a historic challenge”.

She urged the judges in Italy to identify and issue international arrest warrants for the masterminds of the assassination and “withstand the political and diplomatic pressures and the obstacles that the mullahs' regime is bound to create in order to deviate the course of justice”.

A Berlin court issued arrests in 1997 for a committee made up of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, then-President Ali-Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, then-Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, and then-Intelligence Minister Ali Fallahian, after a four-year-trial found that they gave the orders for the assassination of dissidents outside Iran.

Rajavi called for the indictment of Khamenei, Rafsanjani and Iran’s current President Mohammad Khatami by an international tribunal
Click to expand...

http://www.unpo.org/article.php?id=4806

http://www.payvand.com/news/05/mar/1100.html
Prague, 11 March 2005 (RFE/RL) -- Like many revolutions, the Islamic Revolution led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini came in two waves.

The first wave toppled Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in January 1979. The second consolidated power in the hands of Khomeini and his supporters at the expense of many other groups, including secular ones, that had made common cause with his camp.

The consolidation-of-power phase of the revolution saw the Islamic regime employing its security services against rivals in exile.

Outside Iran, perhaps the best-known case was that of Shapour Bakhtiar, the last prime minister of the shah's era and a prominent opponent of the Islamic Republic. He was stabbed and killed in his Paris home in 1991. A French investigation led to the imprisonment of several individuals who were believed to have been intelligence agents of the Islamic Republic.

In 1992, an attack on Kurdish opposition leaders in a Berlin restaurant, the Mykonos, caused such an uproar that it led to a major breakdown in attempts to improve ties between Iran and the European Union.

Mehdi Ebrahimzadeh was among nine people hit by automatic-weapon fire in the Mykonos. He recalled the trial that followed the incident:

"On 17 September 1992, the restaurant was drenched in blood with the commando-style terrorist attack of the agents of the Islamic Republic, in which four opposition figures were killed. With four to five years of judiciary investigations and hearings that followed, the outcome was the trial of top officials of the Islamic Republic. In April 1997, for the first time a European court issued a sentence, in which it named Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, President Hashemi Rafsanjani, Foreign Minister Ali Velayati and most important of all, Intelligence Minister Ali Fallahian, as the person who implemented the collective decision of physically eliminating the opposition -- in this case, the leaders of Democratic Party of Kurdistan. The verdict also mentioned other assassinations, including the assassination of Dr. Qassemlu in Vienna and Dr. Shapour Bakhtiar in Paris," Ebrahimzadeh said.

Following the German court's verdict, Iranian officials denied having any role in the Mykonos killings. However, European Union countries recalled their ambassadors from Tehran to emphasize that Europe would not tolerate Iranian state sponsorship of terrorism. The ambassadors returned again in late 1997 after the EU became convinced that Iran's Intelligence Ministry -- at least in future -- would not carry out political assassinations on European soil.

Inside Iran, thousands have perished in apparent assassinations that followed the Islamic Revolution -- including dissidents and intellectuals. But the killings have been obscured by the monolithic structure of the new cleric-led government, the lack of an independent press, and a ban on nongovernmental political bodies.
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/16/AR2005061601380_pf.html

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?topic_id=1416&fuseaction=topics.event_summary&event_id=201484


Oh an check this out-

Iran's suicide brigades.(Terrorism Resurgent). Ali Alfoneh.
Middle East Quarterly 14.1 (Wntr 2007): p37(8).
About this publication | How to Cite | Source Citation | SpanishFrenchJapaneseGermanItalianPortugueseChinese (Simplified)Korean
Find This @ UVa Libraries
Subjects

Full Text :COPYRIGHT 2007 Middle East Forum


More than five years after President George W. Bush's declaration of a global war against terrorism, the Iranian regime continues to embrace suicide terrorism as an important component of its military doctrine. In order to promote suicide bombing and other terrorism, the regime's theoreticians have utilized religion both to recruit suicide bombers and to justify their actions. But as some factions within the Islamic Republic support the development of these so-called martyrdom brigades, their structure and activities suggest their purpose is not only to serve as a strategic asset in either deterring or striking at the West, but also to derail domestic attempts to dilute the Islamic Republic's revolutionary legacy.

Such strategy is apparent in the work of the Doctrinal Analysis Center for Security without Borders (Markaz-e barresiha-ye doktrinyal-e amniyat bedun marz), an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps think tank. (1) Its director, Hassan Abbasi, has embraced the utility of suicide terrorism. On February 19, 2006, he keynoted a Khajeh-Nasir University seminar celebrating the anniversary of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's fatwa (religious edict) calling for the murder of British author Salman Rushdie. As Khomeini often did, Abbasi began his lecture with literary criticism. He analyzed a U.S. publication from 2004 that, according to Abbasi, "depicts the prophet of Islam as the prophet of blood and violence." Rhetorically, he asked, "Will the Western man be able to understand martyrdom with such prejudice? [Can he] interpret Islam as anything but terrorism?" The West sees suicide bombings as terrorism but, to Abbasi, they are a noble expression of Islam.

So what is terrorism if not suicide bombing? To Abbasi, terrorism includes any speech and expression he deems insulting to Islam. According to press coverage of his lecture, Abbasi noted that "[German chancellor] Merkel and [U.S. president] Bush's support of the Danish newspaper, which insults Islam's prophet, has damaged their reputation in the Islamic world and has raised the question of whether Christianity, rather than Islam, is of terrorist nature." (2) From the Iranian leadership's perspective, therefore, Jyllands-Posten's cartoons are evidence of Christian terrorism.

By Abbasi's definition, Iran may not sponsor terrorism, but it does not hesitate to promote suicide attacks. He announced that approximately 40,000 Iranian estesh-hadiyun (martyrdom-seekers) were ready to carry out suicide operations against "twenty-nine identified Western targets" should the U.S. military strike Iranian nuclear installations. (3)

Such threats are not new. According to an interview with Iran's Fars News Agency released on Abbasi's weblog, he has propagated haras-e moghaddas (sacred terror) at least since 2004. "The front of unbelief," Abbasi wrote, "is the front of the enemies of God and Muslims. Any deed which might instigate terror and horror among them is sacred and honorable." (4) On June 5, 2004, he spoke of how suicide operations could overcome superior military force: "In 'deo-centric' thought, there is no need for military parity to face the enemy ... Deo-centric man prepares himself for martyrdom while humanist man struggles to kill." (5)

Abbasi's rise to prominence in the state-controlled Iranian media coincides with the growth of a number of organizations that have constrained those prone to moderation within the Islamic Republic. Take, for example, the Headquarters Commemorating the Martyrs of the Global Islamic Movement (Setad-e Pasdasht-e Shohada-ye Nehzat-e Eslami), an organization founded in 2004 as a protest against President Mohammad Khatami's attempts at improving Iran's relations with Egypt. (6)

The organization's prominence continued to grow throughout the year. On June 5, 2004, the reformist daily Shargh granted Mohammad-Ali Samadi, Headquarters' spokesman, a front page interview. (7) Samadi has a pedigree of hard-line revolutionary credentials. He is a member of the editorial boards of Shalamche and Bahar magazines, affiliated with the hard-line Ansar-e Hezbollah (Followers of the Party of God) vigilante group, as well as the newspaper Jomhouriye Eslami, considered the voice of the intelligence ministry. (8) Samadi said he had registered 2,000 volunteers for suicide operations at a seminar the previous day. (9) Copies of the registration forms (see Figure 1, page 39) show that the "martyrdom-seekers" could volunteer for suicide operations against three targets: operations against U.S. forces in the Shi'ite holy cities in Iraq; against Israelis in Jerusalem; and against Rushdie. The registration forms also quote Khomeini's declaration that "f the enemy assaults the lands of the Muslims and its frontiers, it is mandatory for all Muslims to defend it by all means possible [be it by] offering life or property," (10) and current supreme leader Ali Khamene'i's remarks that "[m]artyrdom-seeking operations mark the highest point of the greatness of a nation and the peak of [its] epic. A man, a youth, a boy, and a girl who are prepared to sacrifice their lives for the sake of the interests of the nation and their religion is the [symbol of the] greatest pride, courage, and bravery." (11) According to press reports, a number of senior regime officials have attended the Headquarters' seminars. (12)

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

SUICIDE UNITS

The Iranian officials appeared true to their word. During a September 2004 speech in Bushehr, home of Iran's declared nuclear reactor, Samadi announced the formation of a "martyrdom-seeking" unit from Bushehr while Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of the official daily Keyhan, called the United States military "our hostage in Iraq," and bragged that "martyrdom-operations constitute a tactical capability in the world of Islam." (13)

Then, on November 23, 2004, in response to the U.S. campaign against Iraqi insurgents in Fallujah, (14) Samadi announced the formation of the first suicide unit. Named after the chief bomb-maker of Hamas, Yahya Ayyash, also known as Al-Muhandis (The Engineer) assassinated on January 5, 1996, it consisted of three teams of unknown size: the Rim Saleh ar-Riyashi team, named after Hamas's first female suicide bomber; the Mustafa Mahmud Mazeh team, named after a 21-year-old Lebanese who met his death in a Paddington hotel room on August 3, 1989, priming a book bomb likely aimed at Salman Rushdie; and the Ahmad Qasir team, named after a 15-year-old Lebanese Hezbollah suicide bomber whose operation demolished an eight-story building housing Israeli forces in Tyre, southern Lebanon, on November 11, 1982. (15) Samadi said there would be an additional call for volunteers at Tehran's largest Iran-Iraq war cemetery, the Behesht-e Zahra, the following week, (16) and even promised to consider establishing special elementary schools to train for suicide operations, (17)

He kept his word. On December 2, 2004, the Headquarters gathered a crowd in the Martyr's Section of Behesht-e Zahra, (18) where those who conducted suicide operations are honored. According to the Iranian Mehr News Agency, the organization unveiled a memorial stone commemorating the "martyrs" killed in the 1983 Hezbollah attacks on the U.S. Marine and French peacekeepers' barracks in Beirut. They set the stone next to one commemorating Anwar Sadat's assassin. Samadi concluded the ceremony with a raging speech, declaring, "The operation against the Marines was a hard blow in the mouth of the Americans and demonstrated that despite their hollow prestige and imagined strength ... they [have] many vulnerable points and weaknesses. We consider this operation a good model. The cemeteries in which their dead are buried provide an interesting view and cool the hearts of those Muslims who have been stepped upon under the boots of the Yankees while they were ignored by the international community." (19)

The suicide corps continued to expand even though there is no evidence that their patrons have made them operational. In April 2005, the semi-official daily Iran announced convocation of a unit of female suicide bombers nicknamed the Olive Daughters. (20) The Baztab news website, which is associated with Mohsen Rezai, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from 1981 to 1997 and since secretary of the Expediency Council, cited one Firouz Rajai-Far, who said, "The martyrdom-seeking Iranian women and girls ... are ready to walk in the footsteps of the holy female Palestinian warriors, realizing the most terrifying nightmares of Zionists." (21) Rajai-Far, a former hostage taker at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, holds the license for Do-Kouhe (Two Mountains, referring to one of the fiercest battlegrounds of the Iran-Iraq war) magazine, which is affiliated with the vigilante organization Ansar-e Hezbollah. (22)

Ayatollah Hossein Nouri Hamedani bestowed theological legitimacy upon such suicide terror operations in a written message to the gathering. (23) Attendance at the rally indicates some endorsement and a support network for suicide operations. Attending the rally were Palestinian Hamas representative Abu Osama al-Muata; Muhammad Hasan Rahimian, the supreme leader's personal representative to the powerful Bonyad-e Shahid (The Martyr Foundation); Mehdi Kuchakzadeh, an Iranian parliamentarian; Mustafa Rahmandust, general secretary of the Association for Support to the People of Palestine; and model female fighter Marziyeh Hadideh Dabbagh. (24)

More vocal expressions of solidarity are limited, however. The Mehr News Agency reports only a single declaration of solidarity from the spokesman of the University Basij at the Tehran branch of Islamic Azad University, who compared contemporary suicide operations with the "revolutionary deeds" of Mirza-Reza Kermani, the assassin of Nasser al-Din Shah, a nineteenth-century king vilified by the Islamic Republic, and with Navvab Safavi, founder of the Fadayian-e Islam and famous for assassinating the liberal nationalist author and historian Ahmad Kasravi. (25) Still, that a group at the Islamic Azad University endorsed the organization is significant. Founded to broaden the reach of education after the Islamic Revolution, the university has several dozen satellite campuses across the country and today is the largest higher education system in Iran.

On May 13, 2005, officials declared the second suicide terror unit, the so-called "Martyr Shahada unit," consisting of 300 martyrdom-seekers, to be ready. (26) Some months later, there was a gathering of the "martyrdom-seekers" at Shahrud University. While the invited Hamas representative did not attend, they watched Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech from the "World without Zionism" conference on screen. (27) While the status of the third and fourth suicide brigades remains unclear, new suicide units continue to declare their readiness. In May 2006, a fifth "martyrdom-seeking" unit, named after Commander Nader Mahdavi, who died in a 1988 suicide mission against the U.S. Navy in the Persian Gulf, declared itself ready to defend Iran. The Headquarters even claims to have recruited "thirty-five foreign Jews" for suicide attacks. (28)

Lebanese Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers on July 12, 2006, provided another press opportunity for Iranian suicide brigades. On July 17, 2006, Arya News Agency reported an expedition of two "martyrdom-units," one consisting of eighteen and the second consisting of nine "martyrdom-seekers," to Lebanon. (29) At demonstrations in Tehran and Tabriz ten days later, sixty Iranian volunteers declared their readiness for holy war. (30) There was also a rally in Rasht, capital of the Caspian province of Gilan, on July 29. (31) But despite the bravado, Iranian police stopped a caravan of self-described "martyrdom-seekers" at the Turkish border. A leftist weblog quoted the governor of the West Azerbaijan province in which the border crossings with Turkey lie as saying he received a telephone call from Ahmadinejad asking him to stop the suicide units. (32)

TRAINING AND COMMAND

While the Iranian government seeks propaganda value out of announcements of new suicide units, it remains in doubt just how committed recruits are. When an Iranian youth magazine interviewed Rajai-Far, an organizer of the Olive Daughters, she remained elusive about how serious her recruits were about suicide. (33)

Despite its rhetoric and the occasional rally, there is little evidence that the Iranian government has established camps to train suicide terrorists, While the Revolutionary Guards operate a network of bases inside Iran, there is little coverage--at least in open source newspapers and Iranian media--of actual training of those recruited by the Headquarters. There have been two mentions of a military exercise for the suicide brigades around the Karaj Dam. Muhammad-Reza Ja'afari, commander of the Gharar-gahe Asheghan-e Shahadat (Congregation of the Lovers of Martyrdom) training camp, referred to one exercise as the "Labeik Ya Khamene'i" (We are responding to your call, Khamene'i). (34) With the exception of the representation of Hamas in the early development of the Iranian "martyrdom-seekers," there is little proof of organizational links to external terrorist organizations.

Nor does the training of any unit mean that the Iranian government is prepared to deploy such forces. In June 2004, Samadi explained that the "activities of the Headquarters will remain theoretical as long as there is no official authorization, and martyrdom-seeking operations will not commence unless the leader [Khamene'i] orders them to do so." (35)

But command and control remain vague. Hussein Allah Karam, a well-known figure from Ansar-e Hezbollah without formal ties to the "martyrdom-seekers," stresses that Khamene'i need not grant permission for any exercises since the trainees are not armed. Evading the question of what need there is to create "martyrdom-seeking" units parallel with the Basij, Karam responded, "Martyrdom-seeking groups are nongovernmental organizations," (36) not part of Iranian officialdom.

The Basij, a paramilitary militia of irregulars loosely charged with defending the revolution, has not been happy with the competition. Basij Commander Mohammad Hejazi condemned the Headquarters' declaration that it sought to dispatch suicide units to Lebanon. "Such actions have absolutely no link to [Iran's] official apparatus and only serve propaganda aims," he declared. In an indirect critique of the suicide units' leadership, he added: "Some seemingly independent groups are trying to attract ... the youth with no coordination with official institutions and without the approval of the command structure for propaganda purposes. Their goals might be noble, but their means are not correct." (37) Government spokesman Gholam-Hussein Elham underlined this argument. (38)

The nongovernmental status of the Headquarters and the "martyrdom-seekers" was reinforced in comments of an anonymous Revolutionary Guards commander to Shargh. He explained, "Since the Headquarters ... is a nongovernmental organization, the organization does not look for orders from the military in case they should take action. Their operations are to be compared with the martyrdom-operations of the Palestinians which are not related to the government of Iran." (39) The foreign ministry, which under Khatami was more reformist than the hardline Revolutionary Guards, referred to the Headquarters members as "irresponsible elements" who did "not reflect the line of government," (40) and, on August 3, 2006, Iranian parliamentarian Mehdi Kuchekzadeh called the Headquarters an NGO during a rally at Behesht-e Zahra. (41)

Baztab reacted angrily to the publication of advertisements for "martyrdom operations" in Partov, the hard-line monthly of the Imam Khomeini Research Institute in Qom, accusing the publication, the Headquarters, and the director of the institute, Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi--perhaps the most radical of the Islamic Republic's religious theoreticians--of enabling outsiders more easily to label Iran as a terror sponsor. (42) Vice President Mohammad Ali Abtahi expressed similar sentiments. "Martyrdom-operations against the interests of other states must remain secret... The public exposure of such gatherings is the very proof that they are not going to do anything," he wrote. Abtahi accuses Yazdi of harming the national interests of Iran, and more seriously, of attempting to create parallel institutions in the Islamic Republic in order to eliminate internal opposition to his political interests. (43) Such attacks called member of the parliament Shokrollah Attarzadeh to the defense of Mesbah Yazdi. Attarzadeh said that volunteers without connection to the ayatollah organized the "martyrdom operations," which he claimed, at any rate, to be purely defensive. (44)

AN INSTRUMENT FOR POWER STRUGGLES

Baztab's hostility toward Mesbah Yazdi is significant. The Islamic Republic of Iran has long sanctioned widespread use of terror and vigilante justice to keep its citizens in line. Perhaps the most prominent example was the 1997-99 serial killings in which the Iranian secret services systematically liquidated Iranian intellectuals with the aim of intimidating dissidents. This case has been subject to extensive debate, causing a considerable uproar among the Iranian public. The Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and National Security claims that the murders were committed by rogue cells in the ministry. However, Iran's most famous journalist and political dissident, Akbar Ganji, accuses the former minister of intelligence, Ali Fallahian, and Khamene'i of responsibility for the killings. (45)

During the 2005 presidential campaign, the reformist daily Rooz warned of the formation of a new Forghan, (46) a radical Islamist group from the early days of the Islamic Revolution. (47) Ali Yunesi, minister of intelligence, and Abtahi both seconded such concerns. (48) Baqir Nobakht, spokesman for' Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's election campaign, criticized Yazdi by suggesting that he sought to use the "army of martyrdom-seekers" for operations against his political enemies inside Iran. (49)

For more than a century, hard-line officials have turned to vigilante groups during periods of political upheaval. (50) Their political influence is noticeable. (51) The 1979 Islamic revolution only strengthened such tendencies, and there is no doubt that the patrons of the "martyrdom-seekers" have used the Headquarters as a tool to maintain revolutionary values against those that might ameliorate them.

Here, the crisis regarding the change in Iran's policy towards Egypt is instructive. From almost the start of the Islamic Republic, there has been considerable tension between Tehran and Cairo. Ayatollah Khomeini objected to Egyptian president Anwar Sadat's recognition of and peace treaty with Israel. After Sadat's assassination, Iranian authorities named a street after his assassin, Khaled Islambouli. For years after, this action has been an irritant in Egyptian-Iranian relations. (52) But in January 2004, toward the end of Muhammad Khatami's presidency, the Mehr News Agency reported that the Iranian government had asked Tehran's city council to change the street name. (53) The city council acquiesced, renaming it "Intifada Street." Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi attributed the decision to improving Egyptian-Iranian relations. (54)

The Headquarters protested, sending a letter to then-mayor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. (55) Ahmadinejad defended the decision in the name of promoting unity among Muslim countries "in order to face the global Zionist front." (56) The Headquarters responded with a press release (57) and a demonstration against the decision. (58) Mehdi Chamran, the Tehran city council chairman and brother of the late commander of the Revolutionary Guard, Mostafa Chamran, said that the foreign ministry had imposed the decision but that he preferred to honor Islambouli. (59) In an Iranian-style compromise, the street was finally called Mohammad al-Durrah Street after a 12-year old boy who was caught in crossfire and killed in the opening days of the second intifada. (60) But the Headquarters was successful in scuttling rapprochement with the largest Arab state to make peace with Israel. On January 28, 2004, the London-based Arabic daily Asharq al-Awsat announced that Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak would not visit Iran due to the presence of a picture of Khaled Islambouli on public display in Tehran. (61)

Those associated with the Headquarters appear willing to use irregular forces against enemies not only foreign but also domestic. Groups connected to Mesbah Yazdi roughed up Rafsanjani on June 5, 2006, in Qom. (62) In the past, vigilantes directed such attacks against reformers or free thinkers, but now the first generation of the Iranian revolutionaries such as Rafsanjani receive the same treatment.

And as in the past, the violence is connected to the same groupings in Iranian politics: the Keyhan editor Shariatmadari, now close to the Headquarters, as the intellectual proponent of violence against liberal elements, (63) and Hussein Allah Karam of Ansar-e Hezbollah, now also linked to the "martyrdom-seekers" (64) and, more directly, with Ansar-e Hezbollah itself, which publishes advertisements for the Headquarters and interviews with their spokesmen. (65)

CONCLUSIONS

Since 9-11, the increased focus on international terror has amplified fear of terrorism. By forming suicide terrorists units, Tehran can, at a minimum, exploit such fear. Already, Western policymakers warn that any strike against Iran could spark a resurgence of Iranian-backed terror. That the Islamic Republic has already formed suicide bomber brigades underscores that point. But the fact that the Iranian leadership must embrace such nonconventional deterrents may suggest that Tehran recognizes that the Iranian military is weaker than Iranian figures admit.

However, the suicide units may serve a dual function. They are, in effect, the most radical factions' guns-for-hire, unquestioning loyalists who are willing to die to preserve revolutionary values. As such, Iranian hard-liners can use them to saber-rattle as well as to keep reformers and liberals at bay. This may pose the more immediate threat since the willingness of Iranian hardliners to use violence against their internal political opponents could pose an almost insurmountable impediment to those who might seek to liberalize the Islamic Republic from within.

(1) Doctrinal Analysis Center for Security without Borders website, accessed Aug. 8, 2006.

(2) Shargh (Tehran), Feb. 20, 2006.

(3) Shargh, Feb. 20, 2006.

(4) Hassan Abbasi weblog, June 5, 2004, accessed Aug. 6, 2006.

(5) Abbasi weblog, June 5, 2004.

(6) Mehr News Agency (Tehran), Jan. 5, 2004.

(7) Shargh, June 5, 2004.

(8) Shargh, June 5, 2004.

(9) Shargh, June 5, 2004.

(10) Ruhollah Khomeini, Tawzih al-Masa'il, 9th ed. (Tehran: Entesharat-e Iran, 1999), pp. 454-5.

(11) Ali Khamene'i, May 1, 2002 speech.

(12) Mehr, Oct. 16, 2004.

(13) Iran (Tehran), Sept. 11, 2004.

(14) Iran, Nov. 20, 2004.

(15) Mehr, Nov. 29, 2004.

(16) Mehr, Nov. 23, 2004.

(17) Iran, Sept. 11, 2004.

(18) For a pictorial report, see Mehr, Dec. 2, 2004.

(19) Mehr, Dec. 3, 2004.

(20) Iran, Apr. 19, 2005.

(21) Baztab (Tehran), Apr. 21, 2005.

(22) Shargh, June 5, 2004.

(23) Baztab, Apr. 21, 2005.

(24) Baztab, Apr. 21, 2005; Shargh, Apr. 23, 2005.

(25) Mehr, Dec. 5, 2004.

(26) Mehr, May 13, 2005.

(27) Rooz (Tehran), Nov. 18, 2005.

(28) Shargh, May 27, 2006.

(29) Arya News Agency, July 17, 2006.

(30) CNN, July 27, 2006.

(31) Shargh, July 30, 2006.

(32) Peik Net (Tehran), Aug. 3, 2006.

(33) Javan (Tehran), July 9, 2005.

(34) Javan, Aug. 16, 2005.

(35) Shargh, June 5, 2004.

(36) Iran, Sept. 5, 2005.

(37) Shargh, July 22, 2006.

(38) Jahan-e Eghtesad (Tehran), July 25. 2006.

(39) Shargh, June 5, 2004.

(40) Shargh, Aug. 17, 2004.

(41) E'temad (Tehran), Aug. 3, 2006.

(42) Baztab, July 24, 2005.

(43) See Mohammad Ali Abtahi, Webnevesht website, July 27, 2005.

(44) Shargh. July 31, 2005.

(45) Akbar Ganji, Tarik-khaneh-ye ashbah. Asibshenasi-ye gozar be dowlat-e democratic-e tose-gara (Tehran: Tarh-e No, 1999), pp. 408-10; idem, Alijenab-e sorkhpoush va alijenaban-e khakestari: Asibshenasi-ye gozar be dowlat-e demokratik-e tose 'e-gara (Tehran: Tarh-e No, 2000), pp. 210-8.

(46) Rooz, June 21, 2005.

(47) For more information, see Rasoul Ja'farian, ed., Jaryan-ha va sazeman-ha-ye mazhabi-siyasi. Sal-ha-ye 1320-135 7 (Tehran: Markaz-e Asnad-e Enghelab-e Eslami, 2004), pp. 568-82; Michael Rubin, Into the Shadows. Radical Vigilantes in Khatami's Iran (Washington, D.C.: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 2001), pp. 21-2.

(48) Iranian Students' News Agency (ISNA), July 16, 2005; Abtahi, Webnevesht, July 27, 2005.

(49) Iran, June 22, 2005.

(50) Richard Cottam, Nationalism in Iran (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1964), pp. 37-8; Marvin Zonis, The Political Elite of Iran (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971), p. 348.

(51) Rubin, Into the Shadows, p. xviii.

(52) Shahrough Akhavi, "Egypt: Political and Religious Relations in the Modern Period," Encyclopaedia Iranica Online, accessed Aug. 23, 2006; William Millward, "Egypt and Iran: Regional Rivals at Diplomatic Odds," Commentary, May 1992; Neshat Daily (Tehran), June 6, 1999, in BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, June 8, 1999; Al-Hayat (London), June 7, 1999, in BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, June 9, 1999.

(53) Mehr, Jan. 5, 2004.

(54) Mehr, Jan. 6, 2004.

(55) Mehr, Jan. 7, 2004.

(56) Mehr, Jan. 7, 2004.

(57) Mehr, Jan. 9, 2004.

(58) Mehr, Jan. 9, 2004.

(59) Mehr, Jan. 9, 2004.

(60) BBC News, Jan. 5, 2004.

(61) Mehr, Jan. 28, 2004.

(62) For a pictorial account of the attack against Rafsanjani, see ISNA, June 5, 2006.

(63) Iran, Sept. 11, 2004.

(64) Iran, Sept. 5, 2005.

(65) Firouz Rajai-Far, interview, Ya Lesarat al-Hossein (Ansare Hezbollah, Tehran), May 10 and 17, 2006; see advertisements for "martyrdom operations." Ya Lesarat al-Hossein, Apr. 12, 2006.

Ali Alfoneh is a Ph.D. fellow in the department of political science, University of Copenhagen, and a research fellow at the Royal Danish Defense College. He thanks Henrik Joergensen and Thomas Emil Jensen, both from the Institute for Strategy at the Royal Danish Defense College, for their input.
Click to expand...
 
There was a whole documentary recently on Iran's religious army (I forget the name) who where armed with not much more than Kourans (not sure I spelled it right spell check had no ideas I meant to say Islamic bible) and the odd man with a AK or such. Most of them where not much older than 12 or 15 years old, some of the ones that survived have been used as Trainers for the current breed of insurgents / Terrorists.

Iran also funds and equips the insurgents in Iraq, some of the things found recently in Iraq have been traced to Iran, Further evidence for this is the Intelligence officer the allies currently have in custody.
 
Welsh

That is going to take a while to read!
I started with the first article... yes Iran is responsible for assasinations of iranians in foreign countries. No doubt about it. 100%. But let us define terrorism then ...
If you want to argue that Iran's government is corrupt... you wont find an argument here. I totally agree.

I will have to leave the others for the weekend, but I am starting to admire your approach to all of this. At least there is dialogue.

But remember mate, I support the disarming of iran... not the bombing it to the stone age approach like we see in iraq and afghanistan. That is going to be a lose lose situation.

Alec

You have reached a point of no return buddy. You got blood in your eyes... and there is no way im going to convince you of the right for moslems to live. Iran is already in the "stone age"... ??? Well friend, Israel wouldnt be where it is if America didnt bring them back from almost extinction. They have saved them, fed them, put them back on a map, armed them to the teeth and continue to support them. And I dont mean that in a condescending way. I thank god (even though im not religious) that Jews exist today, but I find it morally distressing, and lose faith in mankind, when someone like you suffered so much but hasnt learnt anything from it. Im not going to argue with you if you are going to treat this like a Youtube commentary box.


Muff

As for the documentary you saw. You are confused. Iran does not support the insurgents. Insurgents are coming from the Al-Qaida network which has nothing to do with IRan. And even the most damning article will admit that. Even FOX.

They ARE supporting the Shiite's who are currently in civil war with the Sunni's. Shiites are not insurgents. They make up majority of Iraq. Calling the Shiites insurgents in Iraq is like calling the Yanks insurgents during America's civil war.

Im not surprised you didnt remember the documentary's name

And here comes my next point Muff, If this small army you describe did in fact exist, you're futile effort to suggest they are the voice of iran is as ridiculous as saying the Ku Klux Klan is the voice of america.
That is the shifty reporting that goes on, and the propoganda that catches you out.

It doesnt matter where u are from, science tells us that majority of human beings are good people. IT IS PROPOGANDA that swells the chaos we see today... and its happening plenty on both sides.
Give me a camera and I could convince you there are no fish in the sea.

... I know Iran's government ISNT looking out for its own people when it encourages war... But equally, are you sure American government is looking out for its people when it instigates war?
 
Welsh
Before I continue to read the articles, let me say a few things

You may have noticed I am trying to make a distinction here.
There is a big difference between a government that is corrupt\criminal and a country that is terrorism. This is an important distinction to make. A corrupt government will take its own people as hostage whilst a terrorist state suggests its entire nation is your enemy. Terrorism is a word that is thrown around nowadays, to suit people's causes. And it is the difference between turning Iran into rubble and changing its governing body. To suggest iran is a terrorist country, in the words of Bush means that Iran is an enemy, in its entirety. This is the mistake of bush when he trampled on iraq. Its people, good or bad had to fight...
So which one is it. He only changed his tune when he realised there were no WMD's.

To associate iran with terrorism, you speak of, puts the country alongside that of Taliban and Alqaeda and all things 911... which you know is untrue.... The problem that exists in iran is completely different. Branding them as "Terrorists" with rigorous articles citing secret citizen assasinations etc. is warmongering with a blurred perspective.

People should know the bottom line facts behind a decision to go to war. And the threat of terrorism from iran isnt one of them.

If the threat of terrorism we saw in 911 concerns you, you should be pointing the finger at factions in Pakistan, Indonesia, Saudia Arabia and Egypt.

Boming Iran will just get you further into the mess, that is the middle east.
 
Ashley- I think you are blurring lines pretty much here. I also have significant doubts about Iran's denials of supporting Shia militants in Iraq. In fact, it would be foolish for Iran not to support Shia militants in Iraq.

True, the official line is that Iran supports the state of Iraq.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5337300.stm

But that's probably just good public diplomacy, much like how the US and other countries don't engage in covert activity. Iran has a long history of supporting militants. I pointed out Hezbollah and Massoud in Afghanistan. There has been evidence linking Iran to supporting militants in Iraq.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4333246.stm

I think the idea of an Iranian Shia state with a state based on a religious identity would have a very difficult time keeping its hands out of Iraq. Similiarly, Iran had a interest in fighting against the Taliban and supporting insurgents in Afghanistan (and thus there was something of a cooperative arrangement between the US and Iran over Afghanistan, if for awhile). But a weakened Iraq, split into three sections with Iran getting influence over the Shia section would be a nice "win" for Iran. So far the biggest winner in Iraq is Iran.

I think you're correct to say that terrorism is a mis-used word. I opposed the notion of a "war against terrorism" because terrorism, as in a terrorist act, is just a adjective and how do you have wars with adjectives.

You can deal with those individuals and states that engage in terrorism, however.

Terrorism, lets define it as- an act of violence committed by one actor against civilians with the intention of causing fear or terror against that other or third parties for ideological or political gain. Defined this way you can

We've actually discussed this definition on the boards here before. Based on this I would say that-

a bombing by the IRA against a truck of British soldiers- would be a military attack by an insurgent group. A similiar bombing against a school bus would be terrorism.

The US bombing of predominantly civilian Hiroshima would be an act of terrorism, although the US and Japan are in a state of war- with the intention of terrorizing the Japanese into surrender.

The assassination of dissidents with the intention of terrorizing others who are critical of a state, is an act of terrorism.

Likewise, the use of torture as a means of social repression, is a form of terrorism.

Israelis send a hit team to whack Black September operatives responsible for the Munich massacre- no terrorism. Why? By becoming a terrorist or affiliating with a terrorist group you have essentially become a covert operator, a spy, for an organization. Such individuals have elected to become "players" in the game- and thus are at risk for the consequences.

A terrorist is someone who does this.

But as for what is a terrorist state?

I would argue that state-sponsored terrorism is a state that is willing to utilize terrorism against its own nationals or other nationals and/or will fund, supply or otherwise support non-state groups who are willing to undertake acts of terror against others.

Does Iran fit?
If Iran provides missiles to Hezbollah to be launched into civilian towns, then Iran is a terrorist state.

If Iran threatens commercial vessels passing the Straits of Hormuz with attack by silkworm missiles= terrorism

If Iran provides aid to insurgent Shia to be used against civilian Sunnis, that's terrorist.

But there is an added question- is the state responsible for its people even if the people act in ways contradictory to national policy.

Or- what about the responsibilty of a state when its own people engage in terrorist acts on behalf of the state.

Pakistan's Intelligence Service (ISI) has been known to be supporting the Taliban and Al - Qaeda after 9-11. Is Pakistan responsible? Truth is that the State of Pakistan has had little control over its intelligence agency and the government has suffered a bit of a Praetorian guard problem- the military and ISI being safeguards of the state (and thus its overlords).

That said Pakistan has a responsibility of reigning in its agents.
Why? Because under international law, those in command have responsibility.

During the Second World War, the Japanese in the Philippines had essentially lost command and control under US bombardment. The soldiers, without control, became egregious in their acts against civilians and non-combatants, violating many war crimes. Was the general responsible for the acts of men he could no longer control?

Yes, the commander is responsible to make sure his men don't break the law.

So if Iran is engaged in these acts, willfully- than its a terrorist state.
If agents of Iran are committing these acts without the knowledge of the state, then the state is still responsible- for the state is responsible for the acts of its agents.

But to think this has anything to do with 9-11 is foolish. I agree, I don't think Iran had anything to do with 9-11. In fact, Iran had an interest in removing the very regime that was an accessory to the Taliban.

But does that mean that Iran's hands are clean? No. Has Iran engaged in terrorism? Yes.

Citing the assassinations of dissidents is not warmongering- its testifying to acts of terror committed by Iran for political purposes.

I agree- there is a difference between a corrupt government and a corrupt state. But there is a problem here too. A corrupt state, if its like a mafia, has a desire to stay in power. And like a mafia it will use coercive violence to achieve that ends.

Consider the position of the mullahs and the willingness of Iran to issue edicts for the deaths of novelists- don't you think the Iranian state would utilize terror to achieve its ends?
 
ashley52 I detect a large Anti war sentiment from you and that's your opinion stick to it if you wish. Iran is a terrorist state pure and simple and if you wish to argue that there not go ahead but I know it is a Terrorist state and action should be taken to prevent it from further dammigeing this region.

And it is also a a bad Idea to allow a politically unstable state such as Iran to have WMD's.
 
Muff said:
ashley52 I detect a large Anti war sentiment from you and that's your opinion stick to it if you wish. Iran is a terrorist state pure and simple and if you wish to argue that there not go ahead but I know it is a Terrorist state and action should be taken to prevent it from further dammigeing this region.

And it is also a a bad Idea to allow a politically unstable state such as Iran to have WMD's.
Click to expand...

Interesting. You know, germany ain't that political stable too,
at the moment, that's what I read, problems in the coalition
that leads the land, no one knows where they gonna go in
the their foreign politics.

Maybe, if one is already in Iran, take that few miles more,
and preemptive airstrike germany, I say, needs not more
then 3 days, shock & awe, and back home.
Oh sometimes there is thinking about WMD in germany too.
 
To be honest, I am not sure how politically unstable Iran is. The government might be politically unpopular, but it seems that the government is fairly well in command, which would mean that the state knows and probably authorizes the killing of dissidents, support for Hezbollah, and other actions.

With all respect to Ashley- I doubt Iran would be so troublesome or the US so interested but for one thing- oil.
 
Get real, people: we need their fucking oil! Oil, oil, oil! How are you going to live a life of luxury without the black gold?

Come, come, nuclear bomb!
 
oh crap I just typed another long essay... and pressed "post" and it said error... and I lost it all.... Goodnight fellas
 
alec said:
Get real, people: we need their fucking oil! Oil, oil, oil! How are you going to live a life of luxury without the black gold?

Come, come, nuclear bomb!
Click to expand...

The good thing is that even if the oil is radiated, it still makes for good gas.
 
Ok, well Im starting to feel like a true iranian here. Ive got multiple people to argue with... lets start with the easier ones.

Muff
ashley52 I detect a large Anti war sentiment from you ...
Click to expand...

Oh man... you are quite the cluey fella. And forgive me for having such an atrocious sentiment.

Iran is a terrorist state pure and simple ... I know it is a Terrorist state ..
Click to expand...

Well now that you've cleared all that up... lets all grab a cup of tea. ???!?!?!?
 
OK Welsh... I give it my best shot.. (I had a big night last night)

I also have significant doubts about Iran's denials of supporting Shia militants in Iraq.
Click to expand...
Yeh I totally agree they support the shia... but my argument is. Shia are not insurgents nor militants. They are iraqis (majority of Iraq is shia) who are fighting a civil war against the sunni's. Would any other country NOT try to play a hand if their neighbor was in civil war.

Iran has a long history of supporting militants. I pointed out Hezbollah and Massoud in Afghanistan. There has been evidence linking Iran to supporting militants in Iraq.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4333246.stm
Click to expand...

Welsh
I actually read the source you list here... and from the article itself... "The prime minister said evidence linked the attacks either to Iran or its militant, Lebanese allies Hezbollah, but added that officials could not be sure."

Could not be sure .. could not be sure... but that's how things are carved in stone these days. And that's how WMD were reported to be in iraq.

Terrorism, lets define it as- an act of violence committed by one actor against civilians with the intention of causing fear or terror against that other or third parties for ideological or political gain.
Click to expand...

So bombing a country into submission is ok..?.
This definition suits people fine when they have 10 tonnes of TNT, 10 miles up in the air... but you know, it makes no difference to the dead whether it was classed as an air bombardment or 'terrorist' attack. It seems terrorism is the be all and end all, and anything alongside pales in its comparison. It appears everything besides terrorism is all fair in love and war.

Terrorism has become a satanic zest pool, and any opponent of America (and its allies) are thrown into it. You even admit that Iran would mean nothing to the world if not for its oil, and more or less you admit they had no hand in the 911, london, bali attacks. Yet you insist on terrorist association by way of small technicalities.
This itself is more damaging to the allied cause than anything else. Invading Iraq was the single biggest mistake for combating the true terrorism that resulted in 911, london and bali bombings. It was a demoralizing distraction, and every tangent the allies choose to partake in, puts them one step behind. Of course, my opinion is that these distractions didnt happen by accident (oil !!).

Does Iran fit?
1. If Iran provides missiles to Hezbollah to be launched into civilian towns, then Iran is a terrorist state.

2. If Iran threatens commercial vessels passing the Straits of Hormuz with attack by silkworm missiles= terrorism

3. If Iran provides aid to insurgent Shia to be used against civilian Sunnis, that's terrorist.
Click to expand...
1. Israel declared war on Hezbollah and reduced half of Lebanon to rubble. Israel killed many more civilians. Why is it that Hezbollah can not strike back? (remember the satanic zest pool I talked about). Even if Iran did have a hand in supplying aid to Hezbollah, how is it any different to America supplying firepower to Israel.

2. Threats? I dont even think your own definition classifies this as terrorism. I mean where do you stop Welsh, are horror movies an act of terrorism too.

3. How is this any different to what happened back in the 80's Iran-Iraq war when America provided aid to iraq to kill iranians. Including WMDS and illegal chemical weapons. Oh, I guess if you put "gate" at the end of it, it precludes you from terrorism?

Can we see the hypocrisy in your means of associating iran with terrorism, based on your technicalities.

At the end of the day Welsh, the only way I can get everything into perspective is by asking you this hypothetical.

If I were to say that going to war with iran would necessitate you're direct frontline involvement (including that of you're son, father and brother), would you still be adamant that we must go to war. Because that is the only time we should. When the threat is so real that you are willing to go to war yourself.

this would require complete honesty but I'm not going to ask that of you... I know its not fair to expect you to answer it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top