Charged for being responsible and caring human

'Human shields' face heavy penalties. This is what the Americans get when they practice their democratic right to practically oppose war by shielding the civilians from bombs.

Democratic rights? Yes, you have them but only if you are approved.

Build a disease; they'll buy the pill

Science at the service of the rich:
"Science is used to support what the marketers want," said Alan Cassels, a researcher at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
"Marketing is triumphing over sound medical science," said Canadian Women's Health Network spokesperson Kathleen O'Grady.

Exposing people to un-necessary risk? Who cares. Show me the money:
"The problem, of course, is that the company doesn't want to market to people with extreme conditions. They want more of the market," Cassels said.

Deceiving people; as usual:
"They really make it sound like everyone is at risk."

And the result:
"The drug is now one of Pfizer's top sellers."

Hey, this is the lovely and humane capitalism.

Read more here .

When the good guys do nothing

Borrowed form Left is Right .
Whole story in a few pictures and notes .

Real people with real pain. Warning: Graphic pictures

I wish I could have someting pleasant to share with you. But I don't have any to offer, at least not yet.

These pictures are graphic and hard to watch, but imagine if we have difficulty just watching them, how those victims felt when they were going through it. See what has happened to them, then evaluate your level of humanity. How would you feel if one of your loved ones were amongst them?

There are twenty pages with tens of pictures on each, and these are perhaps just parts of the human tragedy which happened in front of the cameras. Who knows how many happened hiden and will never be revealed.

Also note, in the list of sources for those pictures, you don't find CNN or Fox.

There are many many other photo links presented here as well. Also, see Weapons of Mass Destruction (democratic ones).

Blood on their hands

Nigerian woman facing death for adultery is another example of the dark aspects of organized religion
A worth reading Toronto Star letter.

Canadian Medicare and Social Welfare: Tommy Douglas and the NDP

Tommy Douglas was the most influential Canadian politician never to be elected Prime Minister. He pursued his radical ideas relentlessly until they became so mainstream rival politicians claimed them as their own. Called a communist and threatened by in-party fighting, Douglas battled hard to bring the New Democratic Party to legitimacy in its first ten years. He was often criticized for his singular idealism but through it all Douglas was undeterred, convinced that he was helping to create a better, more humane society (and yes he did help creating a better, more humane society - Faramin).

Courtesy of CBC on Tommy Douglas .

visitor

I had a visitor today form the following domain:
"uscourts.gov ? (United States Government)"

Am I becoming important?

Brainwashing the children

This evening in the news, there were talks about Hutton inquiry and Tony Blair's testimony. Tony Blair and George Bush were mentioned many times. My 6 year old asked me whether Tony Blair and George Bush are bad people. Although I believe they are not only bad people but also criminals, my answer was: "I don't know, you will grow up and will see people like them, then you decide if they are good or bad."

Yes, this is the way I "brainwashed" my kid today. How would you do?

Well.....

Well, that's it. Just ....well .

And, making decesions for the world?

Where is the proud western culture going toward?

About 300 bodies of elderly people who died during the latest heat wave in France are waiting to be picked up and burried by their families. but, no one is claiming them and soon, French government will be burrying them in homeless peoples' cemetaries.

Are our children going to do the same to us as well? Is this the proud western culture that makes fun of other cultures? Is this the western values some keep braging about? If this is civilization, I'de rather to be a barberian.

This is sickening.

Former UN Chief: Bomb was Payback for Collusion with US

Looks like there are still high ranking people with Conscious.

"In Iraq, the UN imposed sustained sanctions that probably killed up to one million people. Children were dying of malnutrition and water-borne diseases. The US and UK bombed the infrastructure in 1991, destroying power, water and sewage systems against the Geneva Convention. It was a great crime against Iraq."

"Thirteen years of sanctions made it impossible for Iraq to repair the damage. That is why we have such tremendous resentment and anger against the UN in Iraq. There is a sense that the UN humiliated the Iraqi people and society. I would use the term genocide to define the use of sanctions against Iraq. Several million Iraqis are suffering cancers because of the use of depleted uranium shells. That's an atrocity. Can you imagine the bitterness from all of this?"

Read more here .

1953 Coup; A German Historian's Analysis (in Farsi) - Update: Estephen Kinzer and Ervand Abrahamian on the Coup (in English)

A short review of the British Role in the US-backed Coup d'etat against the government of Dr. Mosaddegh.
In Farsi .

An American Coup And The Roots of Middle East Terror
In English .

To those Americans who think their government is promoting democracy in Iraq today: Please take a few minutes to read/listen/watch this. It's just an indication of how skillful the US government have been in fabrication and deceiving people. Then, you will find out why we cannot trust your governments. This is not just conspiracy theory, this was a real crime against the will of the Iranian nation. Have the courage to criticize your government if you can see its dirty hand in this dirty US/British business. You will not loose your pride by doing so, you will gain/maintain your proud by putting the blame on the shoulders of who deserves it.

Moral Question

Hooman at WhoMan.net (August 24) has an intersting topic for discussion. It is titled as Moral Question .

Check it out.

Stupidity or personal benefit?

One must be either stupid or benefit from this injustice:
This is how an Israeli air strike was reported by CBC (yes Canadiuan CBC):
An Israeli airstrike in the Gaza Strip have killed four Palestinians, including two who were members of the military wing of Hamas.

And a few days ago, when a suicide bomber blew himself up and killed many Israelis, it was reported as: " A suicide bomber killed 21 Including 5 Israeli children.

When Israelis kill, the emphesis is on specifying the number of Hamas people who were killed, and When Suicide bombers kill, the emphesis is on the number of civilians, particularly children, who are killed.

Also, this is very typical: "That airstrike came in response to a Hamas suicide bombing that killed 21 people on a Jerusalem bus two days before.

But when Suicide bombers kill, They ignore saying this: "During this six-week period of "relative quiet," however, some 17 Palestinians were killed and at least 59 injured by Israeli occupation
soldiers and settlers...". and it does not call it "in response to" or "in retaliation".

Sometimes you can see the ugly effect of CNN and Fox on CBC as well. It is sad though, because this is Canadian and not American and naturally, you would expect better than that from it.

The media is only creating hatred by what it does. This, in long run would just help craetion of more terrorism. As I said, One must be either stupid or benefit from this and accept it..

Why this is typical? well, it was posted 2 days ago (see "North American media ignores Israeli crimes", posted on August 22).

The motive behind Jewish terror

If this isn't fundamentalism, what the hell is it then?

Fair and Balanced? Is it possible, or it's just a lie?

Sometime ago, I read an interesting report/article at The 3rd World View on August 18. Apparently, Fox News has sued a comedian for using the phrase "Fair and Balanced" in his upcoming book. Fox has claimed that this phrase is its licensed trademark.

Yes, Fox is claming that it is fair and it is balanced. I don't want to get into the detail as how laughable this is, but it just made me think whether even with the best intention, this is possible at all.

In reporting the events and news, if ethics and professionalism are present, it might be possible to be somehow fair in presenting the true reflection of the events without commenting on them, but how is it possible to be balancedwhile maintaining fairness? A news network such as Fox, has some set policies (at least in short term) and performs around that policy. For example, right or wrong, it decides to support the war, so the reflection of war events on Fox would be based on supporting the war. Then, the question is how could that be balanced? This can even be extended to the CNN. For example, about 25% of the US public were not supporting the US plans to invade Iraq, but only less than 4 percent of the US public opinion was reflected in the interviews at these networks. Now, how could this be called balanced?

Let me admit that even in my insignificant writings, I do not wish and plan to be balanced. I might try, to some extend, present other point of views as well, but even that, I am not sure if I should. In a world, where majority of broadcasting tools are in the hands of some select group with an already set ideas and policies, in a world, where other points of views belonging to those "not as powerful" do not get much chance to be heard, is it fair if I even try to be balanced and give both points of views the same opportunity? May be not. I believe it is true fairness, not to let my limited resources be swallowed by those who already have dominated all the media. Presenting their side of stories, is not only not fair, but it can be a complete unfairness to the underdog. I am, by no means, suggesting that I do not welcome opposite opinions to mine make their voice heard in this blog, after all, my resume is not shiny enough to make me a suitable employee of Fox or CNN.

I don't believe and expect Fox, and CNN for that matter, be balanced at all; first because of their ugly nature, second, because being balanced (in polices) and fair is just a lie; a big lie to which only Fox and CNN type networks are capable of. People have different interests, values, and behaviors, so how is it possible to please every body and still claim to be fair?

I would like to make it clear here, I am not trying to be balanced, and this makes my goal for fairness so much easier. And, I know one thing for sure: I don't care if my comments might anger some people, however I will never lie in what I report and I will never (to my knowledge) report only half of the truth.

Please tell me what do you think?

North American media ignores Israeli crimes

North American media ignores Israeli crimes but is always quick in blaming Plestinians.
Another example:
FAIR-L
Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and activism

MEDIA ADVISORY:
Journalists Find "Calm" When Only Palestinians Die

August 22, 2003

The deadly bus bombing in Jerusalem on August 19 was foreshadowed by a
pair of suicide attacks a week earlier which killed two Israeli civilians.
While U.S. media tended to portray these attacks as a return to violence
after a relatively peaceful period, there were numerous killings in the
weeks leading up to the suicide bombings that underscore the lack of
evenhanded attention given to loss of life in the Israeli/Palestinian
conflict.

When the two Palestinian suicide bombers each killed an Israeli civilian
along with themselves on August 12, U.S. news outlets immediately depicted
the attacks as an apparent resurgence in Mideast violence. "Summer truce
shattered in Israel," announced CBS (8/12/03), while NBC (8/12/03)
reported that "the attacks broke more than a month of relative silence."
The Los Angeles Times (8/13/03) wrote that the bombings "broke a six-week
stretch during which the people of this war-weary land had enjoyed
relative quiet."

During this six-week period of "relative quiet," however, some 17
Palestinians were killed and at least 59 injured by Israeli occupation
soldiers and settlers, according to the Palestine Red Crescent Society.
The dead included Mahmoud Kabaha, a four-year-old boy, who was sitting in
the back seat of a jeep with his family at a checkpoint when an Israeli
soldier shot him dead-- in a spray of bullets that the army simply called
an "accidental burst of gunfire" (Associated Press, 7/25/03). Virtually
none of the major U.S. news reports on the August 12 bombings alluded to
the Palestinian death toll in this period, leaving out a key piece of the
story: For Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, the violence had never
ceased; while the Israeli attacks had decreased, there had never been
anything like an Israeli cease-fire.

An Associated Press report on August 19 (filed prior to that day's
bombing) did acknowledge that since June 29, "more than 20 people have
been killed on the Israeli and Palestinian sides." What it didn't note was
that of those "more than 20," at least 21 were Palestinian, according to
the Red Crescent.

After a month and a half in which Palestinians were being killed several
times a week and receiving relatively little mention, the Washington Post
and New York Times both put the bombings on their August 13 front pages,
each declaring the violence a break from weeks of "relative calm," and
each including a front-page photo of the victims' relatives in mourning.
USA Today also put grieving relatives on the front page, along with the
headline, "Two Suicide Attacks End a Six-Week Lull in Conflict." One can
empathize with the losses of those survivors while recognizing that the
families of the Palestinians who died during the "lull" were virtually
invisible.

On CNN, the August 12 bombings were a major story, with eight separate
segments mentioning the attacks in a three-hour period. Anchor Wolf
Blitzer declared a "grim return to the battle days in Israel and the
Palestinian territories." His colleague Aaron Brown echoed that theme,
noting that "after a period of relative calm there has been a major surge
in violence in Israel and the Palestinian territories." Correspondent
Jerrold Kessel reported that the bombings "cast doubt on the viability of
this peace process known as the road map for peace."

These bombings had killed four people, including the bombers. Just four
days earlier, on August 8, two Palestinians and one Israeli were killed in
an Israeli raid on a suspected militant, while two more Palestinians were
killed at an ensuing rally-- one shot, and the other killed by Israeli
tear gas (Chicago Tribune, 8/9/03). But those five deaths-- mainly
Palestinian-- were not deemed a "major surge in violence" or a "grim
return to the battle days" on CNN. Instead, anchor Carol Costello
(8/8/03) suggested that the Israeli raid "may be another smudge, a bump if
you will, on that road map to peace."

The media's tendency to downplay-- or completely ignore-- Palestinian
suffering and death is nothing new. In late 2001 and the beginning of
2002, for example, a loose cease-fire declared by Yasir Arafat led to a
period of very few Israeli deaths, but sustained Palestinian deaths-- and
the American media repeatedly referred to it as a time of "relative calm"
(FAIR Action Alert, 1/10/02, 2/5/02).

In order to convey the Mideast crisis in all its complexity, journalists
need to take seriously the violence suffered by all communities.
References to "relative calm" while Palestinians are being routinely
killed only serve to trivialize human life and obscure the cycle of
violence that afflicts the region.

If you wish, you can subscribe to FAIR-L at thier web site by clicking here. Their subscriber list is kept confidential.

Iraqis didn't want saddam, neither do they want the US

Cartoon .
Courtesy of Toronto Star .

Many of detainees in Guantanamo Bay, might be innocent

When there is a talk about the US hostagees in Tehran during the invasion of the US embassy in Tehran, many count the number of days those hostages spent in captivity and many speak of compansation for them.

In a few month the datainees in Guantanamo Bay will "celebrate" their second year in captivity. It is rightly prosumed that many of the detainees might be innocent and should be freed. After about two years, the US is now talking about bringing them to trial, what kind of trial (fairt or not) it would be, is not being discussed here, but it is at least called trial.

I wonder if those who were really concerned about the rights of about 50 US hostages being denied for over 400 days, were so kind to be upset about that, why their "kindness" does not apply to about 600 detainees who have spent about 600 days (and counting) in captivity! Is it because they believe the Americans are more important than the non-Americans? It is a shem to think so, but it is more shameful to hide it if they believe so.

NY Times writes it this way: "The detainees held in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, on suspicion of involvement in terrorism have been in custody so long it may seem that they have been found guilty of something."

And .."The military tribunal rules also contain restrictions on lawyers that will make it difficult, if not impossible, for them to mount effective defenses." ...and .."The Bush administration has already denied each of the Guantánamo detainees one basic right guaranteed in the civilian justice system: a speedy trial. Now it appears determined to deny many more."
Read more here .

An interesting but not scientific poll (Temporary Post)

Untill 2:00 Am on August 22, 84% of the on line readers of The Globe And Mail (fairly right wing conservative Canadian paper), believed that "George W. Bush has led the U.S. into a quagmire in Iraq".
View the poll here .

One huge common attitude; they all deceived their public

Looks like it wasn't only Washington and London who deceived their public in order to gather support to invade Iraq, Canberra did the same, obviously. Really, does the world want to learn democracy from these un-democrats?
Read here .

Formerly willing countries, now reluctant to send troops to Iraq

Japanese Troops for Iraq Unlikely:
Japanese politicians say it's now unlikely Japan's Ground Self Defense Forces will go to Iraq following the explosion at the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad.

Spain Under Pressure to Withdraw Forces After First Casualty in Iraq
Spain already has 744 soldiers there, but the death of one of their own number has shocked the population and opposition parties demanded a parliamentary debate in the belief that Spanish forces should be brought home.

Poland to withdraw troops from ' high-risk area' near capital
Poland scaled back its military commitment in Iraq yesterday in response to Tuesday's devastating attack on the UN headquarters in Baghdad.

How Israel helped Idi Amin to take power

I didn't know, did you? But I'm not surprised at all; Israel helping a potential dictator to become an actual dictator. What a democracy-loving country Israel is.
Or, is this just another conspiracy theory?

We once had democracy; it was crushed by the "civilized countries"

In the fiftieth anniversary of the US-backed military coup of August 19, 1953 which resulted in toppling of DEMOCRATICALLY ELLECTED government of Dr. Mosaddegh, It will not be very off to conclude that this anti-democratic and anti freedom action (of Britain and the US who claim to be the world centres of freedom, democracy and civilization) somehow was the point of departure for terrorism and fundamentalism in Iran and Middle East. Considering the influence of Iran in Middle East, the region could be very different today if it wasn't for the aggression of the US and the British. Who knows may be this was also one more reason for the US and Britain to plan and execute that Coup.

The following is from Guardian regarding this shamful act of barbarism and aggression against the will of Iranian nation.

Britain and the US crushed Iran's first democratic government. They didn't learn from that mistake.
Ignoring international law. Britain and the US opted for the high-risk strategy of regime change in order to pre-empt a volatile enemy in the Middle East. It was not Iraq, however, that was in the firing line but Iran, and the aftershocks are still being felt.

Fifty years ago this week, the CIA and the British SIS orchestrated a coup d'etat that toppled the democratically elected government of Mohammad Mossadegh. The prime minister and his nationalist supporters in parliament roused Britain's ire when they nationalised the oil industry in 1951, which had previously been exclusively controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Mossadegh argued that Iran should begin profiting from its vast oil reserves.

...The crushing of Iran's first democratic government ushered in more than two
decades of dictatorship under the Shah, who relied heavily on US aid and
arms. The anti-American backlash that toppled the Shah in 1979 shook the
whole region and helped spread Islamic militancy, with Iran's new hardline
theocracy declaring undying hostility to the US.

I strongly suggest you read more here .

May be and may be not

What he said, might not have been very pleasant to some:

``It is traumatic. It must be one of the most humiliating periods in their history. Who would like to see their country occupied? I would not like to see foreign tanks in Copacabana,'' Sergio Vieira de Mello told the Brazilian newspaper Estado de Sao Paulo in an interview published Monday.

Throughout his tenure in Baghdad, he took pains to remind everybody that the United Nations would be in the country long after U.S. forces leave and insisted that the world body - not the U.S.-led coalition - should control the spending of Iraqi oil revenues.

``We're truly in a unique situation here,'' he said of the occupation. ``By the usual U.N. standards, this is at best a bizarre situation.''

55 year old United Nations' envoy to Iraq was killed in bombing of his UN office in Baghdad on Tuesday.

Call it conspiracy theory or whatever you like, but who knows what really happened. 47 years after its occurance, CIA accpeted the responsibility for the Coup d'etat against Iran's Dr. Mosaddegh in 1953.

For more read here .

Or here again the reason why he possibly wasn't liked very much by the US officials.

I passed my self-checking test

Today, while I was waiting for a friend in a coffee shop , I noticed one car which looked more like a wreckage of a car (with a baby sit in it) stopped and the driver came out of it into the coffee shop. The small circular hat he was wearing was an indication that he was Jewish. The guy looked weak and depressed and was a complete display of poverty. This little scene and a few more minutes to wait for the friend un-intentionally gave me the opportunity to review the way I see Jews. Although, I have always made sure that my serious disapproval of the Israeli criminal policies had nothing to do with Jews, Once more I tried to make sure about that. I thought to myself:" Is this guy my enemy? Is he the enemy of Palestinian children? Is he the enemy of humanity?" The answer to that was:" This guy probably has difficulty providing for his family every day. He probably is just like other hard working people who are exploited by the big businesses. He is probably.... .

Thinking about all these made my conscious clear one more time that I am not against Jews, as I can see a Jewish in my side regardless of what his/her beliefs are. But I am still definitely against the criminal policies of Israel.

Citizens' Indictment Of Bush, Cheney, Et Al.

I am not an American, but some Americans who value human life might be interested in this.

Democratic Torture!

I leave it to your judgment.

Rumsfeld Led Bush to War, Ex Diplomat

This is the partial reality of US politics.
Bush; strong leader? In what? Horse Riding?

You are not helping

You decide to take a look around, see what are being said in other blogs, what comments are left in there especially on the subjects that would interest you. Well, to me, it is sometimes enough to rush to read the posts and comments if they are about Iran. Now, that many (and not all) Americans have become the ZORROs of the day and act like "Liberators", you might wonder what they have to say. Oh, yes, they are talking about Iran and liberalizing Iran; they know how brutal Iran regime is, they know everything, so they decide to become superman and free Iranians from their misery!

Having said that, when the subject is about other human issues such as Israeli-Palestinian conflict, suddenly the same people become "underdog bashers", "victim kickers"; Bad Palestinians, Good Israelis, Palestinian lands, what land? Looks like they know nothing about history, looks like their brain only functions on only selective issues and not others. And the funniest thing is that they think other people are brainwashed and other people should learn about civilization from them.

Some think they have the right to decide what is good and what is bad for others. However, what is usually missing is the talent and the courage for self-criticizing. Yes, self-criticizing requires talent to identify the problem as well as courage to break out of the shells of stupidity to truly realize what is right and what is wrong. Yes, they both are required.

Regarding Iran, their arrogance is so much that, they manage to push many Iranians who dislike and possibly hate the government of Iran to the position that is easy to interpret as defending that government. This has happened to me many times; their displayed arrogance has been so heavy that sometimes my resistance to that arrogance has somehow pushed me to the point that made me wonder if I was supporting the criminal regime of Tehran. Once there was (and still is) talks of attacking Iran. Well, this might be one of those examples. As I have written many times, this is such a sensitive issue to me that I don't think twice standing up to the Americans who dare to use their "COWBOYISM" to threaten the country that is my business and only mine (as an Iranian).

Some other times, the way they see themselves so superior to others, is disgustingly sickening. In one of the comments, I was asked to point evidences to convince the writer that the UN would be more effective than the US in bringing freedom and democracy to Iraqis. Do I really need to convince anybody on this? I don't think so, my answer is very simple: "who the hell are you to decide for the world, who the hell are you to bring freedom (as you see it) to Iraqi people, who the hell are you to .. and finally, you yourself need to be freed from what is governing you which is nothing but the big business." Of sourse, this is not very easy to understand by an incapable brain.

It is scary to see a high percentage of the public in the country with so much "muscle power" do not recognize that UN should have the authority on international Issues and not the US. Yes, something as simple as this is so difficult for many Americans (and not all) to understand. And yet, they consider themselves the smartest people on earth. I don't know if I should consider this a joke or a human brain tragedy but perhaps this is why the oiliest people on earth become number one and number two people in the US.

Whatever it is, it hasn't helped many Iranians in their struggle for freedom for their country by their hands and their terms only. This type of American support for us to achieve freedom is only helping the regime in Tehran and not the Iranian people. This kind of support is only delaying our freedom. The lesser of this type of support the sooner we will be free. It was once said nicely: "If you have nothing helpful to say, if you just shot up, you will infact be helping".

(I reserve my respect to those Americans with independent thoughts and values)

If Real Compensation for Pan Am passengers, why not for Iran Air Passengers?

In the news is that Libya has agreed to pay $2.7 billion dollars as compansation to the families of victims of the Pan Am flight over Lockerbie Scotland. Based on this, each family of the vicims will receive $10 million.

This just makes me wonder what the families of 298 victims of the Iranian flight which was shot down (14 years ago on July 3 and perhaps to increase the joy of celebrations for July the 4th - US independence day) , by the barberic US navy, received as compensation.

If Libya had anything to do with this, of course it should be condemned and held accountable for that. By the same token, US should be also held accountable for parishing 298 Iranian civilian lives; each one no less valuable than those of American victims of the Pan Am flight. Unfortunately, great number of Americans do not appreciate the fact the the value of non-American life is not less than the American life.

Yes, the images of those children whose shattered bodies were being collected from the waters of the Persian Gulf, will not fade in my mind, never.

The Jewish group wants movie related to Jesus be modified

Apparently, a Mell Gibson movie called "the Passion", that is almost ready to be released is attracting critisism from Jewish groups. The film portrays the last 12 hours of the life of Jesus Christ. Before being realesed to the public, this movie was privately screened by a leading Jewish group ( The Anti-Defamation League, ADL) which further critisized the movie by claiming that this movie "would fuel bigotry and anti-semitism in its current form" and want Gibson to modify the movie before it is released for public view. According to the director of the said group, this movie somehow shows Jews reponsible for the decesion to crucify Jesus Christ.

Let's hope their influence does not result in denied peoples' right to see, and judge for themselves about this movie in its original form.

More can be read about this movie here.

Congratulations Canada for the first step towards protecting the environment

Today, Canadian government pledged $1 Billion to act on its commitment towards Kyoto protocol. Canada officially adopted Kyoto accord on December 16, 2002. The overwhelming public support for this protocol, defused all the actions of lobby groups who were lobbying on behalf of big businesses and industries which did not want to be part of this and considered their mandatory participation in this, as profit cutting factor. Pro-business parties in Canada such as "Canadian Alliance" and "Progressive Conservative Party", strongly opposed this law, while it was backed by "The New Democratic Party - NDP" and "Block Quebequa". This was also supported by majority of the Liberal MPs in Canadian parliament to some of whom public pressure played a major roll to support this protocol.

Today's announcement from the government of Canada can be considered as a small step torwards meeting canadas commitment in reducing "Green House Gas Emmitions". In this announcement, there are incentives for almost everyone should they take more active roll in helping reduce G.H.G.E. .

When it comes to Green House gases, next to the US, Canada is still one of the biggest offenders( see here ). However, Canadians today should take pride in taking this first step towards less polluted environment and living up to their responsibilities.

It is interesting that during Clinton administration in the United States (the most polluting country on earth), this country had agreed with this treaty, but the new administration of Mr. Bush showed its anti-environmental policies by killing this agreement as one of the first major implemented policies.

Perhaps it has been correctly said by Mr. Al Gore in his recent speech:

"...That's what happened, for example, when Vice President Cheney invited all of those oil and gas industry executives to meet in secret sessions with him and his staff to put their wish lists into the administration's legislative package in early 2001....
....That group wanted to get rid of the Kyoto Treaty on Global Warming, of course, and the Administration pulled out of it first thing."

Let's hope Canada's leading roll in this issue, becomes a model for other countries most contributing to the global warming.

More on this can be read here .

Why at the middle of peace and quiet?

Looks like some people do not wish to see any peace and quiet in the Israeli - Palestinian conflict. Every time, the situation gets a bit quieter, and suicide attacks stop accuring on Israelis, the Sharon government goes on action to break that quiet. Assasinations in Palestinian areas and this time, the car bombig in Beirut (Lebonon) are the examples of that. These actions only serve the continuation of the violence in this conflict. Perhaps some hardline Israelis who are not less gulity than hardline Palestinians want to see the conflict continue.

Regarding the recent escalation of the vilence between Israel and Lebonees Hezbollah, this was trigered by the car bombing that occured in Beirut a while ago, where a member of Hezbollah was assasinated. This promted the retaliation form Hezbollah and then again retaliation form Israel and... and the cycle continues and who suffers here? of course, ordinary civilians on both sides.

Well, Syria has been warned about supporting Hezbollah. May be all this is to create opportunities to renew threats to Syria, as the Us has warned Syria about this.

Remember, in order to do something as significant as attacking a country, some excuses and justifications have to be made up. You never know, may be these are parts of such plan.

Iraqi Group Vows Anti-U.S. Attacks, Denies Saddam Links

This can open a whole new chapter in resistance to US/British occupation of Iraq.

1953 Coup d'etat - Toronto Upcoming Conference

On August 23rd & 24th the Iranian Assoc. at UofT is hosting a conference on the above topic.

Among the notable speakers at this event are:
Mark Gasiorowoski, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Abbas Milani, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California
Ahmad Ashraf, Center for Iranian Studies, Columbia University, New York City
Farhang Rajaee, Department of Political Science, Carleton University, Ottawa
There may be more speakers of note, but so far these are the ones that are confirmed. There will also be other speakers in panels and discussion groups.

Courtesy of Maykadeh .

'Bring us home': GIs flood US with war-weary emails

Susan Schuman is angry. Her GI son is serving in the Iraqi town of Samarra, at the heart of the 'Sunni triangle', where American troops are killed with grim regularity.
Breaking the traditional silence of military families during time of war, Schuman knows what she wants - and who she blames for the danger to her son, Justin. 'I want them to bring our troops home. I am appalled at Bush's policies. He has got us into a terrible mess,' she said.

Schuman may just be the tip of an iceberg. She lives in Shelburne Falls, a small town in Massachusetts, and says all her neighbours support her view. 'I don't know anyone around here who disagrees with me,' she said.

Read the rest here.

Site Statistics; Invasion of privacy?

It is good to know the number of visitors to our blogs, isn’t it? It might even be good to know from where the visitors are visiting. But do we need to know what operating system they have, what IP address they have, what kind of browsers they use, what time zone they are in and what was their local time when they visited our blog? Or, do we really need to track their domain, and their organization from which they made the visit?

All the information collected here, can provide a very good statistics on many computer–related commodities and as a result they can be valuable information for the manufacturers of these commodities. Basically, in most optimistic way of looking at this issue, by each visit to other sites we are potentially participating in invalounteered surveys, whether this information is used or not is not the issue. The issue is that the information can potentially be used.

Beside, the accuracy of the information on all the specifications of the visitor’s PC system, makes me wonder if a lot more information cannot be extracted about the content stored in that PC. Thes information can range from simple routins (what time ususally we do what), to all our interests (Where do we usually visit and what are our favourites), and even what files we have in our system.

As I said, this is a very optimistic situation. How if you want to look at this a bit deeper. Given the fact that in many cases, the high tech technology available to us as consumers is not the highest technology that exists and there are some institutions and organizations which are always one step ahead of us in some particular technologies, I think it would be reasonable to think that a lot more quantity and a lot more accurate information about our lives can be extracted from each simple visit we make here and there.

I am not a computer expert, but I think if you have already visited a site/blog and if you have left a comment before, it might not be very difficult to figure out that the new comment is yours even if you use a different name. Also, it is not difficult to figure out where you are (all this is of course if you use the same computer each time you visit).

The question is whether we would like to give out so many information about ourselves. And whether this is not some kind of invasion of our privacy. I might be wrong. What do you think?

APPEAL: Write to CRTC to support Al-Jazeera TV in Canada

This is the content of an email that I received regarding Pro-Israeli groups acting against Al-Jazeera being aired in Canada. I think it is important to act on it.

If you agree with it, please don't leave it for later on. Send your email now, and don't let Pro-Sharon people decide what we should watch and what we should not. Don't forget, they are organized, they act together, We might have huge diffeneces too, but there is one thing we can share: we want to hear and watch all sides of the stories. If we don't move now, we will loose again. (I am not necessarily endorsing "Muslem Canadian Congress - see below- but I agree with them that we should act now). Even if you are in the US, you can write to the CRTC, and in the name of democracy ask them to allow Al-Jazeera be aired in Canada. Hey, you never know, this might open up more windows for better and more balanced coverage of the events in the US as well . Please remeber the deadline for your submission is August 11, 03.

Right wing pro-Israeli organizations are lobbying the Canadian authorities
to literally ban Al-Jazeera TV from Canada and we need to speak up against
and such anti-democracy groups..

I am appealing to you to send an e-mail, just a few lines, to the Secretary
General of the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission,
CRTC expressing your support for Al-Jazeera TV in Canada.

Please do not hesitate to use the submission by the Muslim Canadian Congress
(MS Word file attached) as a guide to formulate your own ideas. The
deadline for your submission is Monday, August 11, 2003

Send your e-mail to: procedure@crtc.gc.ca

or visit CRTC's Official Notice Inviting Submissions .

You could also fax your submission to (819) 994-0218

Militant rejoices death sentence for Bali bombings

This is what Bush Administration does not understand about fundamentalists and how to deal with them. Don't be dumb more than you already are Mr. Bush, they are not scared of your weapons and they are not scared of death AT ALL. You have taken a loaf bigger than your mouth Mr. Bush.

The way you have chosen will not defeat them. Fighting fundamentalism requires, honesty, courage and facts of positive actions to show people that fundamentalism is not the way to go. How could you, Mr. Bush, do this? You yourself are a fundamentalist; a dis-honest one.

Al Gore's Speech

Below is part of Al Gore's Speech On President Bush's Iraq Policy .

UpDate - I have noticed that this event has been covered in many blogs, and websites, so I am cutting from the quantity of the related information here (It can be read as its entirity by clicking on the above link). However, I keep some areas that need to be emphesized on:


Millions of Americans now share a feeling that something pretty basic has gone wrong in our country and that some important American values are being placed at risk. And they want to set it right....

...That's what happened, for example, when Vice President Cheney invited all of those oil and gas industry executives to meet in secret sessions with him and his staff to put their wish lists into the administration's legislative package in early 2001....

....That group wanted to get rid of the Kyoto Treaty on Global Warming, of course, and the Administration pulled out of it first thing. The list of people who helped write our nation's new environmental and energy policies is still secret, and the Vice President won't say whether or not his former company, Halliburton, was included. But of course, as practically everybody in the world knows, Halliburton was given a huge open-ended contract to take over and run the Iraqi oil fields-- without having to bid against any other companies....

...After all, this President has claimed the right for his executive branch to send his assistants into every public library in America and secretly monitor what the rest of us are reading. That's been the law ever since the Patriot Act was enacted. If we have to put up with such a broad and extreme invasion of our privacy rights in the name of terrorism prevention, surely he can find a way to let this National Commission know how he and his staff handled a highly specific warning of terrorism just 36 days before 9/11....

...And speaking of the Patriot Act, the president ought to reign in John Ashcroft and stop the gross abuses of civil rights that twice have been documented by his own Inspector General. And while he's at it, he needs to reign in Donald Rumsfeld and get rid of that DoD "Total Information Awareness" program that's right out of George Orwell's 1984...

....Similarly, the Kyoto treaty is an historic effort to strike a grand bargain between free-market capitalism and the protection of the global environment, now gravely threatened by rapidly accelerating warming of the Earth's atmosphere and the consequent disruption of climate patterns that have persisted throughout the entire history of civilization as we know it. This administration has tried to protect the oil and coal industries from any restrictions at all -- though Kyoto may become legally effective for global relations even without U.S. participation....

If the 21st century is to be well started, we need a national agenda that is worked out in concert with the people, a healing agenda that is built on a true national consensus. Millions of Americans got the impression that George W. Bush wanted to be a "healer, not a divider", a president devoted first and foremost to "honor and integrity." Yet far from uniting the people, the president's ideologically narrow agenda has seriously divided America. His most partisan supporters have launched a kind of 'civil cold war' against those with whom they disagree.

Was I helping Saddam?

Believe it or not, this is not a made up story, this is what I had in my dream last night.

Somewhere in Iraq; Saddam was with me and needed my help to hide from the American troops. It was strange because I don't even speak Arabic, and I have never been to Iraq, but he was asking me where to go.

Well, while he was with me, I remembered all he had done to my Country. I remembered that he was the reason the Mullahs in Iran stabilized their control over the country in the name of War time security measures when Iraq attacked Iran. I remembered his brutality against his own people and all I remembered was negative about him and what he had done.

This dream, unlike many other dreams which are vague and are easily forgotten, was very clear to me. I even remember that I also thought of tempting 30 million dollars reward that the US would give to the provider of the information that would lead to arrest (call it killing) of Saddam.

I don't know why, but I felt so sorry for him. After all, I considered him a looser of a war between two criminals. And then, the victor was looking for him. Despite all my hatred towards his actions while in power, it was like my mind was set to help him not to fall into the hands of the Americans. Again, I don't know why I didn't even hesitate trying to help him.

All these were happening so quickly. Seemed like everything was being reviewed in my mind in a very short time. During this short period, I also imagined a scenario in which his regime had collapsed by the hands of the Iraqis and then the Iraqis were looking for him to put him on trial. But there was no 30 million dollar reward. In that case, I felt that this time, I would not hesitate trying to apprehend him and handing him to the only people who have the right to try him; the Iraqi people.

When I woke up in the morning, I felt good about myself.

For those who miss Tehran

I came across this via "That American Guy" blog.

The images are updated every minute and show a couple of Tehran highways.

I will soon make this a permanent feature in my blog.

My thanks to the American Guy for placing this on his blog.

Nuclear Weapons: OK for some, not OK for others? - Update

(Remembering Hiroshima & Nagasaki - It was 58 years ago, today. Read more on that here)
and also: Hiroshima Mayor Balsts Bush. Read it here.

In a conversation between Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger in the 70's and during Vietnam war, Nixon expressed his desire to use atomic bombs against the Vietnamies; "I don't give a damn about their lives": he said. Kissinger being concerned about the effect of this on world public opinion (and not the humanitarian aspect of it), objected and disagreed with it.

May be Nixon just had a bad day, May be he had a fight with his wife, may be he was just too angry at something when he expressed this horrifying desire, on the other hand, may be he was serious about it Let's say he was just upset and he didn't really mean it (but remember, you can go to jail if you threaten to kill somebody even if you don't mean it).

Anyhow, What if his anger would increase by something else (let's say another fight with his wife or, his mother-in-law coming for a visit ) to even higher level so he would make an even harsher comment; but he still wouldn't mean it. Then again, what if something really bothered him and his administration to esculate his anger to an even more critical level so the order to use atomic bomb would be issued? (Don't laugh, it can be as simple as that).

These days, all the talk is about Iran and its Nuclear programs. Sounds like it is no good if Iran developes nuclear bombs but it is alright for Israel to have it. Why do I keep talking about Israel, why not the US, Russia, France, England, China and even the new kids in the block: India and Pakistan?

One might say: "Iran and even North Korea should not have these kinds of weapons because the leaders of those countries are crazy enough to use them". Well, I agree, but if using these weapons comes from the crazyness of the leaders, so it is crazy to use them, period. Unless, somebody says: "No, your leaders should not have those weapons, so they cannot kill hundreds of thousands of people but it is alright if our leaders have them, because the way we kill is more civilized. Killing is bad and evil if you kill, but what we do is just saving the humanity when we kill." Who knows who the judge is to say who is right and who is wrong.

BTW, North Korea? After witnessing what happened to Iraq after it became clear the WMD did not exist, who can blame North Korea for not wanting to destroy the weapons it might have or even for wanting to continue developement of WMD? If Iraq had Nuclear weapons, US and Britain would not have dared attacking that country.

Without giving too much credit to Iran leaders, I have to admit, they did not use chemical weapons against Iraqi army during the 8 year Iran-Iraq war while Iranian soldiers were being chemically bombed on almost daily basis by Saddam's army which had the blessing of the civilized US leaders and of course British, French and Russia.

Atomic bombs are dangerous enough to not consider them safe in the hands of some countries and their prosumed controlling system to make sure they are not going to be used where they should not be used. Then again, who can determine about these Should(s) and should not(s)?

By the way, another answer to the issue of Iran and North Korea's leaders being crazy is: "Yes, they are crazy but so is George Bush and his adventurous oily gang". We cannot just hope that these people will not make wrong decisions whether they should or should not use nuclear weapons. If you travel in time to the past to 1944, you would not even imagine what was going to happen to two Japanies cities (and yes, to all their civilian population) in less than a year. You would perhaps make fun of the comment such as "warning of the nearing tragedy", but that did happen. We cannot let that happen again (for any B.S. reason). We cannot wait and hope that the Nixon(s) would not make crazy decisions. we cannot leave our lives and our childrens' lives in the hands of bunch of bussiness-oriented politicians.

If we do not care enough about our own lives, we have the responsibility to make sure these things do not happen to our children. We have to destroy all these weapons, no matter where they are, and who controls them. We have to tell those who are obssessed with these weapons, to pack up, take your weapons with you and get lost from the face of the earth, go away to the places far from earth and far from our lives, and then play with these toys as much as you want.

Am I looking at this in a very simplistic way? You bet I am. It really is simple but we are making it too complicated. It is as simple as saying no-one (and I mean no-one) should have these weapons what so ever.

You might react to this piece either positively or negatively (if you understand my writing that is), but whatever you do, please continue talking about it and let this issue be talked about before another tragedy hits.

Just one more note: with the money that is spent on these monsterous weapons, every member of the humanity can live the way a human being deserves, with no starvation, no poverty, and you name it. Let's begin talking about this issue today (You might wonder how stupid Faramin is! Yes, I might be stupid but I am also worried, even stupids have the right to worry about things).

More Media Examples - Update

The Globe and Mail is one of the most read newspapers in Canada. Every now and then, Globe and Mail has new on line poll. This time the issue is the priorities for the federal government of Canada in terms of allocationg money to different areas of spending. These days, as before, spending money on issues such as health care and affordable housing are of the most talked issues in Canada. I should also mention that spending money on the military has become a topic that atracts many people as well.

It is inetersting that the Globe (Which has improved in last few years to be a more balanced paper in Canada), ignores the main issues and its poll, only give two options to its readers to choose from:
1- Arts and Culture and
2- Military

This is the exact wording of the poll:
Globe Poll
The federal government should spend more money on
Arts and culture
The military

As I expected, the result favours spending on the Military. But is this really what Canadians want? If other options were available to choose from, the result, I beleive, would be completely different.

I don't know how to justify this. Only thing that crosses my mind is that this is another way of manipulition of the issues important to people.

What do you think?
------------------------

Also, I came across a report on Toronto Star (The most read Canadian newspaper). It is quoted from Associated Press and the title is Israel digs in on withdrawals after militant attack. The report starts with This:
"JERUSALEM — Israel's defence minister today rejected any further troop withdrawals from West Bank towns until the Palestinians act against militants after an ambush that wounded four Israelis."
Of course, Palestinians should be blamed for this stoppage on the Israeli withdrawals from West Bank towns. Right?

But what the Star does not report is this .

"Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) shot dead four Palestinians in the past twenty four hours, two of them in the West Bank and two others in the Gaza Strip, in a new Israeli escalation that threatens to put an end to the declared hudna, or temporary truce, announced by Palestinian factions more than a month ago."

All the blame has to be placed on Palestinians; What is new? And Israeli angels have done nothing wrong.

The depth of the unfair reporting is that this is published on one of the most balanced papers in Canada and perhaps North America. Imagine how the un-balanced ones are.

U.S. Wants Saddam, But Dead - Not Alive

This is an article I read from ERIC MARGOLIS a Toronto Sun Foreign Correspondent. As it was discussed at Eyeranian before, there are many reasons why US does not want to capture Saddam alive. As Margolis puts it: "The Bush administration will be delighted not to put Saddam on public trial. Dead dictators tell no tales."

Some parts of the Article as why the US does not want him allive are below:

-The CIA's role in bringing the Ba'ath Party to power in a 1958 coup, opening the way for Saddam to take control.
-U.S., Israeli, and Iranian destabilization of Iraq during the 1970s by fueling Kurdish rebellion.
-Washington's egging on the aggressive shah of Iran in the Shatt al-Arab waterway dispute, a primary cause of the Iran-Iraq War.
-The U.S. secretly urging Iraq to invade Iran in 1980 to overthrow that nation's revolutionary Islamic government.
-Covert supply of Saddam's war machine by the U.S. and Britain during the eight-year Iran-Iraq conflict, plus biological warfare programs and germ feeder stocks, poison gas manufacturing plants and raw materials.
-Billions in aid, routed through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Italy's Banco del Lavoro and the shadowy BCCI. Heavy artillery, munitions, spare parts, trucks, field hospitals and electronics.
-Equally important, the U.S. Defence Intelligence Agency and CIA operated offices in Baghdad that provided Iraq with satellite intelligence data on Iranian troop deployments that proved decisive in the war's titanic battles at Basra, Majnoon and Faw.

And especially this part:

The murky role played by Washington just before Iraq's 1991 invasion of Kuwait. The U.S. ambassador told Saddam "The U.S. takes no position in Arab border disputes." Was this a trap to lure Saddam to invade Kuwait, then crush his army, or simple diplomatic bungling? Saddam could supply the awkward answers.

Gadhafi: US policy strengthens al-Qaeda

It doesn't matter who is saying this, but it is true. I have always believed what the US government has been (and is) doing has resulted (is resulting) in stronger and more popular extrem fundamentalism around the world; chances are that an ordinary Muslem; let's say the owner of small convenience store somewhere in Egypt, who used to mind his business has become a defender of Islam against what are perceived to be the enemies of Islam. Yes, the first victims of that outcome are the non-extremist people who beleive in and try to achieve democracy, a real democracy in their countries. Now they have to deal with those who consider anything non-Islamic as the things that must be destroyed for "the sake of God and defending Islam".

Dear Mr. Bush, your war-based, aggressive and not- very-smart policies have hurt the freedom-loving people of the world. You have added to the burden they already had in dealing with fundamentalist religious people. You have not helped, and yes, you have caused a huge increase in religious terrorism. When you add all of these to State terrorisms such as Israel's, Iran's and the US for that matter, we see you not only have not made the world a safer place but a place with plenty of uncertainty and nervousness.

You and your team along with other religious fundamentalists are parts of a dark chapter in human history. I wish you and the religious fundamentalism were things of the past and I was reading about you in the history books, but no, you are today's realities; sad realities that threaten the future of our children.

The title article/report can be read here.

Yes Indeed, You share those Crimes Mr. Majority Leader

In his speech to Israeli Knesset, Congressman Tom Delay who is also the majority leader in the US Congress, gave his full support to what Israel has done and continues to do in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict The writers of his speech made sure every pleasing words for Israelis was includede in his speech. Every word such as these:

- ".... Their (Palestinains' - Faramin) plight is real: they have been oppressed and abused by a pernicious enemy."
- "But their enemy is not Israel, nor its people, nor its democratic government."
- "Their enemy is Yasser Arafat."
- "Nations and organizations — however well-intentioned — that acknowledge Yasser Arafat and his network as legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people validate The Lie, and perpetuate terror." (whether you and I like it or not, he is the elected leader of the Palestinians, and it is not up to you to determine the Leadership of the Palestinians)
- ''Whereas Israel has no choice but to use its own measures to fight terrorism if the Palestinians are unwilling to do so..." (Call it a green light to kill even more of the Palestinian children for whose lives Mr. Delay has no regard - Faramin)

Is Yasser Arafat good? I don't know. But is he not elected by its people? Mr. Delay should have delayed his speech to read frist, not that he doesn't know?
Really, who the hell is Mr. Delay to interfer with Palestinian affairs and to say who is good and who is bad for them. However, Mr. Delay just gauranteed his re-election by the flood of financial support his campaign will receive from powerful pro-Israelis in the US.

He continued:
"In short, it is the position of the people of the United States, as expressed by their representatives in Congress, that Israel's fight is our fight."

Yes, Mr. Delay, I am glad you admit that israel's fight (call it crimes) are your fight. Afetr all, Israel would not be able to continue its fight (call it crimes) without your help.

And:
"History, as always, will judge harshly those who would accommodate evil's aggression." (Read your own words again Mr. Delay, that is absolutely right - Faramin).

And again he said a story:
"...She told me this story this week in a park, surrounded by the play of children directly affected by Palestinian terror. She called two of them over, and introduced me to her two grandchildren who were orphaned that day.
Despite the story I heard, these children played, and laughed, and seemed as hopeful about the future as any child could be.
And despite my heartache, I smiled too, because hope was with us in that park."

Mr. Delay, don't kid yourself, your heart only aches for the Israeli children and your heart does not even feel the daily suffering of Palestinain children. A good-intentioned heart would ache for all the children; Israeli and Palestinian and would seek a real solution to end the suffering of the people not like what you are doing which is perhaps a deliberate attempt to provoke more violence.

Given the fact that the Palestinians have to deal with people like Mr. Delay, who shows no real respect to what democracy is all about, by daring to call the elected leader of the Palestininas as "the enemy of the Palestinians", the PA should be very cousious in trusting the American administration and their so-called Road Map. After all, these comments are not from just an ordinary person; they are made by one of the most powerful and enfluencial elements in the United States forign policies.

The whole text of Mr. Delay's speech can be read without a delay here.

Hope of many victims fading

Under lots of pressure from the US and the British and of course Israel, the Belgian Ware Crimes law has been scaled down to a piece of garbage. It is sad, that the challeng to make it possible to try the criminals against the humanity have to start all over again. But this time, I hope no intimidation can stop it from happening.

Read This.

Worth Repeating: 1953 American/British Coup in Iran

I came across This Read and This Listen to via Eyeranian.

This was a close cooperation between the US and the British and an indication of the history of forming qualitions between them to bring democracy to the world (!), just like how they did to Iran in 1953: "Yes, they killed the Democratically Elected government of Prime Minister Dr. Mosaddeq".

CIA and British intelligent services, arranged some domonstrations in Tehran in which some people (who were on CIA payrole) would demonstrate and shout: "We love Mosaddeq and Communism" in order to damage Mosaddeq's credibility.

There is a very strong historical basis for Iranians to be anti-Amertican. Iran was once a democracy, that democracy came to an end because the United States overthrew it and in last 50 years people of Iran had to live under the influence of tirany as a result of our Coup.... . An Iranian woman wrote to me: "It brings tears to my eyes to think of what we've lost and what we could have had...." Just put yourself in the position of Iranians and ..... .

Well, this would perhaps be branded as "not true" and just a "conspiracy theory' if it was being said by someone as warning for a contemporary event. Yes, there are many reasons not to trust the US and the British.

Be prepaired, It has been cooked for a few months:

US expert promises WMD 'surprises'

Of course, we have been expecting it for long. Why did it take them so long?
Well, it is going to cost Mr. Bush his presidency (something that perhaps he still doesn't believe he has got). He has to do something about it. It is just an embaressment that might go away if the US public can be convinced there was WMD in Iraq. But at least, this time the administration better be smart enough to present somebody else's thesis to prove its claim, not the same person's that it used last time. Or, they should say: Iraq bought enriched Uranium from let's say.. hmm... Cameron, or Kenya (you pick) not Nigeria as they said last time.

It must have been well-planned for a while so it wouldn't backfire. Let's wait and see the surprise, that is really not a surprise, presented to us; oh no, not to us, I am an Iranian, who cares about what I think. Beside, I cannot vote in the US elections.