I have been asked why I don’t call Islamic Regime in Iran, Islamic Republic of Iran.

Here are my reasons.

I was happy to see that Mrs. Nafisi, author of “Reading Lolita in Tehran” shares exactly the same views that I have been mentioning here for months regrading the potential US conflict with Iran. In the past, I have posted an interview with Azar Nafisi on Peyvast.

***

Curtsy LA TIMES:

Fight Iran with a war of ideas

Empowering the country’s dissidents, not military action, is the best way to weaken the Islamic regime.

THOSE WHO SEE a military attack on Iran as inevitable are relying on a specific interpretation and image of that country: Iran supports terrorism and develops weapons of mass destruction. The terms “WMD” and “terror” generate panic and fear, and the images coming out of Iran seem to justify those responses.

However, that is an incomplete picture, one that has been reduced to the Iran espoused by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his supporters: a belligerent president, a violent rhetoric, a denial of the Holocaust. In addition, some analysts and Iran experts say that the Iranian people have given up on change, that they have left the political arena, opting for economic wellbeing, and therefore there is no longer a real resistance against the Islamic regime.

Those who hold this narrow and dire view conclude that such conditions could lead to a military attack on Iran. But were we to include the full range of images and voices in Iran today in the scenario, we would see that Ahmadinejad’s violent rhetoric abroad and repressive measures at home stem not from a position of strength but weakness.

Since his election, there have been two demonstrations by Iranian women and a campaign to gather a million signatures against the segregationist laws in Iran. There have been workers’ protests in 10 cities since January, and others at universities, which Ahmadinejad has called the bedrock of “secularism and liberalism”; students have greeted him and his projects with slogans of “death to the dictator.” He has been the target of severe criticism even within the ruling hierarchy, including the conservative camp. And he has been chastised in parliament for using bluster and violent rhetoric abroad to divert attention from domestic problems, especially dire economic conditions, inflation and unemployment.

Under such conditions, who would benefit from a military attack on Iran? Not the workers, students, minorities, women or the dissenters who have been trying to find nonviolent and democratic ways of resisting and changing the present system.

Such an attack would provide an excuse for the most reactionary and violent elements within the ruling elite to stifle any voice of dissent not just from within the civil society, but from the divided and factional ruling elite. It would help rally factions within that elite behind Ahmadinejad, and it would provide Iran a good excuse to attempt to further isolate the United States within the international community.

In other words, the main beneficiary of an attack on Iran would be the most militaristic and reactionary elements in the Iranian ruling hierarchy.

As someone who has for years advocated that the best policy toward Iran is to support the Iranian people’s democratic aspirations and that the only means of establishing pluralism and openness in that country is through democratic and nonviolent means, I emphasize once more that the best weapon democracies have against repressive regimes and against terror is not military but ideological and cultural. The most effective war against the tyrants in Iran is through giving voice to the workers asking for their rights, to women fighting for equality and to students, journalists, writers and intellectuals fighting for freedom of expression.

To miss this opportunity not only would be disastrous for the Iranian people, it would have dire consequences for the United States and the world.

Islamic Regime in Iran is fully responsible for creating the conditions of war with US. It has been well known that they have been arming the Shia insurgents within Iraq. As I have mentioned before, the regime has been one of the responsible parties of the violence in Iraq as well as responsible for antagonizing the sitaution. The problem is that US should not fall in to this trap.

Here is a direct proof of The Islamic regime’s support of a Muqtada Al-Sadr , a terroist responsible for killing of Iraqi’s as well as US forces. “His fighters, dressed in black, are armed with assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, anti-air missiles and other light weapons, and have been known to use IEDs (improvised explosive devices). The size of the force is thought to be between 6,000 and 10,000.”

***

Clips from Guardian:

“Senior commanders of the Mahdi army, the militia loyal to the radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, have been spirited away to Iran to avoid being targeted in the new security push in Baghdad, a high-level Iraqi official told the Guardian yesterday. On the day the Iraqi government formally launched its crackdown on insurgents and amid disputed claims about the whereabouts of Mr Sadr, the official said the Mahdi army leadership had withdrawn across the border into Iran to regroup and retrain.

“The strategy is to lie low until the storm passes, and then let them return and fill the vacuum,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The Tehran authorities were “playing a waiting game” until the commanders could return to Baghdad and resume their activities. “All indications are that Moqtada is in Iran, but that is not really the point,” he added.

One of the main aims of the latest government crackdown - codename Imposing Law - is to halt the work of the Shia militias and death squads thought to be behind much of the sectarian violence gripping the capital.

The Mahdi army has launched two failed uprisings against US troops and has been linked to death squads preying on Sunnis. The new security operation in Baghdad will be the third attempt by US forces and their Iraqi allies to end violence that soared following the bombing of the sacred Shia shrine in Samarra a year ago.

“They [the Iranians] are calculating that the security operation will continue for a certain period of time, and that it will do serious damage to the Sunni jihadists and the insurgents,” the official said. “While in Iran they will be able to get more training and then once the Sunnis have been pacified, they plan to return.”

The claims appeared to be partially confirmed in the holy city of Najaf, south of the capital, yesterday by a senior figure in the Mahdi army, Karim al-Moussawi. He said most of the militia leaders had gone to Iran, but on their own initiative. “They were neither ordered to go by Sayid Muqtada nor invited to enter by the Iranian authorities,” he said. “Simply they were seeking sanctuary as individuals from expected targeting by the US occupying forces during the security drive in Baghdad.” A number of commanders had also gone to Najaf and the southern provinces, he added. “The US forces should be targeting the real terrorists,” he said.

The US has long blamed Iran - and Syria - for letting militants use their territory to slip into Iraq to attack US and Iraqi forces as well as civilians. Yesterday George Bush said he was convinced Iranian weapons were being used by insurgents in Iraq and promised to “do something about it”. “

Clips from the newspaper in Iran

گروه شبه نظامي وابسته به او يعني ارتش مهدي بارها از سوي امريکا به عنوان مهم ترين تهديد براي اتحاد عراق مورد اتهام قرار گرفته و در صدر فهرست گروه هايي است که در طرح امنيتي جديد عراق مورد هدف امريکا قرار گرفته است.مقام هاي امريکايي و عراقي در هفته هاي اخير فشار بر گروه هاي شبه نظامي را در تلاشي براي مهار خشونت هاي فرقه يي افزايش داده و به عنوان بخشي از آن تعدادي از اعضاي ارشد سپاه مهدي را بازداشت کرده اند.نيروهاي عراقي و امريکايي ماه قبل ابتدا در روز 19 ژانويه يکي از فرماندهان ارشد سپاه مهدي را بازداشت کردند. از فرد بازداشت شده به عنوان شيخ عبدالهادي الدراجي مدير ارتباطات رسانه يي دفتر آقاي صدر نام برده شده است.چند روز بعد موج ديگري از بازداشت ها روي داد و گزارش شد که حدود 600 فرد مسلح و 16تن از رهبران سپاه مهدي در بغداد بازداشت شدند.

.ه دنبال درگيري شديد گروه مقتدا صدر و ارتش امريکا، فرماندهان اين ارتش وعده دادند او را زنده يا مرده دستگير کنند. به دنبال آن درگيري بود که مقتدا صدر اعلام کرد فعاليت هاي ارتش مهدي را متوقف خواهد کرد و وارد فاز سياسي خواهد شد

به گفته خبرنگاران، سپاه مهدي حدود 60هزار عضو دارد و در گذشته، در مواردي با نيروهاي امريکايي درگير شده است. صدر در سال 2004 دو بار عليه نيروهاي امريکايي دست به شورش زد

وي در سفر يک سال قبل خود به ايران براي نشان دادن عمق همبستگي اش با مقام هاي جمهوري اسلامي تا آنجا پيش رفت که گفت اگر ايران مورد هدف قرار گيرد، شبه نظاميان سپاه مهدي به کمک ايران خواهند شتافت. صدر در آن سفر با مقامات ارشد ايراني همچون وزير خارجه و دبير شوراي عالي امنيت ملي ديدار و گفت وگو کرد. اما ديدار برنامه ريزي شده او با محمود احمدي نژاد، رئيس جمهور ايران، بدون توضيحي لغو شد. مقام هاي ايراني نيز در آن سفر به تعريف و تمجيد از صدر که پدرش از مراجع برجسته شيعه در عراق بود و به دست عوامل صدام حسين به قتل رسيد، پرداختند.ند.

Remember few months ago I posted a report that Iran was in 2nd place for the number of the executions in 2006? And that I mentioned considering the vast difference in population of two countries, teh Islamic regime truly deserves the Gold medal of executions instead of silver? Well guess what? They did it again. Another medal:  

Congratulations to Ayatollah Khamenei spiritual leader of Islamic Regime in Iran for gaining the 3rd place in the competition for the world’s worst dictators. (Source )

1) Omar al-Bashir, Sudan

 2) Kim Jong-il, North Korea

 3) Sayyid Ali KhamEnei, Iran

 4) Hu Jintao, China

 5) King Abdullah, Saudi Arabia

 6) Than Shwe, Burma (Myanmar)

 7) Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe

  Islam Karimov, Uzbekistan

 9) Muammar al-Qaddafi, Libya

 10) Bashar al-Assad, Syria