The U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said on Monday 19 December that the Iranians have reached a point where they can assemble a bomb in a year or potentially less.Answering to question of Scott Pelley from 60 minutes CBS news about American position toward a unilateral attack by Israel , Panneta said "Well, we share the same common concern. The United States does not want Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. That's a red line for us and that's a red line, obviously, for the Israelis. If we have to do it we will deal with it. Panneta add that Panetta: There are no options off the table. Read the interview in MOD web site HERE .
Showing posts with label attack. Show all posts
Showing posts with label attack. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Monday, December 5, 2011
Britain seek compensation for broken and stolen Embassy stuff
According to Telegraph newspaper published in London on December 4 , the British government will ask around 1 Million Pound of financial compensation from the Islamic Republic for damages made to its embassy building and stuff during the raid of November 29 .
The items spoiled or destroyed during the raid included valuable paintings, rugs, furniture, every electronic device that could be found and several official cars. A fire also caused substantial damage.
Jewellery and other personal belongings were looted from diplomatic homes at a separate compound in northern Tehran.
The items spoiled or destroyed during the raid included valuable paintings, rugs, furniture, every electronic device that could be found and several official cars. A fire also caused substantial damage.
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Iranian FM Salehi show hapiness during meeting with first gay German foreign minister Westerwelle
The Iranian television show in its news bulletin of Monday 5 December , scenes of hand shaking and friendly talking of Ali Akbar Salehi with German foreign minister Guido Westerwelle during a conference on Afghanistan , to demonstrate the good Iran-German relation , few days after attack on British embassy in Tehran HERE .
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Attack On British Embassy Summons Memories Of 1979
Golnaz Esfandiari
RFL
Fresh images of hardline students storming a foreign embassy in Tehran can't help but seem like a déja vu. It's even November, just like before.
Before, of course, was just after Iran's 1979 revolution when a group of young people calling themselves "students following of the line of Imam" (Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic) stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and ended up holding 52 U.S. diplomats hostage for 444 days.
Events this week in Tehran has inevitably been compared to events of 32 years ago. But there are differences. The 1979 hostage crisis began spontaneously. What happened on November 29 seems to have been a calculated move by hardliners in the regime.
In a statement, the young people who claimed responsibility for the attack on the British embassy called themselves "Muslim Student Followers of the Supreme Leader." They referred to the British embassy as "another nest of spies" and said the action is just one response to Britain's recent sanctioning of Iran's Central Bank, which they say represents a declaration of war.
A follow-up statement referred to the British Embassy as a "nest of plots" and accused it of playing a key role in organizing and provoking the 2009 post-election protests, which the government brutally supressed.
"Nest of spies" is a phrase heard often in the early years of the post-revolution period -- and is still used by some -- to describe the U.S. Embassy, which was accused of spying on Iranians.
Whereas the 1979 students immediately took hostages in the U.S. Embassy, there is confusion over whether this group held six British embassy staffer hostage for several hours. Mehr news agency first reported that they had, but then removed the report from its website.
Later, the hardline Fars news agency said six diplomatic staff who had been under siege during the attack were released by diplomatic police. British Foreign Secretary William Hague said he wouldn't call the six "hostages."
The storming of the U.S. embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979 led to the cutting of ties between the two governments and a deep distrust that continues to this day.
The consequences of the storming of the British Embassy are not clear yet, but the events have no doubt dealt a serious blow to diplomatic ties between the two countries. Prime Minister David Cameron has already warned of "further and serious consequences."
Tensions between London and Tehran have been rising in recent months over Iran's refusal to halt suspicious nuclear programs. A recent UN report concluding that Iran has worked to acquire a nuclear weapon led to a rare joint resolution by the P5+1 negotiating group -- Russia, China, the United States, France, and Britain, along with Germany -- aimed at putting more pressure on Tehran.
The attack on the British Embassy appears to have been a reaction to this growing international pressure on the Islamic Republic, and follows a vote on November 27 in Iran's parliament, by a large majority, to downgrade diplomatic relations with the UK in response to its new sanctions.
The 1979 hostage taking was widely seen as a response to the United States' long-standing support for the deposed Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and what the hostage takers perceived as Washington's attempts to undermine the revolution.
Observers believe the assault on the British Embassy could have not happened without the approval of senior officials. Since the 2009 post-election mass street demonstrations in Iran, and especially after this year's Arab uprisings, Iranian security forces have prevented any public protest from taking place. Protests without the backing of the state are therefore almost impossible to hold in the Islamic Republic.
The swift reaction from the Iranian Foreign Ministry, which expressed regret over the move and called it "unacceptable behavior by a small number of protesters in spite of efforts by the police," suggests that some within the conservative Iranian establishment are trying to do damage control and prevent tensions from rising even further.
Conversely, the 1979 occupation of the U.S. embassy was endorsed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini, who called it Iran's "second revolution."
The current leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khamenei, had not publicly reacted to the attack on the British Embassy hours after it ended. What he eventually says will be central to what the Islamic Republic does next vis-a-vis Britain.
One possibility may be that, as both international pressure and the government's internal power struggle reach new heights, the Iranian regime may be hoping that the international diplomatic crisis could generate popular support.
On social media sites following the attack, some Iranians close to the opposition movement were trying to distance themselves from the protesters. One person even wrote that the people who stormed the embassy belong to the same Basij forces that attacked the peaceful 2009 protests.
Ironically, the country that some 30 years ago coined the "Death to America" slogan is today thought to have the most pro-American population in the region.
It remains to be seen if and how the attacki on the British Embassy will impact the sentiments of Iranians toward the UK.
RFL
Fresh images of hardline students storming a foreign embassy in Tehran can't help but seem like a déja vu. It's even November, just like before.
Before, of course, was just after Iran's 1979 revolution when a group of young people calling themselves "students following of the line of Imam" (Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic) stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and ended up holding 52 U.S. diplomats hostage for 444 days.
Events this week in Tehran has inevitably been compared to events of 32 years ago. But there are differences. The 1979 hostage crisis began spontaneously. What happened on November 29 seems to have been a calculated move by hardliners in the regime.
In a statement, the young people who claimed responsibility for the attack on the British embassy called themselves "Muslim Student Followers of the Supreme Leader." They referred to the British embassy as "another nest of spies" and said the action is just one response to Britain's recent sanctioning of Iran's Central Bank, which they say represents a declaration of war.
A follow-up statement referred to the British Embassy as a "nest of plots" and accused it of playing a key role in organizing and provoking the 2009 post-election protests, which the government brutally supressed.
"Nest of spies" is a phrase heard often in the early years of the post-revolution period -- and is still used by some -- to describe the U.S. Embassy, which was accused of spying on Iranians.
Whereas the 1979 students immediately took hostages in the U.S. Embassy, there is confusion over whether this group held six British embassy staffer hostage for several hours. Mehr news agency first reported that they had, but then removed the report from its website.
Later, the hardline Fars news agency said six diplomatic staff who had been under siege during the attack were released by diplomatic police. British Foreign Secretary William Hague said he wouldn't call the six "hostages."
The storming of the U.S. embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979 led to the cutting of ties between the two governments and a deep distrust that continues to this day.
The consequences of the storming of the British Embassy are not clear yet, but the events have no doubt dealt a serious blow to diplomatic ties between the two countries. Prime Minister David Cameron has already warned of "further and serious consequences."
Tensions between London and Tehran have been rising in recent months over Iran's refusal to halt suspicious nuclear programs. A recent UN report concluding that Iran has worked to acquire a nuclear weapon led to a rare joint resolution by the P5+1 negotiating group -- Russia, China, the United States, France, and Britain, along with Germany -- aimed at putting more pressure on Tehran.
The attack on the British Embassy appears to have been a reaction to this growing international pressure on the Islamic Republic, and follows a vote on November 27 in Iran's parliament, by a large majority, to downgrade diplomatic relations with the UK in response to its new sanctions.
The 1979 hostage taking was widely seen as a response to the United States' long-standing support for the deposed Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and what the hostage takers perceived as Washington's attempts to undermine the revolution.
Observers believe the assault on the British Embassy could have not happened without the approval of senior officials. Since the 2009 post-election mass street demonstrations in Iran, and especially after this year's Arab uprisings, Iranian security forces have prevented any public protest from taking place. Protests without the backing of the state are therefore almost impossible to hold in the Islamic Republic.
The swift reaction from the Iranian Foreign Ministry, which expressed regret over the move and called it "unacceptable behavior by a small number of protesters in spite of efforts by the police," suggests that some within the conservative Iranian establishment are trying to do damage control and prevent tensions from rising even further.
Conversely, the 1979 occupation of the U.S. embassy was endorsed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini, who called it Iran's "second revolution."
The current leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khamenei, had not publicly reacted to the attack on the British Embassy hours after it ended. What he eventually says will be central to what the Islamic Republic does next vis-a-vis Britain.
One possibility may be that, as both international pressure and the government's internal power struggle reach new heights, the Iranian regime may be hoping that the international diplomatic crisis could generate popular support.
On social media sites following the attack, some Iranians close to the opposition movement were trying to distance themselves from the protesters. One person even wrote that the people who stormed the embassy belong to the same Basij forces that attacked the peaceful 2009 protests.
Ironically, the country that some 30 years ago coined the "Death to America" slogan is today thought to have the most pro-American population in the region.
It remains to be seen if and how the attacki on the British Embassy will impact the sentiments of Iranians toward the UK.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Iranian State Television Attacks CNN's Fareed Zakaria
By : Golnaz Esfandiari
Iranian state television has attacked CNN's Fareed Zakaria over his recent reporting from Iran.
On the weekend of October 22-23, Zakaria traveled to Tehran where he interviewed Iran's embattled President Mahmud Ahmadinejad.
In an October 24 report, the state television which is controlled by Iran's Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei accused Zakaria of hurting the country's image under the watch of officials.
The channel 2 network claimed Zakaria had aired "one-sided" reports from Iran in which conditions in the country had been portrayed as "dark and gloomy."
"He tried to show to his audience an Iran that the United States wants to see. For example [CNN's Zakaria] tried to prove U.S. claims that Iran is under pressure because of the sanctions. In order to do so he resorted to lies."
Zakaria said in one of his reports from the Iranian capital, which he described as a "bustling, cosmopolitan city", ordinary Iranians seem to resent that they have to pay for the actions of their government.
"From the bazaar to shops of every kind that dot neighborhoods, you see Iranians doing business. Because of sanctions, you see very few Western brands. Every bank, store, and boutique has a local name with local products. There are some exceptions. Coca Cola is a here as it is everywhere.”
WATCH: Iranian state television attacks CNN's Fareed Zakaria for his supposedly biased reports from Tehran. (IN PERSIAN)
From the bazaar to shops of every kind that dot neighborhoods, you see Iranians doing business. Because of sanctions, you see very few Western brands. Every bank, store, and boutique has a local name with local products. There are some exceptions. Coca Cola is a here as it is everywhere.”
In another report that has been widely shared on social media among opposition members, Zakaria reported that Gabriel Garcia's "News of a Kidnapping" has become a bestseller among Iranians following a recommendation by the opposition leader Mir Hossein Musavi.
Musavi who's been under house arrest for more than 7 months is said to have told his daughters that whoever wants to understand his plight should read the book. (Persian Letters broke the news about "Tehran's Unlikely Bestseller" in September.)
The state television network also accused Zakaria of trying to "neutralize" Iran's impact on the "Islamic awakening" in the region.
"Islamic awakening" is the term Iranian leaders use to describe the Arab uprisings, which they claim have been inspired by Iran's 1979 revolution.
Sensitive Questions
Iranian leaders have been expressing support for Arab protesters -- except in their ally country Syria-- while cracking down on opposition activists inside Iran.
In his report, Zakaria raised a sensitive question: where are Iran's protesters in the year of the Arab spring?
"One answer could be that the Iranian regime has really learned its lesson from 2009 -- now it crushes the first signs of dissent. It's also learned from watching the Arab Spring -- it won't let hundreds of people gather in public places.
"But the likes of Libya and Syria tried that too. What's different here is that Iranians are not Arabs. Many don't like the phrase 'Arab Revolutions.' You see, the word 'revolution' here in Tehran brings back memories of 1979, the year the Shah was overthrown.
"It was the time when Iranians felt like they could re-create their country. It was an Iranian Spring. It was their revolution.”
Some observers believe the attack, which comes amid an ongoing power struggle between Ahmadinejad, and Ayatollah Khamenei and his powerful allies, also targets the Iranian government, which is in charge of issuing visas.
Reflecting The Views Of Hard-Liners
In the report, state television reflects the views of hard-liners, who have laid charges of negligence against the officials who allowed Zakaria to travel to Iran.
They claim that it was not possible to "expect more from the correspondent of an American network such as CNN" and that the situation could have been avoided if those who issued Zakaria's visa had conducted "a simple background check."
“The attack against Zakaria demonstrates the rift within the Iranian political system," says Iranian journalist Roozbeh Mirebrahimi. "One faction accuse him of being the tool of intelligence agencies while the other faction invites him to Iran.”
Ebrahimi says Iranian officials had also named Zakaria in trials that took place during the post-election crackdown in 2009 and accused him of working against the Islamic Republic on behalf of Western countries.
He adds that the anger directed at Zakaria was to be expected given the issues he covered in his reports.
In its report, state television claimed that Zakaria had pushed for a boycott of the coverage of Ahmadinejad’s trip last month to New York where he attended the United Nations General Summit.
Iranian state television has attacked CNN's Fareed Zakaria over his recent reporting from Iran.
On the weekend of October 22-23, Zakaria traveled to Tehran where he interviewed Iran's embattled President Mahmud Ahmadinejad.In an October 24 report, the state television which is controlled by Iran's Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei accused Zakaria of hurting the country's image under the watch of officials.
The channel 2 network claimed Zakaria had aired "one-sided" reports from Iran in which conditions in the country had been portrayed as "dark and gloomy."
"He tried to show to his audience an Iran that the United States wants to see. For example [CNN's Zakaria] tried to prove U.S. claims that Iran is under pressure because of the sanctions. In order to do so he resorted to lies."
Zakaria said in one of his reports from the Iranian capital, which he described as a "bustling, cosmopolitan city", ordinary Iranians seem to resent that they have to pay for the actions of their government.
"From the bazaar to shops of every kind that dot neighborhoods, you see Iranians doing business. Because of sanctions, you see very few Western brands. Every bank, store, and boutique has a local name with local products. There are some exceptions. Coca Cola is a here as it is everywhere.”
WATCH: Iranian state television attacks CNN's Fareed Zakaria for his supposedly biased reports from Tehran. (IN PERSIAN)
From the bazaar to shops of every kind that dot neighborhoods, you see Iranians doing business. Because of sanctions, you see very few Western brands. Every bank, store, and boutique has a local name with local products. There are some exceptions. Coca Cola is a here as it is everywhere.”
In another report that has been widely shared on social media among opposition members, Zakaria reported that Gabriel Garcia's "News of a Kidnapping" has become a bestseller among Iranians following a recommendation by the opposition leader Mir Hossein Musavi.
Musavi who's been under house arrest for more than 7 months is said to have told his daughters that whoever wants to understand his plight should read the book. (Persian Letters broke the news about "Tehran's Unlikely Bestseller" in September.)
The state television network also accused Zakaria of trying to "neutralize" Iran's impact on the "Islamic awakening" in the region.
"Islamic awakening" is the term Iranian leaders use to describe the Arab uprisings, which they claim have been inspired by Iran's 1979 revolution.
Sensitive Questions
Iranian leaders have been expressing support for Arab protesters -- except in their ally country Syria-- while cracking down on opposition activists inside Iran.
In his report, Zakaria raised a sensitive question: where are Iran's protesters in the year of the Arab spring?
"One answer could be that the Iranian regime has really learned its lesson from 2009 -- now it crushes the first signs of dissent. It's also learned from watching the Arab Spring -- it won't let hundreds of people gather in public places.
"But the likes of Libya and Syria tried that too. What's different here is that Iranians are not Arabs. Many don't like the phrase 'Arab Revolutions.' You see, the word 'revolution' here in Tehran brings back memories of 1979, the year the Shah was overthrown.
"It was the time when Iranians felt like they could re-create their country. It was an Iranian Spring. It was their revolution.”
Some observers believe the attack, which comes amid an ongoing power struggle between Ahmadinejad, and Ayatollah Khamenei and his powerful allies, also targets the Iranian government, which is in charge of issuing visas.
Reflecting The Views Of Hard-Liners
In the report, state television reflects the views of hard-liners, who have laid charges of negligence against the officials who allowed Zakaria to travel to Iran.
They claim that it was not possible to "expect more from the correspondent of an American network such as CNN" and that the situation could have been avoided if those who issued Zakaria's visa had conducted "a simple background check."
“The attack against Zakaria demonstrates the rift within the Iranian political system," says Iranian journalist Roozbeh Mirebrahimi. "One faction accuse him of being the tool of intelligence agencies while the other faction invites him to Iran.”
Ebrahimi says Iranian officials had also named Zakaria in trials that took place during the post-election crackdown in 2009 and accused him of working against the Islamic Republic on behalf of Western countries.
He adds that the anger directed at Zakaria was to be expected given the issues he covered in his reports.
In its report, state television claimed that Zakaria had pushed for a boycott of the coverage of Ahmadinejad’s trip last month to New York where he attended the United Nations General Summit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)