Tagged: Iran Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Masoud Dalvand 11:18 am on 21 May 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Iran, , , , , Truth of Islam   

    FIGHT OVER THE TRUTH OF ISLAM 

    New- Maryam Rajavi

    The following article by Maryam Rajavi appeared on October 5, 2016, in the Saudi newspaper, Alwatan Asaudiya.

    Terrorism, insane craving for power and overlooking national borders are common features of the (Iranian) mullahs and Daesh

    The crises of terrorism and tyranny under the name of Islam continue to confront both the Muslim and global communities as never before. In addition to the crimes continuously taking place in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, the brutal killings in Nice and Normandy, France, in July, the explosion that took place next to the Prophet’s Mosque in Medina on the 4th of July, the killing on June 12 in Orlando, U.S., and the March 22 killing in Brussels, capital of Belgium, confirmed the persistence of the threat that befell these and other cities around the world.

    A study of these attacks in their real context, which also includes the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, will afford us more profound results: These incidents are the outcomes of a frightening and aggressive world outlook that tramples upon divine values on the pretext of defending religion. It attempts to put a veil of religious legitimacy on actions that by all accounts constitute murder and massacre. And, it portrays these actions as carrying the highest values by revering methods employed during the darkest periods of humanity.

    Those who subscribe to this outlook consider themselves to be Muslims, acting as if they are the elite followers of a legitimate faith while all others, including the rest of Muslims, are complete heretics, worthy of either total domination or annihilation.

    Steeped in this outlook, they allude to Quranic verses and the traditions of the Prophet of Islam, in a vain attempt to justify their actions. They masquerade as Islam an ideology that is summed up in tyranny, violence, sacrilege, inequality and misogyny. Is this really Islam or a complete perversion of it?

    Coercion or Freedom?


    Since the outset when Prophet Mohammad invited all to accept a single God, he told people that this would bring them salvation. God said in the Holy Quran that the Prophet had come to open the chains from people’s hands and feet.

    Prior to this, Jesus had said: Love one another just as the Lord loves you.
    Before him, Moses invited people to a religion that considers human beings as part of one family, describing the various peoples, ethnicities, and tribes as branches that lead back to a single source.

    So, all of us, as the children of Abraham, are brothers and sisters. What is essential in relations among human beings is not retribution, tyranny and exploitation, but freedom, compassion and unity.

    For a long period of time, of course, oppressive rulers and forces interpreted Quranic verses in accordance with the most reactionary schools of thought. They attached many fabricated veneers to Islam. But the true message of Islam has survived.

    In the course of this conflict, two diametrically opposed versions of Islam have emerged to confront one another:

    One interpretation is based on tyranny while the other Islam rests on freedom.

    The first promotes compulsion and deception, while the other relies on free and conscious choice. The first looks to the past and defends laws and social relationships of the past millennia, and the other defends universal human rights and underscores freedom. The first is based on a mechanical and fundamentalist reading, while the second is based on a dynamic reading tied to the explicit sayings of the Quran and the liberating spirit of Islam.

    In order to justify religious compulsion and coercion, fundamentalists claim that when choosing Islam as a faith, the scope of freedoms are limited, and after accepting Islam each Muslim must submit to the coercive measures that the fundamentalists advocate. This is while every specific action and ritual in Islam is only valid when it springs from the individual’s choice and volition. Islam teaches every follower to strive to engage in Ijtihad (adapting general laws to the contemporaneous social setting).

    Islamic fundamentalists consider the initial measures of Islam, which were in the direction of abolition of oppression, violence and inequality, as permanent and fixed commandments. After 1,400 years, they insist that humanity must remain stuck in that same historical spot.

    This is while Islam opened a path on which humanity could take other steps in order to realize divine compassion and true human freedom.

    At a time when women were not only deprived of owning property but had absolutely no economic rights, Islam, as a first step, recognized the rights of women to own property and declared that they deserve an inheritance at least half that of men. This decree heralded an age for the abolition of inequality. The intention of it was not that women will have only half the rights of men for all eternity.

    In an age of barbarity, where one tribe carried out a wholesale slaughter of another over a single murder, the monotheistic religions instituted “qisas” (retribution) as a punishment commensurate with the scope of the crime committed. This opened a path for limiting punishments and respecting the lives of families and tribes to which the accused belonged. It was not an order to unleash ruthlessness.

    In the age of slavery, Islam said that many sins can be forgiven through the freeing of slaves. This was a clear course-setting measure for the gradual abolition of slavery, and nothing less.

    Besides, why do the fundamentalists who ignore the true direction or course-setting actions of the Quran and still rely on its verses, continue to ignore the Quran’s explicit sayings?

    In The Family of Imran, verse 7, the Quran clearly says that some verses in the holy book are Muhkamat (foundational and not subject to change) while others are Muteshabihat (allegorical). However, it says, “Then those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation.”

    Muhkamat are verses relating to foundational and non-changing principles such as the oneness of God, the Day of Judgment, equality among human beings, and personal responsibility.

    Muteshabihat, on the other hand, are primarily related to social and economic regulations and edicts, as well as the methods and strategies to realize humanitarian and social values. These methods are predicated on historical and geographical circumstances, always changing and evolving in proportion to the advancements and progress made in particular epochs. What is important is that 1,400 years ago, these edicts and methods were far more advanced than the methods, traditions and standards prevalent in even the most advanced societies of that age, especially in the Arabian Peninsula that saw the advent of Islam. These laws heralded a vast economic and social transformation in that historical context.

    The Quran has gone even further when it comes to recognizing the changing nature of socioeconomic laws and methods. The Quran was revealed to the Prophet of Islam over the course of a 23-year period. Many of the orders revealed in the early years of Islam that were proportional to the level of progress and advancement in the Muslim community ultimately changed during the final years of revelations and the Prophet’s life. In The Cow, we read: “Whatever message We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or one like it. Knowest thou not that Allah is Possessor of power over all things?”

    The Bees talks about orders that replace others. The first leader of Shiites, Imam Ali, states that the Quran says, “Some affairs were mandatory in their own times, but were annulled at a later point.”

    Despite all this, fundamentalists have expropriated the Quran, committing many crimes by falsely quoting Quranic verses based on a rudimentary understanding of the holy text to advance particular political agendas while referring to views that have been fabricated through the ages.

    In addition to the rulings mentioned in the Quran, other rulings, the bulk of which are the mullahs’ sharia, did not exist either during the life of the Prophet of Islam or in later years. They have rather been formulated by clerics in subsequent centuries.
    Now that we know the Quran itself recognizes the termination of certain things and highlights the need to replace the old with the new, why should the rulings of clerics who lived a thousand years ago remain unchangeable? Why should Muslims not be able to critique these rulings and formulate laws and regulations that are proportional to the progress of society? Why should they follow rulings, many of which defend oppression and inequality, and are thereby un-Islamic? Truly, without a dynamic understanding of the Quran, any interpretation will inevitably be a perversion and must be firmly rejected.

    The Common Beliefs of Fundamentalists

    All fundamentalists, from the mullahs ruling in Tehran, who are the ideological godfathers of Daesh (ISIS), to the militias affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ Qods Force in Iraq, or the Lebanese Hezbollah, Boko Haram, and Daesh, speak of Islam, but in reality they stand against the truth of Islam.

    All of them – with their different names and faces – have a common belief summed up in their commitment to the reactionary Sharia and extremist implementation of it. This Sharia emerges in various forms, including religious coercion, tyrannical rule, misogyny, heresy, and rejection of moral and Islamic principles.

    1. Coercive Religion – When Khomeini and his clerical clique instituted their regime by suppressing those who had brought about the 1979 revolution, they imposed their reactionary ideology by chanting the slogan “Only One Party, the Party of God.” They suppressed women by chanting “either the veil or a hit on the head.” They then proceeded to force people to comply with the rules of a coercive religion through executions, torture and intimidation.

    Three decades later, when Daesh began to appear on the scene, its main slogan was “Islamic Sharia will never be implemented without a weapon.” This is while anything that is accompanied by force and compulsion is diametrically opposed to the spirit of religion, and as the Quran has itself said: “There is no compulsion in religion.”

    And the rituals that are mandatory for the followers of Islam, including daily prayers and fasting, are not considered valid unless they are purposeful (to get closer to God) or voluntary.

    2.The Establishment of Despotic Rule – Fundamentalists seek to establish a barbaric tyranny under the banner of Islam, referring to it with various names like the velayat-e faqih in Iran (absolute clerical rule), or the Islamic State or Caliphate. They claim that since they have risen up to implement Islamic laws, they are justified in using force and eliminating freedoms. But, tyranny is a contradiction of Islam. In the Quran, God tells his Prophet: “So remind. Thou art only one to remind.
    Thou art not a warder over them —.”

    Two very important documents assist us to an extent in revealing Islam’s true view regarding the behavior of rulers towards their people.

    First is the letter written by Umar bin-Al-Khattab, the second Islamic Caliph (586-644), to the people of Jerusalem in 636 after Muslims won a portion of the Byzantine Empire. In the letter, Umar wrote: “This is a promise of security that Umar, the leader of Muslims, is giving to the people of Jerusalem. I hereby guarantee the security of all residents, healthy or sick, including people’s lives, property, churches, and crosses. I will not occupy or destroy their churches. Churches themselves or anything in their vicinity, crosses and properties will not be touched. No one will be able to force them to leave their land or abandon their faith. No one will be hurt. … Anyone who leaves Jerusalem will be guaranteed safety for their lives and property until they reach a secure destination. And anyone who remains in the city will be safe.”

    The second is a letter from Ali bin Abitaleb, the Prophet’s son-in-law, the fourth Caliph and the first leader of Shiites (518-661), who wrote to Malik Ashtar, after appointing him as the ruler of Egypt: “Harbor compassion, good behavior, and goodness towards people. You shall never act like a rabid animal towards them thinking that devouring them is fine. There are two kinds of people: those who are your brothers in faith, and those who are humans like you in creation. … The best minister in your view should be a minister who tells you the bitter truth instead of admiring you for the words and deeds which the Lord does not accept for his friends. Improvement in the lives of the citizens must weigh more heavily in your thinking than taxing them, because taxes will not become available unless with development. So, if those who pay taxes complain about it being too heavy, give them discounts to the extent that they see improvement in their lives. Prevent your military forces from confronting the ordinary people so that their spokesperson can speak up without stuttering and without fear and concern. I have heard many times from the Prophet that no nation ever becomes clean and refined, unless the meek and the deprived can obtain their rights from those in power without stuttering, fear and concern.”

    3. Terrorism and the insane craving for power under the banner of “Jihad” – What today’s fundamentalists introduce as “Jihad” or “Jihadism” is in reality nothing other than sheer terrorism and brutality. The meaning of jihad in the Quran is to rise up against injustice, something that has even been enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Quran gives permission for jihad only to those who face injustices, are being murdered or forcibly exiled from their country. This means that the Quran recognizes their right to stand up against injustice. In this context, what does such a struggle have to do with the seeking of domination by the mullahs over Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, or Yemen, or with the attempts by Daesh to dominate more territory and gain access to more oil fields?
    In their minds, Muslims who oppose the rule of clerics or caliphs, as well as non-Muslims who refuse to surrender to them, are the primary targets of this so-called jihad.

    Why do those who claim they declare jihad against the enemies of God live in peace and solidarity with Bashar Assad and Khamenei, while at the same time spraying unarmed people in concert halls or train stations with bullets?

    Is it considered jihad when the mullahs ruling Iran unleash their armies in Syria to massacre hundreds of thousands of Syrian women, men and children while displacing over half the country’s population?

    4. Rejection of Borders – Another common element among fundamentalists is the rejection of national borders and efforts to occupy other countries’ territories. Today, Daesh has occupied portions of Iraq and Syria under the banner of an Islamic State while calling for the occupation of other countries. But the phrase “Islamic State” was something that was mentioned over three decades ago by Khomeini in his will. He demanded the creation of “an Islamic State with free and independent republics.” In the current constitution of the Iranian regime, the government is responsible to constantly strive for “the realization of the political, economic, and cultural unity of the Islamic World.”

    In order to preserve their power in Iran, the mullahs have always tried to gain influence in other Muslim countries of the region. The Iran-Iraq war, which on the insistence of Khomeini continued for eight years and resulted in the deaths of over a million Iranians, as well as the mullahs’ current domination over parts of Iraq and Lebanon serve as examples of this policy. Such reactionary expansionism, which has occurred at the expense of the unjust shedding of the blood of innocent people accompanied by a horrendous scale of destruction, are contradictory to the teachings of Islam.

    5. Misogyny and degrading women’s status – Among the other clear and predominant common features of fundamentalists is their misogyny. This is the implementation of inequality and violence against women, depriving them of their basic freedoms and rights, barring them from management and leadership roles in sociopolitical institutions, and considering them as second-class citizens, all of which occur by using Islam as the excuse. But when Islam was introduced, it played a pioneering role in opening the path of liberty and equality for women. For example, from the earliest days, hundreds of women gained prominence by swearing allegiance to the Prophet and assuming responsibilities to assist the Prophet in political, social and military matters.

    The Quran highlights equality among all human beings, including women and men. The dynamism of Islam and the Quran annuls all rulings that in one way or another reject gender equality.

    6. Takfir (Excommunication) – Khomeini, Daesh, and other similar entities use Takfir to suppress and eliminate opponents and especially to confront those who oppose the mullahs’ Sharia.

    Khomeini’s religious decree to massacre political prisoners in Iran in 1988 is one of the most important examples of Takfir in modern history. In a handwritten order, Khomeini claimed that sympathizers of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) are not “in any way” committed to Islam and are sentenced to death in various prisons across Iran. On the basis of this order, in the span of a few months, over 30,000 political prisoners, most of whom were supporters of the PMOI, were executed. But, according to the Quran and the traditions of the Prophet, the spirit of Islam is intertwined with tolerance and acceptance of disagreements and differences among human beings, groups, and followers of various faiths and religions. In verse 87 of The Cow, God vociferously reprimands those who ban others, saying that they are pompous and reject one group while killing another.

    7. Dogmatism with respect to secondary issues combined with neglect of humanitarian principles – One of the disgraceful beliefs of all fundamentalists, from which they do not shy away, lies in the attempt to discredit moral, humanitarian and Islamic principles to reach their own petty goals, especially in their quest to preserve power.

    They are extremely fastidious, inflexible and dogmatic when it comes to secondary and inconsequential issues. At the same time, when it comes to the fundamental principles and ideals of Islam, they commit heresy and are negligent in accordance with their own interests.

    Before obtaining power, Khomeini in his book entitled “The Islamic State” deemed as permissible mass killings in order to ensure the survival of the state or, as he put it, in order to “uproot many of the corrupt races that are harmful to society.” After he came to power, he also said: “The vali-e faqih (clerical ruler) can prevent prayers, fasting and Haj if he finds such prevention expedient … and to destroy the house of a believer and secure the divorce of the man’s wife.”

    And as everyone witnessed, in order to preserve his rule, he continued the devastating Iran-Iraq war for eight years and left a million victims among the Iranian people.

    Today, Daesh, which massacres people without a moment’s pause, is following the same example and lends no value or credence to humanitarian or moral principles.

    By the way, is it not true that monotheistic religions were revealed in order to ensure the compliance of human beings with moral codes and humanitarian principles?

    Were the Ten Commandments of Moses or everything that Jesus and Mohammad said not intended to contain the aggressive, greedy and oppressive tendencies of human beings in order to inaugurate a path toward freedom and the realization of individual and social ideals?

    So how can fundamentalists give permission to themselves to commit all sorts of brutality and dub it Islam?

    It is astonishing that fundamentalists, in all their Shiite and Sunni variants, portray themselves as defenders of Islamic and moral standards. In order to implement unjustified violence, which they falsely describe as “Islamic punishments,” they have amputated many limbs, gouged out eyes and stoned women to death with indescribable barbarity and callousness. While in this age, no one has trampled upon divine and Islamic laws more than this bunch. As the Quran says, “And of men is he whose speech about the life of this world pleases thee, and he calls Allah to witness as to that which is in his heart, yet he is the most violent of adversaries. And when he holds authority, he makes effort in the land to cause mischief in it and destroy tilth and offspring; and Allah loves not mischief.”

    32

    Our Beliefs

    All this is not a mere theoretical treatise for our movement. It is the subject of a difficult struggle, which has continued for the last five decades at a heavy price that includes many lives sacrificed by the PMOI. The history of the PMOI is a history of persistent theoretical and practical rebellion against the foundations of reactionary religious ideology.

    The PMOI is the oldest and largest Muslim organization in the Middle East that opposes extremist interpretations of Islam. The PMOI was founded in 1965. Ever since, it embarked on a theoretical effort to understand the truth of Islam and wipe away the dogmatic and static readings of it. The PMOI succeeded in formulating and promoting in Iranian society the credible views of Islam on freedom, human rights, social justice, gender equality, the rights of ethnic and religious minorities and other matters.

    The thinking proffered by PMOI founder Mohammad Hanifnejad marked a revolution in Islamic thought. He said that the true demarcation is not between believers and non-believers of God. The real demarcation line lies between those who suppress and oppress others, and those who are being suppressed and exploited.

    This outlook marked a definitive and unyielding gulf between the traditional and static understanding of Islam on the one hand and the true Islam on the other. It marked an indisputable boundary between the PMOI or a democratic Islam and a reactionary Islam.

    On this basis, today, we reject sectarianism and religious conflicts. We declare that the struggle is not between Shiites and Sunnis, or Muslims and Christians, or the people and culture of the Middle East against the people and culture of the West.

    Yes, there is no war of civilizations. Rather, the main struggle is between tyranny and fundamentalism on the one hand, and democracy, freedom and people who seek freedom and progress on the other.

    We believe that the verses of the Quran have been emphatic enough in indicating that the followers of all religions are equal in their social, political and even ideological rights. The following are a few examples:

    Chapter Maida (The Table Spread), verse 69: Surely, those who have believed, and the Jews, and the Sabians, and the Christians — whoso believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good deeds, on them shall come no fear, nor shall they grieve.

    Chapter Baqara (The Cow), verse 285: The Messenger believeth in what hath been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith. Each one [of them] believeth in Allah, His angels, His books, and His messengers. “We make no distinction [they say] between one and another of His messengers.” And they say: “We hear, and we obey: [We seek] Thy forgiveness, our Lord, and to Thee is the end of all journeys.”

    Chapter Maida (The Table Spread), verse 46: And we caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, fulfilling that which was revealed before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel which contained guidance and light, fulfilling that which was revealed before it in the Torah, and a guidance and an admonition for the God-fearing.
    Correct understanding is achieved through correct action

    Other steps taken by the PMOI in the context of the theoretical and ideological struggle against religious reactionary thinking are just as important.

    In circumstances where traditional culture ruled over a majority in Iranian society, the PMOI, with incredible bravery, stood up to the reactionary mullahs, referenced the Quran and said that a correct understanding of Islam is dependent on one’s participation in the struggle to produce social change. And this is something that the reactionary mullahs who justify crimes committed by ruling regimes cannot do.

    In contrast to the mullahs who view scientific achievements and theories like the evolution of life and society as contradictory to their reactionary understanding of Islam and the Quran, the PMOI sees these theories as conforming and complementary to the ideological and anthropological viewpoints outlined in the Quran and Islam. The PMOI considers the emergence of prophets and prominent religions like Islam as the biggest change inducers for social evolution in history.

    These are among the subjects that the Iranian Resistance’s Leader Massoud Rajavi taught in the early years after the anti-monarchical revolution. At the time, the French Daily Le Monde wrote, “One of the most important events not to be missed in Tehran is the course on comparative philosophy, taught every Friday afternoon by Mr. Massoud Rajavi. Some 10,000 people present their admission cards to listen for three house to the lectures by the leader of the People’s Mojahedin on Sharif University’s lawn.”

    Moreover, the PMOI embraced the theory of “Quranic dynamism,” which supplies the framework and context for a correct understanding of the Quran. Inspired by Islamic principles, this context affirms the legitimacy of secular legislation while annulling and rejecting fundamentalist Sharia laws whose special role is to enchain social freedoms.

    The PMOI, inspired by the principle of free will and choice embedded in Islamic and Quranic teachings, rose up to defend the people’s freedom and sovereignty, declaring anything based on tyranny and refusal of the people’s free vote as alien to Islam. The Iranian Resistance’s initiative to call for the abolition of the death penalty, a rare example in Islamic countries, was the practical upshot of such an outlook.

    In this context, the PMOI rose up against the velayat-e faqih (absolute clerical rule) in Iran. Paying a heavy price, they rejected the mullahs’ constitution, which has the velayat-e faqih as its pillar. They also disavowed and renounced the demagoguery of the mullahs, who claimed that they were representatives of God on earth.

    The PMOI also launched a drawn out and profound struggle for gender equality. By making reference to the Quran and the traditions of the Prophet and other Islamic pioneers, they showed that denying women their rights and freedoms is contradictory to the true message of Islam. This belief has had a tangible and real impact on the structure of the resistance movement. Women have attained a decisive role in the leadership of this movement as well as in other levels of decision making.

    And, ultimately, the PMOI‘s crucial trailblazing act has been the promotion of the separation of religion and state, which leaves no room for theocracy and religious discrimination. Support for this principle could not have attained the seriousness and impact that it has had if it were not a Muslim movement’s initiative. In the program of the National Council of Resistance of Iran and the transitional government, Massoud Rajavi reiterated in 1981: “Scientific, philosophical and ideological facts are never decided by democratic voting, however, in the realm of political administration of the country, it is impossible to have a consensus of all the different opinions and various views in a united framework, unless everyone accepts that political legitimacy is primarily decided democratically after passing a democratic test of polling and general elections.”

    مسعود

    Massoud Rajavi Leader of the Resistance of Iran

    Massoud Rajavi added, “We, Muslims, believe that the abolition of political and social discriminations among all citizens of a nation, does not in any way mean that we overlook the righteousness of the genuine Mohammadan Islam. On the contrary, our Islam is exactly the opposite of Khomeini’s, and does not need to prove its legitimacy and justification through coercion and compulsion. In other words, we profoundly believe that Islam’s true blossoming becomes possible when no social or political discrimination, privilege, or coercion is used.”

    In defense of this principle, we have risen up against coercive religion and religious coercion. Can this principle be considered as creating limitations or introducing revisions in Islam’s fundamental ideas? No, to the contrary, it insists on the true spirit of Islam.

    Do we mean that in a society liberated from dictatorship no individual or group can be active by relying on Islam? No, what we mean is that, just as a resolution adopted by the National Council of Resistance of Iran says, the ballot box reigns supreme and no privilege should be granted or taken away due to belief or lack of belief in a particular religion. This principle also guarantees freedom of religion in the sense that Muslims or followers of other faiths can freely practice their religion without facing any form of inequality whatsoever.

    In a document he prepared in 633 in the city of Medina, the Prophet of Islam said: “Jews and Muslims are like one nation or people. (The only difference is that) the Jews follow their religion and the Muslims are committed to their own.”

    What we are advocating is to annul and reject tyranny under the veil of religion. This is the conclusion reached from a great historical experience, which foresaw the defeat of religious dictatorship in Iran. Our goal is to overthrow the foundation of sectarianism under the guise of Shiism or Sunnism. Exploiting religion for the pursuit of power must not continue any longer.

    4

    Maryam Rajavi is the President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), a coalition of Iranian opposition groups and personalities striving for a democratic, secular and non-nuclear republic in Iran.

    Advertisements
     
  • Masoud Dalvand 11:11 am on 19 May 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Iran, , ,   

    The Right Policy to Tackle Iranian Regime 

    Support Iranian resistance.jpg

    Earlier this month, following more than a year of speculation, Donald Trump pulled out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, citing its failure to protect the US and its allies as well as a failure to address all of the problems of the Iranian Regime.

    The deal, also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was struck by Permanent Members of the UN Security Council (the US, the UK, China, Russia, and France) and Germany in the hope that the Iranian mullahs would reform if invited into the fold of international diplomacy.

    However, there was no evidence that the Regime was capable of reform and plenty that they would continue their expansion and aggression. In the years since, it has become apparent that the signatories were wrong to trust Iran and foolish to release the billions of dollars in frozen assets to them.

    This money did not improve the lives of the ordinary Iranians, but increased the Regime’s military budget and allowed them to fund wars in Syria (where they are propping up Bashar al-Assad to the tune of $24 billion per year), Iraq and Yemen. While many other countries in the region suffer because of the Iranian Regime’s sponsorship of terrorist groups.

    Once a rich nation, the people of Iran has lost everything because of the mullahs. The Regime isn’t even trying to hide it anymore, with Brig. Gen. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf revealing on national television that 96% of the population is poor and the other 4% takes everything. Iran has a wealth of natural resources, but their people remain in poverty.

    Not content with plunging their people into poverty, the Iranian Regime arrests about 50 people per hour, according to Hassan Mosavi Chalk, Director of Iran’s Social Services Association. Their ‘crimes’ can range from peaceful political activism to not fasting during Ramadan to being a woman and wearing ripped jeans.

    The Iranian people are naturally furious at the Regime for this neglect and abuse, which is why they first took to the streets in a nationwide uprising calling for regime change. The Regime met this protest with a brutal crackdown.

    Reza Shafiee, wrote: “What is left of the JCPOA windfalls – after paying proxy terrorist group bills in the region – is spent on a variety of security forces in Iran. The regime provides theses forces with state-of-the-art gears to come down hard on protesters.”

    That hasn’t stopped the demonstrations. It may even have made the Iranian people more intent on fighting back, especially after NCRI President Maryam Rajavi encouraged the protests.

    The right policy

    So what could be the right policy to tackle Iran? It seems the international community has tried just about everything and nothing has worked.

    Well simply, they should support the people’s call for regime change as this is the only thing that can remove Iran’s threat to the world as a whole.

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 7:22 am on 16 May 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Iran,   

    On June 30, the World Will See an Alternative Iran 

    June 30-free Iran-Villepinte Exposition -Paris – France

    What’s often missing in discussions of Western policy on Iran is the role of the Iranian people and their desires. A comprehensive policy must before all else take into consideration events on the ground in Iran or else it would yet again fail to address one of the most crucial foreign policy issues of recent times.

    The wave of protests which started at the end of last year and continued through the New Year shook not only the regime in power but the entire world. The people of Iran poured onto the streets across the country rejecting the clerical regime in its entirety. Chants of “death to Khamenei and Rouhani” and “reformists, hardliners, the game is over” left no doubt that the people of Iran want regime change and nothing short of that. The people called for a republic and a free Iran. To the surprise of many Iran experts and governments in the West, the core of the people on the streets of over 140 cities were the same sector of the society which were wrongly thought to be the power base of the clerical regime. Indeed, the entire nation is demanding regime change.

    On June 30, 2018 Iranians from across the world, free from the yoke of the mullahs, will join in Paris, in an extraordinary event “Free Iran; The Alternative.” Tens of thousands are expected to participate in the gathering. Each Iranian attending the rally represents dozens, if not hundreds or thousands, of brave Iranians inside the country who are protesting for regime change. The event has already been publicized inside Iran through social media, and messages of support for the event are coming from civil society. The people of Iran see the June 30 event as the echo of their own cry for freedom.

    The annual gathering of Iranians in previous years had drawn some 100,000 participants. However, this year’s event, given the domestic situation and the international developments, is unique. The event heralds the dawn of freedom for the people of Iran and an end to the nightmare of spread of Islamic fundamentalism and instability in the region.

    Maryam Rajavi, President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which includes the largest resistance force inside Iran, the PMOI (MEK), said in the 2017 annual gathering that regime change in Iran is necessary and within reach. The wave of protests proved the correctness of the message which at time was confronted by some skepticism by governments and many ‘Iran experts’. The message this year is short but very precise: Iran has a democratic alternative – thus, setting aside the misguided notion, advocated by the Iranian regime’s lobby, that regime change would lead to chaos.

    For far too long, the people of Iran and their desires were ignored. For many years, the West looked at Iran from very narrow spectacles. It is time to realize that the mullahs’ regime cannot exist without suppression at home and export of terrorism abroad. Silence regarding the criminal mullahs, let alone wittingly or unwittingly empowering those responsible for, and the perpetrators of, the massacre of the Iranian nation, will only embolden the religious dictatorship’s warmongering, export of fundamentalism and terrorism. The end of religious dictatorship in Iran is a requisite for regional peace, democracy, security, and stability. This is the only way to end war and crisis in the region and avert a larger war.

    It is time to listen to the Iranian people and set aside the old inertia and look at the alternative to the mullahs and the prospect of a new Iran, a Free Iran. An Iran governed by the rule of law. An Iran in which women enjoy full equality with men including in the political leadership. An Iran in which there is no room for compulsory veil or compulsion in religion. An Iran in which national and religious ethnicities live in harmony, work together and hand in hand to rebuild the country from the ruins left by the mullahs.

    This event is also unique because in the midst of partisanship on both sides of the Atlantic, dignitaries, politicians and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle will join each other to support the Iranian people in their dream and desire for a free and democratic Iran. Americans and Europeans, Democrats and Republicans, Conservatives and Christian Democrats as well as Social Democrats and Socialists will address the rally along with representatives of Iranian communities.

    The composition of Iranians attending the rally, the bond between the millions on the streets of Iran and those attending the Paris rally, and the united front of Iranians from different political tendencies will show that there exists within the organized opposition the capacity to lead the protests in Iran to ultimate regime change. The regime’s Supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, has already expressed concern about the role of the MEK in organizing the protests in Iran. That is why Hassan Rouhani called on France’s President with a disgraceful demand to restrict the legitimate activities of the NCRI and MEK.

    Last year more than 500 international dignitaries attended the gathering, including former Prime Ministers, government officials, and Members of Parliament. They included the former French Minister of Foreign Affairs Bernard Kouchner; the former President of Germany’s Bundestag Rita Suessmuth; and the former UK Minister of Northern Ireland from Europe as well as Ambassador John Bolton, Senator Joe Lieberman, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Gov. Ed Rendell, and former US House Speaker Newt Gingrich from America.

    The Free Iran gathering of June 30, 2018 will present to the world an alternative to the mullahs’ regime for a future free and democratic Iran.

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 9:30 pm on 9 May 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Iran, , ,   

    Target Iran’s nuclear/terrorism threats for regime change 

    Iranian missile program, a menace to the security of the region

    Iranian missile program, a menace to the security of the region

    PMOI/MEK staff writer

    May 9, 2018 – Following the United State’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal and fully impose powerful economic against Tehran, there will be an increase in discussions on the path forward from here.

    If the Middle East is to experience anything resembling peace, democracy, stability, and security, it is an inarguable necessity to first realize democratic change and end the mullahs’ rule in Iran.

    Tehran has taken advantage of several decades of appeasement, resulting in the suffering of the Iranian people and nations across the region. The history of billions flowing into Iranian regime bank accounts and pallets of cash flown into this country must come to an end.

    Iran’s sinister regime, understanding no language but the language of a firm and definitive policy, is beginning to see the end of a long and fruitful journey at the expense of many others.

    Tehran, being the world’s central banker of international terrorism, “has funded its long reign of terror by plundering the wealth of its own people,” according to U.S. President Donald Trump’s speech.

    It is worth noting how the Iranian opposition coalition National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), of which the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) is a member of, first blew the whistle back in 2002 on Iran’s clandestine nuclear program, highly suspicious of seeking nuclear weapons.

    Such an industrial scale effort is meaningless for a country sitting on an ocean of oil and natural gas. Especially when such a multi-billion dollar project is depriving millions of people struggling with poverty across the country.

    “Eradicating the clerical regime’s nuclear and terrorism threats means getting rid of the regime in its entirety. A regime based on the principle of Velayat-e faqih (absolute rule of the clergy) cannot exist without terrorism, suppression, and weapons of mass destruction,” said NCRIPresident Maryam Rajavi following the US decision.

    All banks and companies currently doing business with Iran are finding it extremely difficult to continue their endeavors. It is quite obvious that Iran’s $450 billion economy is no choice in the face of the U.S. $44 trillion economy.

    It is also a moral decision placed before everyone from all walks of life in the international community: to continue seeking short-term economic interests with Iran’s regime, or finally deciding to stand with the Iranian people in their quest for freedom, democracy, and human rights.

    Iran’s regime must also be stopped in its treks of warmongering, export of fundamentalism and terrorism, as explained by Mrs. Rajvi. It is quite interesting how standing alongside the Iranian people will actually further the long-term interests of the very parties currently appeasing the Iranian regime and only seeking short-term interests.

    Such a policy will also prevent Iran from launching a new war and bring an end to the ongoing wars already causing havoc across the region.

    The Iranian people proved once again in December and January how they seek liberation from the oppressive rulers sitting on the throne in Tehran.

    Democratic change is coming to Iran and each and every member of the international community must decide sooner or later where they stand on this very dire matter.

    As a necessity, the United Nations Security Council should take this opportunity and launch the global effort focusing on Iran’s long forgone human rights dossier, parallel to holding this regime accountable for its meddling throughout the Middle East and beyond, and advancing a dangerous ballistic missile program.

    Countless crimes have been committed by the Iranian regime inside the country and abroad. Steps are being taken against Tehran. More needs to be done and the Iranian regime must be held to the ropes until all those responsible for these crimes are placed before justice.

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 8:27 pm on 7 May 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Iran, , ,   

    Iran exiles demand regime change as nuclear deadline looms 

    Iran Commentary

    The international community is literally hanging in the balance over the upcoming May 12th Iran nuclear deal deadline. Advocates of the accord, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), continue to claim anything but the deal will lead to a new war in the Middle East.

    The Iranian people, however, represented by thousands of exiles taking part in Saturday’s “Iran Freedom Convention” in Washington, DC, voiced their demand for regime change in their home country. Their call is coupled with significant support provided by a long slate of American dignitaries and elite Members of Congress.

    This is the beginning of even more turbulent weeks and months for the Iranian regime.

    Strong voices

    The event was hosted by the Organization of Iranian-American Communities, a group supportive of the 2017-2018 protests and advocating regime change to realize freedom and democracy in Iran.

    “The people of Iran are calling on…

    View original post 761 more words

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 7:49 am on 7 May 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Iran, Iran Freedom Convention in the US, ,   

    Iran Freedom Convention rallies bipartisan support for regime change in Iran 

    Iranian American Covention in Washington on Freedom in Iran

    Iranian American Covention in Washington on Freedom in Iran

    PMOI/MEK,6 April 2018—  On Saturday, representative from Iranian communities from 40 U.S. states gathered in Washington to attend the Iran Freedom Convention for Democracy and Human Rights. Also attending were distinguished U.S. politicians, including President Donald Trump’s cybersecurity advisor Rudy Giuliani and Former Governor Bill Richardson.

    The speakers of the event voiced their support for the uprisings of the Iranian people and stressed the need for a firm policy vis-à-vis the regime of Iran, which is the record-holder of executions and a renowned state-sponsor of terrorism.

    In a televised speech to the gathering, Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), thanked the participants for their support for the aspirations of the Iranian people for the establishment of freedom and democracy in their country. Referring to the uprisings that spread across the country in December and January, Mrs. Rajavi stressed that the people of Iran “seek the overthrow of the clerical regime in its entirety” and call “on the international community, in particular, the West, to support their uprising.”

    Mrs. Rajavi iterated the unwarranted concessions given to the mullahs as a result of the nuclear pact signed between the Iranian regime and six world powers, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and reminded that the Iranian resistance had at the time emphasized the need for the complete dismantlement of the regime’s nuclear program. The JCPOA effectively granted the Iranian regime free pass on its human rights violations and terrorist meddling in neighboring countries in exchange for limited caps on its nuclear activities. “Evicting the regime from the Middle East and preventing its regional meddling… is a fundamental principle that needs to be included in any agreement,” Mrs. Rajavi had said at the time.

    Mrs. Rajavi also stated that the regime is in a critical state and the Iranian people are ready for more uprisings, and she underlined the need to neutralize the efforts of the regime and its cohorts to promote the policy of appeasement and the importance to be the voice of the Iranian people across the world.

    Video:  If you can’t see the subtitle, please click on the button “CC” to read the English subtitle:

    Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle sent recorded messages to the convention and expressed their support for the cause of freedom in Iran.

    In his keynote speech, Mayor Giuliani underlined the bipartisan support for the Iranian resistance in the U.S. He also spoke of his meeting with the members of PMOI/MEK in Albania and voiced his admiration for their efforts and determination in freeing their country.

    Giuliani stressed that, in contrast to the previous administration, which did not support the 2009 uprisings in Iran, the current president of the United States will not turn his back on the people of Iran and is a vocal supporter of regime change in Iran. He also said that, contrary to other countries in the region, which underwent turmoil and chaos after revolutions, Iran has an organized alternative that can see to a peaceful transition in the country after the toppling of the regime.

    Gov. Richardson stressed that the Iranian regime is nearing its end. He also praised the Iranian opposition and its leader, Mrs. Rajavi, for the sacrifices they’ve made to achieve freedom in their country.

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 9:31 pm on 22 Apr 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Iran, , , ,   

    How Syria Attack Affects Iran Nuclear Deal Crisis 

     

    As President Trump’s 120-day deadline for fixing Iran nuclear deal gets closer, European countries are focusing on Iranian regime’s missile program and its regional intervention, calling on the regime to stop both.

    Meanwhile, the missile attack by US, France and UK on Bashar Assad’s chemical weapons facilities in Syria has extremely scared Iranian regime officials.

    “Considering its behavior towards the nuclear deal and Syria, how does the United States expect Iran to negotiate over its missile program?” says head of regime’s Judiciary ‘Sadegh Larijani’, adding “they’re putting forward missile negotiations in such an environment. They should be asked: how do you expect Muslim countries to trust you? Considering your approach towards the nuclear deal and your recent criminal attack on Syria, do you really expect to have negotiations with Iran?’ ” (State-run Fars news agency, April 16, 2018)

    In an article titled “tomorrow’s world is the world of missiles, not dialogues”, state-run Kayhan newspaper points to possible negotiations with the West and acknowledges that the recent missile attack on Syria has been aimed at giving a warning to Iran, writing “maybe the most important point hidden in recent missile-throws has been the message the attackers intended to send to Iran. If we agree that the main purpose of the United States and its flunkies’ clear aggression on Syria was to threaten Iran and its allies and also accept the very obvious fact that we’re living in ‘the law of the jungle’ era in which the world’s bullying countries don’t even respect their own-legislated rules, then is it wise to encourage a second JCPOA-like deal and negotiate over our military and missile capabilities with countries that happen to be the same three that were involved in attacking Syria?” (State-run Kayhan newspaper April 16, 2018)

    Regime’s former diplomat Soleiman Afshar meanwhile believes that the recent missile attack on Bashar Assad’s chemical weapons sites by three western countries was aimed at ‘continuing pressure on Iran and Hezbollah through bargaining with Russia and causing a rift among Iran, Turkey and Russia.”

    Pointing to United States’ 120-day deadline being over on May 12, Afshar predicts that Trump “will either leave the nuclear deal or win concessions from Iran through Europe and stay.”

    Afshar refers to both alternatives as pieces of a ‘US pressure puzzle’, saying “more regional and international pieces of the puzzle will be revealed in the future.” (State-run Iranian Diplomacy, April 16, 2018)

    Also in this regard, state-run Aftab-e-Yazd newspaper on April 16, 2018, writes “the coming month of May will be a decisive one as the US president makes a decision on the fate of Iran nuclear deal and will also have a possible meeting with North Korean leader. It’s quite possible that Trump’s strategic decisions next month will effectively change the situation. Under such circumstances, it seems that adopting a tougher stance against Iran and the nuclear deal is going to bring him some success.”

    Such comments by regime officials and media, however, point to a bigger reality. The reality of regime’s growing weakness and inability, and that it has no defensive tool to deal with the extremely dangerous situation it’s caught in.

    Being defenseless against outside pressures is while the regime is also faced with people’s increasing protests at home, protests that can’t be shielded from, either, since the regime has learned from experience that its ‘oppression blade’ could no longer stop the protests from rising.

    Fearing the situation, Revolutionary Guards’ Commander ‘Mohammad-Ali Jafari’ said on April 16, 2018, “we’re going through an extremely crucial stage of the revolution, with all enemies joining hands to create an environment of disappointment.”

    “In addition to problems coming from outside, there are also domestic issues that should be resolved” added Jafari, somehow pointing to the escalation of regime’s international and domestic crises and the effects they have on one another.

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 11:03 am on 17 Apr 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Iran, , ,   

    Syria is a shadow, the main goal is the Iranian regime 

    Syria is a shadow, the main goal is the Iranian regime 2

    The bombs and missiles, which were launched on April 14th to Bashar al-Assad’s chemical production and distribution centers, seem to have been hit politically to the Mullahs regime. Because some of the Iranian regime’s agents and analysts acknowledge that all the forces that support Bashar al-Assad today in Syria invited by Mullahs regime there, (Russia, Hezbollah Lebanon and other terrorist troops in Syria)

    Syria is a shadow, the main goal is the Iranian regime

    On the other hand, although Russia is currently the first force in Syria, the preservation of Bashar al-Assad, unlike the clerical regime of Iran, is not strategic for Russia.

    This is why the Mullahs regime’s response to this attack is so hysterical and horrific, as Khamenei himself immediately came to the scene and reacted against it.

    Afterwards, we witnessed a massive propaganda campaign and a huge amount of comments from the authorities and the regime’s media.

    In reaction to the attacks on Bashar al-Assad and the Mullahs regime’s interests in these attacks, Khamenei deceptively said that “Their purpose of these attacks is not to hit Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan. but they want blow to the Islamic nation and Islam”. (Iran state TV, April 14, 2018) It is clear that the Islamic nation and Islam and such words in the culture of Mullahs rule are the pseudonym of the corrupt regime of Velayat-e faqih.

    One of the agents of Khamenei’s gang, Saadallah Zarei, says, “Syria is a shadow, the main goal is the Iranian regime” says National Security Advisor John Bolton.

    While pointing to the role of the national security adviser in the attack, Khamenei’s gang member acknowledged that since the Iran regime plays a key role in keeping President Bashar al-Assad governed in rule and even “everyone in Syria today is in defense of the people! and their government” They are invited to by Iran “(Fars News Agency, April 14). So, the target of the attack has been Iran regime.

    Hermidas Bavand, a former diplomat, also asked the regime to “go beyond” with the question “What was the message of the American invasion to Syria?”

    While expressing dismay at Russia’s lack of action and the fact that Russia “will not do anything other than verbal sentencing”. It does not take any other action from the verb condemnation and does not react “to the extent that it condemns or rightly states that it will make Syria’s future more difficult and prolonged.”

    Another former ambassador to the regime, Qadiri Abyaneh, also said that “the ultimate goal of the United States, Britain and France of attack on Syria was to confront the Iran,” as they intended to “block the Hezbollah as a prelude to confronting Iran. In fact, the ultimate goal of the West was to confront Iran has been »

    Mehdi Motahrania, a member of the Rouhani gang, warns in fear of the consequences of attacking the chemical facilities of Bashar al-Assad in Syria: “We have to keep our hat tight, so that it does not hurl us out of our heads, and we strengthen our foundations so hard and so close to us.” If the tornado comes cannot take us out of the ground. We have to make the most of our efforts to get out of this conflict. ”

    As the comments from the members of both gangs come up, the fact is that after Bashar al-Assad, this Mullahs regime is a major loser to attacking the chemical facilities of Bashar al-Assad.

    For many times, the international community has emphasized that Iranian regime is the source of many conflicts in the countries of the region and should stop interfering in Syria and interfering in the internal affairs of other countries in the region.

    The United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, at the Security Council meeting, explicitly called the actions of the Iranian regime in countries like Syria and Yemen as the source of human tragedies from military conflicts in the Middle East, adding that the Mullahs regime is the source of destabilizing measures that are almost entirely in the Middle East has spread.

     

    It now seems that it’s time that this regime, which has been “The wind was planting” for years with its evil presence in the region, is now “Now the storm will reap”, as Mehdi Motahrania, a gangs’ member of Mullahs regime, acknowledged “a storm has raged in the region, and the possibility The incidence of whirlwind has increased “and is in the horror of the storm, which recommends the regime to” change in different dimensions “and is ready to drink the next poison cups.

     

     
    • wizzymedpower 2:20 pm on 18 Apr 2018 Permalink

      Thanks for your update… God’s intervention

      Liked by 1 person

    • bluemoone 11:20 pm on 19 Apr 2018 Permalink

      While I see the reason for some to be excited over the US’s actions, chemical weapons are horrid and disgusting, one has to consider some things. The US has been using white phosphorus in Syria, fairly indiscriminately. So why are they taking such a hard stance on chemical weapons now? I sincerely hope that bombing those places helped the Syrian people but Donald Trump is at the helm and not noted for his humanitarianism. I wager those bombs helped him most of all and any aid to the people was nothing short of serendipitous. I ave seen the news of what happens when short-sighted people have decided that burning a crop of marijuana was the best way to dispose of it and ended up getting the town(s) downwind stoned. So I must ask, what happens when the chemicals in those plants gets incinerated?

      Like

    • Masoud Dalvand 8:10 am on 20 Apr 2018 Permalink

      Thanks for comment dear Danielle. Your comments are always interesting to me because they are accompanied by a sense of human responsibility. I have a few points about your opinion. There are some obvious facts beyond of reasons for US and Tramp bombardment of Assad’s military and chemical centers. First, all the relief groups in Syria and the locals who were attacked by Assad chemically welcomed the military invasion of Assad’s chemical centers. Because global powers have been basically talking about the crimes of the bloodthirsty dictator of Syria and its criminal supporters, namely, Khamenei and Putin, over the past seven years. So when Syrian people see countries such as the United States, France and the United Kingdom just show a few practical responses to Assad, they are happy. Finally, one has found the answer to this dictator. Why are these people, especially the children and women of Syria, who should be bombarded by Assad? Once again, let the military centers of the dictator be targeted. I do not make any comment on the intentions of the Trump or the leaders of France and England. They certainly have their own interests and not humanitarian goals, but the result of their work in this world of oppression and crime that we see is the massacre in Syria, and for seven years nobody helps them important for us. Yes, the important thing is that even for the contradiction of the interests of the superpowers, the United States and its allies engage in a reaction to the crimes of the bloodthirsty dictator of Syria. Also this applies about our people in Iran and oppression and religious tyranny that has been imposed on our people for 40 years, is right. And finally, Obama much appeased with Mullahs and gave them a lot of money just to achieve a very weak nuclear deal. So dear Danielle, in a world full of injustice to rid the oppressed people of the massacres and the repression and crimes that dictators do against them, we welcome any action that the Western powers are taking against these dictators. Be sure, we know the intentions of the powerful countries. But let them do it if they can target the dictators, and we also thank them. Our intentions are just the freedom and establishment of democracy and human rights in the countries of this region of the world, where Khamenei’s and ISIS’s savagery crimes continue against our people. Thank you so much again because you are a great woman and a great poet with great human emotions.

      Like

    • bluemoone 8:23 am on 20 Apr 2018 Permalink

      You’re welcome Masoud. I think that’s the most you have ever said to me at once. 😊 I am happy if the U.S. actions helped. The people of the U.S. want to see things get better for the people of Syria and Iran. I still remain suspicious of Trump’s motives and don’t see him being effective for the people for long. He has tried 3 times to ban Iranian people from the U.S., even the legal citizens. I know Trump and Putin have interest in Syria’s oil. I’d say that is why he took action. It’s Iraq all over again. I know the people of Syria and Iran are in an impossible situation and it’s an enemy-of-my-enemy situation for them. My heart is with them and we are working hard here to change things for the better so that we have good people with good intentions in office. I would just caution people to remember who Trump truly is and not to sing his praises too much or too loud. The devil may be your friend today, but he’s still the devil.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Masoud Dalvand 8:48 am on 20 Apr 2018 Permalink

      I’m happy too Danielle to read your comments, we have same opinion about people’s interests in every where. Thanks again.

      Like

    • bluemoone 2:58 am on 21 Apr 2018 Permalink

      Yes, we do Masoud. That was a great article. Very strong writing.

      Liked by 1 person

    • bluemoone 4:55 am on 21 Apr 2018 Permalink

      My pleasure

      Liked by 1 person

    • Masoud Dalvand 11:16 am on 22 Apr 2018 Permalink

      This is your positive opinion about me, because I know my English is not strong!

      Like

    • oldpoet56 9:53 pm on 15 May 2018 Permalink

      Excellent article, I enjoyed the read so I am going to reblog this article for you.

      Liked by 1 person

    • oldpoet56 9:53 pm on 15 May 2018 Permalink

      Reblogged this on Truth Troubles.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Masoud Dalvand 3:33 pm on 16 May 2018 Permalink

      Appreciate!

      Like

    • Masoud Dalvand 3:34 pm on 16 May 2018 Permalink

      Thanks so much dear friend for sharing.

      Like

  • Masoud Dalvand 4:57 pm on 15 Apr 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Iran, ,   

    How Can The International Community Curb The Iran Threat? 

    The US policies of appeasement towards Iran have ended. When former President Barack Obama was in office, Iran was able to benefit from a complete lack of accountability. Obama, fearing that speaking out against the regime or condemning it for its belligerence would derail the 2015 nuclear deal, turned a blind eye much too frequently.

    Obama’s appeasement of Iran didn’t just fail to bring Iran back into line with international standards, it actually made the situation worse. Iran became more brazen and bold in its malign acts – both at home and across the Middle East.

    Current US President Donald Trump recognised that appeasement was not working and when he took office he declared that the so-called “golden years” for Iran were over.

    Trump has openly criticised the nuclear deal, and after several threats to pull out, he has given the signatories of the deal the deadline of 12th May to make the deal stronger. Trump said that the major flaws in the deal need to be fixed and Iran’s ballistic missile program should be addressed otherwise the United States will exit the deal.

    However, some experts are saying that taking a tough approach to Iran will not make much of a difference either.

    Firstly, not all leaders are willing to take the same stance as Trump. The government of the United Kingdom staunchly refuses to list the notorious Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organisation. The IRGC is not just vaguely linked to terrorism – it is an organiser and an instigator of terrorism. Dozens of MPs in Britain called on the Home Secretary to designate the group, but the government still refused.

    Secondly, Iran has had many different policies applied to it over the years. All possible options and policies have been tested. And they all failed.

    This leaves regime change. For years, the main opposition to the regime – the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) – has been saying that the only viable option is regime change. This is because of all the tried and failed policies and the incapability of the regime to reform. The regime has been claiming moderation and international leaders have been saying that it is in the process of reform at various times. Yet reform is impossible.

    Regime change in Iran will be driven by the people. At the end of last year, millions of Iranians took to the streets to protest against the economic problems that are being aggravated by the regime’s mismanagement and corruption. But the protests quickly turned into anti-government demonstrations.

    The leader of the NCRI, Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, who has been behind the people of Iran for years, believes that to achieve freedom, democracy and human rights via regime change, it is essential for the Iranian regime’s income to be cut at the source with sanctions. One such example would be to stop it from selling oil.

    The IRGC also must be designated as a terrorist organisation.

    But most importantly, the people of Iran need the backing of the international community in their continued resistance.

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 9:39 pm on 13 Apr 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Iran, , ,   

    Iranian Silence on Chemical Attack Speaks Volumes 

    The Assad regime’s recent chemical attack against innocent civilians marks another atrocity in Syria’s multi-year human catastrophe. Hospital reports indicate that the victims all showed signs of chemical exposure. In total, there were over 500 casualties and at least 42 confirmed deaths, two of them small children brought into the hospital cold, limp, and foaming at the mouth.

    The attack sparked widespread condemnation from the international community.

    U.S. President Donald Trump called the act “mindless” and a “humanitarian disaster.”

    British Prime Minister Theresa May said the Assad government must be “held to account.” Predictably, the Iranian regime was one of the few silent voices, due to its steadfast support of the Assad regime.

    Alluding to Iran’s inhuman complacency, French President Emmanuel Macron said that Assad’s allies “bore particular responsibility in this massacre.”

    The Iranian regime’s alliance with Syria was born following the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Iran has been granted Syrian construction contracts and generally supported all actions taken by the Assad regime.

    Direct Iranian involvement in the attack has not been confirmed, but its silence underscores the absence of moral leadership in the Middle East. Iran is the world’s number-one state sponsor of terrorism and systematically violates the human rights of its own citizens. By proxy, this gives all Iranian allies a green light to commit their own atrocities. Conversely, an Iran committed to international law could dramatically reshape the inter-state accountability dynamics within the Middle East.

    During the uprising in Iran that engulfed as many as 142 cities, one of the key chants of Iranians in the street was, “Leave Syria Alone, Think About us,” a clear popular rejection of the Iranian regime’s nefarious involvement in the violence in Syria.

    If the international community seriously wants to prevent further Syrian atrocities, it must support the Iranian people strive for regime change, in favor of a secular, democratic, non-nuclear form of government. This is a key step in bringing peace to the Middle East.

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: