. . . that the recently revealed nuclear facility at Qom was "built over a number of years, located in a reinforced underground bunker and immune to standard bombs."
Barak further noted the indifference of the West in assisting Iran’s beleaguered people, when he went on to say:
"It is not pleasant to see the response of the free world to the activities there, to the trampling of citizens by the regime."
In fact, the velvet revolutions were a triumph of slow and patient engagement from a position of strength. The upheavals in Eastern Europe were an indigenous phenomenon and the product of containment, diplomatic engagement, and the slow-but-steady spread of democratic ideals through the Helsinki process and other mechanisms. And the first Bush administration was smart enough to keep its hands off until the demise of communism was irreversible, which is precisely the approach we ought to take toward Iran today.
On the matter of the Iranian nuclear program vexing Israel, America and the other members of the “5+1,” Walt noted:
As I mentioned a few days ago, we should not assume that a Green triumph in Iran would eliminate all sources of friction between Iran and the West. A new government would probably seek to continue Iran’s nuclear enrichment program and will certainly want a secure (read: superior) position in its own neighborhood. …..So I hope somebody in the Obama administration is starting to think about a) what we do if the Green Movement succeeds, b) what we do if it fails, and c) how to keep hawks in the United States and Israel from making things worse.
Veteran Iran observer, Kenneth Timmerman in a private email rebuttal to Walt noted active American support for ‘velvet revolutions’ in Eastern Europe:
Bush 41 did not just sit back and watch the velvet revolutions unfold. The U.S., under President Reagan, sent tremendous amounts of aid to Solidarity in Poland and to Czech dissidents. The actual assistance was covert, but the policy was public: the U.S. supported the pro-freedom movements behind the Iron Curtain, and everyone knew that, starting with the KGB.
On the question of Iran’s nuclear program presuming the fall of the IRI, Timmerman criticized Walt:
It is a fallacy that a secular republican government in Iran will continue to pursue clandestine nuclear weapons programs. They may or may not decide to pursue nuclear energy, but even if they do, they have no reason to pursue clandestine programs, which have made the current regime a pariah state.
To explore these emerging revolutionary prospects in Iran, we turned to Amil Imani, Iranian American writer, a pro-democracy activist and co-founder of Former Muslims United. Imani has been in the forefront of communicating the important views of the Iranian opposition via his brilliant writing and commentary, as well as facilitating communications from within Iran to the world media.
Gordon: Where and in what circumstances did you grow up in Iran?
Imani: I was born in Tehran, Iran into a wonderful, loving and intellectual family. Growing up in a Muslim family, I was fortunate to have parents that never forced me to follow Islam and its rituals or for that matter, any other religion or ideology. They believed that religion was a personal choice and in time I would decide for myself. Yet, I did grow up in a Muslim society and have witnessed first-hand the horrors and indignity that Islamic dogma visits on people it subjugates, and for that matter, I have taken it upon myself to do my part in defeating this ideology of oppression, hate and violence.
Gordon: Why did you decide to leave both Iran and Islam?
Imani: For as long as I can remember, I had a very difficult time following a religion whose founder(s) had butchered my ancestors. Islam was forced on Iranians with the sword of Allah. In my heart, I never considered myself a Muslim, though I did not reveal this until later in life for fear of retribution. I believe you cannot possibly be a Persian and a Muslim at the same time in the same fashion that one cannot be an American and a true Muslim at the same time. They are totally incompatible. A large number of Iranians are completely fed up with Islam and they also want to leave this dogma of hate and violence. In fact, many already have left, but they simply aren’t able to come forward and announce it, for the obvious reason.
I left Iran to continue my education abroad, but never envisioned that radical Islam would take over our very modern and prosperous country, Iran. Most likely, I would not be alive today if I had stayed in Iran.
Gordon: When did you start your blog as an opponent of the Islamic Republic and what has been the reaction both in the West and Iran?
Imani: I started my battle with the forces of darkness when the evil (Ayatollah Khomeini) landed in Iran and unleashed his wrath on many Iranians who in the beginning, believed this man was their savior. But, he turned out to be the evil that our ancient Prophet Zoroaster had warned us about some 4000 years ago. With the advent of the Internet, I was able to send my messages to the world much faster and created my own webpage nearly 4 years ago.
Ayatollah Khomeini, with his cultural revolution, intended to de-civilize a very rich and civilized nation. This radical Islamist believed non-Muslims and westerners were infidels and began to refer to the U.S. as “the Great Satan.”
I believe that people in the West and in America are beginning to see the real face of Islam and the danger it poses to the secular democratic societies. In the past, Islam succeeded in largely displacing the magnificent Persian civilization with a primitive myopic discriminatory system of belief. Presently, once again with renewed vigor, Islam is aiming to destroy another civilization—the Judeo-Christian civilization, a civilization that constitutes a living falsification of the Islamic primitive and backward creed. Islamofascisim presents a clear and present danger, not only to Western civilization, but to the entire civilized world as is evidenced by the ruling Islamists in places such as Iran, the Sudan, Somalia, and Saudi Arabia.
. . . that the recently revealed nuclear facility at Qom was "built over a number of years, located in a reinforced underground bunker and immune to standard bombs."
Barak further noted the indifference of the West in assisting Iran’s beleaguered people, when he went on to say:
"It is not pleasant to see the response of the free world to the activities there, to the trampling of citizens by the regime."
In fact, the velvet revolutions were a triumph of slow and patient engagement from a position of strength. The upheavals in Eastern Europe were an indigenous phenomenon and the product of containment, diplomatic engagement, and the slow-but-steady spread of democratic ideals through the Helsinki process and other mechanisms. And the first Bush administration was smart enough to keep its hands off until the demise of communism was irreversible, which is precisely the approach we ought to take toward Iran today.
On the matter of the Iranian nuclear program vexing Israel, America and the other members of the “5+1,” Walt noted:
As I mentioned a few days ago, we should not assume that a Green triumph in Iran would eliminate all sources of friction between Iran and the West. A new government would probably seek to continue Iran’s nuclear enrichment program and will certainly want a secure (read: superior) position in its own neighborhood. …..So I hope somebody in the Obama administration is starting to think about a) what we do if the Green Movement succeeds, b) what we do if it fails, and c) how to keep hawks in the United States and Israel from making things worse.
Veteran Iran observer, Kenneth Timmerman in a private email rebuttal to Walt noted active American support for ‘velvet revolutions’ in Eastern Europe:
Bush 41 did not just sit back and watch the velvet revolutions unfold. The U.S., under President Reagan, sent tremendous amounts of aid to Solidarity in Poland and to Czech dissidents. The actual assistance was covert, but the policy was public: the U.S. supported the pro-freedom movements behind the Iron Curtain, and everyone knew that, starting with the KGB.
On the question of Iran’s nuclear program presuming the fall of the IRI, Timmerman criticized Walt:
It is a fallacy that a secular republican government in Iran will continue to pursue clandestine nuclear weapons programs. They may or may not decide to pursue nuclear energy, but even if they do, they have no reason to pursue clandestine programs, which have made the current regime a pariah state.
To explore these emerging revolutionary prospects in Iran, we turned to Amil Imani, Iranian American writer, a pro-democracy activist and co-founder of Former Muslims United. Imani has been in the forefront of communicating the important views of the Iranian opposition via his brilliant writing and commentary, as well as facilitating communications from within Iran to the world media.
Gordon: Where and in what circumstances did you grow up in Iran?
Imani: I was born in Tehran, Iran into a wonderful, loving and intellectual family. Growing up in a Muslim family, I was fortunate to have parents that never forced me to follow Islam and its rituals or for that matter, any other religion or ideology. They believed that religion was a personal choice and in time I would decide for myself. Yet, I did grow up in a Muslim society and have witnessed first-hand the horrors and indignity that Islamic dogma visits on people it subjugates, and for that matter, I have taken it upon myself to do my part in defeating this ideology of oppression, hate and violence.
Gordon: Why did you decide to leave both Iran and Islam?
Imani: For as long as I can remember, I had a very difficult time following a religion whose founder(s) had butchered my ancestors. Islam was forced on Iranians with the sword of Allah. In my heart, I never considered myself a Muslim, though I did not reveal this until later in life for fear of retribution. I believe you cannot possibly be a Persian and a Muslim at the same time in the same fashion that one cannot be an American and a true Muslim at the same time. They are totally incompatible. A large number of Iranians are completely fed up with Islam and they also want to leave this dogma of hate and violence. In fact, many already have left, but they simply aren’t able to come forward and announce it, for the obvious reason.
I left Iran to continue my education abroad, but never envisioned that radical Islam would take over our very modern and prosperous country, Iran. Most likely, I would not be alive today if I had stayed in Iran.
Gordon: When did you start your blog as an opponent of the Islamic Republic and what has been the reaction both in the West and Iran?
Imani: I started my battle with the forces of darkness when the evil (Ayatollah Khomeini) landed in Iran and unleashed his wrath on many Iranians who in the beginning, believed this man was their savior. But, he turned out to be the evil that our ancient Prophet Zoroaster had warned us about some 4000 years ago. With the advent of the Internet, I was able to send my messages to the world much faster and created my own webpage nearly 4 years ago.
Ayatollah Khomeini, with his cultural revolution, intended to de-civilize a very rich and civilized nation. This radical Islamist believed non-Muslims and westerners were infidels and began to refer to the U.S. as “the Great Satan.”
I believe that people in the West and in America are beginning to see the real face of Islam and the danger it poses to the secular democratic societies. In the past, Islam succeeded in largely displacing the magnificent Persian civilization with a primitive myopic discriminatory system of belief. Presently, once again with renewed vigor, Islam is aiming to destroy another civilization—the Judeo-Christian civilization, a civilization that constitutes a living falsification of the Islamic primitive and backward creed. Islamofascisim presents a clear and present danger, not only to Western civilization, but to the entire civilized world as is evidenced by the ruling Islamists in places such as Iran, the Sudan, Somalia, and Saudi Arabia.