:) Thank you. :) :)
/R
Richard,
I can't say I don't have a certain affection for you, but you are an
ignorant old man.
Kevin
Richard <rsierra7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf
Of Kevin White
Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2006 1:41 PM
To:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [NewPacifica] FW: [LAAMN]
Neither U.S. Aggression Nor Theocratic Repression
Talk
about a waste of time....
Richard,
I can't say I don't have a certain affection for you, but one thing you
need to learn is an expert is a person who's stopped learning. Lorraine is a
primary source for this subject. Most of us learned the rest of it from the
Beatles.
This is convoluted and
I'm not going to break it down. Maybe you could simply have written
you prefer Loraine's take on things without throwing in the other
stuff? What you smoking? :)
I learned something really interesting in this discussion. I learned from
Camilla that any study of Western history leads toward either a mistrust of
religion or out and out atheism. Islam has always been a religion of scholars
and authors while Christianity has been dominated by the ignorant and the book
burners.
It's been known for
long before you and I were born that secular history is
anti-religious as it's based on reason, not faith. That doesn't rule out
having a knowledge of history and keeping ones faith also....faith
from within whichever religion.
I see. Islam is the
good religion and Christianity the bad one. Isn't that your
polarizing view?
Did you know that convicted rapest and drug addict Jim Bakker is back in
the TV evangilism business?
No, and who in hell
cares?
Thank you, Camilla. I'm happy to see you on the list.
Seems Kevin's taking
my Dear Loraine jest seriously or is it only that he wants to.
/R
Kevin bin Troy ibn Mohammed
Richard
<rsierra7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
For
a number of reasons I'm not getting into here....I wanna get off
this
damn comp.
But, for a third time, here's a link: http://www.nysun.com/article/22712
Dear
Loraine, my life would be much simpler if you just accepted everything
I
say. :) /R
-----Original Message-----
From:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf
Of L. Mirza
Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2006 6:47 AM
To:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [NewPacifica] FW: [LAAMN]
Neither U.S. Aggression Nor
Theocratic
Repression
Richard,
Just how do you get the impression, the
elected
government of Iraq is allied with the US? Since I
follow
Ayatollah Seestani and also speak daily with a
lot of folks I have
known for years in Iraq I
understand the strategy of the
coalition.
That strategy is to take measures to get the
Americans
out of Iraq ASAP. The sooner the coalition forms a
stable
government, the sooner the Americans will have
no further excuse to
continue the occupation. The
so-called insurgency on the other hand is
committing
its acts of violence in attempts to ferment
sectarian
divisions, create instability, prevent rebuilding
of
infastructure and prolong US occupation.
It is the US trying to
create its version of a free
market economy, which only really means, how
much oil
they can exploit before they are given the boot.
---
Richard <rsierra7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The short of it is I
don't support any gov allied
> with the present US gov
> and
currently that's reality as I see it. Free
> market democracy is not
for
> me.
>
> No, I wasn't in Iraq and Iran as the war was
on and
> there was no way I could
> obtain a visa in Jordan or
elsewhere. /R
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
[mailto:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of L. Mirza
>
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2006 7:52 PM
> To:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [NewPacifica] FW: [LAAMN]
Neither U.S.
> Aggression Nor
> Theocratic
Repression
>
>
> Why do you reject the current Iraq
government
> Richard?
> It was elected. The winners were a
coalition of
> mostly
> Shia, but some Kurdish and Sunnis, oh
and I
> understand
> there is a Christian party in it as
well.
>
> The first election was boycotted by most or at
least
> many Sunnis, so if they refused to stand up and be
>
counted how in the hell can they complain when not
> in
> the
count!!!!
>
> However, in the most recent and second
election,
> Sunnis did join in as both candidates and more
voted
> than in the first elections.
>
> The coalition
that won the majority of votes is
> certainly entitled to the
government. This was not
> an
> installed government but one
that was elected. Not
> that it matters who you support Richard, since
you
> are
> not an Iraqi and can not vote there. However,
uncle
> sam is doing its best to keep the pot boiling so it
>
can maintain the occupation.
>
> I don't recall hearing you had
ever been to Iraq. I
> have and the Shias were completely oppressed,
the
> only
> slums in Baghdad were where the Shias lived,
and
> while
> all of the Central and Northern Iraq were
well
> developed, had good water supplies and very good
> roads,
that changes drastically once you drive south
> in Iraq. You could
tell exactly where the southern
> Iraqi dividing line was by the way
the super four
> lane
> each way highway, suddenly turned into a
one lane
> dusty, pot-holed road. In the south all the cities
>
were crumbling, streets were in poor shape and
> services such as
water and electricity were minimal.
> Unlike central Iraq where
everything was rebuilt
> from
> the Gulf war, just 9 months
earlier, nothing in the
> south had been rebuilt since 1988 when the
Iran Iraq
> war ended, let alone the the 1991 Gulf
war.
>
> Are you saying Richard, that an oppressed
majority
> can
> not now be allowed to rule as a majority in
their
> own
> country?
>
> --- Richard
<rsierra7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > You last paragraph
may turn out to be accurate but
> > for the present Bush
and
> > his admin are hand in hand with Chalabi and I can
>
> only assume that's their
> > intent for the future. With the
current
> arrangement
> > I have to reject the
> >
Iraqi gov and hope things change for the better.
> /R
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
[mailto:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> > Behalf Of L.
Mirza
> > Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2006 6:26 PM
> > To:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [NewPacifica] FW:
[LAAMN] Neither
> U.S.
> > Aggression Nor
> >
Theocratic Repression
> >
> >
> > Chalabi is
actually in no one's graces. He tied
> his
> > wagon to the
coalition only because he figured
> with
> > Ayatollah
Sistani's blessings, it would win the
> > popular vote. Had there
been a chance for the US
> > backed candidate or another, he'd have
hitched to
> > that wagon.
> >
> > Right
now the coalition has no policy to bar
> anyone
> > who
wanted to join in, and getting into any kind
> of
> > battle
trying to bar some would only divert them
> > from
> >
what already is a difficult situation. As I would
> > guess from
experience in other countries where
> > numerous parties have
joined together to defeat
> one
> > party or another, and the
most recent aliance of
> > past
> > avowed enemies,
Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif to
> > defeat Parwaiz Musharaf, is
an example expediency
> > for
> > a temporary period in
order to gain political
> > advantage. In Bhutto's father's time, 9
parties
> > lined
> > up in a coalition in an attempt to
defeat him.
> >
> > In Iran five so-called "moderate"
parties joined
> up
> > to
> > attempt to gain in
the elections. However, before
> > the
> > elections took
place none of the five was willing
> to
> > bow out and
support just one candidate. That led
> to
> > the election of
Dr. Ahmedijad
> >
> > Today's allies will no doubt fall
out and be
> > tomorrow's rivals in Iraq as well.
>
>
> > --- Richard <rsierra7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> > > No Bushy wasn't but now empowered Chalabi,
back
> in
> > > US graces, and his
> > >
friends are the prime nexus btw him and the
> Iraqi
> > >
gov and they have control
> > > of the oil, defense, and finance
ministries.
> One
> > > can look at the gov one
>
> > way or another but to me that, along with
> > >
Shia/Sharia domination of the
> > > judiciary in the background,
constitutes prime
> > > power. I see an imperial
> >
> alliance and on that ground I object to the
> Iraqi
> >
> government.
> > >
> > > This is an
anti-imperialist POLITICAL position
> re
> > > the
particular matters of
> > > the two involved states and not an
attack on the
> > > islamic Faith in general.
> >
>
> > > May Allah's will prevail. /R
> >
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
[mailto:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> > > Behalf Of L.
Mirza
> > > Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2006 5:45 AM
> >
> To: NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE:
[NewPacifica] FW: [LAAMN] Neither
> > U.S.
> > >
Aggression Nor
> > > Theocratic Repression
> >
>
> > >
> > > bush is not at all happy with the
results of the
> > > results of the elections in Iraq. He's just
been
> > > forced to live with the results. Have you
>
> forgotten,
> > > the US state department backed another
party
> > > altogether? Now they have to learn to "live"
>
with
> > > the
> > > coalition party and try to make
the best by
> > > attempting
> > > some
manipulation. Thus, I am convinced that the
> > US
> >
> is
> > > behind much of the sectarian violence which
of
> > > course
> > > gives the USA more time to
keep the occupation
> > > going.
> > >
> >
> If peace really breaks out in Iraq uncle sam
> will
> >
> have
> > > to pack and leave.
> > >
>
> > --- Richard <rsierra7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
>
> > > > Come on, your first sentence is
nonfactual
> > > > spin....the new left is based on the
fem
> > principle
> > > > not the male.
You're
> > > > turning truth on its head.
> > >
>
> > > > Hey, all it boils down to is some support
one
> > set
> > > of
> > > > beliefs and
others others; all tend to
> encourage
> > > > spread
and
> > > > empowerment of their own ideas and povs.
But
> > then
> > > > there's the matter of
imperialism,
> specifically
> > > that
> > >
> of the US.
> > > >
> > > > I'm sorry,
Altaf, but it's, like,
> anti-imperial
> > > left
>
> > > vs the imperial US gov and its allied govs and
> >
> mvts.
> > > > That's the
> > > > bottom
line and it doesn't just happen Bush is
> > pro
> > >
> the present Iraqi gov anymore than it used to
> be
> >
> pro
> > > > Shah. The new
> > > > left
works against the beast's interests not
> for
> > > >
them.
> > > >
> > > > I might say it's
interesting seeing if
> Venezuela
> > > can
> >
> > create an oil alliance contra the US, one
> > >
including
> > > > Iran and other
> > > >
nations. /R
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
[mailto:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf
> Of
> > >
> Altaf Bhimji
> > > > Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 1:27
PM
> > > > To: NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> Subject: RE: [NewPacifica] FW: [LAAMN] Neither
> > >
U.S.
> > > > Aggression Nor Theocratic Repression
>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > this so-called
"new left" however does wish
> for
> > > > regime
changes in areas of the world that it
> > knows
> > >
> nothing about - and
> > > > as such is
reactionary, imperialist, and
> > > > patriarchical
(sure... it does not advocate
> > > military
> > >
> intervention, but it ends
> > > > up feeding the beast
that it supposedly
> opposes
> > )
> > > > ...
because it does not believe in
> > > > self-determination ---
or the
> > > > notion that people may decide to live in
ways
> > > other
> > > > than the "new-left"
ideology. And if a people
> do
> > > > chose a form
of
> > > > govt other than "new-left", the new-left
will
> > > > attribute that to "theocratic repression"
or
> > just
> > > > plain backwardness of
>
> > > people (who then need to be "educated" on the
> >
> > virtues of the "new left").
> > > >
> >
> > Altaf
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > > -----Original
Message-----
> > > > From: Richard
> >
> > Sent: May 26, 2006 1:13 PM
> > >
> To: NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> Subject: RE: [NewPacifica] FW: [LAAMN]
>
Neither
> > > > U.S. Aggression Nor Theocratic
Repression
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> The new left opposes Bush (christian
> > >
conservative)
> > > > and the aligned Iraqi gov
(islamic
> conservative)
> > > and
> > > >
they don't
> > > > adhere to the Pres's form of
imperial
> democracy
> > > nor
> > > > do
they support christian Law (Old Testament)
> > and,
> >
> > finally, they
> > > > don't approve of islamic
Sharia. State legal
> > > systems
> > > > and
movements based on the Law and Sharia are
> > > > traditional
and
> > > > patriarchal. The new left everywhere and
>
> whatever
> > > > its form is anti-patriarchalism and its
many
> > > > manifestations.
> > > >
>
> > > The new Iraqi Constitution, if I recall
>
> > correctly
> > > > via Article 2....as well as
elsewhere,
> > establishes
> > > > islamic
Law
> > > > (Sharia) as the high FOUNDATION and
supreme
> > source
> > > > of national law.
>
> > >
> > > > Since the renaissance a
secular left has
> > existed
> > > > throughout
history having in our age spread
> over
> > > the
>
> > > face of the
> > > > earth. Then too, at
times, deep calls to
> deep.
> > > >
> > >
> So it is in heaven, on earth, and in the
>
sea.
> > > /R
> > > >
> > >
>
> > > > -----Original Message-----
>
> > > From: NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > [mailto:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> > >
> Behalf Of L. Mirza
> > > > Sent:
Friday, May 26, 2006 10:31 AM
> > > > To:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: RE:
[NewPacifica] FW: [LAAMN]
> Neither
> > > > U.S.
Aggression Nor
> > > > Theocratic
Repression
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> Well then the secular left should stop being
> >
so
> > > > arragent and trying to impose
their
> philosophy
> > > on
> > >
> others. What is the difference between them
> >
and
> > > > bush's
> > > > regime
change policy? They want secular
> then
> > >
they
> > > > live
> > > > here and
work on the areas needed of change
> > and
> > >
> correction here and not call for "regime"
> >
change
> > > > in
> > > >
countries they do not live or vote in or try
> > to
> >
> > interfer in those countries. Iran, BTW, IS a
>
> > > DEMOCRACY! They have had elections
> > >
> since the Islamic revolution, including two,
> >
not
> > > > just
> > > > one vote,
on the type of government they
> > wanted;
> > >
a
> > > > secular or religious. They have term
limits
> as
> > > > well
> > >
> for the President, who can only serve for
>
two
> > > > terms,
> > > > then
has to wait it out two terms before
> > running
> > >
> again. Even their constitution was put to a
> >
> > referendom
> > > > before being finally
adopted. I've been in
> > Iran
> > > >
during
> > > > the Iran and Iraq war when people
dodged
> > misiles
> > > > being
> > >
> dropped on them in order to get to the poles
> >
and
> > > > votes. 83% of qualified voters turned
out
> > during
> > > > the
> > >
> elections during the Iraq imposed and U.S.
> >
> > sponsored
> > > > war. That was more
than impressive, but
> > amazing,
> > > >
when
> > > > we see here, hardly 25-30%
registered
> voters,
> > > not
> > > >
just
> > > > qualified voters, turn-out in
many
> elections.
> > > >
> > >
> It is indeed NOT thercratic oppression when
> >
the
> > > > popular votes decide the form of
government
> is
> > > to
> > > > be
>
> > > from a religious perspective.
> > >
>
> > > > --- Richard
<rsierra7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > Regrets to those objecting to the LAAMN
> >
post's
> > > > > content but there was
never
> > > > > any possibility of an American
secular new
> > > left
> > > > >
supporting religious
> > > > > governments
whether christian, jewish, i
> > > slamic
> > > >
or
> > > > > whatnot. The
separation
> > > > > of church/temple/mosque
and state
> principle
> > > > >
forestalls any such support. /R
> > > >
>
> > > > > -----Original
Message-----
> > > > > From:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
[mailto:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> > > >
> Behalf Of Altaf Bhimji
> > > > > Sent:
Thursday, May 25, 2006 1:11 PM
> > > > > To:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject:
Re: [NewPacifica] FW: [LAAMN]
> > Neither
> > > >
U.S.
> > > > > Aggression Nor
> >
> > > Theocratic Repression
> > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > >
> > > > > Yes, I
agree totally with Loraine. I got
> the
> > > >
same
> > > > > impression --- this is
the
> > > > > same as the neo-con... you wish
for
> > > "elections"
> > > > but
> >
> > > if people elect someone
> > >
> > you don't like... well then you go about
> >
> wishing
> > > > for
> > > >
> "regime change" --- How
> > > > > is that
really , when it comes down to it,
> > any
> > >
> > different than the neo-con
> > >
> > imperialists? Well the left better start
>
get
> > > > used to
> > > > >
seeing this happen all
> > > > > over the
mid-east... or, remain totally
> > > > irrelevant
>
> > > > other than Saturday
> > >
> > afternoon marches...
> > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > >From: "L. Mirza"
<haq4u@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
>Sent: May 25, 2006 11:31 AM
> > > > >
>To: NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
>Subject: Re: [NewPacifica] FW: [LAAMN]
> > > Neither
>
> > > U.S.
> > > > > Aggression
Nor
> > > > > Theocratic Repression
>
> > > > >
> > > > >
>This is bullshit, big time. How dare
> others
> > >
who
> > > > do
> > > > >
not
> > > > > >live in Iran tell the Iranis
what form of
> > > > > government
> >
> > > >they should have.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > >I
applaud the majority of the Irani
> working
> > > >
class,
> > > > > and
> > >
> > >working poor for their good judgement in
>
> > > chosing
> > > > > the
>
> > > > >government. I wonder how many on
that
> list
> > of
> > > > >
>signatories has actually been in Iran,
> has
> > >
> actually
> > > > > >met thousands of
those "theocrats" label
> > > them.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > >Sure
like the priviliged classes in Cuba
> > and
> > >
> > >Venueseula, the wealthy Iranians don't
>
> > support
> > > > the
> > >
> > >Islamic government. But the working class
>
> and
> > > > the
> > > > >
poor
> > > > > >know exactly what they
want! In the
> > > elections
> > > >
> before
> > > > > >this one they tried
a so-called moderate
> > > > (Khatamie)
> > >
> > >and after being neglected, burned and
> >
> watching
> > > > > their
> >
> > > >society turn into greedy western
style
> > > > consumerism,
> > > >
> >70% of the people of Iran came out and
> > voted,
>
> > > and
> > > > > the
> >
> > > >majority voted for the most religious
of
> > the
> > > > >
>candidates.
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >You know the left/progressive
>
intelligencia
> > > is
> > > > not
> >
> > > so
> > > > >
>superior as they claim. They just as
> > ignorant
> >
> > and
> > > > > >prejudice and the
neo-cons.
> > > > > >
> > >
> > >--- Richard <rsierra7@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> -----Original Message-----
> > > > >
>> From: laamn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
>> [mailto:laamn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf
> > Of
>
> > > > >> Ed Pearl
> > >
> > >> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 6:03 AM
>
> > > > >> To: Ed Pearl
> > >
> > >> Subject: [LAAMN] Neither U.S.
>
Aggression
> > > Nor
> > > > >
>> Theocratic Repression
> > > > >
>>
> > > > > >>
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> Iran: Neither U.S. Aggression Nor
> > >
Theocratic
> > > > > >>
Repression
> > > > > >> - A call for a
new, democratic U.S.
> > foreign
> > > >
> policy
> > > > > >> in
> >
> > > >> the Middle East
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> Dear Friend,
> > > > >
>>
> > > > > >> As the
Administration escalates its
> > threats
> > >
> > against
> > > > >
>> Iran, we are writing to invite you to
> > sign
>
> > > the
> > > > > >>
Campaign
> > > > > >> for Peace and
Democracy statement
> "Iran:
> > > > Neither
>
> > > > >> U.S.
> > >
> > >> Aggression Nor Theocratic Repression
-
> A
> > > call
> > > > for
> >
> > > a
> > > > >
>> new, democratic U.S. foreign policy in
> > the
>
> > > Middle
> > > > > >>
East." The text is below. If you would
> > like
> > >
> to
> > > > > add
> > >
> > >> your
> > > > >
>> name or donate to publicize the
> > statement,
>
> > > please
> > > > > go
>
> > > > >> to
> > >
> > >> our website www.cpdweb.org (if for
any
> > > reason
> > > > you
> > >
> > >> have
> > > > >
>> difficulty at the website, just send us
> > an
>
> > > email
> > > > > at
> >
> > > >> cpd@xxxxxxx)
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> Please join Michael Albert, Tom
> Ammiano,
> > >
> Stanley
> > > > > >> Aronowitz,
Rosalyn Baxandall, Eileen
> > Boris,
> > >
> > Jeremy
> > > > >
>> Brecher, Noam Chomsky, Ariel Dorfman,
> > >
Martin
> > > > > >> Duberman,
>
> > > > >> Rusti Eisenberg, Carlos R.
Espinosa,
> > Samuel
> > > > >
Farber,
> > > > > >> Mansour Farhang,
Barbara Garson, Larry
> > > Gross,
> > >
> > Mina
> > > > > >>
Hamilton, Thomas Harrison, Howie
> Hawkins,
> > > >
Adam
> > > > > >> Hochschild, Nancy
Holmstrom, Doug
> > Ireland,
> > > > Joy
>
> > > > >> Kallio,
> > >
> > >> Larry Kramer, Joanne Landy, Jesse
>
> Lemisch,
> > > > John
> > > >
> >> Leonard, Sue Leonard, Rabbi Michael
> >
Lerner,
> > > > > Nelson
> > >
> > >> Lichtenstein, Norman MacAfee, Marvin
&
> > > Betty
> > > > >
>> Mandell,
> > > > > >> David
McReynolds, David Oakford,
> Barbara
> > > >
Watson
> > > > > >> Pillsbury, Henry
Pillsbury, Frances Fox
> > > > Piven,
> > >
> > Nancy
> > > > > >>
Romer, Ruth Rosen, Peter Rothberg,
> > Matthew
> > >
> > >> Rothschild,
> > >
> > >> Jennifer Scarlott, Jay Schaffner,
>
Sydney
> > > > > Schanberg,
> > >
> > >> Stephen R. Shalom, Wallace Shawn,
>
> Meredith
> > > > Tax,
> > > >
> >> Cornel
> > > > > >> West,
Cora Weiss, Peter Weiss, Edmund
> > > White,
> > >
> > >> Reginald
> > > >
> >> Wilson, and Howard Zinn in signing this
> > >
> > statement.
> > > > >
>>
> > > > > >> Signers names and
affiliations (for
> > > > >
identification
> > > > > >> only) will
be listed on the Campaign
> for
> > > > Peace
>
> > > > and
> > > > >
>> Democracy website and in other public
> > >
venues.
> > > > > >>
> > >
> > >> In peace and solidarity,
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> Joanne L andy, Thomas Harrison, and
> > >
Jennifer
> > > > > Scarlott
> > >
> > >> Co-Directors, Campaign for Peace and
>
> > > Democracy
> > > > > >>
Please
> > > > > >> go to the CPD
website at www.cpdweb.org
> > to
> > > >
sign,
> > > > > >> donate, or see the
full list of
> signers.
> > > > >
>>
> > > > > >> IRAN: NEITHER U.S.
AGGRESSION NOR
> > > THEOCRATIC
> > >
> > >> REPRESSION
> > > >
> >>
> > > > > >> Just as it
did before its invasion of
> > Iraq,
> > > >
the
> > > > > Bush
> > >
> > >> administration is manufacturing a
>
climate
> > > of
> > > > fear
> > >
> > in
> > > > > >>
order to prepare public opinion for
> > another
> > >
> act
> > > > > of
> > >
> > >> aggression -- this time against Iran.
>
> Three
> > > > years
> > > >
> >> ago
> > > > > >> it was
the specter of Saddam Hussein's
> > > > alleged
> >
> > > >> weapons
> > >
> > >> of mass destruction; today it's the
>
> threat
> > > of
> > > > a
> > >
> > >> possible Iranian nuclear bomb.
> >
Washington's
> > > > > >>
immediate
> > > > > >> goal is to get
the U.N. Security
> Council
> > to
> > >
> > impose
> > > > >
>> sanctions on Iran and, in all
> > probability,
>
> > to
> > > > > >> justify
a
> > > > > >> military attack on
Tehran's nuclear
> > > > facilities --
> > >
> > a
> > > > > >>
job
> > > > > >> that may be outsourced
to Israel. The
> > White
> > > > House
> >
> > > >> even
> > > >
> >> insists on keeping the catastrophic
> > >
"nuclear
> > > > > option"
> > >
> > >> on
> > > > >
>> the table -- that is, using tactical
> > >
nuclear
> > > > > weapons
> > >
> > >> to
> > > > >
>> strike Iranian nuclear facilities, many
> > of
>
> > > which
> > > > > are
>
> > > > >> located in or near civilian
population
> > > > centers.
> > >
> > >> Although a full-scale invasion of
Iran
> is
> > > > highly
> > >
> > >> unlikely at the moment, there can be
>
> little
> > > > doubt
> > > >
> >> that
> > > > > >> the
neoconservatives in the Bush
> > > > administration
>
> > > > have
> > > > >
>> a
> > > > > >> grand strategy
that includes,
> eventually,
> > > > "regime
>
> > > > >> change" in Tehran as a way of
further
> > > > enlarging
> > > >
> U.S.
> > > > > >> imperial
power.
> > > > > >>
> > >
> > >> We strongly oppose the U.S.
occupation
> of
> > > > Iraq:
> > >
> > it
> > > > > >>
has
> > > > > >> brought appalling
suffering to the
> Iraqi
> > > > people
> >
> > > with
> > > > >
>> fatalities in the tens of thousands,
> > >
descent
> > > > into
> > > > >
>> civil
> > > > > >> war and the
strengthening of the most
> > > > >
authoritarian
> > > > > >> elements in
Iraqi society -- as well as
> > > more
> > > >
than
> > > > > >> 2,400
> >
> > > >> U.S. soldiers dead and thousands
more
> > > > wounded.
> > > > >
>> Likewise, the U.S. government's
> attempts
> >
to
> > > > bully
> > > > >
>> Iran
> > > > > >> are
succeeding mainly in terrorizing
> the
> > > >
Iranian
> > > > > >> people
> >
> > > >> and weakening internal opposition
to
> the
> > > > mullahs.
> > >
> > >> The
> > > > >
>> Bush administration's claim that it is
> > > >
promoting
> > > > > >> democracy in
these two countries is the
> > > > grossest
> > >
> > >> hypocrisy; its only interest is power
>
and
> > > > control
> > > > >
of
> > > > > >> oil resources. We, on
the other hand,
> > care
> > > > very
> >
> > > much
> > > > >
>> about the ability of the Iraqi and
> > Iranian
>
> > > people
> > > > > to
>
> > > > >> control their own societies,
about
> civil
> > > > >
liberties
> > > > > >> and
> >
> > > >> the rights of women, gays, workers,
and
> > > > ethnic
> > > > >
>> minorities there. That is why we raise
> > our
>
> > > voices
> > > > > >>
against the current threats to Iran and
> > > call
> >
> > for
> > > > > >> immediate
withdrawal of all U.S. forces
> > > from
> > >
> > Iraq.
> > > > >
>>
> > > > > >> We too would like
to see a regime
> change
> > in
> > >
> > Tehran,
> > > > >
>> but
> > > > > >> one brought
about by the Iranian people
> > > > >
themselves,
> > > > > >> not
>
> > > > >> by Washington. For 26 years Iran
has
> been
> > > > ruled
> > >
> > by a
> > > > > >>
repressive theocracy. Behind the formal
> > > >
trappings
> > > > > of
> > >
> > >> democracy, real power is held by an
>
> > > un-elected
> > > > > >>
oligarchy of clerics; all electoral
> > > >
candidates
> > > > > must
> > >
> > >> receive their approval, and their
>
> authority
> > > > is
> > > >
> >> enforced
> > > > > >> by
gangs of religious thugs. President
> > > > >
Ahmadinejad
> > > > > >> is a
>
> > > > >> Holocaust denier who has called for
the
> > > > > elimination
> > >
> > >> of
> > > > >
>> Israel.
> > > > > >>
>
> > > > >> Iranian women lack some of the
most
> basic
> > > > human
> > >
> > >> rights.
> > > >
> >> They cannot dress, work, travel or
> choose
> >
> > spouses
> > > > > >> freely.
"Honor killing" is legal, and
> by
> > > law
> >
> > > women
> > > > >
>> can
> > > > > >> be hanged or
stoned to death for
> > "unchaste
> > >
> > >> behavior."
> > > >
> >> Millions of Iranian women find ways to
> at
> >
> > least
> > > > > >>
partly
> > > > > >> circumvent these
restrictions, and
> > > relatively
> > > >
few
> > > > > >> suffer the most extreme
penalties.
> Women
> > > vote
> > > >
and
> > > > > >> sit
> > >
> > >> in parliament, and there are
>
significant
> > > > numbers
> > >
> > of
> > > > > >>
women both in university and at the
> > > >
workplace.But
> > > > > >> the
>
> > > > >> fact remains that there are
few
> countries
> > > in
> > > >
the
> > > > > >> world
> > >
> > >> where women face legal handicaps as
>
> severe
> > > as
> > > > >
those
> > > > > >> in
> > >
> > >> Iran.
> > > > >
>>
> > > > > >> Workers who try to
strike or form
> > > independent
> > >
> > trade
> > > > > >>
unions are often violently put down.
> > Large
> > >
> > numbers
> > > > >
>> of
> > > > > >> workers have
not been paid for months
> and
> > > in
> > >
> some
> > > > > >> cases
>
> > > > >> for years. Attempts to organize
are
> > > > frequently
> > > >
> >> attacked
> > > > > >> by
club- and knife-wielding
> mercenaries,
> > > >
security
> > > > > >> forces and the
military. Despite this
> > > > repression,
> > >
> > >> workers are continuing to organize,
>
> > however,
> > > > and
> > >
> > >> independent unions are gaining a
> >
foothold.
> > > > > >>
> > >
> > >> As in many countries, homosexuality
is
> > > > outlawed,
> > > > >
but
> > > > > >> Tehran has go ne
further than most by
> > > making
> > >
> > >> homosexual
> > > >
> >> conduct by men or women punishable by
> >
death
> > > > and
> > > > >
>> unleashing a vicious pogrom against
> > Iranian
>
> > > gays,
> > > > > >>
many
> > > > > >> of whom have been
tortured, beaten, and
> > > > publicly
> > >
> > >> executed. The government is carrying
on
> a
> > > > massive
> > >
> > >> campaign of entrapment through the
>
> > Internet;
> > > > > victims
>
> > > > >> are subjected to constant
surveillance,
> > > loss
> > > > of
> >
> > > >> employment, arrest, and violent
>
blackmail
> > > > that
> > > >
> >> forces
> > > > > >> them
to reveal the names of other
> > > > homosexuals.
>
> > > > >> Torture
> > >
> > >> is used to make gay people confess to
>
> > crimes
> > > > they
> > >
> > >> never
> > > > >
>> committed. The basiji and other
> religious
> > >
> > parapolice
> > > > >
>> forces kidnap gay people, who are
> > >
sequestered
> > > > and
> > > >
> >> tortured until they name names. Gays on
> >
the
> > > > > >> government's lists are
forbidden to
> leave
> > > the
> > >
> > >> country.
> > > >
> >> And now Iran has exported its violent
> > > >
anti-gay
> > > > > >> crusade
>
> > > > >> to Iraq.
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> In recent years there has been growing
> > > >
resistance
> > > > > >> within Iranian
society, particularly
> from
> > > > workers
>
> > > > >> fighting privatization and
unemployment
> > and
> > > > young
> > >
> > >> people chafing against social and
>
> political
> > > > > >>
repression.
> > > > > >> This resistance
holds the promise of
> > > bringing
> > >
> > >> grassroots democratic change to Iran.
>
The
> > > > threat
> > > > >
of
> > > > > >> military action or
broader and harsher
> > > > sanctions
> > >
> > >> from
> > > > >
>> outside -- and especially the
> horrifying
> > >
> menace
> > > > > of
> > >
> > >> nuclear strikes --only serve to rally
>
> > people
> > > > > around
> >
> > > >> the
> > > >
> >> regime and to give it another excuse to
> > >
clamp
> > > > > down
> > >
> > >> on
> > > > >
>> dissent, inhibiting a potentially
> > > >
revolutionary
> > > > > &g t;>
process
> > > > > >> and strengthening
the right-wing
> clerics.
> > > > U.S.
> >
> > > >> threats
> > >
> > >> have already served to legitimize
>
nuclear
> > > > weapons
> > > >
> to
> > > > > >> the Iranian
people.
> > > > > >>
> > >
> > >> Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
>
> Treaty,
> > > > Iran
> > > >
> has
> > > > > >> the right to
develop civilian nuclear
> > > power,
> > >
> > though
> > > > >
>> the
> > > > > >> Bush
administration has tried to
> obscure
> > > this
>
> > > > fact.
> > > >
> >> Many of us oppose the use of nuclear
> >
power
> > > by
> > > > any
> > >
> > >> country, both for environmental
reasons
> > and
> > > > >
because
> > > > > >> of
> >
> > > >> its link to nuclear weapons -- but
that
> > is
> > > > not
> > >
> > the
> > > > > >>
issue in the present U.S.-Iran
> > > confrontation.
> >
> > > While
> > > > >
>> there is reason to doubt Tehran's
> > >
assurances
> > > > that
> > > >
> it
> > > > > >> only wants to
develop civilian nuclear
> > > > energy,
> > >
> > Iran
> > > > > >>
is
> > > > > >> probably still several
years away from
> > > being
> > > > able
>
> > > > to
> > > > >
>> produce nuclear weapons. And if Tehran
> > > >
acquires
> > > > > the
> > >
> > >> bomb, it is unlikely that the
>
ayatollahs,
> > > who
> > > > >
hold
> > > > > >> decisive power, would
use it since it
> > would
> > > > be
> >
> > > >> suicidal
> > >
> > >> to do so. Israel alone has between
200
> > and
> > > > 300
> > >
> > >> nuclear
> > > >
> >> warheads capable of striking Iran, and
> >
this
> > > > is
> > > > >
not
> > > > > >> counting the thousands
of warheads the
> > U.S.
> > > > can
> >
> > > >> launch
> > >
> > >> at Iran. Nevertheless, there is no
>
> > guarantee
> > > > that
> > >
> > >> Iran,
> > > > >
>> or any other state armed with nuclear
> > > >
weapons,
> > > > > won't
> > >
> > >> use them or make them available to
>
> others.
> > > As
> > > > >
long
> > > > > >> as
> > >
> > >> these barbaric weapons exist, they
can
> be
> > > > used,
> > >
> > and
> > > > > >>
the
> > > > > >> more countries that
possess them the
> more
> > > > likely
> >
> > > it
> > > > >
>> is
> > > > > >> over time that
they will be used.
> > > > > >>
>
> > > > >> We therefore strongly oppose any
effort
> > by
> > > > Tehran
> > >
> > to
> > > > > >>
acquire nuclear weapons. But as long as
> a
> > > >
handful
> > > > > of
> > >
> > >> nations arrogate to themselves the
>
> > exclusive
> > > > > right
>
> > > > >> to
> > >
> > >> possess nuclear weapons, the
have-nots
> > will
> > > > >
always
> > > > > >> be
> > >
> > >> able to point to the threat posed by
>
the
> > > > nuclear
> > > > >
>> powers
> > > > > >> and will
constantly seek to acquire
> such
> > > >
weapons
> > > > > for
> > >
> > >> themselves -- as North Korea has
>
already
> > > > done,
> > > > >
>> withdrawing from the Non-Proliferation
> > >
Treaty
> > > > > >> regime.
> >
> > > >> Likewise, Iran, which has been
menaced
> by
> > > the
> > > >
> U.S.
> > > > > >> for
> >
> > > >> more than two decades and was a
charter
> > > > member of
> > > >
> >> Bush's "axis of evil," may opt out of
> the
> >
> > NPT.
> > > > > >>
> >
> > > >> An end to Washington's belligerence
is
> a
> > > > crucial
> > >
> > >> step
> > > > >
>> in preventing Tehran from joining the
> > >
nuclear
> > > > > >> "club."
>
> > > > >> Beyond that, the only way to
stop
> > > > proliferation
> > > >
> is
> > > > > >> for
> >
> > > >> those countries that have
nuclear
> weapons
> > > to
> > >
> > begin
> > > > > >>
disarming -- something the Bush
> > > >
administration
> > > > > and
> > >
> > >> previous administrations of both
>
parties
> > > have
> > > > >
>> refused
> > > > > >> to do,
despite the fact that the U.S.
> is
> > a
> > >
> > signatory
> > > > >
>> to
> > > > > >> the
Non-Proliferation Treaty which
> > commits
> > >
it
> > > > to
> > > > >
>> "pursue negotiations in good faith on
> > > >
effective
> > > > > >> measures relating
to cessation of the
> > > nuclear
> > >
> > arms
> > > > > >>
race
> > > > > >> at an early date and
to nuclear
> > > disarmament."
> > > > At
>
> > > > the
> > > > >
>> same time the nuclear powers must work
> > >
toward
> > > > > >> nuclear-
>
> > > > >> free zones around the world,
but
> > especially
> > > > in
> > >
> > the
> > > > > >> ;
Middle East, a particularly volatile
> > and
> > >
> > dangerous
> > > > >
>> region.
> > > > > >>
>
> > > > >> We call for a new democratic
U.S.
> foreign
> > > > policy
> > >
> > >> that
> > > > >
>> would deal with the threat posed to all
> > of
>
> > us
> > > > by
> > > >
> >> terrorist networks, and by weapons of
> >
mass
> > > > > >> destruction,
>
> > > > >> and promote real democracy in
the
> Middle
> > > East
> > > > and
>
> > > > >> elsewhere, by:
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> Renouncing the use of military
> > intervention
>
> > > to
> > > > > >>
extend
> > > > > >> and consolidate U.S.
imperial power,
> and
> > > > >
withdrawing
> > > > > >> U.S. troops and
bases from the Middle
> > East.
> > > >
> >>
> > > > > >> Ending U.S.
support for authoritarian
> and
> > > > corrupt
>
> > > > >> regimes, e.g. Saudi Arabia, the
Gulf
> > states
> > > > and
> > >
> > >> Egypt.
> > > >
> >>
> > > > > >> Opposing all
forms of terrorism
> worldwide
> > > --
> > >
> by
> > > > > Al
> > >
> > >> Qaeda, Iraqi death squads, and
> >
Palestinian
> > > > > suicide
> >
> > > >> bombers, and by U.S.-backed forces
like
> > the
> > > > > >>
Colombian
> > > > > >> paramilitaries
and the Israeli military
> > in
> > > > the
>
> > > > >> Occupied
> > >
> > >> Territories -- as well as the
brutality
> > and
> > > > > >>
humiliation
> > > > > >> inflicted on
Iraqis every day by U.S.
> > > > occupation
> > >
> > >> forces
> > > >
> >> and Washington's ominous threats
> against
> >
> > Iran.
> > > > > >>
>
> > > > >> Supporting the right of
national
> > > > > self-determination
>
> > > > >> for
> > >
> > >> all peoples in the Middle East,
>
including
> > > the
> > > > >
Kurds,
> > > > > >> Palestinians and
Israeli Jews. Ending
> > > support
> > > >
for
> > > > > >> Israeli occupation of
the West Bank and
> > > > > oppression
>
> > > > >> of
> > >
> > >> the Palestinian people.
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> Taking unilateral steps toward
> renouncing
> > >
> weapons
> > > > > of
> > >
> > >> mass destruction, including nuclear
>
> > weapons,
> > > > and
> > >
> > >> vigorously promoti ng international
>
> > > disarmament
> > > > > >>
treaties, instead of obstructing even
> > > minimal
> >
> > > >> efforts
> > >
> > >> to end the arms race.
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> Abandoning the effort to impose,
> through
> > >
the
> > > > > >> IMF/World
> >
> > > >> Bank or unilaterally, neoliberal
>
economic
> > > > > policies
> > >
> > >> of
> > > > >
>> privatization and austerity that bring
> > mass
>
> > > > misery
> > > >
> >> to
> > > > > >> people in
large parts of the world.
> > > > Initiating a
> >
> > > >> major
> > > >
> >> foreign aid program directed at popular
> > > >
rather
> > > > > than
> > >
> > >> corporate needs.
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> The majority of people in this country
> > now
>
> > > > believe
> > > >
> >> that
> > > > > >> the
invasion of Iraq was disastrously
> > wrong
> > > >
and
> > > > > that
> > >
> > >> they were systematically lied to by
the
> > > Bush
> > > > > >>
Administration about the reasons for
> > going
> > >
to
> > > > > war,
> > >
> > >> and
> > > > >
>> they are wary of new U.S. military
> > > >
intervention
> > > > > in
> > >
> > >> the
> > > > >
>> Middle East. At the same time, the
> > >
> > administration's
> > > >
> >> scare tactics may succeed in generating
> > > >
popular
> > > > > >> support
>
> > > > >> for aerial attacks on Iran. It
is
> > therefore
> > > > > >>
imperative
> > > > > >> to speak out now
against Washington's
> > > > threats, to
> > >
> > >> educate public opinion, and to build
>
> > > organized
> > > > > >>
opposition to aggression against Iran,
> as
> > > >
well as
> > > > > >> support for
immediate, complete
> > withdrawal
> > > >
from
> > > > > >> Iraq.
> >
> > > >> It is time to demand a new
democratic
> > U.S.
> > > > >
foreign
> > > > > >> policy that
genuinely expresses
> > solidarity
> > > >
with
> > > > > the
> > >
> > >> aspirations of people for liberty
>
> > everywhere,
> > > > > >>
renounces
> > > > > >> once and for all
imperial intervention,
> > and
> > > > is
>
> > > > >> committed to real
disarmament.
> > > > > >>
> >
> > > >> [CPD's previo us statements,
including
> > "We
> > > > Oppose
> > >
> > >> Both
> > > > >
>> Saddam Hussein and The War Against
> Iraq:
> >
A
> > > > call
> > > > >
for
> > > > > >> a
> > >
> > >> new, democratic U.S. foreign policy,"
>
> have
> > > > > appeared
> > >
> > >> in
> > > > >
>> The New York Times, The Nation, and The
> > >
> > Progressive,
> > > > >
>> as
> > > > > >> well as on many
websites and listserves
> > in
> > > > this
>
> > > > >> country
> > >
> > >> and abroad. Your tax deductible
>
donation
> > > will
> > > > >
enable
> > > > > >> us
> > >
> > >> to publicize this declaration of
> >
opposition
> > > > to
> > > > >
war
> > > > > >> and
> > >
> > >> repression in these dangerous times.]
>
> > > > >>
> > > >
>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
>
>>_______________________________________________________
>
> > > > >> portside (the left side in
nautical
> > > parlance)
> > > > is
> >
> > > a
> > > > >
>> news,
> > > > > >> discussion
and debate service of the
> > > > Committees
> >
> > > of
> > > > >
>> Correspondence for Democracy and
> > Socialism.
>
> > > It
> > > > > aims
> >
> > > >> to
> > > >
> >> provide varied material of interest to
> > >
people
> > > > on
> > > > >
the
> > > > > >> left.
> > >
> > >>
> > > > >
>> To subscribe:
> > > > >
>>
> > > > >
> > >
>
> > >
> >
> http://lists.portside.org/mailman/listinfo/portside
>
> > > > >
> > > > >
>Read "Internment Camps of Bangladesh," by
> > > >
Loraine
> > > > > Mirza
> > >
> > >Published by Crescent International
> >
> Newspapers,
> > > > > Inc.
> >
> > > >300 Steelcase Road West, Unit 8,
Markham,
> > > > Ontario,
> > > >
> Canada L3R 2W2
> > > > > >"The story
of a long-suffering people
> told
> > > with
> >
> > > compassion and sensitivity.
> > >
> > All who care for justice must read this
> >
book.
> > > > > Loraine Mirza, an
American
> > > > > Muslim print and broadcast
journalist, has
> > > > written
> > >
> > this remarkable account
> > >
> > of the 'Stranded Pakistanis,' trapped in
> >
> > internment
> > > > > camps in
Bangladesh
> > > > > since 1972." (Zafar
Bangash, Director of
> > > > Institute
> > >
> > of Contem porary Islamic
> > >
> > Thought.)
> > > > >
>For more information:
> > > > >
>e-mail: haq_for_u@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> >
info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
>
crescent@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
>
crescent.uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > >Visit
web sites:
> > > > >
www.statelesspeopleinbangladesh.net
> > > > >
>
> > www.strandedpakistanis.com
> > >
> >
>
www.OBATHelpers.org
> > > > >
>
www.muslimedia.com
> > > > >
>
www.ihrc.org
> > > > >
-
New Pacifica Working Group
http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
'Save Our Stations!'
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS