Thursday, August 17, 2006

Hoder's Hypothesis

I have only come face to face with Hossein Derakhshan (Hoder) twice. As he prefers to call himself Hoder and that is what he is better known by, I too will refer to him as Hoder for the rest of this article. Its also less to type.

First occasion was a press conference at the Foreign Press Association (FPA) in London, shortly after Ahmadi-Nejad became the president. I was on the panel along with Amir Taheri, journalist and commentator, and Babak Emamian, who was picked to represent the reaction of Iranian businessmen and entrepreneurs to Ahmadi-Nejad's presidency. Don't ask me why Emamian was picked to represent Iranian businessmen and entrepreneurs. I didn't know a Zurich Life insurance salesman qualifies one as an entrepreneur!

Hoder, who had campaigned for the reformist candidate, Mostafa Moin and had just returned from Iran, was also supposed to be on the panel, but he arrived late and sat amongst the small audience during some of the questions.

Amir Taheri spoke about his new terminology for the new kids on the block in Iran, referring to them as the new Mamluks, saying the militarists had taken over from the clergy in Iran. Not an analysis that I found very appealing.

Emamian, paraphrased some of the stuff he had obviously picked up from some of the sales guru conferences he had attended which had nothing to do with our subject of presidential elections in Iran. "Some people look at this glass as half empty but I look at it as half full", "money is good, because it buys us freedom, if we don't like Manchester, money gives us the chance to live in Paris" and all that salesmaship conference mumbo jumbo. Most importantly, Emamian said he had voted for Ahmadi-Nejad because Ahmadi-Nejad's message to the poor had appealed to him, but if Ahmadi-Nejad turned Iran into a North Korea, he would be knocking on his door :)) - with that statement, Emamian gestured a knocking on the door motion. He then went on to say that Iran's problem is not the mullahs but that we do not have enough entrepreneurs!

Restraining myself extremely hard from chinning this revolting character there and then in front of the audience and instead sufficing to snapping the pencil I was holding in my hand, I interrupted him and said, "we have more than enough good entrepreneurs and successful businessmen and innovators, our problem is that we have too many sycophants like you, who always want to go to bed with whoever is in power no matter what". Emamian not knowing what sycophant meant, and whether it was a good thing or bad thing, stuttered at my interruption.

I talked about how it was so obvious that this was not a free election to start with. A selected few were hand picked and filtered through the Guardian Council to stand as candidates, and no real opposition was given any platform to reach the people but even then within such restricted process, there was massive fraud and voter manipulation. I quoted Islamic Republic's own statesmen who had made these claims and quoted Iran's ministry of interior's own figures which claimed in several districts more than 100% of the eligible voters had voted.

Afterwards we were all invited for lunch. I had a brief chat with Hoder as we were coming downstairs. Hoder claimed that the Iranian election was free. I compared it with the elections in South Africa during Apartheid and said even that was freer than what happened in Iran, because at least the minority there who were allowed to vote had a real choice. He didn't reply and we sat down for lunch.

Emamian took over my attention again. He tried to show off his wealth to me, saying he was worth £3 Million Pounds, in a way which could only remind me of one of British Comedian, Harry Enfield's characters. The one who goes round dressed in a blazer telling people "Excuse me, but it strikes me that I am considerably richer than you". Emamian was even more vulgar than that character, as he was for real :) Anyway, I ridiculed Emamian so much, that he started crying and left the table. Both Taheri and Hoder admonished me for having upset him and making him cry. To hell with that vulgar sycophant, I told them.

Only after Emamian left crying, I managed to get a chance to talk to Hoder properly. He reminded me of the old generation Iranian "intellectuals", the Ali Shariati types. Kids who were brought up in rich Iranian traditional Bazaari religious families, who for the most part of their lives were denied a window to culture and reading, then suddenly at some stage they got an opportunity to read a couple of books and then it wasn't long before they considered themselves an intellectual of the highest levels.

After lunch the three of us walked towards the tube station. I asked Hoder what he did for a living? He said he didn't have a job and was trying to get some funding for a few projects. He exchanged cards with Taheri, saying he had a few project proposals he wanted to discuss with him. Taheri happily gave him his card. I shook hands with Hoder on departing and asked him if he was going my way. Hoder said he was going to Open Democracy offices in Farringdon, where he was fishing for another project proposal. I wondered to myself then, if he didn't have a job, how the hell did he afford to travel so much.

Second time and last time I saw Hoder was at Simin Behbahani's poetry recital in London. I be honest, I am not much of a poetry fan, I am more of a practical man, interested in practical things and rival poetry circles are not my cup of tea. I have a handful of Iranian poets which I really like and admire, the great Ferdowsi of course, Siavash Kasraii, Ferydoon Moshiri and Simin Behbahani. Simin, I admire for her enormous courage too. She is not just the greatest contemporary poetess of Iran, but she is also a courageous woman who despite her advanced years has remained youthful in spirit and has never bowed her head to the clerics in Iran.

Hoder was sitting right in front of me at Simin Behbahani's poetry evening. I am not sure if he saw me but he certainly did not acknowledge me or perhaps didn't remember me, he was too busy smooching, caressing and fondling the girl he was with. There I was trying to listen to Simin Behbahani's poetry and Hoder was busy sticking his tongue in his girlfriend's ear. I think everything has its time and place and thought Hoder was being very disrespectful, even more so when he and his girlfriend left half way through the program. After all, Hoder had campaigned for Mostafa Moin for presidency in Iran. Moin had adopted one of Simin Behbahani's poems - "I will rebuild you again my country" - as his campaign anthem, I don't know if they had her approval, but in any case I thought he could show some respect towards Simin Behabhani; for that reason at least.

So that was my only face to face encounters with Mr. Hoder. Of course I knew him as someone who started blogging amongst Iranians, and I have browsed his blog a few times, but I never found anything with much substance in his writings to browse it on a regular basis. It was only recently when a comment on my last post made me aware of this article he had written, mentioning my name: http://hoder.com/weblog/archives/015453.shtml

Intrigued as to what he could have said or known about me, I read his article and the "hypothesis" that he had concocted. So I feel obliged to separate the facts from the myths, although I think anyone with a half decent intellect would simply laugh at the conclusion of this child of a Nouveau rich Iranian reliogious family and his "hypothesis".

When Ganji came to London, he was surrounded by the likes of Behnood. Another professional sycophant and a perpetual liar by nature. Behnood is another Emamian type character who tried his best to be close to the imperial court when the going was good and when fortunes turned, he tried his best to get close to the clerics. As someone who campaigned against the boycott of the presidential elections in Iran, I believe Behnood must be one of Hoder's mentors too. By the way Hoder thinks Ahmadi-Nejad won the presidential "elections" because the likes of me boycotted the process :)))

In any case, Ganji was surrounded by such people. He was invited to Al-Mahdi restaurant in Hammersmith. A friend of mine who has Left-wing views, but is a fair and genuine person, was also in their party. Ganji spoke strongly against monarchy and said he would not co-operate with anyone who supported the invasion of Iran, such as Reza Pahlavi. My friend asked Ganji, how he had come to the conclusion that Reza Pahlavi supported a military attack on Iran? In all Reza Pahlavi's statements and interviews, he had spoken firmly and unequivocally against any military attack against Iran, and Reza Pahlavi only ever solicited moral support for the pro-democracy movement in Iran as the best alternative for both Iran and the West.

Ganji, apparently was shocked and didn't know all this. Although, I am not surprised, if he was surrounded by the likes of Behnood. Even so, Ganji refused to recognise monarchy as an alternative for Iran, saying any hereditary regime is not acceptable. Well everyone is entitled to their views and people have different tastes.

After Ganji was in London for one week, his call for a hunger strike was becoming a complete shamble. Behnood and his circle had still not managed to decide on a place for this action. Behnood told everyone that he had booked a church in Trafalgar square and would get confirmation after the weekend. We all waited over the weekend. Still unable to announce where the hunger strike in support of Iran's political prisoners would be, we were unable to let others know about it. On Monday, we learned that the lady in charge of the church hall, Behnood was promising, was only able to hire out the hall for two hours! What kind of a hunger strike would it have been if it was for two hours only?!
The reason Jeremy Taylor of the Independent got the place of the hunger strike wrong in his article was precisely because Behnood had told him the wrong location. I have the email from Taylor which confirms this.

After the ceremony for the Iranian victim of the 7/7 bombing which Ganji also attended, we approached Ganji and said we wished to help him in his hunger strike. I gave him a lift in my car and we went to one my friends. There we told him that the people who had surrounded him were making a complete mess of the situation. Ganji said, well forget them, you yourselves go and sort it out. With that said, we took a group photo and set out to get the police permission for the hunger strike outside BBC Bush House where the Persian service is broadcast from. Behnood and his cronies at the BBC Persian were livid and angry with the arrangements. Yet when the hunger strike started, the BBC Persian staff kept interviewing Behnood and not the actual hunger strikers! Behnood also implied in one of his BBC interviews that those taking part in the hunger strike were his supporters!

The truth was the 15-20 people who took part in the hunger strike, came from across the polictal spectrum. Left, right, republican and monarchists, pro-referendum appeal and anti or even not aware of it. They were not there to argue with each other, they wanted to publicise the plight of Iranian political prisoners and act in solidarity with them. What does Hoder find wrong with that?
There were no pictures or placards of any political leaders, only that of Iranian political prisoners. What does Hoder find wrong with that?

And yes Reza Pahlavi did ring and spoke to those who were taking part. He was happy that Iranians were united in action for a good cause. Everyone there at the time Reza Pahlavi phoned, even those who were anti-monarchist, thought it was very thoughtful of him to show his support. What does Hoder find wrong with that?

The telephone conversations with Reza Pahlavi went on for an hour. People had an opportunity to talk to Reza Pahlavi, discuss their views and have a dialogue with him. What does Hoder find wrong with that?

To answer Hoder's silly hypothesiss, those who organised the hunger strike in London, were from all walks of life and political persuasions or had no set political views but wanted to see an Iran without political prisoners. There were students of Ramin Jahanbegloo and friends of Mossavi Khoeini, and yes even Iranian bus drivers that drove past, hooted and expressed support. So why does Hoder find all this so wrong?
See the best article, in my view, on the hunger strike by Michael Petrou : http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/world/article.jsp?content=20060731_131076_131076
which describes who was there.

Hoder's hypothesis gave me an opportunity to read more of his weblog. My hypothesis is that Hoder has a very low regard for Iran's prisoners of conscience. Read the offensive article he has written on Akbar Mohammadi.
He compares Akbar Mohammadi, a young student who took part in the student uprising of July 99, was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment, and was recently killed in the Islamic Republic prisons with the terror suspects in Guantanamo! Shame on you Hoder!

As for my part in the Iran Undercover documentary shown on Channel 4, I was not a "producer". Film producing is not my profession. The documentary makers wanted to make a program about the student movement in Iran, the course of this program changed after Zahra Kazemi, the photographer was beaten to death in Islamic Republic prisons. It took nearly 10 months to make the film, throughout the making of the documentary, I voluntarily informed the program makers of the latest news and events about Iran and also translated some of the material.
I did not agree with all that was shown, especially the interview with the Iranian intelligence defector which I had no part in, but I had no part in decision making in what was to be shown or not to be shown. During the 10 months of the making of the documentary, I developed good friendships with Jane Kokan and the other members of the team as well as with Fakhravar. I do not choose my friends based on their political views but I stick by my friends through thick and thin. Friendship is not a word I use lightly. Fakhravar, I found the most courageous of the people, the documentary makers, had contacted. In the time I have known Fakhravar since, he has not changed his path or what he says even an iota. It does not mean I agree with everything he says or does, that is not a condition for my friendship, but I admire people who are resolute and don't change course with the wind, Mr. Hoder.

So based on what I recently read from Hoder's weblog after his article, here is my hypothesis.
Reading Hoder's bio in his own words, he got his Iranian national diploma with appalling grades, struggled with his university course too and soon dropped out. Like many children of the rich religious Iranian families, he was sent to live in Canada. As I have never known him to have a proper regular job, his parents must continue to fund him in his mid-thirties. Economically he enjoys the business privilegess his family have. He feels threatened by Ahmadi-Nejad, his ideal situation is a Khatami type government where his family would continue to prosper financially and fund him and also for him to be able to go back and forward to Iran but not actually live in Iran.
Some people tell me that the Supreme Leader performed his first wedding ceremony but I do not listen to hear say and that sort of thing is not important to me, I am a fair person, credit must be given to Hoder for starting the blog amongst Iranians, other than that, judging by his hypothesis and the stuff he writes, he is a person of average intellect with views that are not genuine but have a selfish agenda attached to them.

18 comments:

Amir said...

Very impressive response Potkin jaan. Carry on. Merci.

Anonymous said...

Good post. Hoder used to write about video game, but now he feels that he has views about somewhat more important matters in life! shame his ideas are too attached to his own background.

Anonymous said...

presumably if Behnood had (mis)-organised the hungerstrike, Hoder would have been praising it! But because Reza Pahlavi called, suddenly it was bad!

Pasha said...

Dear Potkin,

thanks a lot to you because of writing such an interesting article about Mr. Hoder and also Mr. Biba (Emamian). I didn’t know, that Mr. Biba had voted for Ahmadinejad. Shame on you Mr. Biba! You are a real awful sycophant. How much money do you need to live? Is it so much that you can’t just be a noble man- I mean ba-sharaf-?
Much more interesting than reporting about Mr. Biba The Sycophant was revealing the background and the way of thinking of Mr. Hoder. (By the way I prefer for him the name: Herr Hode, a German name meaning Mr. Testicle.)

Dear Potkin,
I can only quote part of your article, that characterises him better than other words:
-He reminded me of the old generation Iranian "intellectuals", the Ali Shariati types. Kids who were brought up in rich Iranian traditional Bazaari religious families, who for the most part of their lives were denied a window to culture and reading, then suddenly at some stage they got an opportunity to read a couple of books and then it wasn't long before they considered themselves an intellectual of the highest levels.-

And his comparison of Akbar Mohammadi with the terror suspects in Guantanamo is a frontier crossing that fits in his way of thinking and his background. Shame on you Herr Hode!

Dear Potkin,
you are on the right way, continue it.

ba dorudhaye garm
Pasha

Anonymous said...

Dear Potkin,

thanks a lot to you because of writing such an interesting article about Mr. Hoder and also Mr. Biba (Emamian). I didn’t know, that Mr. Biba had voted for Ahmadinejad. Shame on you Mr. Biba. You are a real awful sycophant. How much money do you need to live? Is it so much that you can’t just be a noble man- I mean ba-sharaf-?
Much more interesting than reporting about Mr. Biba The Sycophant was revealing the background and the way of thinking of Mr. Hoder. (By the way I prefer for him the name: Herr Hode, a German name meaning Mr. Testicle.)

Dear Potkin,
I can only quote part of your article, that characterises him better than other words:
He reminded me of the old generation Iranian "intellectuals", the Ali Shariati types. Kids who were brought up in rich Iranian traditional Bazaari religious families, who for the most part of their lives were denied a window to culture and reading, then suddenly at some stage they got an opportunity to read a couple of books and then it wasn't long before they considered themselves an intellectual of the highest levels.

And his comparison of Akbar Mohammadi with the terror suspects in Guantanamo is a frontier crossing that fits in his way of thinking and his background. Shame on you Herr Hode.

Dear Potkin,
you are on the right way, continue it.

ba dorudhaye garm
Pasha

Aryamehr said...

Hoder tries to misinform the media and shamelessly dishonors the memories of our fallen heroes (recently Akbar Mohammadi!). Thanks for writing up this excellent post Potkin-jaan.

Winston said...

Well, people like hoder are afraid their source of money goes away if their beloved regime is gone through a popular uprising and that;s why they try so hard to keep this bloodthirsty regime in order.

Any ways, Thanks for the great reply to this charlatan and his cronies.

C.H. said...

Good post.

I admire your activism.

Hoder is a phoney, immature little worm.
Hopefully his antics have revealed the truth to the naive and have cost him connections and future project proposals.

Winston said...

Hoder is gonna be on VOA and we must stop it

WRITE A MESSAGE TO VOA HERE

and tell them not to put him on VOA roundtable show plz

Cyrus F. said...

This is a good post. Thank you for taking the time to relate these stories.

I just wanted to add that entrepreneurship is not a bad thing. It sounded to me you were putting it down generally. The thing is though, that for it to have any positive effect it has to be happening in a free society or in a society that is moving that way. Otherwise it could be manipulated just as many other things in the hands of despots like Ahmadinejad and the rest of the Islmaic republic.

Azarmehr said...

Cyrus,

I don't know why you got the impression that I think entrepreneurship is bad. I am all for it. Just didn't think that Emamian was an entrepreneur and represented them. Selling insurance and arranging mortgages is not being an entrepreneur in my view.

Aryamehr said...

Potkin-jaan have a look at these comments by "Hoder":

"Got a chance when I was in Egypt last week and visited the Shah's tomb. It was so sad to see him buried outside his country, no matter who he was and what he had done. Maybe he would not have ended up being buried in Egypt, had he not escaped Iran."


Pay attention to the last sentence:

"Maybe he would not have ended up being buried in Egypt, had he not escaped Iran."

Is he playing a dumb idiot or is he really one? If the late Shah had stayed in Iran, Hossein Derakhshan's reformist buddies would have lynched him and carried his burnt body like animals that they are throughout the streets of Tehran!

As if that's not enough read this:

"The news about Akbar Mohammadi's sudden death in prison is saddening and shocking. But instead of giving Bush -- who deals with his opponents in Guantanamo -- another excuse to pressure Iran on human rights, we should help Shahroodi, the head of the Judiciary and the only remaining reformer in Iran, isolate those influential radicals who by principle have no belief in the human rights whatsoever."

So now Akbar Mohammadi is no longer a "Gunatanamo Bay terrorist" as Hoder found so fitting to compare him as before but now it's "saddening and shocking"! Oh, and it doesn't stop there we should all support the last remaining "reformer" in Iran, Ayatollah Shahroudi the (Iraqi) head of the Judiciary in the Islamic Republic! A known killer who would be facing charges of crimes against humanity in a free Iran!

I'm out of words.

Aryamehr said...

Please see my email to Mr Baharloo regarding "Hoder's" coming appearance on his show:


***********************



Dear Mr Baharloo,

Having received news that Hossein Derakhshan aka "Hoder" will be participating in your programme obliges me to inform you of some information regarding this individual. I am not for "silencing" people but I do believe that you as a respectable journalist should have all the information and background on the people that you decide to invite to your highly respected and watched programme. If I may, I would like to ask of you to read this account on "Hoder" by Potkin Azarmehr (another blogger) which won't take much of your time but which will add to your knowledge about whom you've decided to hold a dialouge with on your programme:

http://azarmehr.blogspot.com/2006/08/hoders-hypothesis.html

Amongst the many "negative" issues raised in this entry about the individual you are about to host on your programme, what is important to note is his recent shameless comments comparing our lost freedom fighter, Akbar Mohammadi, to Guantanamo Bay terrorists!

Mr Baharloo, I ask of you to know who you are talking to and to raise these issues for "Hoder" to address. Personally I do not see him as anything more than what Mr Azarmehr put as:

"He reminded me of the old generation Iranian "intellectuals", the Ali Shariati types. Kids who were brought up in rich Iranian traditional Bazaari religious families, who for the most part of their lives were denied a window to culture and reading, then suddenly at some stage they got an opportunity to read a couple of books and then it wasn't long before they considered themselves an intellectual of the highest levels."

Mr Baharloo, I have a great deal of respect for you and your programme and I hope that you do not let those who dishonor the memories of noble men like Akbar Mohammadi, whose life was taken away by the Islamic Republic a few weeks ago, off the hook that easily.

The "west" divides the Islamic Republic into two camps "reformist" and "conservatives", but I hope that we as Iranians have come to realize (after 27 years) that this is but a show masterfully performed by the Islamic Republic to keep Iranians busy believing this system can change - which it cannot. These two factions work hand in hand behind the scenes in consolidating the power of the Islamic Republic and as we know "Hoder" is a tool of the so-called "reformist" faction of the Islamic Republic.

Mr Baharloo, Hossein Derakhsan considers Ayatollah Shahroudi, the (Iraqi) head of the Islamic Republic judiciary and an infamous killer as "the only remaining reformer in Iran". That is a direct quote by "Hoder" which you can find on his english weblog: http://hoder.com/weblog/

Mr Baharloo, forgive me for taking your time but I felt that it was necessary for me to write this email to you. It is important to note that I am not alone in my views regarding Hossein Derakshan and his activities.

In conclusion I would like to wish you all the best, and in hope that one day (very soon) you can return and serve your country in the way that you do so very well.

Respectfully yours,

Kia

My Blog: http://aryamehr11.blogspot.com/

Eric Jette said...

In response to "hoder"'s latest:


http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/hossein_derakhshan/2006/08/nuclear_iran_needed_for_defens.htm

Dorood "Hoder",

Please allow this American Bhuddist "infidel" who's granddad helped build the very first atomic bomb clue you in to why the premis of several aspects of your thinking two years ago is still valid, and why various premis behind statements made in the above article are badly in need of reexamination, from a logical and non-emotional mindset.

1. The environmental aspects of nuclear energy:

Traffic patterns have no bering on the geographical probability of a major earthquake occuring in Iran. Lack of transparent environmental and geological study including public imput on these issues alone should give any rational Iranian pause for thought as to the logical environmental concequences of the future start-up of Bushir (or any other proposed facility) may ultimately become manifest in the region. And this is not simply an Iranian issue, many Gulf nations have expressed exactly this concern, officially.

I just list one environmental aspect here, as my time is limited, but there are many others that need to be factored in.

2. "Political" considerations as you call them, boil down to a question of regime intent, both in regards towards nations in the region, and the international community. As well as its intent towards the people of Iran.
Intent can be redily assesesed in word and deed of the regime itself over a long period of time, and over multiple presidencies, of which the latest selected is on record of stated intent to wipe nations off the map, including the USA.
You talk of the situation in Iraq, but not of the regime's intent to destabilize a soverign government that exists there today, which with more than enough evidence shows the non-peaceful intent of the regime toward its neigbors, via proxi groups it supports with arms and propaganda. (I'll be kind to you here and simply make the initial assesment that you are also a victim of "spin").

If anything, the abysmal human rights practices of the regime are worse that they've ever been in the entire 27 year history of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
By way of proof from their own lips, the regime just recently stated that they will kill each and every political prisoner now in custody, should the UN Sec. Council impose sanctions over the nuclear issue.

Again, I don't have time to write a hundred pages covering all the human rights aspects that remain valid premis to your original thinking, but I would point out that the people of Iran have no say in nuclear matters at present, and that is in itself a violation of their civil liberties, being slaves to the intent of the regime.

A regime which by the way, has over the last two years, recruited by public advertizment in a regime-run publication, some 52,000 Martyrs willing to blow themselves up in suicide opperations against US and allied government's interests in the region, including Iraq and other Gulf nations.
A regime who's selected president has gone on record as saying that Martyrdom is the highest order of individual achievment, and who's Iranian Hizbollai supporters of the 12th imman have declared EVERY Iranian to be potential martyrs of the revolution.

3. Nuclear weapons assesment:

I'm probably among a dozen or so people in the world still living who has held a piece of "trinitite" in my hands. This is the fused sand from the first atomic explosion, bubbled green glass, encased in leaded crystal, given to the department heads and leading scientists at Los Alamos at the end of WW2, including my granddad. The rest has been bulldozed underground at the Trinity test site in White Sands. It is the most concrete example I can show any one of the risk of nuclear war, or the results of it.
Any leader holding this potential future in hand will have something to remember, and think about.

It took America just about 27 months, from 1942-45 to build an industry from scratch, based on designs from scratch, building a city from scratch to build a bomb from scratch, with only theories to go on, in the middle of the largest and most costly war in history. Yet we did this and ended that war that had cost 50 million lives up to that point with the weapon that no one knew would even work at the time it was being produced.

Everyone who worked on the first bomb, being as uncivilized a weapon as it is, believed it would cause mankind to forever choose peace instead of war after it ended WW2. Unfortunately, that direction was not taken, at the expense of the environment, and to the continued threat to all life on this planet.

I stress here the biggest "what if?" is what we might have accomplished as the Human species had we chosen to live in peace, instead of fear after WW2.

Anyone who has witnessed the birth of one's child can tell you that yes indeed you create your own reality, the question is what do we wish to create for ourselves as reality on this planet, now and for our children's, and their children's future? Not just in this country, but the world as a whole, as an international vision.
Inherently, change is viewed with suspicion, as a threat to culture and ways of tradition and ethical belief systems. As it applies to developing countries in this nuclear age, the post-cold war aftermath presents a vast paradox that present no easy solutions, and has culminated in the reality of the war on terrorism as it exists today.

We in America share a concept, united we stand, divided we fall, 9/11 has forced the world to grasp this concept. Ready or not, globalization is at hand, a global response to chaos in the form of potential nuclear terrorism.

So it is now out of a sense of duty to my grandfather's memory I hereby state this for the record, knowing that I am of sound mind, and good heart, and do my best to remain objective. Objectivity can be hard to come by where it concerns family, or politics, as we are all human beings, and of a species prone to emotions, at the expense of logic.

If there is one thing about people that's a given, it's that they can only change themselves. You can try to understand them, change their circumstances, try to point the roads to peace, but in the end, they must want it for themselves, knowing what the alternatives are.

There is a situation soon to be pressed regarding Iran, over multiple issues outstanding, both acute and systemic, with far reaching ramifications for non-proliferation, counter-terrorism, human rights, and the general stability of the Mideast.

The IRI is fast pushing the free world to another alternative that could be far worse, if the IRI does produce a nuclear weapon before the people decide their own fate, and remove the threat both to them and the international community.

Now I hear a fair amount of talk that the US is just using this as an excuse to promote "regime change". But the reality is if the regime isn't changed soon, the mullahs who are willing to martyr 10 million recruits (as also noted in IRI statements), and is on record of having an agenda of obliterating nations off the map, would certainly be willing to use such a weapon on their own people to make it look for all intents and purposes as if the Israeli's or the US had just attacked them, thereby creating the needed justification for holy war (or un-holy war depending on one's mindset), and thereby create the apocalyptic conditions of prophesy to hasten the mahdi's return.

Now Iran has had at least 18 years, lots of help from other nations, black market smugglers, and their scientists have had proven designs to work with, and in all probability now has in its possesion, a handful of nuclear devices smuggled in after being bought on the black market.

My conclusion is this,... and I hope you will all consider very carefully what you wish for, because one of the basic flawed premis in modern political mythology is that having a nuclear weapon buys national security.

Regardless of flaws in US policy that one may perceive, the risk the Islamic Republic poses to the Iranian people far outweighs by orders of magnitude, the risk the US government poses to you.

Why is that?

Because for the last 60 years since we dropped 2 atomic bombs to end a war that took over 50 million lives, my government has done everything in its power to make sure not another one gets dropped....by anyone.

However, given the Iranian government's intent and actions, it is apparent to many globally that in order to maintain global peace and security, the current government of Iran must go....either quietly into the night, voluntarily returning to their mosques never to participate in politics again. Or by removal at the hands of the people themselves and/or be removed by the will of nations and force of arms.

At present, the US government has still a policy of "behavior change" in effect, has made a generous offer to resolve the "nuclear problem" diplomaticly in concurrance with other nations and a UN resolution mandating compliamce with international norms.

The regime has turned it down, and is apparently unwilling to be a functional member of the family of nations.

Don't blame the US for the choices the regime makes, nor the results that the consequences will ultimately manifest.

Those of the Muslim faith, as well as those Iranians who read this have my great sympathy for the choice that you must now make as individuals, to preserve your nation and the umma itself from those who lead a great nation and people over oblivion's cliff.

"Hoder" I trust you will also reflect on what has been written here with utmost sincerity.

ba sepaas....

EJ


Posted by: Eric Jette | August 25, 2006 02:34 AM

کاوه said...

درود. من با وبلاگ شما از طریق لینک هودر (که به نظر من یک خود فروش سیاسی-اجتماعی واقعی و مامور جمهوری اسلامی است) آشنا شدم. و واقعا خوشحالم که به بلاگ شما آمدم. شما را در فیورت لیستم گذاشتم که بازهم به شما سر بزنم.

با درود: کاوه

Abtin Shokouhi said...

But how does Hoder's background affect his argument Potkin jan?

His arguments are strong enough to make people doubt about some of their neevr challenged views and I've seen people who are affected by his opinion.

The best way to empower him is what you and your commenters are ding here by bashing him with no substance or reason.

This is exactly what he wants.

Azarmehr said...

A person's background is very important in analysing his views and where his real interests lie.
But apart from that I have given plenty of reasons why his "hypothesis" is complete claptrap. Sorry if I didnt convince you. Go and think like Hoder that the best way to stop the closing of weblogs is to write to service providers and get a fatwa from a Shiite source of emulation that weblog is private property. If to you that is strong argument then I will never convince you and wont waste time on you.

Anonymous said...

Hey, I recently added a news widget from www.widgetmate.com to my blog. It shows the latest news, and just took a copy and paste to implement. Might interest you too.