Los mexicanos se manifiestan en protesta por el acuerdo de comercio con EE.UU
2008-01-04 06:21
Miles de mexicanos en protesta por la firma de un acuerdo comercial entre este país con EUU y Canadá, prendieron fuego a las banderas de estos dos países.
De acuerdo con CNN, cientos de mexicanos ayer en protesta por el tratado de libre comercio entre los países de América del Norte conocido como NAFTA, celebraron manifestaciones ante la embajada de EE.UU en la ciudad de México.
Otras ciudades de México también se manifestaron en protesta por dicho acuerdo.
Los manifestantes consideran que la ejecución del tratado de NAFTA, conducirá al aumento de pobreza, desempleo y la inmigración en México por lo que se pronuncian por la cancelación de este tratado.
IRIB: La Radio en Español
http://spanish.irib.ir/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1954&Itemid=83
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Defeat of Rafsanjani in election is not regarded as collapse of his power
Defeat of Rafsanjani in election is not regarded as collapse of his power
Interview with Mr. Mohammad-Hassan Ghadiri-Abianeh, fundamentalist political analyst, advisor to chairman of Expediency Council, former ambassador in Australia:
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
With attention to the fact that Supreme Leader formulates the general policies of the country following consultation with Expediency Council, so entrustment of supervision to implementation of the general policies “which is a power of leader“ to the Expediency Council is a wise decision because Expediency Council plays a vital role in compilation of the general policies also.
Revival of Rafsanjani?
Of course this approval has given more power to the Expediency Council and naturally its chairman
(Rafsanjani) but Rafsanjani has a very brilliant capability and beloved personality and he constantly had and has high position in the Islamic system, so we can not conclude that the aim of this decision is to increase power of Rafsanjani. Aim of the leader has been “proficiency in supervision to implementation of the general policies of the country†and entrustment of this power to Expediency Council shows the deep confidence of Leader Khamenei to Rafsanjani.
Defeat of Rafsanjani in election is not regarded as collapse of his power.
Some people believe that this time Khamenei tries to curb power of hardliners and he is going to play role of a balancer. What is your idea?
This supervision does not decrease powers of any branch (Judiciary, Majlis, and executive). Here just channel of supervision of leader is specified. Channel of supervision by leader is Expediency council. Such analysis like controlling the hardliners, or making a balance between the political groups is completely wrong and baseless. You know that this decision was made some years ago and during the former government. Process of compilation of its regulations took long some years. So there is no relation between time of announcing this decision and presidency of Ahmadinejad. This approval would come in to execution in this time regardless of victory of any of the candidates of presidency.
The positive or negative effects of this decision?
It has no negative outcome. This is a wise decision and a logical principle for management. When a policy “micro or macro“ is formulated, there must be enough mechanism to implement it duly. About the general policies of the country the leader has prepared the mechanism of supervision to the implementation of these policies by the same body which is intervened in formulation of these policies.
So this is a very expertise plan and has no fault or negative point.
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/001363.html
Interview with Mr. Mohammad-Hassan Ghadiri-Abianeh, fundamentalist political analyst, advisor to chairman of Expediency Council, former ambassador in Australia:
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
With attention to the fact that Supreme Leader formulates the general policies of the country following consultation with Expediency Council, so entrustment of supervision to implementation of the general policies “which is a power of leader“ to the Expediency Council is a wise decision because Expediency Council plays a vital role in compilation of the general policies also.
Revival of Rafsanjani?
Of course this approval has given more power to the Expediency Council and naturally its chairman
(Rafsanjani) but Rafsanjani has a very brilliant capability and beloved personality and he constantly had and has high position in the Islamic system, so we can not conclude that the aim of this decision is to increase power of Rafsanjani. Aim of the leader has been “proficiency in supervision to implementation of the general policies of the country†and entrustment of this power to Expediency Council shows the deep confidence of Leader Khamenei to Rafsanjani.
Defeat of Rafsanjani in election is not regarded as collapse of his power.
Some people believe that this time Khamenei tries to curb power of hardliners and he is going to play role of a balancer. What is your idea?
This supervision does not decrease powers of any branch (Judiciary, Majlis, and executive). Here just channel of supervision of leader is specified. Channel of supervision by leader is Expediency council. Such analysis like controlling the hardliners, or making a balance between the political groups is completely wrong and baseless. You know that this decision was made some years ago and during the former government. Process of compilation of its regulations took long some years. So there is no relation between time of announcing this decision and presidency of Ahmadinejad. This approval would come in to execution in this time regardless of victory of any of the candidates of presidency.
The positive or negative effects of this decision?
It has no negative outcome. This is a wise decision and a logical principle for management. When a policy “micro or macro“ is formulated, there must be enough mechanism to implement it duly. About the general policies of the country the leader has prepared the mechanism of supervision to the implementation of these policies by the same body which is intervened in formulation of these policies.
So this is a very expertise plan and has no fault or negative point.
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/001363.html
Ghadiri-Abyaneh: We Accept Nazis Operated Crematoria and Gas Chambers; Hiroshima and Nagasaki Were Just Bigger Crematoria
Ghadiri-Abyaneh: We Accept Nazis Operated Crematoria and Gas Chambers; Hiroshima and Nagasaki Were Just Bigger Crematoria
12/27/2005
Former Iranian Diplomat: We Accept Nazis Operated Crematoria and Gas Chambers; Hiroshima and Nagasaki Were Just Bigger Crematoria
Following are excerpts from an interview given by former Iranian diplomat Mohammad-Hassan Ghadiri-Abyaneh, which was aired on Jaam-E Jam 1 TV, on December 27, 2005.
Mohammad-Hassan Ghadiri-Abyaneh: Recently, there has been a debate around the world about the Holocaust and the Nazi crimes, and it has been said that the Iranians doubt this. OK, we accept that... the German... Hitler... Germany committed many crimes... We accept that the Nazis committed many crimes. We also accept that they operated crematoria and gas chambers, in order to kill Jews.
Do the Europeans and the Americans view this as a bad thing? Or perhaps they view this as a bad thing only when Germany does it? Perhaps they consider it to be bad because it was limited... Isn't it true that an atomic bomb can turn an entire city into a crematorium? Isn't it true that what America did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to burn, in an instant, these two cities, which were inhabited by tens or even hundreds of thousands? Didn't these cities turn into crematoria? This is what an atomic bomb means.
It has been announced that next year the number of America's atomic bombs would reach 10,000. This means they will have the ability to operate 10,000 crematoria, each one the size of an entire city, at least. This is what they base their strength on, and they invest money to attain this.
As for the gas chambers - are chemical bombs, nerve gas or biological weapons any different? The only difference is that the Nazis – so they claim - did this in a closed room, whereas the French, Germans, English and Americans gave Saddam many chemical weapons for him to use against our people.
This is just like the gas chambers, except that the amount of gas is so great that there is no need for a closed space, and it can kill many people this way.
[...]
Why do the Europeans defend the claim that six million were exterminated in Mr. Hitler's crematoria? Let's assume this happened, and we will not go into this right now...
Interviewer: But, obviously, it didn't happen...
Mohammad-Hasan Ghadiri-Abyaneh: But let's assume it did. The Europeans believe it. Why do the Europeans support this claim? Who built the crematoria? The Europeans themselves.
Interviewer: Yes, the first and second world wars...
Mohammad-Hasan Ghadiri-Abyaneh: There is an internal contradiction in this claim. They are trying to attribute this to Hitler. First of all, Hitler was not alone. All Germans viewed the Jews in a negative light. Why? This question should also be asked. What did the Jews do that made them so evil? I believe this should be investigated as well. A possible topic for doctoral students is the state of the Jews in Germany at that time and the reason for the Germans' general hatred of them.
The reason is that the Jews had only their own interests in mind, and tried to accumulate wealth. They placed their personal interests above the national interest, and were willing to commit any crime in order to accumulate wealth. This incited public opinion against them.
[...]
Interviewer: The Europeans defend the issue of the Holocaust because of their national zeal. This is only natural. But why do the Americans support this?
Mohammad-Hasan Ghadiri-Abyaneh: Let's not forget that the Zionists rule America. The Rockefellers.... America, too, is in the hands of the Zionists.
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/002206.html
12/27/2005
Former Iranian Diplomat: We Accept Nazis Operated Crematoria and Gas Chambers; Hiroshima and Nagasaki Were Just Bigger Crematoria
Following are excerpts from an interview given by former Iranian diplomat Mohammad-Hassan Ghadiri-Abyaneh, which was aired on Jaam-E Jam 1 TV, on December 27, 2005.
Mohammad-Hassan Ghadiri-Abyaneh: Recently, there has been a debate around the world about the Holocaust and the Nazi crimes, and it has been said that the Iranians doubt this. OK, we accept that... the German... Hitler... Germany committed many crimes... We accept that the Nazis committed many crimes. We also accept that they operated crematoria and gas chambers, in order to kill Jews.
Do the Europeans and the Americans view this as a bad thing? Or perhaps they view this as a bad thing only when Germany does it? Perhaps they consider it to be bad because it was limited... Isn't it true that an atomic bomb can turn an entire city into a crematorium? Isn't it true that what America did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to burn, in an instant, these two cities, which were inhabited by tens or even hundreds of thousands? Didn't these cities turn into crematoria? This is what an atomic bomb means.
It has been announced that next year the number of America's atomic bombs would reach 10,000. This means they will have the ability to operate 10,000 crematoria, each one the size of an entire city, at least. This is what they base their strength on, and they invest money to attain this.
As for the gas chambers - are chemical bombs, nerve gas or biological weapons any different? The only difference is that the Nazis – so they claim - did this in a closed room, whereas the French, Germans, English and Americans gave Saddam many chemical weapons for him to use against our people.
This is just like the gas chambers, except that the amount of gas is so great that there is no need for a closed space, and it can kill many people this way.
[...]
Why do the Europeans defend the claim that six million were exterminated in Mr. Hitler's crematoria? Let's assume this happened, and we will not go into this right now...
Interviewer: But, obviously, it didn't happen...
Mohammad-Hasan Ghadiri-Abyaneh: But let's assume it did. The Europeans believe it. Why do the Europeans support this claim? Who built the crematoria? The Europeans themselves.
Interviewer: Yes, the first and second world wars...
Mohammad-Hasan Ghadiri-Abyaneh: There is an internal contradiction in this claim. They are trying to attribute this to Hitler. First of all, Hitler was not alone. All Germans viewed the Jews in a negative light. Why? This question should also be asked. What did the Jews do that made them so evil? I believe this should be investigated as well. A possible topic for doctoral students is the state of the Jews in Germany at that time and the reason for the Germans' general hatred of them.
The reason is that the Jews had only their own interests in mind, and tried to accumulate wealth. They placed their personal interests above the national interest, and were willing to commit any crime in order to accumulate wealth. This incited public opinion against them.
[...]
Interviewer: The Europeans defend the issue of the Holocaust because of their national zeal. This is only natural. But why do the Americans support this?
Mohammad-Hasan Ghadiri-Abyaneh: Let's not forget that the Zionists rule America. The Rockefellers.... America, too, is in the hands of the Zionists.
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/002206.html
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
VIDEO FROM IRAN: DIPLOMAT COMPARES HOLOCAUST TO HIROSHIMA
VIDEO FROM IRAN: DIPLOMAT COMPARES HOLOCAUST TO HIROSHIMA
IRANIAN TV: Former Iranian Diplomat Says Iran Accepts That Nazis Had Crematoria and Gas Chambers, But That Hiroshima and Nagasaki Were Just Bigger Crematoria, December 27, 00:03:24, MEMRI
"We also accept that they [the Nazis] operated crematoria and gas chambers, in order to kill Jews. ... Isn't it true that what America did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to burn, in an instant, these two cities, which were inhabited by tens or even hundreds of thousands?"
Spanish Version Below
Irán desafiante rompe los sellos
Por Enfoque Internacional
El señor Mahmud Ahmadinejad, presidente de la República islámica de Irán, no parece ser alguien que se ande por las ramas. El martes, su gobierno rompió los sellos de su planta de enriquecimiento de uranio en Natanz, y de otras dos instalaciones, lo que lo pone al borde de un choque con Estados Unidos, la Unión Europea y la Agencia Internacional de la Energía Atómica (AIEA). Choque que, todo indica, Ahmadinejad mismo está buscando.
La movida se veía venir. El Irán de los ayatolás mantuvo por 18 años, oculto, un programa nuclear. Desde que la AIEA lo descubrió, en el 2003, alega que tiene fines pacíficos, no militares. Por presión internacional, está suspendido desde noviembre de ese año y las instalaciones para adelantarlo fueron selladas. El Reino Unido, Alemania y Francia vienen negociando que la suspensión sea definitiva, a cambio de ventajas comerciales y tecnológicas.
Aunque se le amenazó con referirlo al Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU, para ser sancionado, si reanudaba su programa, en agosto pasado Irán retomó la conversión de uranio básico en gas UF6, paso indispensable para el enriquecimiento de ese elemento (el uranio enriquecido sirve tanto para fines pacíficos como militares). Rusia ofreció enriquecerlo en sus instalaciones, para asegurarse de que no sirviera a fines militares. Pero Irán decidió hacerlo por su cuenta.
¿A qué juega el régimen iraní? A partir del 2004, los conservadores, ya muy fuertes en el clero y otros ámbitos, se han apoderado de todas las palancas del poder. Retomaron pleno control del parlamento en las elecciones de febrero y mayo de ese año, en las que fueron vetados muchos candidatos de oposición.
En junio del 2005 fue elegido presidente Ahmadinejad, el ultraconservador ex alcalde de Teherán, quien ha cobrado notoriedad por declaraciones provocadoras, como decir que el holocausto es un mito; que Israel debe desaparecer; o que Ariel Sharón debería morirse rápido. En el fondo, Irán parece apostar a convertirse, a ojos de un mundo islámico radicalizado por la cruzada antiterrorista occidental, en una alternativa ultraortodoxa y desafiante frente a Estados Unidos. Reanudar su programa de enriquecimiento de uranio pone a Irán al borde de ser referido al Consejo de Seguridad y de sufrir sanciones.
Quizá confía en que Rusia y China, con poder de veto, no lo permitan. Quizá apuesta a que Estados Unidos, empantanado en Iraq y ocupado en Afganistán, no se atreverá a emplear la fuerza en su contra (Irán es muy influyente entre los chiitas iraquíes).
Israel podría golpear sus instalaciones nucleares, como lo hizo en 1981 contra el reactor iraquí de Osirak, pero la retaliación iraní no se haría esperar. En cualquier caso, un escenario preocupante. Por una parte, asusta un régimen fanático con armas nucleares. Y preocupa que sean gobiernos, a los que no les faltan rasgos de fundamentalismo, en Washington o Tel Aviv, quienes aspiren a contenerlo.
http://www.watchingamerica.com/eltiempo000017.shtml
http://memritv.org/data/thumbnails/clip_998.jpg
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/002215.html
IRANIAN TV: Former Iranian Diplomat Says Iran Accepts That Nazis Had Crematoria and Gas Chambers, But That Hiroshima and Nagasaki Were Just Bigger Crematoria, December 27, 00:03:24, MEMRI
"We also accept that they [the Nazis] operated crematoria and gas chambers, in order to kill Jews. ... Isn't it true that what America did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to burn, in an instant, these two cities, which were inhabited by tens or even hundreds of thousands?"
Spanish Version Below
Irán desafiante rompe los sellos
Por Enfoque Internacional
El señor Mahmud Ahmadinejad, presidente de la República islámica de Irán, no parece ser alguien que se ande por las ramas. El martes, su gobierno rompió los sellos de su planta de enriquecimiento de uranio en Natanz, y de otras dos instalaciones, lo que lo pone al borde de un choque con Estados Unidos, la Unión Europea y la Agencia Internacional de la Energía Atómica (AIEA). Choque que, todo indica, Ahmadinejad mismo está buscando.
La movida se veía venir. El Irán de los ayatolás mantuvo por 18 años, oculto, un programa nuclear. Desde que la AIEA lo descubrió, en el 2003, alega que tiene fines pacíficos, no militares. Por presión internacional, está suspendido desde noviembre de ese año y las instalaciones para adelantarlo fueron selladas. El Reino Unido, Alemania y Francia vienen negociando que la suspensión sea definitiva, a cambio de ventajas comerciales y tecnológicas.
Aunque se le amenazó con referirlo al Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU, para ser sancionado, si reanudaba su programa, en agosto pasado Irán retomó la conversión de uranio básico en gas UF6, paso indispensable para el enriquecimiento de ese elemento (el uranio enriquecido sirve tanto para fines pacíficos como militares). Rusia ofreció enriquecerlo en sus instalaciones, para asegurarse de que no sirviera a fines militares. Pero Irán decidió hacerlo por su cuenta.
¿A qué juega el régimen iraní? A partir del 2004, los conservadores, ya muy fuertes en el clero y otros ámbitos, se han apoderado de todas las palancas del poder. Retomaron pleno control del parlamento en las elecciones de febrero y mayo de ese año, en las que fueron vetados muchos candidatos de oposición.
En junio del 2005 fue elegido presidente Ahmadinejad, el ultraconservador ex alcalde de Teherán, quien ha cobrado notoriedad por declaraciones provocadoras, como decir que el holocausto es un mito; que Israel debe desaparecer; o que Ariel Sharón debería morirse rápido. En el fondo, Irán parece apostar a convertirse, a ojos de un mundo islámico radicalizado por la cruzada antiterrorista occidental, en una alternativa ultraortodoxa y desafiante frente a Estados Unidos. Reanudar su programa de enriquecimiento de uranio pone a Irán al borde de ser referido al Consejo de Seguridad y de sufrir sanciones.
Quizá confía en que Rusia y China, con poder de veto, no lo permitan. Quizá apuesta a que Estados Unidos, empantanado en Iraq y ocupado en Afganistán, no se atreverá a emplear la fuerza en su contra (Irán es muy influyente entre los chiitas iraquíes).
Israel podría golpear sus instalaciones nucleares, como lo hizo en 1981 contra el reactor iraquí de Osirak, pero la retaliación iraní no se haría esperar. En cualquier caso, un escenario preocupante. Por una parte, asusta un régimen fanático con armas nucleares. Y preocupa que sean gobiernos, a los que no les faltan rasgos de fundamentalismo, en Washington o Tel Aviv, quienes aspiren a contenerlo.
http://www.watchingamerica.com/eltiempo000017.shtml
http://memritv.org/data/thumbnails/clip_998.jpg
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/002215.html
Iran Should Lodge a Complaint against the West's Nuclear Assistance to Israel
Iran Should Lodge a Complaint against the West's Nuclear Assistance to Israel
March 11,
Political analysts believe that considering the West's assistance to the Zionist Regime to make Israel a nuclear state, Iran should lodge a compliant to the International Atomic Energy Agency against the West.
Strategic Management expert Mohammad Hassan Ghadiri Abyaneh referred to the British Foreign Minister's recent interview with Britain's Channel 4 and said, "Jack Straw said during the interview that since Iran has endorsed the NPT voluntarily, it is required to observe its rules and regulations, but the Israeli Regime, Pakistan and India are not required to do so because they have not endorsed the Non-Proliferation Treaty and thus, they are not considered as violators of any treaties."
"This is while BBC, relying on documents it had accessed in compliance with the law of freedom of information and interview with former state officials, disclosed that England had assisted Israel with the development of the secret nuclear power plant of Deymona in the 1960s and it had provided the Zionist Regime with Plutonium and other banned nuclear materials used for the production of nuclear weapons," he reminded.
Abyaneh continued, "according to the same report, Britain has also sold to the Zionist Regime, hundreds of other nuclear cargoes used for the production of atomic weapons, including Uranium, Lithium, Beryllium and heavy water."
Stating that even though Straw does not recognize Israeli Regime as a violator of the NPT because Zionists have not endorsed the treaty, the political expert stressed, "but England has endorsed the NPT and it has violated the treaty by rendering nuclear help to the Israeli Regime."
He added, "Iran can lodge a compliant against Britain and the United States for assisting the Zionist Regime to produce nuclear arsenal and it should call on the IAEA to verify the violation of the NPT by the said member states".
http://www.baabeilm.org/baabnews/baabnews.asp?id=12060
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/002221.html
March 11,
Political analysts believe that considering the West's assistance to the Zionist Regime to make Israel a nuclear state, Iran should lodge a compliant to the International Atomic Energy Agency against the West.
Strategic Management expert Mohammad Hassan Ghadiri Abyaneh referred to the British Foreign Minister's recent interview with Britain's Channel 4 and said, "Jack Straw said during the interview that since Iran has endorsed the NPT voluntarily, it is required to observe its rules and regulations, but the Israeli Regime, Pakistan and India are not required to do so because they have not endorsed the Non-Proliferation Treaty and thus, they are not considered as violators of any treaties."
"This is while BBC, relying on documents it had accessed in compliance with the law of freedom of information and interview with former state officials, disclosed that England had assisted Israel with the development of the secret nuclear power plant of Deymona in the 1960s and it had provided the Zionist Regime with Plutonium and other banned nuclear materials used for the production of nuclear weapons," he reminded.
Abyaneh continued, "according to the same report, Britain has also sold to the Zionist Regime, hundreds of other nuclear cargoes used for the production of atomic weapons, including Uranium, Lithium, Beryllium and heavy water."
Stating that even though Straw does not recognize Israeli Regime as a violator of the NPT because Zionists have not endorsed the treaty, the political expert stressed, "but England has endorsed the NPT and it has violated the treaty by rendering nuclear help to the Israeli Regime."
He added, "Iran can lodge a compliant against Britain and the United States for assisting the Zionist Regime to produce nuclear arsenal and it should call on the IAEA to verify the violation of the NPT by the said member states".
http://www.baabeilm.org/baabnews/baabnews.asp?id=12060
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/002221.html
Iran believes that there is no reason to give up from its right
Iran believes that there is no reason to give up from its right
Interview with Mr. Mohammad-Hassan Ghadiri-Abianeh, conservative political analyst and advisor to chairman of Expediency Council, former ambassador in Australia:
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
Iran believes that there is no reason to give up from its right. Of course Iran can consider any proposition, but it is better for the West to recognize rights of the Iranian nation including the right to enrichment, instead of depriving from its right. The West should try to find the ways for making confidence-building instead of denying this right. The Europeans should bear in mind that the period of dominance of the West to the world has finished. Now we live in an era in which the nations must be sovereign to their fates and to have the equal rights with the other nations especially with the Europeans.
France produces 70 percent of its electricity by nuclear energy. Why they [Germany] are trying to deprive the other nations from their rights.
In the Algeria declaration, US promised that it will not interfere in the internal affairs of Iran but then US neglected this commitment. US always rules out its commitments. On the other hand the American can not overthrow Iranian Islamic system. Even if America ensures that it [US] is trying to change the regime in Iran, it [US] can not do any thing in this regard. US opposed with Iranian revolution, but this revolution happened. US and the West supported from Saddam, but they could not succeed to overthrow the Iranian political system. So how US wants to give us the guaranty not to do something that it [US] can not do?
Even if US want to do something against us (to overthrow the regime) it [US] will never be able to do it and it will just increase the troubles of America.
It is clear that such guaranty can not satisfy Iran to give up it right. We need to have nuclear energy and we intend to develop it. I believe that there is no need to give up this right.
The Europeans have committed a strategic mistake towards Iran. So far difference of the Europens policy with that of the Americans about Iranian nuclear issue has been in the method not in the goal.
Their goal is the same. The Americans want to deprive Iran by using force, but the Europeans try to use diplomacy in order to deprive Iran from its right.
Their aim is wrong, so strategy of the both is wrong.
We say yes to diplomacy and follow diplomacy, not for deprivation of Iran from its right, but for confidence-building. In the propositions of the Europeans I am seeing a kind of racism and selfishness that is reminiscent of their colonialism period. I believe that the aim of the Europeans for proposing this incentive is a propaganda tactic in order to pretend and propagate this idea that we tried the peaceful ways, but it did not bring any fruit in order to satisfy the public opinion which is against warmongeism of US. While trying to deprive a nation from its right does never contain any peacefulness.
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/001360.html
Interview with Mr. Mohammad-Hassan Ghadiri-Abianeh, conservative political analyst and advisor to chairman of Expediency Council, former ambassador in Australia:
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
Iran believes that there is no reason to give up from its right. Of course Iran can consider any proposition, but it is better for the West to recognize rights of the Iranian nation including the right to enrichment, instead of depriving from its right. The West should try to find the ways for making confidence-building instead of denying this right. The Europeans should bear in mind that the period of dominance of the West to the world has finished. Now we live in an era in which the nations must be sovereign to their fates and to have the equal rights with the other nations especially with the Europeans.
France produces 70 percent of its electricity by nuclear energy. Why they [Germany] are trying to deprive the other nations from their rights.
In the Algeria declaration, US promised that it will not interfere in the internal affairs of Iran but then US neglected this commitment. US always rules out its commitments. On the other hand the American can not overthrow Iranian Islamic system. Even if America ensures that it [US] is trying to change the regime in Iran, it [US] can not do any thing in this regard. US opposed with Iranian revolution, but this revolution happened. US and the West supported from Saddam, but they could not succeed to overthrow the Iranian political system. So how US wants to give us the guaranty not to do something that it [US] can not do?
Even if US want to do something against us (to overthrow the regime) it [US] will never be able to do it and it will just increase the troubles of America.
It is clear that such guaranty can not satisfy Iran to give up it right. We need to have nuclear energy and we intend to develop it. I believe that there is no need to give up this right.
The Europeans have committed a strategic mistake towards Iran. So far difference of the Europens policy with that of the Americans about Iranian nuclear issue has been in the method not in the goal.
Their goal is the same. The Americans want to deprive Iran by using force, but the Europeans try to use diplomacy in order to deprive Iran from its right.
Their aim is wrong, so strategy of the both is wrong.
We say yes to diplomacy and follow diplomacy, not for deprivation of Iran from its right, but for confidence-building. In the propositions of the Europeans I am seeing a kind of racism and selfishness that is reminiscent of their colonialism period. I believe that the aim of the Europeans for proposing this incentive is a propaganda tactic in order to pretend and propagate this idea that we tried the peaceful ways, but it did not bring any fruit in order to satisfy the public opinion which is against warmongeism of US. While trying to deprive a nation from its right does never contain any peacefulness.
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/001360.html
Former Iranian Ambassador: The Facts about AMIA case are Well Known
Former Iranian Ambassador: The Facts about AMIA case are Well Known
Monday November 13, 2006
Iran's former ambassador to Australia, commenting on the AMIA bombing case, has said the whole world is aware of the details of the bombing of AMIA Jewish center in Buenos Aires, and the facts about this case are well known.
In an interview with IRNA, Iran's former ambassador to Australia , Hassan Ghadiri Abyaneh, said Israeli officials prevented the Argentine security forces from searching the AMIA Jewish center in the hours immediately following the blast in ( June)1994. Ghadiri Abyaneh added: "the general public wants to know why the Argentine Police and security forces were preventing from searchiung the building and carrying out their investigation into the AMIA blast".
Iran's former ambassador to Australia stressed that eye-witness accounts of the AMIA explosion tell of explosive materials stored inside the AMIA building detonating. He said : The explosion took place inside the building and there was no external blast or external operations.
In further remarks Ghadiri Abyaneh said the Zionists had turned the AMIA Jewish center into a base for carrying out their terrorist operations, and they stored explosives inside the AMIA building which they used in their "operations".
http://english.irib.ir/middle.asp?cat=2&id=8505&day=4
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/002208.html
Monday November 13, 2006
Iran's former ambassador to Australia, commenting on the AMIA bombing case, has said the whole world is aware of the details of the bombing of AMIA Jewish center in Buenos Aires, and the facts about this case are well known.
In an interview with IRNA, Iran's former ambassador to Australia , Hassan Ghadiri Abyaneh, said Israeli officials prevented the Argentine security forces from searching the AMIA Jewish center in the hours immediately following the blast in ( June)1994. Ghadiri Abyaneh added: "the general public wants to know why the Argentine Police and security forces were preventing from searchiung the building and carrying out their investigation into the AMIA blast".
Iran's former ambassador to Australia stressed that eye-witness accounts of the AMIA explosion tell of explosive materials stored inside the AMIA building detonating. He said : The explosion took place inside the building and there was no external blast or external operations.
In further remarks Ghadiri Abyaneh said the Zionists had turned the AMIA Jewish center into a base for carrying out their terrorist operations, and they stored explosives inside the AMIA building which they used in their "operations".
http://english.irib.ir/middle.asp?cat=2&id=8505&day=4
Dr. Ghadiri Abyaneh
http://www.ghadiri.org/archives/002208.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)