US Intelligence has announced the partition of Pakistan - English
A former NATO officer claims US Special Forces have conducted secret raids inside Pakistan's border regions. The operations were conducted between 2003 and 2008, but only one was ever made public....
A former NATO officer claims US Special Forces have conducted secret raids inside Pakistan's border regions. The operations were conducted between 2003 and 2008, but only one was ever made public.
According to reports, troops were looking for high value targets among both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. The one that became widely known in September 2008 was condemned as a provocation by the Pakistani government.
Ethnic groups from Pakistans Belugistan province where most of the raids occurred blame the government in Islamabad for allowing these things to happen, said RT LIVE investigative journalist Webster Tarpley.
He pointed out that President Obamas West point speech of December 2 is a thinly veiled declaration of war against Pakistan in the sense that it announces the intent of the US to promote the dismemberment, the partition of Pakistan along ethnic lines and in order to do that you have to create trouble on the ground.
Ambassador Richard Holbrook, who is the US tsar for the region, was asked Do you have troops in Pakistan? and he said The US has intelligence personnel in Pakistan but not troops. And I would ask What about the contractors, Mr Ambassador? asked Tarpley.
Webster Tarpley disclosed information published in The Nation and Vanity Fair magazines about Blackwater Select and Total Intelligence Solutions having massive snatch and grab and even assassination operations run out of Karachi, Pakistans largest city, under the command of the US Joint Special Operations Command and CIA.
The Taliban refused to take responsibility for some explosions in public places in Pakistan and blamed the CIA for destabilizing the situation in the country through terror.
I guess from some points of view the golden age of Blackwater was perhaps not under Bush/ Cheney but it is now under Obama, Tarpley said, and they are running wild in ways they trample the sovereignty of Pakistan as a country.
More...
Description:
A former NATO officer claims US Special Forces have conducted secret raids inside Pakistan's border regions. The operations were conducted between 2003 and 2008, but only one was ever made public.
According to reports, troops were looking for high value targets among both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. The one that became widely known in September 2008 was condemned as a provocation by the Pakistani government.
Ethnic groups from Pakistans Belugistan province where most of the raids occurred blame the government in Islamabad for allowing these things to happen, said RT LIVE investigative journalist Webster Tarpley.
He pointed out that President Obamas West point speech of December 2 is a thinly veiled declaration of war against Pakistan in the sense that it announces the intent of the US to promote the dismemberment, the partition of Pakistan along ethnic lines and in order to do that you have to create trouble on the ground.
Ambassador Richard Holbrook, who is the US tsar for the region, was asked Do you have troops in Pakistan? and he said The US has intelligence personnel in Pakistan but not troops. And I would ask What about the contractors, Mr Ambassador? asked Tarpley.
Webster Tarpley disclosed information published in The Nation and Vanity Fair magazines about Blackwater Select and Total Intelligence Solutions having massive snatch and grab and even assassination operations run out of Karachi, Pakistans largest city, under the command of the US Joint Special Operations Command and CIA.
The Taliban refused to take responsibility for some explosions in public places in Pakistan and blamed the CIA for destabilizing the situation in the country through terror.
I guess from some points of view the golden age of Blackwater was perhaps not under Bush/ Cheney but it is now under Obama, Tarpley said, and they are running wild in ways they trample the sovereignty of Pakistan as a country.
7:34
|
Drone - Russian Tv report on RQ-170 Sentinel stealth aircraft - English
Head of Iran's Majlis (parliament) National Security and Foreign Policy Committee says the presence of foreign troops in neighboring Afghanistan is a serious threat to regional security and...
Head of Iran's Majlis (parliament) National Security and Foreign Policy Committee says the presence of foreign troops in neighboring Afghanistan is a serious threat to regional security and stability.
“Contemporary experiences in countries like Germany and Japan have shown that the presence of foreign forces in any country will violate that country's sovereignty,” Alaeddin Boroujerdi said on Wednesday.
Speaking in a meeting with the visiting Afghan Deputy Defense Minister Mohammad Homayoun Fawzi, he went on to say that undermining the brotherly relations between regional countries is the main political and security approach adopted by the US and the UK.
“We must not allow foreign powers to sabotage the friendly relations between neighboring countries through their interventionist measures,” Majlis official news agency, ICANA, quoted him as saying.
The lawmaker further stated that the Islamic Republic will spare no effort to help with the development, progress and establishment of calm in Afghanistan.
Boroujerdi also voiced Iran's protest to the recent violation of the country's airspace by a US spy drone which took off from Afghanistan, saying that the incident was against the international obligations of Afghanistan and in violation of international law.
“The government of Afghanistan must account for such incidents and prevent their repetition in the future,” he added.
A US RQ-170 spy drone crossed Afghanistan's border with Iran on December 4, but was successfully brought down with minimal damage by the Iranian Army's electronic warfare unit. The aircraft was flying over the northeastern Iran city of Kashmar, some 225 kilometers (140 miles) away from the Afghan border.
The Afghan minister, for his part, praised the Iranian government and nation for helping in the reconstruction of Afghanistan.
“The Afghan nation will never forget the Iranian nation's support under difficult conditions,” he added.
While Afghanistan's defense ministry has announced that the Afghan army is ready to take responsibility for the country's security, after the invading US-led troops leave, senior American and NATO officials have signaled that foreign troops will remain in the country beyond 2014.
The US-led invasion of Afghanistan was waged in 2001 under the pretext of 'war on terror' and with the declared aim of toppling the Taliban regime and establishing security in the war-torn country.
However, insecurity continues to rise across Afghanistan despite the presence of nearly 150,000 US-led forces in the country.
SS/PKH/HGH
More...
Description:
Head of Iran's Majlis (parliament) National Security and Foreign Policy Committee says the presence of foreign troops in neighboring Afghanistan is a serious threat to regional security and stability.
“Contemporary experiences in countries like Germany and Japan have shown that the presence of foreign forces in any country will violate that country's sovereignty,” Alaeddin Boroujerdi said on Wednesday.
Speaking in a meeting with the visiting Afghan Deputy Defense Minister Mohammad Homayoun Fawzi, he went on to say that undermining the brotherly relations between regional countries is the main political and security approach adopted by the US and the UK.
“We must not allow foreign powers to sabotage the friendly relations between neighboring countries through their interventionist measures,” Majlis official news agency, ICANA, quoted him as saying.
The lawmaker further stated that the Islamic Republic will spare no effort to help with the development, progress and establishment of calm in Afghanistan.
Boroujerdi also voiced Iran's protest to the recent violation of the country's airspace by a US spy drone which took off from Afghanistan, saying that the incident was against the international obligations of Afghanistan and in violation of international law.
“The government of Afghanistan must account for such incidents and prevent their repetition in the future,” he added.
A US RQ-170 spy drone crossed Afghanistan's border with Iran on December 4, but was successfully brought down with minimal damage by the Iranian Army's electronic warfare unit. The aircraft was flying over the northeastern Iran city of Kashmar, some 225 kilometers (140 miles) away from the Afghan border.
The Afghan minister, for his part, praised the Iranian government and nation for helping in the reconstruction of Afghanistan.
“The Afghan nation will never forget the Iranian nation's support under difficult conditions,” he added.
While Afghanistan's defense ministry has announced that the Afghan army is ready to take responsibility for the country's security, after the invading US-led troops leave, senior American and NATO officials have signaled that foreign troops will remain in the country beyond 2014.
The US-led invasion of Afghanistan was waged in 2001 under the pretext of 'war on terror' and with the declared aim of toppling the Taliban regime and establishing security in the war-torn country.
However, insecurity continues to rise across Afghanistan despite the presence of nearly 150,000 US-led forces in the country.
SS/PKH/HGH
1:36
|
[27 June 13] Lebanese Army finds Takfiri tunnels in Sidon - English
The Lebanese Army finds tunnels in Sidon. The tunnels connect several buildings controlled by supporters of Takfiri cleric Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir. This comes as the Lebanese troops are also going...
The Lebanese Army finds tunnels in Sidon. The tunnels connect several buildings controlled by supporters of Takfiri cleric Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir. This comes as the Lebanese troops are also going ahead with their mop-up operation following fierce clashes with the armed followers of Sheikh Assir. The Army is reported to be in full control of the city and the troops have seized control of the radical cleric\'s base. The Lebanese troops have also seized rocket launchers, machineguns and military uniforms inside the base. They are still searching for the radical cleric, who\'s a staunch supporter of Takfiri insurgents fighting the Syrian government. Some analysts say the battle has been a major blow to the takfiris, others have a different idea.
Elian el-Khamissi, Press TV, Sidon
More...
Description:
The Lebanese Army finds tunnels in Sidon. The tunnels connect several buildings controlled by supporters of Takfiri cleric Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir. This comes as the Lebanese troops are also going ahead with their mop-up operation following fierce clashes with the armed followers of Sheikh Assir. The Army is reported to be in full control of the city and the troops have seized control of the radical cleric\'s base. The Lebanese troops have also seized rocket launchers, machineguns and military uniforms inside the base. They are still searching for the radical cleric, who\'s a staunch supporter of Takfiri insurgents fighting the Syrian government. Some analysts say the battle has been a major blow to the takfiris, others have a different idea.
Elian el-Khamissi, Press TV, Sidon
3:36
|
[21 Nov 2013] Karzai says security pact with US should be signed next year - English
Afghan President Hamid Karzai says he\'s willing to delay the signing of a deal with the US, known as the Bilateral Security Agreement, or BSA.
Karzai told Afghanistan\'s assembly of elders,...
Afghan President Hamid Karzai says he\'s willing to delay the signing of a deal with the US, known as the Bilateral Security Agreement, or BSA.
Karzai told Afghanistan\'s assembly of elders, called Loya Jirga, that the deal will not be signed by the president until after next year\'s presidential election. This, as the Jirga has met today to discuss the BSA. Under the pact, American troops would be allowed to remain in Afghanistan beyond a 2014 deadline. Kabul has agreed to US military operations under special circumstances and American troops\' immunity from prosecution in Afghanistan. But, ordinary Afghans are angry over raids by American and other foreign troops. And they have held protests against the security deal with the US.
More...
Description:
Afghan President Hamid Karzai says he\'s willing to delay the signing of a deal with the US, known as the Bilateral Security Agreement, or BSA.
Karzai told Afghanistan\'s assembly of elders, called Loya Jirga, that the deal will not be signed by the president until after next year\'s presidential election. This, as the Jirga has met today to discuss the BSA. Under the pact, American troops would be allowed to remain in Afghanistan beyond a 2014 deadline. Kabul has agreed to US military operations under special circumstances and American troops\' immunity from prosecution in Afghanistan. But, ordinary Afghans are angry over raids by American and other foreign troops. And they have held protests against the security deal with the US.
4:05
|
Nuclear war by miscalculation - 13 August 2008 - English
Russia went into Georgia to essentially deliver a message. There are more than 1000 US military special forces in Georgia doing exercising training Georgian troops before Georgia launched the...
Russia went into Georgia to essentially deliver a message. There are more than 1000 US military special forces in Georgia doing exercising training Georgian troops before Georgia launched the attack on Ossetia on 8 August. There are 1000 Israeli troops at least private security firms and military advisors including advisors who are upgrading the Georgian air force in an installation near Tbilisi. That is what the Russian airplanes hit and they essentially made the military strike on South Ossetia militarily impossible by making incursions inside Georgian territory before they announced that they were calling a halt to their military operations.
More...
Description:
Russia went into Georgia to essentially deliver a message. There are more than 1000 US military special forces in Georgia doing exercising training Georgian troops before Georgia launched the attack on Ossetia on 8 August. There are 1000 Israeli troops at least private security firms and military advisors including advisors who are upgrading the Georgian air force in an installation near Tbilisi. That is what the Russian airplanes hit and they essentially made the military strike on South Ossetia militarily impossible by making incursions inside Georgian territory before they announced that they were calling a halt to their military operations.
President Ahmadinejad Interview Sept 08 with Democracy Now - Part 1 - English
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez,...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
President Ahmadinejad was interviewed recently in New York by Democracy Now
More...
Description:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
President Ahmadinejad was interviewed recently in New York by Democracy Now
President Ahmadinejad Interview Sept 08 with Democracy Now - Part 2 - English
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez,...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
More...
Description:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
President Ahmadinejad Interview Sept 08 with Democracy Now - Part 3 - English
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez,...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
More...
Description:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
0:46
|
Pakistan mosque blast kills 70 - 26Mar09 - English
The incident came shortly after the prayers begun at a mosque in the town of Jamrud in Khyber tribal region. About 100 Sunni brothers were also injured in the bombing. Between 250 and 300 people...
The incident came shortly after the prayers begun at a mosque in the town of Jamrud in Khyber tribal region. About 100 Sunni brothers were also injured in the bombing. Between 250 and 300 people were in the mosque and the wounded were taken to a local hospital in Jamrud and another hospital in Peshawar. Police, paramilitary forces and government officials were among the congregation at the mosque, some 30 km (20 miles) from the Afghan border. The incident was the deadliest in Pakistan since last September, when 60 people died in a suicide truck bomb attack at the five-star Marriott Hotel in Islamabad. The Friday attack came hours before US President Barack Obama was to announce new plans for combating Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Obama is expected to send 4,000 extra troops to Afghanistan in addition to the 17,000 troops already deployed to the war-torn country. ***May Imam of our time reappear soon***
More...
Description:
The incident came shortly after the prayers begun at a mosque in the town of Jamrud in Khyber tribal region. About 100 Sunni brothers were also injured in the bombing. Between 250 and 300 people were in the mosque and the wounded were taken to a local hospital in Jamrud and another hospital in Peshawar. Police, paramilitary forces and government officials were among the congregation at the mosque, some 30 km (20 miles) from the Afghan border. The incident was the deadliest in Pakistan since last September, when 60 people died in a suicide truck bomb attack at the five-star Marriott Hotel in Islamabad. The Friday attack came hours before US President Barack Obama was to announce new plans for combating Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Obama is expected to send 4,000 extra troops to Afghanistan in addition to the 17,000 troops already deployed to the war-torn country. ***May Imam of our time reappear soon***
2:53
|
Middle East in WWI Pt 8 Iraq Revisited English
Middle East in WWI Iraq Revisited. General Townshend's troops, besieged by the Turks at Kut, wait in vain for rescue in the spring of 1916. British forces under the command of General Aylmer try to...
Middle East in WWI Iraq Revisited. General Townshend's troops, besieged by the Turks at Kut, wait in vain for rescue in the spring of 1916. British forces under the command of General Aylmer try to break through the Turkish ring, but fail repeatedly. As Townshend's troops run out of food and ammunition, the situation becomes critical. On April 29th, about 13,000 British soldiers surrender to the Turks. The campaign to capture Baghdad has ended in disaster.
Except for the Dardanelles/Gallipoli campaigns, the extensive combat operations in the Middle East during World War I have been largely overlooked in documentary programs. Given the historical significance of the Ottoman Empire's demise in 1918, and the ongoing importance of Middle Eastern oil reserves to Western economies, a close study of this conflict provides two important lessons:
1. The Treaty of Versailles, agreed to by the Western Powers in 1919, paved the way for military and political chaos in the Middle East, which continues to this very day.
2. Oil reserves in the Middle East became an important strategic concern for Western Powers, helping to justify their economic, diplomatic and military interference in the region.
After the end of World War I, most of the Ottoman Empire was carved up into "spheres of influence", controlled mostly by the British and French. The remaining territories became the modern state of Turkey in 1923 -- after a five-year struggle by Turkish nationalists against Western domination.
With little regard for cultural, historical, religious and demographic considerations, the West sponsored the creation of several new nations: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Thus, a "tinderbox" was built from Western greed, igniting a multitude of wars, revolts, coups and military occupations that truly have made the defeat of the Ottoman Empire little more than a hollow victory
More...
Description:
Middle East in WWI Iraq Revisited. General Townshend's troops, besieged by the Turks at Kut, wait in vain for rescue in the spring of 1916. British forces under the command of General Aylmer try to break through the Turkish ring, but fail repeatedly. As Townshend's troops run out of food and ammunition, the situation becomes critical. On April 29th, about 13,000 British soldiers surrender to the Turks. The campaign to capture Baghdad has ended in disaster.
Except for the Dardanelles/Gallipoli campaigns, the extensive combat operations in the Middle East during World War I have been largely overlooked in documentary programs. Given the historical significance of the Ottoman Empire's demise in 1918, and the ongoing importance of Middle Eastern oil reserves to Western economies, a close study of this conflict provides two important lessons:
1. The Treaty of Versailles, agreed to by the Western Powers in 1919, paved the way for military and political chaos in the Middle East, which continues to this very day.
2. Oil reserves in the Middle East became an important strategic concern for Western Powers, helping to justify their economic, diplomatic and military interference in the region.
After the end of World War I, most of the Ottoman Empire was carved up into "spheres of influence", controlled mostly by the British and French. The remaining territories became the modern state of Turkey in 1923 -- after a five-year struggle by Turkish nationalists against Western domination.
With little regard for cultural, historical, religious and demographic considerations, the West sponsored the creation of several new nations: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Thus, a "tinderbox" was built from Western greed, igniting a multitude of wars, revolts, coups and military occupations that truly have made the defeat of the Ottoman Empire little more than a hollow victory
3:35
|
Middle East in WWI Pt 9 Desert War English
Middle East in WWIPart 9 - Desert War. Beginning in early 1917, British troops under General Archibald Murray clear the Sinai Peninsula of Turkish forces. Murray begins a limited offensive into...
Middle East in WWIPart 9 - Desert War. Beginning in early 1917, British troops under General Archibald Murray clear the Sinai Peninsula of Turkish forces. Murray begins a limited offensive into Palestine, where the Turks have built defensive positions along the ridges between Gaza and Beersheba, two natural gateways into the region. The British advance is slow and methodical; a railroad is built for supplies and reinforcements, and a pipeline is built to carry water for the troops and animals. But the searing Sinai Desert has a fierce effect on the British soldiers, and the sun's terrible heat becomes their worst enemy.
Except for the Dardanelles/Gallipoli campaigns, the extensive combat operations in the Middle East during World War I have been largely overlooked in documentary programs. Given the historical significance of the Ottoman Empire's demise in 1918, and the ongoing importance of Middle Eastern oil reserves to Western economies, a close study of this conflict provides two important lessons:
1. The Treaty of Versailles, agreed to by the Western Powers in 1919, paved the way for military and political chaos in the Middle East, which continues to this very day.
2. Oil reserves in the Middle East became an important strategic concern for Western Powers, helping to justify their economic, diplomatic and military interference in the region.
After the end of World War I, most of the Ottoman Empire was carved up into "spheres of influence", controlled mostly by the British and French. The remaining territories became the modern state of Turkey in 1923 -- after a five-year struggle by Turkish nationalists against Western domination.
With little regard for cultural, historical, religious and demographic considerations, the West sponsored the creation of several new nations: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Thus, a "tinderbox" was built from Western greed, igniting a multitude of wars, revolts, coups and military occupations that truly have made the defeat of the Ottoman Empire little more than a hollow victory.
More...
Description:
Middle East in WWIPart 9 - Desert War. Beginning in early 1917, British troops under General Archibald Murray clear the Sinai Peninsula of Turkish forces. Murray begins a limited offensive into Palestine, where the Turks have built defensive positions along the ridges between Gaza and Beersheba, two natural gateways into the region. The British advance is slow and methodical; a railroad is built for supplies and reinforcements, and a pipeline is built to carry water for the troops and animals. But the searing Sinai Desert has a fierce effect on the British soldiers, and the sun's terrible heat becomes their worst enemy.
Except for the Dardanelles/Gallipoli campaigns, the extensive combat operations in the Middle East during World War I have been largely overlooked in documentary programs. Given the historical significance of the Ottoman Empire's demise in 1918, and the ongoing importance of Middle Eastern oil reserves to Western economies, a close study of this conflict provides two important lessons:
1. The Treaty of Versailles, agreed to by the Western Powers in 1919, paved the way for military and political chaos in the Middle East, which continues to this very day.
2. Oil reserves in the Middle East became an important strategic concern for Western Powers, helping to justify their economic, diplomatic and military interference in the region.
After the end of World War I, most of the Ottoman Empire was carved up into "spheres of influence", controlled mostly by the British and French. The remaining territories became the modern state of Turkey in 1923 -- after a five-year struggle by Turkish nationalists against Western domination.
With little regard for cultural, historical, religious and demographic considerations, the West sponsored the creation of several new nations: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Thus, a "tinderbox" was built from Western greed, igniting a multitude of wars, revolts, coups and military occupations that truly have made the defeat of the Ottoman Empire little more than a hollow victory.
3:47
|
Middle East in WWI Pt 15 Oil in Baku English
Middle East in WWI Pt 15 Oil in Baku By 1918, the oil fields of Baku become the objective for British, Turkish, and even Bolshevik forces. In January, General L.C. Dunsterville leads his troops...
Middle East in WWI Pt 15 Oil in Baku By 1918, the oil fields of Baku become the objective for British, Turkish, and even Bolshevik forces. In January, General L.C. Dunsterville leads his troops ("Dunsterforce") from Baghdad to the Caspian Sea and into Baku by August. Meanwhile, the Turks finally drive Armenian rebels from Eastern Anatolia (March-April) while German troops land from the Black Sea and capture the city of Tiflis in the Caucasus (June12th). The Turks win the race to Baku and vigorously attack the British, who evacuate the city on September 14th. Two months later, a British naval flotilla on the Caspian Sea drives the Turks out of Baku.
More...
Description:
Middle East in WWI Pt 15 Oil in Baku By 1918, the oil fields of Baku become the objective for British, Turkish, and even Bolshevik forces. In January, General L.C. Dunsterville leads his troops ("Dunsterforce") from Baghdad to the Caspian Sea and into Baku by August. Meanwhile, the Turks finally drive Armenian rebels from Eastern Anatolia (March-April) while German troops land from the Black Sea and capture the city of Tiflis in the Caucasus (June12th). The Turks win the race to Baku and vigorously attack the British, who evacuate the city on September 14th. Two months later, a British naval flotilla on the Caspian Sea drives the Turks out of Baku.
Iraqi SHIA SUNNI unite to rebuild Al Askariya Shrine - 09Aug09 - English
Al ‘Askarī Mosque or the ‘Askariyya Mosque/Shrine (Arabic: مرقد الامامين علي الهادي والحسن العسكري Marqad al-Imāmayn ‘Alī l-Hādī wa l-Ħassan...
Al ‘Askarī Mosque or the ‘Askariyya Mosque/Shrine (Arabic: مرقد الامامين علي الهادي والحسن العسكري Marqad al-Imāmayn ‘Alī l-Hādī wa l-Ħassan al-‘Askarī) is a Shī‘ah Muslim holy site located in the Iraqi city of Sāmarrā 125 km (78 mi) from Baghdad. It is one of the most important Shī‘ah mosques in the world, built in 944.[1] Its dome was destroyed in a bombing by terrorists in February 2006 and its two remaining minarets were destroyed in another bombing in June 2007, causing widespread anger amongst Muslims. The remaining clock tower was also destroyed in July 2007. The remains of the 10th and 11th Shī‘ah Imāms, ‘Alī al-Hādī ("an-Naqī") and his son Hasan al-‘Askarī, known as: al-‘Askariyyain ("the two ‘Askarīs"), rest at the shrine[2]. Also buried within the Mosque are: Hakimah Khātūn, sister of ‘Alī al-Hādī; and Narjis Khātūn, the mother of Muħammad al-Mahdī[3]. Adjacent to this shrine is another mosque, built over the location where the Twelfth or "Hidden" Imām, Muħammad al-Mahdī first entered the Minor Occultation.
The ‘Askariyya Shrine is also known as the "Tomb or Mausoleum of the Two Imāms", "the Tomb of Imāms ‘Alī al-Hādī and Hasan al-‘Askarī" and "al-Hadhratu l-‘Askariyya".
CLAIMS OF SECTARIAN VIOLENCE ARE ABSURD AS THE TWO MAJOR SECTS OF ISLAM, SHIA & SUNNI HAVE RESPECTED EACH OTHERS HOLY FIGURES FOR A LONG TIME. THESE SORTS OF INCIDENCES STARTED AFTER FOREIGN TROOPS ILLEGALY OCCUPIES IRAQ IN 2002 UNDER THE PRETEXT OF HAVING THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND THEN LATER THE CRUEL DICTATOR SADDAM. OCCUPYING TROOPS ARE STILL IN IRAQ CAUSING THE DISTRESS AND FEAR AMONG THE GENERAL PUBLIC. NOW SHIAS AND SUNNIS ARE UNITING TO EXPELL THE INVADERS FROM THEIR HOMELAND.
More...
Description:
Al ‘Askarī Mosque or the ‘Askariyya Mosque/Shrine (Arabic: مرقد الامامين علي الهادي والحسن العسكري Marqad al-Imāmayn ‘Alī l-Hādī wa l-Ħassan al-‘Askarī) is a Shī‘ah Muslim holy site located in the Iraqi city of Sāmarrā 125 km (78 mi) from Baghdad. It is one of the most important Shī‘ah mosques in the world, built in 944.[1] Its dome was destroyed in a bombing by terrorists in February 2006 and its two remaining minarets were destroyed in another bombing in June 2007, causing widespread anger amongst Muslims. The remaining clock tower was also destroyed in July 2007. The remains of the 10th and 11th Shī‘ah Imāms, ‘Alī al-Hādī ("an-Naqī") and his son Hasan al-‘Askarī, known as: al-‘Askariyyain ("the two ‘Askarīs"), rest at the shrine[2]. Also buried within the Mosque are: Hakimah Khātūn, sister of ‘Alī al-Hādī; and Narjis Khātūn, the mother of Muħammad al-Mahdī[3]. Adjacent to this shrine is another mosque, built over the location where the Twelfth or "Hidden" Imām, Muħammad al-Mahdī first entered the Minor Occultation.
The ‘Askariyya Shrine is also known as the "Tomb or Mausoleum of the Two Imāms", "the Tomb of Imāms ‘Alī al-Hādī and Hasan al-‘Askarī" and "al-Hadhratu l-‘Askariyya".
CLAIMS OF SECTARIAN VIOLENCE ARE ABSURD AS THE TWO MAJOR SECTS OF ISLAM, SHIA & SUNNI HAVE RESPECTED EACH OTHERS HOLY FIGURES FOR A LONG TIME. THESE SORTS OF INCIDENCES STARTED AFTER FOREIGN TROOPS ILLEGALY OCCUPIES IRAQ IN 2002 UNDER THE PRETEXT OF HAVING THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND THEN LATER THE CRUEL DICTATOR SADDAM. OCCUPYING TROOPS ARE STILL IN IRAQ CAUSING THE DISTRESS AND FEAR AMONG THE GENERAL PUBLIC. NOW SHIAS AND SUNNIS ARE UNITING TO EXPELL THE INVADERS FROM THEIR HOMELAND.
0:58
|
Update On Kashmir Unrest - Curfews Continue, Five Protestors Kashmiris Killed - 15 SEP 2010 - English
Indian troops kill Five in Kashmir
Police in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir have once again opened fire on protesters, killing at least Five and injuring more than two dozen others....
Indian troops kill Five in Kashmir
Police in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir have once again opened fire on protesters, killing at least Five and injuring more than two dozen others.
According to police sources, after protests turned violent security forces were forced to open fire to disperse protesters in the southern town of Mendhar, a Press TV correspondent reported.
The death toll is expected to rise as some of the injured are said to be in critical condition.
The deaths have triggered more protests in neighboring Poonch district and surrounding areas with protestors attacking several police stations in the disputed Himalayan region.
The regional administration has sought the help of Indian paramilitary forces to contain the situation in the predominantly Muslim region.
In a separate incident, pro-independence demonstrators set fire to two government buildings to protest a round-the-clock curfew across Kashmir, which has been in place for four days now.
Residents say they are running out of food and supplies.
Kashmir has been the scene of violent clashes on an almost daily basis.
Over 90 Kashmiri protesters have lost their lives at the hands of Indian troops since the unrest erupted back in June.
Article Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/142612.html
More...
Description:
Indian troops kill Five in Kashmir
Police in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir have once again opened fire on protesters, killing at least Five and injuring more than two dozen others.
According to police sources, after protests turned violent security forces were forced to open fire to disperse protesters in the southern town of Mendhar, a Press TV correspondent reported.
The death toll is expected to rise as some of the injured are said to be in critical condition.
The deaths have triggered more protests in neighboring Poonch district and surrounding areas with protestors attacking several police stations in the disputed Himalayan region.
The regional administration has sought the help of Indian paramilitary forces to contain the situation in the predominantly Muslim region.
In a separate incident, pro-independence demonstrators set fire to two government buildings to protest a round-the-clock curfew across Kashmir, which has been in place for four days now.
Residents say they are running out of food and supplies.
Kashmir has been the scene of violent clashes on an almost daily basis.
Over 90 Kashmiri protesters have lost their lives at the hands of Indian troops since the unrest erupted back in June.
Article Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/142612.html
2:52
|
[Must Watch] Wars could cost over $4 trillion - English
Although a new study has doubled the US war costs, it does not account for the enormous subsequent expenses for the injured troops, a US analyst says.
"The cost of taking care of [the injured...
Although a new study has doubled the US war costs, it does not account for the enormous subsequent expenses for the injured troops, a US analyst says.
"The cost of taking care of [the injured troops] … has not really been taken into account seriously, either by economists or by political figures in the United States," historian and investigative journalist Gareth Porter told Press TV on Thursday.
The new study, conducted by the Nobel Prize winner for economics Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard University Professor Linda Bilmes, shows that the long-term costs of the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq doubles initial estimates, suggesting the revised six-trillion-dollar figure.
The analyst also warned that "the institutional interests of the military itself [is] so enormous that the [US] military is absolutely determined to avoid an end to this war any time soon."
Porter called on the people and the politicians in the United States to take action to make their government bring the wars to an end.
http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/144762.html
****************
Wars could cost over $4 trillion
Authors of the book The Three Trillion Dollar War now estimate that the total cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could top $4 trillion over time. A lagging economy, increases in the cost of medical care, higher than expected expenditures on post-combat medical and psychiatric care, and a surge in disability benefits are likely to place a significant strain on the federal budget.
House Veterans Affairs Chairman, Bob Filner (D-California), stated:
"This may be more of a crisis than the Medicare and Social Security problems we have looming...It rivals both in the potential impact. This is another entitlement we've committed ourselves to, and it could break the bank."
Filner aims on utilizing the latest cost estimates to propose a "veterans trust fund" to pay for the long-term war expenses, a proposal that has so far found minimal support in the Democratic-led House due to the startling price tag associated with it.
Having already blown past original cost projections, combat operations alone in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan have cost nearly $1.1 trillion in nine years. With well over 30,000 maimed for life, a PTSD epidemic, and record suicide rates (in the military), an estimated price tag of at least $4 trillion over the next several years appears to be reasonable.
As a result, those who claim to be fiscally conservative should take a long hard look at the immense cost of open-ended, overseas wars, especially at a time when America could be facing a debt crisis in the not-too-distant future. Vague objectives, shifting benchmarks, imprecise definitions of victory, and unclear exit strategies inevitably lead to costs that far exceed initial budget estimates.
In addition, those who claim to espouse a more progressive, anti-war stance should take a long hard look at the current war policy, as the trillions being spent could be better invested in infrastructure, health care, education, alternative energy, and other domestic programs. Perhaps the strategy of electing leaders who espouse peace, fiscal responsibility, and change in U.S. foreign policy, yet intensify wars, spend even more on the military, and adopt much of their despised opponents' previous platform, should be more critically examined.
http://caivn.org/article/2010/09/30/wars-could-cost-over-4-trillion
More...
Description:
Although a new study has doubled the US war costs, it does not account for the enormous subsequent expenses for the injured troops, a US analyst says.
"The cost of taking care of [the injured troops] … has not really been taken into account seriously, either by economists or by political figures in the United States," historian and investigative journalist Gareth Porter told Press TV on Thursday.
The new study, conducted by the Nobel Prize winner for economics Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard University Professor Linda Bilmes, shows that the long-term costs of the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq doubles initial estimates, suggesting the revised six-trillion-dollar figure.
The analyst also warned that "the institutional interests of the military itself [is] so enormous that the [US] military is absolutely determined to avoid an end to this war any time soon."
Porter called on the people and the politicians in the United States to take action to make their government bring the wars to an end.
http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/144762.html
****************
Wars could cost over $4 trillion
Authors of the book The Three Trillion Dollar War now estimate that the total cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could top $4 trillion over time. A lagging economy, increases in the cost of medical care, higher than expected expenditures on post-combat medical and psychiatric care, and a surge in disability benefits are likely to place a significant strain on the federal budget.
House Veterans Affairs Chairman, Bob Filner (D-California), stated:
"This may be more of a crisis than the Medicare and Social Security problems we have looming...It rivals both in the potential impact. This is another entitlement we've committed ourselves to, and it could break the bank."
Filner aims on utilizing the latest cost estimates to propose a "veterans trust fund" to pay for the long-term war expenses, a proposal that has so far found minimal support in the Democratic-led House due to the startling price tag associated with it.
Having already blown past original cost projections, combat operations alone in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan have cost nearly $1.1 trillion in nine years. With well over 30,000 maimed for life, a PTSD epidemic, and record suicide rates (in the military), an estimated price tag of at least $4 trillion over the next several years appears to be reasonable.
As a result, those who claim to be fiscally conservative should take a long hard look at the immense cost of open-ended, overseas wars, especially at a time when America could be facing a debt crisis in the not-too-distant future. Vague objectives, shifting benchmarks, imprecise definitions of victory, and unclear exit strategies inevitably lead to costs that far exceed initial budget estimates.
In addition, those who claim to espouse a more progressive, anti-war stance should take a long hard look at the current war policy, as the trillions being spent could be better invested in infrastructure, health care, education, alternative energy, and other domestic programs. Perhaps the strategy of electing leaders who espouse peace, fiscal responsibility, and change in U.S. foreign policy, yet intensify wars, spend even more on the military, and adopt much of their despised opponents' previous platform, should be more critically examined.
http://caivn.org/article/2010/09/30/wars-could-cost-over-4-trillion
*VIEWER DISCRETION* 1st Pro-Democracy killing in Bahrain - Arabic
'Saudi Arabia sends troops to Bahrain'
Saudi Arabia is sending troops to Bahrain in a move to crack down on pro-democracy protesters who took to the streets in the capital Manama, a political...
'Saudi Arabia sends troops to Bahrain'
Saudi Arabia is sending troops to Bahrain in a move to crack down on pro-democracy protesters who took to the streets in the capital Manama, a political analyst says.
Bahrain police kill two protesters
Bahraini security forces have shot dead two Shia protesters at the funeral of a pro-democracy demonstrator who died of his wounds a day after Monday's "Day of Rage" rallies in the capital Manama.
http://www.presstv.com/section/351020205.html
More...
Description:
'Saudi Arabia sends troops to Bahrain'
Saudi Arabia is sending troops to Bahrain in a move to crack down on pro-democracy protesters who took to the streets in the capital Manama, a political analyst says.
Bahrain police kill two protesters
Bahraini security forces have shot dead two Shia protesters at the funeral of a pro-democracy demonstrator who died of his wounds a day after Monday's "Day of Rage" rallies in the capital Manama.
http://www.presstv.com/section/351020205.html
1:07
|
Ron Paul: U.S. may try to occupy Pakistan - English
GOP 2012 hopeful Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) thinks U.S. troops will soon be on the ground for an occupation of Pakistan — and he said so on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Wednesday morning....
GOP 2012 hopeful Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) thinks U.S. troops will soon be on the ground for an occupation of Pakistan — and he said so on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Wednesday morning.
Paul called America’s relationship with Pakistan “an impossible situation,” where the U.S. hailed both its friendship with and suspicion of the country.
“I think we are going to be in Pakistan, I think that’s going to be our next occupation, and I fear it,” Paul said. “It’s ridiculous. I think our foreign policy is such we don’t need to be doing this.”
Paul said he had no inside information on Congress authorizing or ordering troops to invade Pakistan. He simply said based on U.S. history, he wouldn’t be surprised to see further U.S. involvement there.
More...
Description:
GOP 2012 hopeful Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) thinks U.S. troops will soon be on the ground for an occupation of Pakistan — and he said so on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Wednesday morning.
Paul called America’s relationship with Pakistan “an impossible situation,” where the U.S. hailed both its friendship with and suspicion of the country.
“I think we are going to be in Pakistan, I think that’s going to be our next occupation, and I fear it,” Paul said. “It’s ridiculous. I think our foreign policy is such we don’t need to be doing this.”
Paul said he had no inside information on Congress authorizing or ordering troops to invade Pakistan. He simply said based on U.S. history, he wouldn’t be surprised to see further U.S. involvement there.
8:45
|
***VIEWER DISCRETION*** Turkey leads anti-Syria smear campaign - 13Jun11 - English
Turkey's smear campaign against the Syrian government is much worse than the propaganda spread by Arab media to tarnish the image of Damascus with regards to its recent unrest.
While Syrian...
Turkey's smear campaign against the Syrian government is much worse than the propaganda spread by Arab media to tarnish the image of Damascus with regards to its recent unrest.
While Syrian officials and residents of crisis-hit Syrian regions have repeatedly said that armed groups are responsible for the deadly clashes in the country, Turkey has tried to portray Iran and the Lebanese Resistance Movement, Hezbollah, as being behind the unrest in Syria and that they help Damascus quell protests.
The Turkish NTV news channel recently claimed that the Syrian soldiers who refused to open fire on protesters were shot dead by their commanders.
The broadcaster reported that a Syrian soldier taking refuge in the country says that he and his comrades were trying to avoid hurting protesters by firing warning shots, but those who refused to open fire on protesters were shot dead.
"I've seen Iranians and Hezbollah operators giving instructions to shoot, and those who refused were immediately shot dead," the alleged fugitive Syrian soldier told NTV, adding that the soldiers were mostly shot from behind or in the neck.
The Turkish broadcaster has also claimed that Syrian forces have opened fire on unarmed civilians in al-Rastan.
"We opened fire on everyone, the young, the old... Women were raped in front of their husbands and children," the army defector told NTV.
Political analysts in Middle East affairs have accused Ankara of playing a double game -- claiming to support the Damascus government in order to have greater influence in the Middle East, while at the same time supporting and providing a safe haven for armed gangs seeking to incite revolt in Syria.
Iranian analyst Hadi Mohammadi says that the United States has now formed operational headquarters in southern Turkey close to the border with Syria to direct the riots in the Arab country after its attempts to cause unrest in southern Syria were unsuccessful.
Mohammadi said that the United States has assigned Turkey to carry out its anti-Syria plan. It has hence provided aid to the Turkish Army to assist Syrian dissidents in crossing into Turkey and settle in tent villages set up in Turkey's Hatay Province.
Meanwhile, a mass grave with bodies of at least 10 Syrian security forces was discovered near the northwestern town of Jisr al-Shughour on Monday.
Syria's state TV says the victims were killed by armed gangs and the bodies bore marks of torture.
Heavy clashes were reported as troops and tanks moved into the city on Sunday and gunmen targeted civilian areas including a hospital.
The government says it entered the town to restore order after some 120 security forces were killed there about a week ago. People in Jisr al-Shughour gathered to thank government troops for protecting them against the gunmen.
More...
Description:
Turkey's smear campaign against the Syrian government is much worse than the propaganda spread by Arab media to tarnish the image of Damascus with regards to its recent unrest.
While Syrian officials and residents of crisis-hit Syrian regions have repeatedly said that armed groups are responsible for the deadly clashes in the country, Turkey has tried to portray Iran and the Lebanese Resistance Movement, Hezbollah, as being behind the unrest in Syria and that they help Damascus quell protests.
The Turkish NTV news channel recently claimed that the Syrian soldiers who refused to open fire on protesters were shot dead by their commanders.
The broadcaster reported that a Syrian soldier taking refuge in the country says that he and his comrades were trying to avoid hurting protesters by firing warning shots, but those who refused to open fire on protesters were shot dead.
"I've seen Iranians and Hezbollah operators giving instructions to shoot, and those who refused were immediately shot dead," the alleged fugitive Syrian soldier told NTV, adding that the soldiers were mostly shot from behind or in the neck.
The Turkish broadcaster has also claimed that Syrian forces have opened fire on unarmed civilians in al-Rastan.
"We opened fire on everyone, the young, the old... Women were raped in front of their husbands and children," the army defector told NTV.
Political analysts in Middle East affairs have accused Ankara of playing a double game -- claiming to support the Damascus government in order to have greater influence in the Middle East, while at the same time supporting and providing a safe haven for armed gangs seeking to incite revolt in Syria.
Iranian analyst Hadi Mohammadi says that the United States has now formed operational headquarters in southern Turkey close to the border with Syria to direct the riots in the Arab country after its attempts to cause unrest in southern Syria were unsuccessful.
Mohammadi said that the United States has assigned Turkey to carry out its anti-Syria plan. It has hence provided aid to the Turkish Army to assist Syrian dissidents in crossing into Turkey and settle in tent villages set up in Turkey's Hatay Province.
Meanwhile, a mass grave with bodies of at least 10 Syrian security forces was discovered near the northwestern town of Jisr al-Shughour on Monday.
Syria's state TV says the victims were killed by armed gangs and the bodies bore marks of torture.
Heavy clashes were reported as troops and tanks moved into the city on Sunday and gunmen targeted civilian areas including a hospital.
The government says it entered the town to restore order after some 120 security forces were killed there about a week ago. People in Jisr al-Shughour gathered to thank government troops for protecting them against the gunmen.
3:42
|
Military Sources Reveal Ground Force Invasion of Libya -English
Infowars.com has received alarming reports from within the ranks of military stationed at Ft. Hood, Texas confirming plans to initiate a full-scale U.S.-led ground invasion in Libya and deploy...
Infowars.com has received alarming reports from within the ranks of military stationed at Ft. Hood, Texas confirming plans to initiate a full-scale U.S.-led ground invasion in Libya and deploy troops by October. The source stated that additional Special Forces are headed to Libya in July, with a Calvary Division (heavy armor) and three corps deploying in late October and early November. Initial numbers are estimated at 12,000 active forces and another 15,000 in support, totaling nearly 30,000 troops. This information was confirmed by numerous calls and e-mails from other military personnel, some indicating large troop deployment as early as September. Among these supporting sources is a British S.A.S. officer confirming that U.S. Army Rangers are already in Libya. The chatter differs in the details, but the overall convergence is clear-- that a full-on war is emerging this fall as Gaddafi continues to evade attempts to remove him from power.
More...
Description:
Infowars.com has received alarming reports from within the ranks of military stationed at Ft. Hood, Texas confirming plans to initiate a full-scale U.S.-led ground invasion in Libya and deploy troops by October. The source stated that additional Special Forces are headed to Libya in July, with a Calvary Division (heavy armor) and three corps deploying in late October and early November. Initial numbers are estimated at 12,000 active forces and another 15,000 in support, totaling nearly 30,000 troops. This information was confirmed by numerous calls and e-mails from other military personnel, some indicating large troop deployment as early as September. Among these supporting sources is a British S.A.S. officer confirming that U.S. Army Rangers are already in Libya. The chatter differs in the details, but the overall convergence is clear-- that a full-on war is emerging this fall as Gaddafi continues to evade attempts to remove him from power.
2:24
|
[28 May 13] Afghans say US presence blamed for insecurity - English
In May 2012, Obama and Karzai signed a security pact that authorized the presence of US troops for a period of 10 years after 2014, which was the original date agreed earlier for the departure of...
In May 2012, Obama and Karzai signed a security pact that authorized the presence of US troops for a period of 10 years after 2014, which was the original date agreed earlier for the departure of all foreign combat troops from Afghanistan.
Washington is also after signing a security deal with Kabul that will give foreign forces in Afghanistan immunity from prosecution among other terms. Meanwhile, on May 9 this year, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Washington had demanded to keep several military bases across Afghanistan.
The pretext of the US and its allies for their presence in Afghanistan is to establish security in the region. But now after more than a decade of US invasion, Afghans still say the foreign presence has led to more insecurity in the region.
More...
Description:
In May 2012, Obama and Karzai signed a security pact that authorized the presence of US troops for a period of 10 years after 2014, which was the original date agreed earlier for the departure of all foreign combat troops from Afghanistan.
Washington is also after signing a security deal with Kabul that will give foreign forces in Afghanistan immunity from prosecution among other terms. Meanwhile, on May 9 this year, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Washington had demanded to keep several military bases across Afghanistan.
The pretext of the US and its allies for their presence in Afghanistan is to establish security in the region. But now after more than a decade of US invasion, Afghans still say the foreign presence has led to more insecurity in the region.
4:40
|
[18 Nov 2013] Afghan official: Pres. Karzai rejects a provision of security pact with US - English
A senior Afghan official says President Hamid Karzai has rejected a provision of a security pact with the United States just days before the country\'s elders gather to debate it.
Media outlets...
A senior Afghan official says President Hamid Karzai has rejected a provision of a security pact with the United States just days before the country\'s elders gather to debate it.
Media outlets have quoted the official as saying that Karzai has rejected the enter-and-search provision. The question of whether foreign troops will be allowed to search Afghan homes after their combat mission ends next year has long been a sticking point of the Kabul-Washington deal. The final draft will be discussed by the Loya Jirga, an assembly of tribal elders, later this week. Karzai has already announced that if the Loya Jirga does not approve the deal, it will not be signed. Last month, the United States and Afghanistan hammered out a draft deal that allows thousands of U-S troops to stay in the country beyond 2014.
More...
Description:
A senior Afghan official says President Hamid Karzai has rejected a provision of a security pact with the United States just days before the country\'s elders gather to debate it.
Media outlets have quoted the official as saying that Karzai has rejected the enter-and-search provision. The question of whether foreign troops will be allowed to search Afghan homes after their combat mission ends next year has long been a sticking point of the Kabul-Washington deal. The final draft will be discussed by the Loya Jirga, an assembly of tribal elders, later this week. Karzai has already announced that if the Loya Jirga does not approve the deal, it will not be signed. Last month, the United States and Afghanistan hammered out a draft deal that allows thousands of U-S troops to stay in the country beyond 2014.
2:03
|
[17 Dec 2013] Iran envoy addresses UNSC on Afghanistan - English
Since the US. and Britain first launched their attack in October of 2001, things have been very unstable and insecure in Afghanistan. The country has one of the lowest life expectancies on earth...
Since the US. and Britain first launched their attack in October of 2001, things have been very unstable and insecure in Afghanistan. The country has one of the lowest life expectancies on earth according to the CIA World Factbook. Instability and violence persists as foreign troops continue to occupy the country. UN Ambassador Mohammed Khazee of the Islamic Republic of Iran, explained the efforts that need to be taken in order to improve the situation at a meeting of the United Nations Security Council.
Khazee made clear that in such a process, the self-determination and sovereignty of Afghanistan should be protected. Khazee made specific reference to the problem of narcotic drugs, that resurfaced in Afghanistan, and caused difficulties throughout the entire region, since the overthrow of the Taliban. With foreign troops scheduled to leave in 2014, among many other big changes, many are hopeful that the situation in Afghanistan can improve.
More...
Description:
Since the US. and Britain first launched their attack in October of 2001, things have been very unstable and insecure in Afghanistan. The country has one of the lowest life expectancies on earth according to the CIA World Factbook. Instability and violence persists as foreign troops continue to occupy the country. UN Ambassador Mohammed Khazee of the Islamic Republic of Iran, explained the efforts that need to be taken in order to improve the situation at a meeting of the United Nations Security Council.
Khazee made clear that in such a process, the self-determination and sovereignty of Afghanistan should be protected. Khazee made specific reference to the problem of narcotic drugs, that resurfaced in Afghanistan, and caused difficulties throughout the entire region, since the overthrow of the Taliban. With foreign troops scheduled to leave in 2014, among many other big changes, many are hopeful that the situation in Afghanistan can improve.
3:00
|
[17 Dec 2013] 400 to 500 dead in clashes between rival army factions in S Sudan - English
The United Nations says that between 400 and 500 bodies have been taken to hospitals in the South Sudan capital Juba after clashes between rival army factions.
The chief of UN peacekeeping...
The United Nations says that between 400 and 500 bodies have been taken to hospitals in the South Sudan capital Juba after clashes between rival army factions.
The chief of UN peacekeeping forces says that about 800 people were also injured in battles between troops loyal to President Salva Kiir and an opposition leader who allegedly tried to stage a coup. The fighting began on Sunday after the president accused troops loyal to his arch-rival, ex-vice president Riek Machar, of attempting to seize power. Machar was sacked from the government in July. About 15000 people have sought refuge in UN compounds around Juba since the fighting started on Sunday.
More...
Description:
The United Nations says that between 400 and 500 bodies have been taken to hospitals in the South Sudan capital Juba after clashes between rival army factions.
The chief of UN peacekeeping forces says that about 800 people were also injured in battles between troops loyal to President Salva Kiir and an opposition leader who allegedly tried to stage a coup. The fighting began on Sunday after the president accused troops loyal to his arch-rival, ex-vice president Riek Machar, of attempting to seize power. Machar was sacked from the government in July. About 15000 people have sought refuge in UN compounds around Juba since the fighting started on Sunday.
0:35
|
[19 Jan 2014] Army launches major operation against ISIL militants in Ramadi - English
The Iraqi army has launched a major offensive against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant militants in the western province of Anbar.
The military says its troops-- backed by helicopters,...
The Iraqi army has launched a major offensive against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant militants in the western province of Anbar.
The military says its troops-- backed by helicopters, began the operation in Ramadi, banning all movement within the city. A police source says policemen and tribal fighters took part in the operation. In recent weeks, Ramadi has witnessed fierce clashes between the Iraqi government troops and the I-S-I-L militants. The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant is an al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group active in both Iraq and Syria.
More...
Description:
The Iraqi army has launched a major offensive against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant militants in the western province of Anbar.
The military says its troops-- backed by helicopters, began the operation in Ramadi, banning all movement within the city. A police source says policemen and tribal fighters took part in the operation. In recent weeks, Ramadi has witnessed fierce clashes between the Iraqi government troops and the I-S-I-L militants. The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant is an al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group active in both Iraq and Syria.
3:27
|
[30/09/19] israeli regime on its way to collapse: IRGC chief - English
The chief commander of Iran\'s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says the Zionist regime is on its path toward collapse because of various weaknesses that are intrinsic to it and...
The chief commander of Iran\'s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says the Zionist regime is on its path toward collapse because of various weaknesses that are intrinsic to it and external regional forces that seek its annihilation.
Watch Live: http://www.presstv.com/live.html
Twitter: http://twitter.com/PressTV
LiveLeak: http://www.liveleak.com/c/PressTV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PRESSTV
Instagram: http://instagram.com/presstvchannel
#PressTV #Iran #News
More...
Description:
The chief commander of Iran\'s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says the Zionist regime is on its path toward collapse because of various weaknesses that are intrinsic to it and external regional forces that seek its annihilation.
Watch Live: http://www.presstv.com/live.html
Twitter: http://twitter.com/PressTV
LiveLeak: http://www.liveleak.com/c/PressTV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PRESSTV
Instagram: http://instagram.com/presstvchannel
#PressTV #Iran #News
6:38
|
[01/10/19] Iraq-Syria major border crossing re-opens after 5 year of closure - English
Syrian and Iraqi authorities have re-opened a major border crossing between the two countries, which was seized by the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group in 2014.
Watch Live:...
Syrian and Iraqi authorities have re-opened a major border crossing between the two countries, which was seized by the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group in 2014.
Watch Live: http://www.presstv.com/live.html
Twitter: http://twitter.com/PressTV
LiveLeak: http://www.liveleak.com/c/PressTV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PRESSTV
Instagram: http://instagram.com/presstvchannel
#PressTV #Iran #News
More...
Description:
Syrian and Iraqi authorities have re-opened a major border crossing between the two countries, which was seized by the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group in 2014.
Watch Live: http://www.presstv.com/live.html
Twitter: http://twitter.com/PressTV
LiveLeak: http://www.liveleak.com/c/PressTV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PRESSTV
Instagram: http://instagram.com/presstvchannel
#PressTV #Iran #News
1:52
|
[03/10/09] Survey: UK economy facing recession - English
A new survey shows Britain’s economy is facing the risk of recession over uncertainties due to a possibly disorderly Brexit.
Watch Live: http://www.presstv.com/live.html
Twitter:...
A new survey shows Britain’s economy is facing the risk of recession over uncertainties due to a possibly disorderly Brexit.
Watch Live: http://www.presstv.com/live.html
Twitter: http://twitter.com/PressTV
LiveLeak: http://www.liveleak.com/c/PressTV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PRESSTV
Instagram: http://instagram.com/presstvchannel
#PressTV #Iran #News
More...
Description:
A new survey shows Britain’s economy is facing the risk of recession over uncertainties due to a possibly disorderly Brexit.
Watch Live: http://www.presstv.com/live.html
Twitter: http://twitter.com/PressTV
LiveLeak: http://www.liveleak.com/c/PressTV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PRESSTV
Instagram: http://instagram.com/presstvchannel
#PressTV #Iran #News
2:22
|
[07/10/19] Iran: 18 countries attend Tehran Minex 2019 - English
Tehran is hosting the eighth edition of Investment Opportunities in Iran’s Mines and Mining Industries Exhibition, known as Minex 2019.
The annual event is one of the largest of its kind in...
Tehran is hosting the eighth edition of Investment Opportunities in Iran’s Mines and Mining Industries Exhibition, known as Minex 2019.
The annual event is one of the largest of its kind in mines and mining industries in the Middles East.
Watch Live: http://www.presstv.com/live.html
Twitter: http://twitter.com/PressTV
LiveLeak: http://www.liveleak.com/c/PressTV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PRESSTV
Instagram: http://instagram.com/presstvchannel
#PressTV #Iran #News
More...
Description:
Tehran is hosting the eighth edition of Investment Opportunities in Iran’s Mines and Mining Industries Exhibition, known as Minex 2019.
The annual event is one of the largest of its kind in mines and mining industries in the Middles East.
Watch Live: http://www.presstv.com/live.html
Twitter: http://twitter.com/PressTV
LiveLeak: http://www.liveleak.com/c/PressTV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PRESSTV
Instagram: http://instagram.com/presstvchannel
#PressTV #Iran #News