HUMAN first, then a proud IRANIAN

This blog represents the way I see some of the most significant events impacting the world and its citizens. This blog also represents how I react to the events as a member of humanity with a voice, a determined voice that insists to be heard. The voice of an Iranian who loves his country but his priority is humanity; humanity without border. I will say what I want to say, when I want to say it, and how I want to say it, but I will never lie. I will also listen; I promise.

September 30, 2004

The debate: Kerry vs Bush

Without agreeing with any of the two US presidential candidates, here is my quick observation of the debate between George Bush and John Kerry:

George Bush:

Bush started ok, he was loaded with ideas combined with right and effective gestures, the gestures that work in American politics, The gestures that move American general public's emotions. Some of the things that George Bush said were perhaps fairly effective to portray him as a firm leader who doesn't cave in to the "enemy". I am sure he was trained to act this way. Some facial gestures, he had been told, would have great impact on people. He did it fairly successfully at the beginning and for a short time after ward.

However, Bush rapidly faded. Lack of substance started surfacing very quickly. Almost, every new topic and every new question would get him back to repeat the same ideas he had said at the beginning. Except occasional cases, he really didn't have much to say. He kept repeating himself so many times. Most of what he said, was not backed by facts but by rhetoric and "good talk with no substance".

Bush repeatedly paused to find words. He tried to not show that without his papers he was empty, but it was clear that he would be disarmed without the papers. Sometimes, what he said, wasn't even relevant to what Kerry had just said, perhaps because many times when Kerry was talking, Bush wasn't listening; he was preparing for his next talk without knowing what was being said. However; many times, after Kerry had responded to the points made by Bush and it was time to move onto next question, Bush jumped in and was awarded additional 30 seconds to have the last word.

Many times, when Bush was asked the question, he tried to joke, he tried to be funny, but it was obvious that he wanted to pass that stage without being forced to repeat himself to the ridiculous level of repetition as he had no much new to say.

When asked about how he felt about 1050 US soldiers who had died in Iraq, by an example relating to the family of a dead soldier with whom he had visited, he tried to show his compassionate side. If I am not mistaking, he even tried to shed some tears at the middle of the debate to show how human he was, but his attempt was unsuccessful.

In most parts of the debate, Bush sounded like he was lecturing bunch of kids about good and evil. He practically never considered his audience as adults with brains, he just saw them as he was seeing himself in the mirror.

John Kerry:

Although there was no major weakness shown, unlike George Bush, Kerry did not start well and first he seemed to be heading for a defeat. But as the time passed, he gradually gained the control of the debate. Soon after, although Kerry maintained the consistent position, by his control on the debate kept increasing and that was due to rapid fading of George Bush, not a sudden change in Kerry's way of communication.

Unlike Bush, Kerry never personally attacked or ridiculed Bush. He never made fun of him, however, in many occasions, Kerry was harsh on Bush without trying to be funny and insulting. Unlike Bush, Kerry never expressed himself with stupid facial gestures. For most part, Kerry was classy, firm and relied on facts and not rhetorics (although that too occasionally happened).

Kerry clearly was the winner of substance. He did not rely on his notes. He talked from his mind, many (but not all) of what he said, seemed to be fairly spontaneous.

Kerry was much more relying on facts compare to Bush. He touched on domestic problems with facts. He touched on the isolation of the US in the world. He touched on the issue tax cut to the wealthy. He touched on Halliburton and the fact that Iraq contract bids were limited to companies from the countries which participated in the war. He touched on the problems with North Korea which were resulted from the changes in the policies of the US after Clinton administration. He touched on Iran and its move towards WMD. He accused Bush administration for being responsible for allowing North Korea to acquire atomic bomb in last couple of years. He kept mentioning Iraq by stating some facts as Iraq has become the center of recruitment for terrorists, because of this war. He kept attacking Bush's policies for practically pushing aside the issue of Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, and attacking Iraq where there was no real treat to the United States existed.

Kerry was clearly promoting the UN on international issues. He accused Bush for having damaged the respect the US once had in the world. The high part of what he said was when he mentioned about J.F. Kennedy who was once trying to convince general deGul of France about Cuba during the Cuban crisis, by offering to show him some related pictures, but was stopped by deGul when he said "no, no need for pictures, the words of the US president is enough for me". He then asked whether this is the opinion of many world leaders today about the president of the United States.

Moderator and questions:

I noticed one big question that was just an indication of selfishness and arrogance of those who had made up the questions for this debate and that was when the question was stated as "Do you think the loss of 1050 American lives was worth ?"

Although everybody knows that tens of times of this number are killed from Iraqi civilians, it did not seem to be a worthwhile issue to be included in the question. I hope I am wrong, but it is perhaps because the general American public doesn't care about non-Americans and the only concern is, if any, the lives of the Americans.


September 29, 2004

US's daily bombing of "terrorists"

Oh watch the pictures of the "terrorists" in Falluja who were bombed by the "brave" American "liberators".


September 28, 2004

Greed runs in the family

Looks like being greedy is nothing new in the Bush family. The greed that all have resulted in the death of thousands or even millions of people:


Whoever acts better wins! Isn't that just horrible?

The debate between President Bush and Senator John Kerry at the University of Miami on Thursday will probably be decided not by what they say, but how they project themselves through gestures, postures, syntax and tone.
In another words, whoever can act better will win. Read this New York Times article.


September 26, 2004

Real or just a planned set up?

Imagine this scenario:

Time is running out, presidential elections are nearing, the guy (the current president) is desparate to discredit many real evidences against him. He wants to create doubt in the minds of the people who have already accepted many evidences against the guy as true and real.

Mr. X comes up with some evidence (or he is set up to believe the evidence he has in his hand is genuine). At first glance the evidence seems very credible against the president who has already lost lot of his credibility due to lying to his people about his policies, his own past, and many other issues.

Using the same evidence which was supposedly meant to be to discredit the president, the president and his guys deliberately let the words spread. However, and on other hand, the president and his guys keep telling people that the accusation against the president is not true. They keep asking people to put their trust on the president. When everybody knows about it, when everybody starts seriously questioning the president's honesty, when everything is falling for the president, all of a sudden, Mr. Y comes up with some very valid reasons why the evidence against the president which first appeared to be genuine, is fake or is seriously questionable. Some people who had reluctantly doubted the president, now feel ashamed and feel they owe an apology to their president.

Who wins in this scenario? I think the president. This will sure backfire against those who do not want this president anymore. Even after this particular scenario, no other evidence (even genuine evidence) against the president will be accepted by the people.

It might seem very simplistic. It might sound like a conspiracy theory. But believe me, there are real conspiracies not just theories in the US and many other countries for that matter. In the United States framing people, setting up things to fulfill the agendas is not anything new. Any of these can really happen. Those who can lie to people, use many techniques in lying to the people. And poor people, fall into the trap AGAIN.

I just came across this which effectively says how this whole CBS reporting has been a welcome news for Bush camp.
So not only was Dan Rather (with an assist from Bill Burkett) responsible for
effectively killing the National Guard story for all time, but the resulting
debacle has now convinced CBS that they shouldn't air any negative stories about
George Bush for the next six weeks — even if they're true. That's some
courageous journalism for you.


Exposed Israeli terror; one of thousands

Watch this three-minute video clip.


September 25, 2004

How do you live with yourself Bush (and the pro-Bush)?

An infant is pulled from the wreckage after bombing of Falluja by the US planes, tanks and artillery units
Photo: Courtesy of BBC

At least eight people have been killed in US strikes on the volatile Iraqi city of Falluja, doctors say.
They said 15 other people were injured, as US planes, tanks and artillery units shelled the city which lies about 40 miles (65km) west of Baghdad.

Photo: Courtesy of Al-Jazeera

Yeah, US "does not have" intention of killing civilians when it uses planes, tanks and heavy artillery against a populated city. Damn you and Damn what you believe in George F*cking Bush! Damn you!


September 22, 2004

Please don't kill the man!

This might sound ridiculous to some. This might sound stupid to some. Some people will sure think that I am crazy. Chances are that this will not get anywhere. But I am going to do it anyway. I am hoping for something to happen and those who hold the British man hostage in Iraq, come across this appeal. I cannot go to bed tonight without doing this, without doing my part.

A short message to those who hold the British hostage in Iraq:

Check out my site. It is all sympathy with Iraqis and the sufferings imposed to them by the occupation of Iraq. I am against war, against occupation, I believe the gang in the White House are bunch of criminals. I believe Tony Blair is a criminal. I believe this war and invasion of Iraq is a crime against the international law and against humanity. I believe this must stop. I believe.... .

Having said that, the man you are holding is only one person who might not really have had anything to do with this whole situation. He might even be partially at fault for being in Iraq. BUT please, by killing him, you don't just kill one man. You will kill many more. There are people who depend on him. There are people who love him. He has children. He might even have grandchildren. They want him. They need him. Every second that is passing now, is like hell to them.

Yes, I know and I have always said that the Iraqis who suffered loss of relatives in this war felt the same. But killing this man, might not be any help to your cause. Have mercy on him and those relatives of his who want him alive. Make many of his relatives smile, by letting him go. In the name of humanity, please let him go back to his family.


September 20, 2004

I am Emrooz today!

In support of the Iranian bloggers and websites who are under attack by the anti-democratic regime of Iran, I am Emrooz today.


September 19, 2004

Hijacking Catastrophe

Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire
Don't miss this incredible documentary.
And here, about the documentary (a 15-minute clip)

"... the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." High level Nazi, Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials


September 18, 2004

Zionist-owned media, number one enemy of the truth

I heard on CBC yesterday that Reuters had complianed to the CanWest Global Communications Inc, a Zionist family owned media outlet in Canada, to stop changing the words and terminologies used in the reports, when quoting Reuters particularly on reports dealing with Palestinian/Israeli conflict as well as Iraq war.

For example, When quoting Reuters, the National Post, a paper owned by CanWest, changed the original report from "...Al-Aqsa Martyr, a Palestinian group fighting Israeli occupation..." to "Al-Aqsa Martyr, A terrorist Palestinian group engaged in a 4-year old campaign of terror and Violence against Israel...". Also, regarding Iraq, it changed a report from "The Iraqi insurgents in Falluja...." to "The Iraqi terrorists in Falluja....".

Apparenlty this is not new from CanWest Global (which also owns Global TV and 11 major newspapers across Canada) as they have tampered with the original reports of the Associated Press as well.

Although it is based in Canada, there is no doubt that CanWest is not a real Canadian entity, but it is a sure fact that this corporation exists in Canada to protect the interests of Israel even if the cost is to sacrify the truth. CanWest is a clear example of how easily media can present reports that do not match the reality. After all, if they can tamper with the quotes they provide from other people/entities, imagine how capable they are in lying to the people on their own editorials, interpretations of the events, or even reports. The good news is that they are sinking in Canada, as for example, the readership of the National Post has been in steady sinking ever since it started publishing 6-7 years ago.

Toronto Star also has a report about this issue.

Here is the exact report on the website of CBC Ottawa.


September 16, 2004

We have 9/11’s on a monthly basis

We have 9/11's on a monthly basis. Each and every Iraqi person who dies with a bullet, a missile, a grenade, under torture, accidentally- they all have families and friends and people who care. The number of Iraqis dead since March 2003 is by now at least eight times the number of people who died in the World Trade Center. They had their last words, and their last thoughts as their worlds came down around them, too. I've attended more wakes and funerals this last year, than I've attended my whole life. The process of mourning and the hollow words of comfort have become much too familiar and automatic....

...9/11/01? New York? World Trade Center?


9/11/04. Falloojeh. An Iraqi home.

From Baghdad Burning.


September 14, 2004

People keep dying, "world leaders" keep talking!

10,000 people are dying every month in Darfur, Sudan and the world so-called leaders are debating whether it is genocide or whose fault it is. Enough bullshit, enough talk, what is being done to stop this from happening? Rwanda wasn't enough to shame us all? Or may be because the death rate is still much lower than Rwanda so we can still wait; after all "only" an average of 330 people are killed or are starving to death everyday in Darfur, while in Rwanda the average killed was 8000 a day.

...and we live in the 21st century?


September 12, 2004

They are as much Iranian as I am!

"Any kilometer you are coming into you think that you are going 10 years backward. I could not even imagine," said Jawad, who has spent 22 of his 23 years in the Iranian capital.
It is heart-breaking to see Jawad and many other Afghan refugees, some of whom have spent most of their lives in Iran, forced out of the country. During so many decades living in Iran, these Afghan refugees have become part of the family. They are part of the nation. They are our friends. They are our brothers and sisters. They are us.

During the time they spent in Iran, they did the harshest works that many Iranians refused to do. They are mostly hardworking individuals who have done more than their part in building anything that has been built in the country. They must have the right to obtain Iranian citizenship if they choose so. It is disappointing to see them go. It is incredibly racist and unjustified forcing them out of Iran; their home.


Is Sharon afraid of becoming another Yitzhak Rabin?

The Palestinian Authority has been always accused of having no desire or no control over Hamas and other Islamic hardline groups. This is even with the fact that the PA's hands are tight on many areas by the conditions imposed to them by the Israeli policies.

Now, it is time to see even a hardliner Prime Minister such as Sharon is suffering from lack of complete control on the ultra-hardline and powerful Jewish extremist groups. They are urging the Israeli soldiers to disobey the authorities as Sharon tries to implement his Gaza pull out plans. They are speaking of "civil war" if Sharon does not back off from his plans.

Many of these Jewish extremists are openly advocating murder of Palestinian civilians. A newly formed party is urging expolsion of millions of Muslims and Christians from the occupied Palestinian territories. I have no doubt that the current Israeli government is dedicated to the continuation of its criminal policies and actions against the Palestinians; however, when considering other powerful Jewish terrorist groups, this government looks quite "moderate". The question is how far this disagreement (yeah just the disagreement on how to continue abuse and murder of Palestinians) between them will last and whether this "disagreement can lead to the repeat of what happened to Yitzhak Rabin.


September 11, 2004

September 11 2001 wasn't the only horrible September 11

The following are some posts that originally appeared on my blog on or around September 11 of 2003.

To some, September 11 is not always September 11
September 11 came and passed. We continued hearing about the truly inhumane action against 3000 people. Everywhere the talk was about it; Moments of silence here and there, half raised flags. We heard and heard and heard. Yes, it was significant enough an event that no matter how much it is talked about, it is not enough. I heard on CBC radio the shivery voice of a father who was talking about his fire fighter son who was killed in New York two years ago. He was talking about his son with such a sorrow in his voice that could easily move the listener. "He was a wonderful young man": he said about his son. and after a few moments of silence, his voice was even more shivery: " I....I....I am not going to see him....again" he continued. and then you could easily picture his wet and teary face with shivery cheeks and lips. It was sad, truly sad. This can also be said about those children who lost thier fathers or mothers that day and about many more people who are still truly devastated from thier loss.

Chilian "Towers"

Courtesy Le Monde, with thanks to Rezwan

But, why are we not human enough to feel that other fathers and mothers, other children, other wives feel no less devastated than this father? Why do we let the media bring tears on our eyes only for those they want us to cry for? Why do we subject ourselves and our emotions to whatever the media wants to do with them. How many times in last 30 years have we heard about more than 3000, that is right 3000 victims, of the US-backed Chilian Coup d'etat in 1973? That's right, September 11, 1973. How many times have we droped some tears for those victims many of whom died (not a quick death but) by some slow deaths under turture of General Pinochet's forces. How many times have we heard about the role Dr. Kissinger played in that crime against the humanity?

Daily repeated September 11's around the world
Just a wish:
I hope there will soon be an end to the events similar to the September 11 attack, wars and Invasion of other countries, killing of innocent civilians either by F16 jets or by suicide bombing or by starvation. Human deserves better than this, much better.This is just a wish, but hey, if there is no hope, there will be no meaningful life either. So let me have my fantacy for now; it won't hurt.


September 10, 2004

More "willings" are becoming "unwilling" now!

The qualition of the "willings" for invasion of Iraq that included an "impressive" wide range of 20 to 30 thousands-population island countries, is increasingly becoming "unwilling".

SAN JOSE, costa rica—Costa Rica asked the United States to remove it from a list of Iraq coalition partners yesterday after the Constitutional Court ruled inclusion on the list violated the country's pacifist principles.
Foreign Minister Roberto Tovar said a diplomatic note was delivered to the American embassy in San Jose. "The court has ordered me to get the country's name off that list, and that's what I'm doing," he said.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the United States would be willing to remove Costa Rica, though a White House website still had the country listed last night.
"Every country has to make their own decision about how they want to participate, and in what ways," he said. "And if that's what they want, then I'm sure we will do that.''
The court ruling, announced late Wednesday, was cheered by a country that widely rejected the U.S.-led war in Iraq... .

Read the rest of this latest "popularity" of the US foreign policies here.


September 09, 2004

Israeli rabbis: Don't spare civilians

A group of prominent Jewish rabbis have asked the Israeli army not to flinch from killing Palestinian civilians in the context of the ongoing military campaign against armed groups resisting the occupation....
...The rabbis quoted a Talmudic edict, or religious ruling, stating that "our lives come first".
"The Christian preaching of 'turning the other cheek' doesn't concern us, and we will not be impressed by those who prefer the lives of our enemies to our lives," they said... .

Yeah, that's what they are saying.

And perhaps this one is one of the approved children killings by these "spiritual" leaders.


September 08, 2004

Isreali peace activists demolish W Bank outpost

Well, the Israeli government doesn't (dare to) do it, so glad to some concerned Israeli activists do it.
Israeli anti-settlement activists have dismantled an unauthorised West Bank outpost to protest at what they say is government inaction.
A Peace Now spokesman said a crane was used to take containers from an outpost near the Palestinian town of Ramallah.
Under the roadmap peace plan Israel is meant to dismantle about 50 "wildcat" settlements set up since March 2001.
The activists later took one of the containers to Tel Aviv where they left it outside the Defence Ministry.
"We wanted to demonstrate to the Israeli public it is possible to dismantle outposts," Peace Now activist Dror Etkes said.
"We decided that removing the outposts starts now," said activist Uriah Shlomot.
"We decided not to wait for [Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon or [Defence Minister] Shaul Mofaz." "Each moment that a trailer or a caravan exists in an illegal outpost, it is a crime against the future of the country."
Most of the outposts so far removed by Israel's security forces have beenuninhabited, and have almost all been systematically rebuilt within days... .
Looks like many Israelis are sick and tired of the settlers as well. Read the rest here.


September 06, 2004

Forever living memories of the best children of Iran who were downed by the regime and its backers

Payam lives alone and never talks about the past.
The 46-year-old Iranian with gentle brown eyes and a quiet smile is haunted by the smell of fear and death.
Now working as an engineer in England, he walks with special soles in his shoes because his feet have been damaged by torture.
For 16 years, he has carried unspeakable memories with him. And Payam is not his real name as he asked for an alias because he believes his life could still be in danger.
In the summer of 1988, most of his school friends, as well as thousands of other men, women and children and possibly as many as 30,000 political prisoners were secretly slaughtered in prisons across Iran.
Places like the large prayer hall in the dreaded Evin prison were turned into gallows.
Children as young as 13 were hanged six at a time.
Prisoners were loaded on forklift trucks in groups and hanged from cranes and beams in half-hourly intervals. Others were killed by firing squads... .
Read the rest here.

The Islamic regime could have been overthrown by the people of Iran in first few years after the revolution. One of the main reasons for this not to happen was the war Saddam Hussein started with Iran. The war was in fact a welcome news for the regime as it saw it as the best opportunity to consolidate its power, to crack down on the bold and democratic demands of the people. Regime crack down was in the name of "war time security measures" and they used it to the full extend. It is true that what Saddam did hurt Iranians in this way, but he was not alone in what he did. He had his backers; most western countries such as England, France, Germany and the most influential one; the Uniterd States, as well as the Soviet Union and China were behind Saddam's Iraq. Saddam also had the full support of the regional arab countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

The war and those who created the conditions for the war in fact helped the regime to become what it is now. In fact, people of Iran had so many internal and external enemies from the regime of Iran to its foreign direct and indirect helpers. They are all guilty of acting against the people of Iran and its best children who were executed by the regime or killed during the 8-year Iraq/Iran war. They are all guilty on every single hardship that is happening on the people of Iran today. They are all guilty.


Israeli press expose Jewish 'terrorists'

Israeli press expose Jewish 'terrorists'
Israeli media have exposed a para-military Jewish group that has been terrorising Palestinian civilians in the West Bank with full knowledge and tacit approval of the Israeli army.
State-run Israeli radio, Reshet Bet, announced on Sunday that members of the group, known as the "Hebrew Brigade," are armed with automatic rifles and equipped with jeeps and vicious attack dogs....
Well, it's not my claim. It's their own.


September 04, 2004

How stupid exactly is this actor, oops, governor?

Austrian historians are ridiculing Arnold Schwarzenegger for telling the Republican convention in New York that he saw Soviet tanks in his homeland as a child and left a "socialist" country when he moved away in 1968.
Recalling that the Red Army once occupied part of Austria after the second world war, the California governor told delegates on Tuesday: "I saw tanks in the streets. I saw communism with my own eyes."
One historian, Stefan Karner, told the Vienna newspaper Kurier: "He could not have seen a Soviet tank in Styria."
Mr Schwarzenegger, admired by many Austrians for rising from a penniless immigrant to become a Hollywood star and now the governor of the most populous US state, was born in Styria in 1947. But the Russians left the province in 1945, said Mr Karner.
In his convention address, Mr Schwarzenegger also said: "As a kid, I saw the socialist country that Austria became after the Soviets left." But Martin Polaschek, a law history scholar and vice-rector of Graz University, told Kurier that, between 1945 and 1970, all Austria's chancellors were conservatives - not socialists.
Read the rest here.
I am not surprised that he could say so many stupid things contrary to the undisputable facts of the recent history. It just shows how idiot he is. But even more idiot than him are those at the convention who were listening to him and applauding him for his own-made "facts".


Bu$hCo's constant modification of words

Here are some facts of what was said by Bush and how they were modified when needed and...sadly, still half of Americans fall for it.


September 03, 2004

More "Bin Ladins" right at home

US worrying about Osama Bin Ladin? There are more aggressive, more dangerous "Bin Ladins" right in the US who are significantly influencing the US policies. And well, they have their high level guardians protecting them too.

The recent article from Los Angeles Times is filled with unnamed government officials attacking alleged espionage operations which Israel is supposedly running in the United States and against American officials and delegations traveling in Israel. "There is a huge, aggressive, ongoing set of Israeli activities directed against the United States," the L.A. Times quoted a recently retired former intelligence official as saying. "Anybody who worked in counterintelligence in a professional capacity will tell you the Israelis are among the most aggressive and active countries targeting the United States." Read the rest here.
Well, may be it's time Americans started looking at the matters closer; way closer, to home. May be they should start asking why their "friends" act the way they do and why their guardians within the US administration protect those who are acting against the "national interests" of the US. After all, wasn't it one of the excuses to for the invasion of Iraq?

May be it's time they started searching for more dangerous faces of "Bin Ladins".


September 01, 2004

Bush speaks his mind, that explains why whatever he says turns out stupid

In her speech at the Republican convention in New York, US's so-called first lady, Laura Bush, praised her husband and said: "George will truly tell you what he really thinks about". As soon as I heard that, I thought to myself: I can't disagree with her. She is right. After all, whatever Bush says turns out to be either so stupid or so dangerous. No surprise there; that's how he thinks.

Top iran blogs award

HUMAN first, then a proud IRANIAN

Top iran blogs