Iran's New President
1 July 2005
By: Ali Ismail
aliismail_uk@yahoo.co.uk
Mobile telephone: 0778-842 5262 (United Kingdom)
The notorious photograph purporting to show President Ahmadinejad holding an American hostage
IRAN’S NEW PRESIDENT MAY HAVE BEEN A HOSTAGE TAKER
The ability to stop Tehran’s nuclear development is a test of Western potency
When a relative told me this morning (1st July) that the newly elected president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is widely suspected of being prominently involved in the American embassy hostage crisis of 1979-1980, I received a shock.
At that time, I was a junior cinema manager at the Classic Cinemas chain and the 444-day incarceration of the American diplomats was the highest item on the news each day, every day. Feelings were running high, even in the UK.
Iran Focus has obtained a photograph that purports to show Mahmoud Ahmadinejad holding the arm of a blindfolded American hostage on the grounds of the American embassy in Tehran in 1979.The photograph was given to Iran Focus by an anonymous source in Tehran. Iran Focus does not know who the photographer was or the exact date it was taken but it is believed that it was taken in November or December 1979 in the American embassy compound in Tehran.Soon after the Iranian Revolution in 1979, President Ahmadinejad, who was studying in Tehran’s University of Science and Technology, became a member of the central council of the Office for Strengthening of Unity (OSU) between universities and theological seminaries, the most influential pro-Khomeini student group.The OSU played a pivotal role in the seizure of the American embassy in Tehran in November 1979. Members of the OSU central council, who included (allegedly) President Ahmadinejad as well as Ibrahim Asgharzadeh, Mohsen Mirdamadi, Mohsen Kadivar, Hashem Aghajari, and Abbas Abdi, were regularly received by Ayatollah Khomeini in person.Former OSU members who were involved in the takeover of the American embassy said that President Ahmadinejad was in charge of security during the embassy occupation, a position that put him in direct contact with the newly formed security organizations of the theocratic regime and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards, of which he later became a member.After the occupation of the American embassy, President Ahmadinejad joined the special forces of the Islamic Revolutionary Prosecutor’s Office, based in Evin Prison. The ‘Revolutionary Prosecutor’ was Assadollah Lajevardi, who earned the nickname the ‘Butcher of Evin’ after the execution of literally thousands of political dissidents during the 1980s.Defectors from the theocratic regime’s security forces have revealed that President Ahmadinejad led the firing squads that carried out many of the executions. He personally fired coup de grace shots at the heads of prisoners after their execution and became known as ‘Tir Khalas Zan’ (literally, ‘The Terminator’).
What makes all this of vast significance is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not the head of state of a minor Islamic nation such as the Maldives or Dubai. He is the president of Iran, which is, arguably, the most militarily powerful and the most resourceful of all the Muslim countries. Furthermore, Iran now has a 25-year record of defying the Western powers and President Ahmadinejad has stated in public that Iran will pursue nuclear research and the implementation of that research against all opposition for ‘peaceful purposes’ by which he means for power generation.
Nearly everybody, including very nearly the dogs in the streets, knows that the use of uranium for electricity generation produces by-products that can be diverted towards military ends. To put it bluntly, Iran would be able to build nuclear bombs. With today’s technology, Iran would be able to by-pass the ‘atom bomb’ stage of Hiroshima and Nagasaki fame and go directly to the ‘hydrogen bomb’ option which, in fact, India already has done as exemplified by a test explosion of the same a few years ago.
The New World Order, which certainly appears to govern the world in the post-Soviet Union era, holds the primacy of the rule (virtually amounting to a law) that no non-Western power should have the potential to pose a military threat to the Western powers as axiomatic. Iran in possession of nuclear power stations will be accumulating yellow cake and other materials with which to build nuclear bombs and the West will only have their bare word to rely on for a guarantee that all that will not be handed over to their military scientists to build weapons with.
Bitter experience has taught the directing classes of the Western powers that words of honour from ones such as ourselves do not, generally speaking, pass the test of time. Iran is no exception. Once in possession of plutonium and yellow cake and whatever else may be necessary, the onward flow of events will most probably bring it about that Iran will have its own nuclear weapons - tactical, atomic and hydrogen - and a fleet of carriers to transport them wheresoever the Islamic Republic’s rulers decree it is God’s pleasure that they be sent to. For the West, that is a nightmare. Israel has already publicly declared recently that it will not tolerate a state of affairs in which the Islamic Republic of Iran possesses nuclear weapons or the capacity to manufacture them.
The background with regard to Israel is that on 7 June 1981, in a surprise air attack the Israeli Air Force using F-15 and F-16 fighter jets destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor located 30 kilometres south of Baghdad. Twenty years later. Meir Dagan, the head of Mossad (an Israeli intelligence and counter terrorism agency), revealed to parliament members in his inaugural appearance before the Israeli Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee that Iran is close to the “point of no return” and that the spectre of Iranian possession of nuclear weapons is the greatest threat to Israel since the founding of the Jewish state. In a 2002 address to the nation, President George W. Bush called Iran, Iraq and North Korea an “axis of evil.”
During a 2003 visit to the USA, Israel’s Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz stated, “under no circumstances would Israel be able to tolerate nuclear weapons in Iranian possession.” Six weeks earlier, Mossad had revealed plans for pre-emptive attacks by F-16 bombers on Iranian nuclear sites.
In September, 2004, Iran rejected the International Atomic Energy Agency’s urgent request for the closing down of its nuclear fuel production programme, which many in the USA and Israel believe to be linked to a covert nuclear weapons programme. Iran then test fired a ballistic missile with sufficient range to reach targets in Israel as well as American military installations in Iraq and all over the Middle East.
In February, 2005, the former U.N. Chief Weapons inspector in Iraq (1991-1998) Scott Ritter in a bombshell to a packed house in Olympia’s Capitol Theatre said that President Bush had “signed off” plans to launch an aerial attack against Iran. Tehran responded that it would retaliate, if attacked, in the form of ballistic missile strikes directed against Israel. President Bush then said: “The notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous.” He added: “Having said that, all options are on the table.”
In March, 2005, American troops begin their biennial air-defence exercise with Israel with the purpose on testing Israel’s Arrow II missile-killer system in conjunction with upgraded American Patriot batteries. Both sides described the month-long game codenamed Juniper Cobra as routine. Israeli security sources said Juniper Cobra would treat Iran’s most advanced Shehab-3 missiles as the main “threat.”
In March, 2005, American Vice President Dick Cheney in an interview with Fox TV said: “At the end of the day, if the Iranians don’t live up to their obligations and their international commitments to forgo a nuclear programme, then obviously we’ll have to take stronger action.”
In April, 2005, Yiftah Shapir, an Israeli analyst, explained: “Israel’s options to counter the threat are limited. A pre-emptive strike against Iran’s missile or nuclear assets is problematic because the targets are too far away, too numerous and dispersed, and too well protected - some of them are in deep underground installations.”
In April, 2005, The American Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld made an official visit to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan and Azerbaijan. His endeavours were described by the Russian media as ‘literally encircling Iran in an attempt to find the best bridgehead for a possible military operation against that country.” Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin made an official visit to Israel. He announced Russia’s decision to sell short-range anti-aircraft missiles to Syria and to continue supporting Iran’s nuclear industry. President Putin’s visit must be interpreted as a signal to Israel regarding its planned aerial attack on Iran. Then the American Department of Defence announced the sale of an additional 100 bunker-buster bombs to Israel. The American media interpreted this decision as “a warning to Iran about its nuclear ambitions”.
In May, 2005, a Russian veto of any U.N. Security Council penalty against Tehran became highly likely. China too was strengthening its economic ties with the Islamic Republic and saw itself as a major buyer of Iranian oil. The heads of the Islamic regime in Tehran sensed a victory for their plans for a nuclear weapon.
On 25 June, 2005, the ultra-conservative Tehran mayor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was swept to a landslide victory in Iran’s presidential elections and then swore to turn Iran into a “strong and exemplary Islamic state.” His victory raises questions about whether or not Iran will harden its stance on its nuclear impasse with the West. “This all but closes the door for a breakthrough in U.S.-Iran relations,” said Karim Sadjadpour, a Tehran-based analyst for the International Crisis Group.
Bearing in mind the virtual axiom that no non-Western state or association of nations will be permitted to threaten North America, Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Israel, the current situation with Iran is a veritable litmus test of the New World Order’s ability to keep order and enforce its will globally.
In 1993, an Iranian software engineer told me: “If anybody tries to take their supremacy away, the West will fight. They will not allow other nations to have nuclear weapons because, once a country has them, it becomes invulnerable.” The same man also told me on another occasion: “One day, mark my words, Russia will rob the world.”
If the West prevails in its frantic efforts to tame Iran, the Islamic world will suffer a setback almost as significant as the expulsion of the Moors from Spain 500 years ago. That Western success would take place in the teeth of opposition from both Russia and China. If the West fails, then the gotterdammerung of Israel is on the cards and the worldwide rule of the Islamic Khilafah will become a distinct possibility.
The ability to stop Tehran’s nuclear development is a test of Western potency
When a relative told me this morning (1st July) that the newly elected president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is widely suspected of being prominently involved in the American embassy hostage crisis of 1979-1980, I received a shock.
At that time, I was a junior cinema manager at the Classic Cinemas chain and the 444-day incarceration of the American diplomats was the highest item on the news each day, every day. Feelings were running high, even in the UK.
Iran Focus has obtained a photograph that purports to show Mahmoud Ahmadinejad holding the arm of a blindfolded American hostage on the grounds of the American embassy in Tehran in 1979.The photograph was given to Iran Focus by an anonymous source in Tehran. Iran Focus does not know who the photographer was or the exact date it was taken but it is believed that it was taken in November or December 1979 in the American embassy compound in Tehran.Soon after the Iranian Revolution in 1979, President Ahmadinejad, who was studying in Tehran’s University of Science and Technology, became a member of the central council of the Office for Strengthening of Unity (OSU) between universities and theological seminaries, the most influential pro-Khomeini student group.The OSU played a pivotal role in the seizure of the American embassy in Tehran in November 1979. Members of the OSU central council, who included (allegedly) President Ahmadinejad as well as Ibrahim Asgharzadeh, Mohsen Mirdamadi, Mohsen Kadivar, Hashem Aghajari, and Abbas Abdi, were regularly received by Ayatollah Khomeini in person.Former OSU members who were involved in the takeover of the American embassy said that President Ahmadinejad was in charge of security during the embassy occupation, a position that put him in direct contact with the newly formed security organizations of the theocratic regime and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards, of which he later became a member.After the occupation of the American embassy, President Ahmadinejad joined the special forces of the Islamic Revolutionary Prosecutor’s Office, based in Evin Prison. The ‘Revolutionary Prosecutor’ was Assadollah Lajevardi, who earned the nickname the ‘Butcher of Evin’ after the execution of literally thousands of political dissidents during the 1980s.Defectors from the theocratic regime’s security forces have revealed that President Ahmadinejad led the firing squads that carried out many of the executions. He personally fired coup de grace shots at the heads of prisoners after their execution and became known as ‘Tir Khalas Zan’ (literally, ‘The Terminator’).
What makes all this of vast significance is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not the head of state of a minor Islamic nation such as the Maldives or Dubai. He is the president of Iran, which is, arguably, the most militarily powerful and the most resourceful of all the Muslim countries. Furthermore, Iran now has a 25-year record of defying the Western powers and President Ahmadinejad has stated in public that Iran will pursue nuclear research and the implementation of that research against all opposition for ‘peaceful purposes’ by which he means for power generation.
Nearly everybody, including very nearly the dogs in the streets, knows that the use of uranium for electricity generation produces by-products that can be diverted towards military ends. To put it bluntly, Iran would be able to build nuclear bombs. With today’s technology, Iran would be able to by-pass the ‘atom bomb’ stage of Hiroshima and Nagasaki fame and go directly to the ‘hydrogen bomb’ option which, in fact, India already has done as exemplified by a test explosion of the same a few years ago.
The New World Order, which certainly appears to govern the world in the post-Soviet Union era, holds the primacy of the rule (virtually amounting to a law) that no non-Western power should have the potential to pose a military threat to the Western powers as axiomatic. Iran in possession of nuclear power stations will be accumulating yellow cake and other materials with which to build nuclear bombs and the West will only have their bare word to rely on for a guarantee that all that will not be handed over to their military scientists to build weapons with.
Bitter experience has taught the directing classes of the Western powers that words of honour from ones such as ourselves do not, generally speaking, pass the test of time. Iran is no exception. Once in possession of plutonium and yellow cake and whatever else may be necessary, the onward flow of events will most probably bring it about that Iran will have its own nuclear weapons - tactical, atomic and hydrogen - and a fleet of carriers to transport them wheresoever the Islamic Republic’s rulers decree it is God’s pleasure that they be sent to. For the West, that is a nightmare. Israel has already publicly declared recently that it will not tolerate a state of affairs in which the Islamic Republic of Iran possesses nuclear weapons or the capacity to manufacture them.
The background with regard to Israel is that on 7 June 1981, in a surprise air attack the Israeli Air Force using F-15 and F-16 fighter jets destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor located 30 kilometres south of Baghdad. Twenty years later. Meir Dagan, the head of Mossad (an Israeli intelligence and counter terrorism agency), revealed to parliament members in his inaugural appearance before the Israeli Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee that Iran is close to the “point of no return” and that the spectre of Iranian possession of nuclear weapons is the greatest threat to Israel since the founding of the Jewish state. In a 2002 address to the nation, President George W. Bush called Iran, Iraq and North Korea an “axis of evil.”
During a 2003 visit to the USA, Israel’s Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz stated, “under no circumstances would Israel be able to tolerate nuclear weapons in Iranian possession.” Six weeks earlier, Mossad had revealed plans for pre-emptive attacks by F-16 bombers on Iranian nuclear sites.
In September, 2004, Iran rejected the International Atomic Energy Agency’s urgent request for the closing down of its nuclear fuel production programme, which many in the USA and Israel believe to be linked to a covert nuclear weapons programme. Iran then test fired a ballistic missile with sufficient range to reach targets in Israel as well as American military installations in Iraq and all over the Middle East.
In February, 2005, the former U.N. Chief Weapons inspector in Iraq (1991-1998) Scott Ritter in a bombshell to a packed house in Olympia’s Capitol Theatre said that President Bush had “signed off” plans to launch an aerial attack against Iran. Tehran responded that it would retaliate, if attacked, in the form of ballistic missile strikes directed against Israel. President Bush then said: “The notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous.” He added: “Having said that, all options are on the table.”
In March, 2005, American troops begin their biennial air-defence exercise with Israel with the purpose on testing Israel’s Arrow II missile-killer system in conjunction with upgraded American Patriot batteries. Both sides described the month-long game codenamed Juniper Cobra as routine. Israeli security sources said Juniper Cobra would treat Iran’s most advanced Shehab-3 missiles as the main “threat.”
In March, 2005, American Vice President Dick Cheney in an interview with Fox TV said: “At the end of the day, if the Iranians don’t live up to their obligations and their international commitments to forgo a nuclear programme, then obviously we’ll have to take stronger action.”
In April, 2005, Yiftah Shapir, an Israeli analyst, explained: “Israel’s options to counter the threat are limited. A pre-emptive strike against Iran’s missile or nuclear assets is problematic because the targets are too far away, too numerous and dispersed, and too well protected - some of them are in deep underground installations.”
In April, 2005, The American Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld made an official visit to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan and Azerbaijan. His endeavours were described by the Russian media as ‘literally encircling Iran in an attempt to find the best bridgehead for a possible military operation against that country.” Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin made an official visit to Israel. He announced Russia’s decision to sell short-range anti-aircraft missiles to Syria and to continue supporting Iran’s nuclear industry. President Putin’s visit must be interpreted as a signal to Israel regarding its planned aerial attack on Iran. Then the American Department of Defence announced the sale of an additional 100 bunker-buster bombs to Israel. The American media interpreted this decision as “a warning to Iran about its nuclear ambitions”.
In May, 2005, a Russian veto of any U.N. Security Council penalty against Tehran became highly likely. China too was strengthening its economic ties with the Islamic Republic and saw itself as a major buyer of Iranian oil. The heads of the Islamic regime in Tehran sensed a victory for their plans for a nuclear weapon.
On 25 June, 2005, the ultra-conservative Tehran mayor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was swept to a landslide victory in Iran’s presidential elections and then swore to turn Iran into a “strong and exemplary Islamic state.” His victory raises questions about whether or not Iran will harden its stance on its nuclear impasse with the West. “This all but closes the door for a breakthrough in U.S.-Iran relations,” said Karim Sadjadpour, a Tehran-based analyst for the International Crisis Group.
Bearing in mind the virtual axiom that no non-Western state or association of nations will be permitted to threaten North America, Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Israel, the current situation with Iran is a veritable litmus test of the New World Order’s ability to keep order and enforce its will globally.
In 1993, an Iranian software engineer told me: “If anybody tries to take their supremacy away, the West will fight. They will not allow other nations to have nuclear weapons because, once a country has them, it becomes invulnerable.” The same man also told me on another occasion: “One day, mark my words, Russia will rob the world.”
If the West prevails in its frantic efforts to tame Iran, the Islamic world will suffer a setback almost as significant as the expulsion of the Moors from Spain 500 years ago. That Western success would take place in the teeth of opposition from both Russia and China. If the West fails, then the gotterdammerung of Israel is on the cards and the worldwide rule of the Islamic Khilafah will become a distinct possibility.
The End
posted by Ali at 12:06 PM
0 comments
